|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-31-16 | | morfishine: Exciting combination! White's Knight sac <28.exd6> leaves him down a rook since he had sacked an exchange earlier. But he ends up the positional master due to Black's blooper <26...Ra2>?? dooming the King rook to passivity ***** |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | agb2002: <Kev: Back in the 70's he had a chess column on the Spanish newspaper ABC> I used to collect them when I was a child. I found them extremely difficult but also very instructive if not truly illuminating. That puzzle series started in the wake of the Spassky-Fischer match if I remember correctly. It's a shame that they were not collected and published in monographs as it happened with many by Roman Toran Albero |
|
Jul-31-16
 | | perfidious: <Once....A very classy puzzle. I found 27. Nxf5 but wanted to cash in the White advantage too soon with 28. Nxd6.> My first thought also was to plump for 28.Nxd6, which I felt must be very good for White, but soon realised the game continuation was stronger still--once I got to the point where Portisch gave up the ghost and saw that 31....Qg6 would have been met by 32.Qxg6 hxg6 33.h7, with that little foot-soldier culminating the game with one final contribution: raising the field marshal's baton as he delivers the final blow, one which the enemy's scattered forces are quite unable to meet. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | eaglewing: <al wazir> about 30...Ra1!: 31. Qf6+ followed by QxRa1. Either 31. ... Kg8 does nothing against the intrusion 32. Re7. Or 31. ... Qf7 still is not enough against the same intrusion, because Qh8+ is then still possible and decisive. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | agb2002: <Patriot: <agb2002> <-One may discover an 'elegant' combination resulting in a gain of, say, two pawns but then it turns out that one only has two pawns for a piece.> This is true especially OTB. For puzzle problems where it is known there is a winning combination, usually the "maximum effect" of material or mate is correct no matter what the material count is. But I think it is more important to practice as one plays because when you play you want that kind of thinking to be automatic. One could also say that OTB there shouldn't be a need to take stock in material because you should know the material difference at all times, so jumping into "solving" a puzzle isn't necessarily out of line with that process--it's usually safe to assume the elegant combination is correct!> Barring time trouble, lack of energy or similar issues, the player of the game has a considerable advantage over the puzzle solver because he has almost surely spotted the combination or maneuver one or more moves before the move shown with the diagram and has already elaborated many details, material counts included. However, I normally prefer not to assume the existence of any winning/drawing combination nor use the supposed puzzle difficulty level as some 'extra information' to find a solution quicker. Apparently simple puzzles often have solutions with hard branches. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | JohnBoy: My own analysis led me to the same superficial conclusion reached by <Once> and <perf>. The game continuation is much stronger than what I saw. The point - one I must face almost every day here when examining games of great masters - is that my treatment way too often lacks the patience necessary for deeper analysis. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | catlover: The puzzle is rated “Insane”. Out of my league, but I’ll take a shot at it. Okay, white is down the exchange. Looks like 27. Nxf5 has possibilities…if 27…pxf5, 28. Qg3+, Ng5, 29. Qxg5+, Kh8 (if Kf7, white wins the queen with Qg7+), 30. Qf6+ Kg8, 31. Be7 looks like it wins. However, as Darth Vader once said, “All too easy”. 27….pxf5 is not forced. 27…Nxd6 seems to blunt the attack….28. Nxd6 Qe7 and I don’t see anything much for white after that. What else? 27. Pe6 Nxd6, 28. Qe5 Ne8 might work…. 29. Pe7 Qd7. Oops. Now what? Okay, I’m stumped. Let’s see what happened in the game… Well, I guess I sort of got the first move, but it doesn’t count because I did not see where to go with it. I see that Diez del Corral pursued the attack with the open e-file with 28….ed6 and used that, plus the pawn on d6 and the opened g-file after Portisch took the knight. This was a fun POTD. |
|
Jul-31-16
 | | Jimfromprovidence: FWIW, the response 27...d4 is causing me a lot of problems.
