< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Nov-23-05|| ||eaglewing: <patzer2> I think, Fritz throws in questionable moves for Black.|
Main line: 31. ... d5 allows later Ke5.
If Black considers d5, he should make sure he controls e5 with its own King and being able to follow up with e5 itself.
Side line: Black can throw in 33. ... h5 itself to counter the h-file attack.
On the a4/Ra3 plan, I would consider apart from Ke7/Kd6 the moves Ke7/Bc6,
maybe even Ke7/h5.
Nevertheless, in the end there should be a win.
|Nov-23-05|| ||jackpawn: Thank you chessgames! I'm doing these puzzles each day on my lunch hour and I'm getting quicker all the time. Used to be I would find the solution (at least Monday thru Friday), but would often take several minutes, especially later in the week. Now I'm much quicker. Found today's solution almost immediately.|
|Nov-23-05|| ||TTLump: I haven't read through all the posts yet, so forgive me if I am being redundant here. |
The move 18. Qg7 seems rather straightforward and clearly leads to a slight material advantage for white, but 27 ... resign, seems premature. I can't see any decisive win for white in this position and with the protected passed central pawn and the two bishops, it seems to me that Black has some chances here.
|Nov-23-05|| ||patzer2: <eaglewing> Actually, I also felt 31...d5 was not Black's strongest reply there either, but I played it out with other variations and Fritz 8 had no trouble winning against the alternatives.|
|Nov-23-05|| ||euripides: If <patzer>'s line is right it seems that it's more efficient to move the rook along the third rank than the fourth. Not trivial to see this over the board, I think.|
|Nov-23-05|| ||TTLump: I put the final position into CM7000 and let it play itself at 10 minutes per game, and it went on for 150 moves resulting in a draw based on the 50-move rule. I am going to try it on a higher setting ...|
|Nov-23-05|| ||Brown: It's strange, how some individuals see certain patterns so quickly, and miss others entirely. Like going through one's life not hearing a word that may be somewhat common, but by chance never coming across it.|
I noticed the pattern/motif here quickly, but yesterday's took 10x longer, not do to difficulty, but do to gaps in my pattern recognition. Find it interesting...
|Nov-23-05|| ||TTLump: I put the final position into CM7000 at 60 min per game and it is mate in 68 for white ...|
|Nov-23-05|| ||Brown: <TTLump> And what did you learn from this?|
|Nov-23-05|| ||coldkingts64: on 14. would it not be better for white to play Q-d3 looking down the road to play N-c4 THEN Bxe4? (black bishop on e-6 tumbles in the exchante)|
|Nov-23-05|| ||TTLump: <Brown> ... that deeper is better!|
|Nov-23-05|| ||Guest1825: <TTLump> the other lesson is that the human mind can summarize some positions relatively more quickly, compared to CM7000 at 60min pergame.|
|Nov-23-05|| ||FICSwoodpusher: The tactics were great. What I want to know is how the GM could see this after playing Na5. |
At first it seems that white will be forced to lose a pawn but soon he gets more than enough in return for this with the active pieces. So how could the GM tell that with Na5 there would be some tactics in the position.
Was this a risky sort of move which may not be the best but can lead to an advantage if the opponent plays it the wrong way?
I don't know much about the theory in the siclian, so was this some theoretical line/novelty?
|Nov-23-05|| ||TTLump: <Guest1825> that is certainly true for GM level players, but I have been surprised by CM a number of times when I was certain I had a winning position. The computer tends to be very good at finding the unorthodox looking winning tactical combinations that I wouldn't normally give a second glance to, and that are often present in what would otherwise be a losing position.|
|Nov-23-05|| ||TTLump: <FICSwoodpusher> which game, which move are you referring to where someone played Na5?|
|Nov-24-05|| ||LIFE Master AJ: I got the key move in just a few seconds, and it took around two minutes to work out the main lines.|
|Nov-24-05|| ||FICSwoodpusher: Na5 = Na4|
|Nov-28-05|| ||Richerby: <Guest1825: Got it, but I'd never see such a passive move (18.Qg7)>|
♕g7 is passive? It's a fork, a queen sacrifice and the exploitation of the pinned ♗e4 all in one!
|Dec-27-07|| ||Nezhmetdinov: I love the way Szabo's king lurches into the centre of the board like a drunken bully - and when he staggers back the game is over.|
|Jul-26-15|| ||ASchultz: Boy howdy, that's a neat combo for the rook trap. Cross pinning and everything.|
|Jul-26-15|| ||morfishine: Cool game, love those cross pins: Tal vs B Brinck-Claussen, 1966|
What does Kan stand for in this variation? I searched everywhere and found nothing.
Decent pun if one remembers far enough back. 'Dodge Ball' or basic hide and seek was more my time
|Jul-26-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: <morfishine: What does Kan stand for in this variation? I searched everywhere and found nothing.>|
I always assumed it was named after Ilia Abramovich Kan
But I searched nowhere and found nothing.
|Jul-26-15|| ||keypusher: <thegoodanarchist> <morfischine>|
|Jul-26-15|| ||eaglewing: Besides my doubts about the endgame noted years ago, I would like to remark a variant instead of the, I think, bad move 17. ... Qc7. Variant 17. Bf4 Bxf4 18. Qxf4 Qxb6 19. Qxb8 0-0 20. Qe5 d5.|
Yes, white material is more with R vs B+P, but imagine the threat of the bishop cruising to f3. With Queens still on the board, White will have difficulties to get a win.
|Jul-27-15|| ||kevin86: White will win quickly, black's pieces are really hemmed in.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·