click for larger view |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | NBZ: The only "forcing" line is 27. Nxf5 Nxd6 (gxf5? is bad and actually leads to mate in a few moves) 28. exd6. If 28. Nxd6 white is playing for long-term compensation, and there is no immediate breakthrough. So let's look at 28. exd6 first. White is threatening Ne7+ after which the white queen penetrates into Black's position. For example, if 28. ... Qf7 29. Ne7+ Kf8 30. Qe5! Ke8 and now white should be winning. Or 28. ... Rf8 29. Ne7+ Kf7 30. Re1. If Black doesn't take the knight White has an overwhelming advantage. So I am happy with this, the key is what happens if Black takes the knight. So 28. exd6 gxf5 29. Qg5+. After 29. ... Kf8 30. Re1 Qf7 31. d7! should do it I think. Similarly after 29. ... Kh8 30. Re1 Qf7 31.d7! |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | NBZ: Actually looking at the position on the board, I now realise that d7 does not work! The key idea I missed is that after Qf7 Re7 Qg6 White has Qxg6! hxg6 h7! as pointed out by other posters. Ah well! |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | Patriot: <agb2002> Very true. I've been critical of solvers who use difficulty level as a clue to the solution (i.e. "Queen sac Monday") because no such clues exist OTB. It comes down to what your goal is--becoming a good puzzle solver or a better analyst. You may have told me long ago, but what is your goal? Judging from what you said, yours is to become a better analyst. I assume you are not moving pieces but rather visualizing and taking notes on what you see and then putting them in an outline format. Your analysis reminds me of what Dan Heisman calls a "de Groot exercise". It's where you take a complicated position and write down everything you calculate in as much detail as you can. He recommends doing this from time to time to help strengthen visualization. Is this what your goal is? de Groot exercises aren't meant to be a "normal" practiced thought process to use OTB but are aimed at visualization. He wants his students to know when to begin and end analysis because that becomes very important during games where time controls exist. That's why I don't understand this in your analysis: <A.1) 29... Kf7 30.Qg7+ Ke6(8) 31.Qf6(8)+ (or 31.Qxb7 + -) 31... Kd7 32.Qe7+ Kc6 (32... Kc8 33.Qe8#) 33.Rc1+ Rc2 34.Rxc2#.> Dan has taught me to stop analyzing whenever I see things like 31.Qxb7  . Because when analyzing during a game, the goal is to find the best move in a reasonable time (according to time remaining and criticality), play the move and hit the clock. To practice this way is good analysis; otherwise time is wasted further proving a line is winning. The ultimate question is, is Nxf5 the best move? That's the goal. I went through most of your analysis with exception to line <B.1.a.iii)> because too many sidelines are hard for me to follow. But this is really good stuff! Line <B.2) 28... Qf7 etc> is a reasonable candidate because white still needs to prove his worth, given he started being down the exchange! If material were even I would say Qf7 is a waste of time because black is giving up material for nothing. The only other thing I would have to add is in your line <A.2) 29... Kh8 30.Be7 Rg8 31.Bf6+ Rg7 32.Bxg7+ Kg8 33.e6 is crushing.> where 31.Qf6+ Rg7 32.Qxg7#. A "win is a win" but if you are striving for accuracy... I really could use some of your approach if I ever want to go beyond my current skill level. Usually I don't want to spend the time but sometimes going in-depth helps! My games (whenever I do play), are no more than G/15 or G/30 where thinking deep is not possible. But thinking deeper and more accurately can be achieved with good practice, to further differentiate me with my opponent. For today's problem, I thought about it shortly after it was posted last night and wanted to prove that Nxf5 isn't refuted outright and analyzed a bit more than what I posted. I actually did assess material and noticed white is down the exchange. For me, white could either play something slow going or not sit back and take it. Given a few advanced pawns and the queen's ability to join in the attack, Nxf5 was my only candidate and since I didn't see how to refute it directly I went with it! That's generally how I look at positions OTB. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | YouRang: Sunday 27.?
click for larger view
Thought process:
Having a pawn hitting the g7 square above black's king always attracts attention, especially if you have queen (which I do). So, to make g7 accessible for my queen, I'll want my Q on the a1-h8 diagonal, but first I have to vacate my Pe5 and Nd4 in some clever way that gets past black's defenses. Pushing the Pe5 first isn't promising (27.e6? Nxd6  ), so let's try moving the Nd4 first. Here, <27.Nxf5!?> looks interesting
click for larger view
Recapturing (27...gxf5) breaks down black's defense allowing Qg3+, which in fact looks devastating. At this point, I almost feel like the puzzle is solved! Since black can't take the N, I'm now threatening Ne7+, Qf3, and e6 -- all with murderous attacking potential on g7. What can white do?
- Exchange off attackers with <27...Nxd6 28.exd6 gxf5> allows <28.Qg5+>
click for larger view
<28...Kf8 30.Re1> threatens to take control of 7th rank with mate to follow. - Guard e-file and pin Pe5 with <27...Re8> allows <28.e6>
click for larger view
and now I threaten Qd4 and Qg7#, and black has to lose material to stop it. I don't see any way out for white, so I'm going to write this off as an easyish Sunday :-) |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | BOSTER: The problem for black is that undefended rook on a2 has no coordination with black pieces.
After 27.Nxf5 Nxd6 28.exd6 black'd play Qf7
to activate his queen.
So, the win is not so fast like many suggested,
and the between move d4 should be considering. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | devere: <Jimfromprovidence: FWIW, the response 27...d4 is causing me a lot of problems.> 28.Qf4 is good enough. If 28...Nxd6 (or ...Re8 29.Rc1 is very strong for White) 29.Nxd6 Qd7 30.Qe4 White wins a rook, and is a piece up
click for larger viewBrilliant game! |
|
Jul-31-16
 | | An Englishman: Good Afternoon: A bit too easy for a Sunday; or, I found enough of the key moves (including the most important one, move 28) to call it solved. Nonetheless, a brilliant attack that makes one wonder what DDC could have accomplished had he played the game full time. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | morfishine: <An Englishman> Good Afternoon to you sir, and I hope your retirement is going smoothly, if not swimmingly! ***** |
|
Jul-31-16
| | Jimfromprovidence: <devere> (if 27...d4) <28.Qf4 is good enough. If 28...Nxd6 (or ...Re8 29.Rc1 is very strong for White) 29.Nxd6 Qd7 30.Qe4 White wins a rook, and is a piece up.> Never saw 28 Qf4. I was thinking Qg3. Thanks for that and the 2 alternatives for black on move 28. BTW, there is also 28...g5?!, answered by 29 Qxd4, below, seeing 30 e6. 
click for larger view |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | gofer: I found <27 Nxf5> quite quickly. I also saw the next few moves upto the finish. So definitely this is "way too easy for a Sunday".
But <al wazir>'s comments had me intrigued... ...I stupidly hadn't even thought of <30 ... Ra1> as a defence to <30 Re1>.
click for larger view<goodevans: <al wazir> 30...Ra1 is a neat resource but after <31.Rxa1 Qd7 32.Qf6+ Qf7 33.Qh8+ Qg8 34.Qxg8 Kxg8 35.Re1> white is still on top.> But the answer it quite simple and simpler than proposed above. Let the
queen take Ra1 and keep Re1 exactly where it is!!!!
<31 Qf6+ ...>
31 ... Kg8
32 Qxa1
click for larger viewBlack is dead because the queen cannot protect g7 and the rook can't either!
so instead the queen must block the check...
<31 ... Qf7>
<32 Qh8+ Qg8>
<33 Qxa1 >
click for larger viewWhite has control of the e file and the a1-h8 diagonal. Black must stop Re7 winning
immediately. But all the obvious tries lose immediately... 33 ... Rd8?
34 Qf6+ Qf7
35 Qxd8 Qe8
36 Qxe8#
33 ... Qg6/Qf7
34 Re7 mating or winning quickly
33 ... Re8
White can choose which way to win...!
34 Qf6+ Qf7
35 Qh8+ Qg8
36 Rxe8+
34 Rxe8+ Kxe8
35 Qe5+ Kf7
36 Qxd5+ Kf8
37 Qxg8+ Kxg8
38 d7 |
|
Jul-31-16
 | | AylerKupp: <<Once> Fritzie thinks that white has an advantage of nearly two prawns - currently +1.79> I agree with Fritzie. Whenever I cook and serve a dish which features shrimp I always make sure that I serve myself a two prawn advantage. ;-) |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | King Harvest: Don't call it a comeback...
After a long absence solving I surprise myself with a reasonable performance on a Sunday. Found the first move... and even saw the deeper ed leaving the N en prise. Sure I miscalculated from there but that's to be expected. Al wazir and Good evens... --30...Ra1! is a nice thought. Eaglewing beat me to 31. Qf6+ ...32 Qxa1. Allowing white to collect the rook while keeping his foot on Black's throat. |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | stst: Two easy routes (but of course, depending on Black's defense, could get more involved): 27.e6 NxB
28.e7 Re8
29.Qe6+ (A) or (B)
(A)....... Kh8
30.Qf6+ Kg8
31.Qg7#
(B)........Nf7
30.Qf6 Qxe7
31.Qg7# |
|
| Jul-31-16 | | j4jishnu: A w e s o m e ! |
|
Jul-31-16
 | | al wazir: <eaglewing: 30...Ra1!: 31. Qf6+ followed by QxRa1.> Yes, that way white maintains the attack. Black has given up the ♖ for nothing. Thanks. |
|
| Aug-01-16 | | agb2002: <Patriot ...
You may have told me long ago, but what is your goal? Judging from what you said, yours is to become a better analyst. I assume you are not moving pieces but rather visualizing and taking notes on what you see and then putting them in an outline format.> Yes to the first two and no to taking notes. I start typing the solution when I think I have it. The problem with this approach is that I often forget to include in my post one or two lines. <Your analysis reminds me of what Dan Heisman calls a "de Groot exercise". It's where you take a complicated position and write down everything you calculate in as much detail as you can. He recommends doing this from time to time to help strengthen visualization. Is this what your goal is? de Groot exercises aren't meant to be a "normal" practiced thought process to use OTB but are aimed at visualization. He wants his students to know when to begin and end analysis because that becomes very important during games where time controls exist.> I'd rather blame Kotov because I don't know anything about de Groot's work. <That's why I don't understand this in your analysis:<A.1) 29... Kf7 30.Qg7+ Ke6(8) 31.Qf6(8)+ (or 31.Qxb7 + -) 31... Kd7 32.Qe7+ Kc6 (32... Kc8 33.Qe8#) 33.Rc1+ Rc2 34.Rxc2#.> Dan has taught me to stop analyzing whenever I see things like 31.Qxb7 . Because when analyzing during a game, the goal is to find the best move in a reasonable time (according to time remaining and criticality), play the move and hit the clock. To practice this way is good analysis; otherwise time is wasted further proving a line is winning. The ultimate question is, is Nxf5 the best move? That's the goal.> You're right and I noticed when I typed that line. However, I spotted the quick forced mate and thought that it was worth mentioning. Of course, I would have considered only 31.Qxb7 otb. However, this is only a puzzle and I prefer not to be too strict with any analyzing and posting criteria. <I went through most of your analysis with exception to line <B.1.a.iii)> because too many sidelines are hard for me to follow. But this is really good stuff! Line <B.2) 28... Qf7 etc> is a reasonable candidate because white still needs to prove his worth, given he started being down the exchange! If material were even I would say Qf7 is a waste of time because black is giving up material for nothing. The only other thing I would have to add is in your line <A.2) 29... Kh8 30.Be7 Rg8 31.Bf6+ Rg7 32.Bxg7+ Kg8 33.e6 is crushing.> where 31.Qf6+ Rg7 32.Qxg7#. A "win is a win" but if you are striving for accuracy...> Thank you! That's another problem with my approach: once I find a winning line I usually don't try to find a better alternative and accuracy suffers. This makes another difference with otb analysis and home analysis. <I really could use some of your approach if I ever want to go beyond my current skill level. Usually I don't want to spend the time but sometimes going in-depth helps! My games (whenever I do play), are no more than G/15 or G/30 where thinking deep is not possible. But thinking deeper and more accurately can be achieved with good practice, to further differentiate me with my opponent.> I suspect that deep analysis exercises help regardless time controls but it's just my impression. |
|
Aug-01-16
| | An Englishman: Good Afternoon: <morphishine>, I'm spending more time at CG each day, so my retirement does seem quite well indeed! |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 24.Rxc2