< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jan-01-04|| ||kaptajn4: 4 secs!! GREAT!! |
|Jan-01-04|| ||patzer2: Some good fourth move alternatives for Black to consider are:|
4...Qe7 as in J Berkvens vs Ian Rogers, 2002
4...c5 as in A Riazantsev vs Y Kuzubov, 2003 and Lautier vs Ivanchuk, 2001 and Mecking vs Korchnoi, 2001
4...a5 as in Eljanov vs Aleksandrov, 2003 and San Segundo Carrillo vs Eingorn, 2002 and Vokac vs Smyslov, 1995
|Jan-01-04|| ||MoonlitKnight: Happy new year, people! And may it be a good one for chess.|
At first, I was looking at 10.Qxc3!!, but then I noticed black was a piece up and realized I had too much champagne last night.
The ending is quite amusing. 78 years after the game was played, one can sense Monticelli sitting there and just waiting for his opponent to blunder with Rd8. Must have been a good feeling.
|Jan-01-04|| ||patzer2: If Fritz 8's analysis is correct, ChessGames.Com's first problem of the New Year 2004 (10. ?) may be cooked after Fritz's recommendation of 13...Nc6!|
Fritz 8 analyzes the position as level after 9...Nxc3!? <surprisingly the best move per Fritz, although I prefer 9...f5 or 9...d5> 10. Ng5 Ne4 11. Bxe4 Bxe4 12. Qxe4 Qxg5 13. Qxa8 Nc6! 14. Qb7 Nxd4 15. Rd1. And now Fritz indicates Black equalizes with 15...Qe5 = (@ 17/51 depth & 708kN/s).
For those interested, Fritz's analysis continues
15...Qe5 16. e3 Nc2+ 17. Kf1 d5 18. cxd5 Qe4 19. Kg1 Nxe3 20. fxe3 Qxe3+ 21. Kg2 Qe2+ 22. Kh3 Qh5+ = (0.16 @ 17/51 depth & 708kN/s) with White faced with the unpleasant choice of accepting a draw by perpetual check or a superior Black position.
So, if Fritz's analysis is indeed best play, then Black may well have a draw in the game solution to today's problem (10. ?).
However, to be honest, I'm not so sure whether this is a case of Fritz over estimating Black's chances in this position or an actual cook. Nonetheless, Fritz's play gives White a lot of complex positions to solve and makes today's problem (10. ?) a lot more complex than a simple White to move and win tactic. By the way, for all who think they solved this one (10. ?) quickly, it took Fritz 8 over an hour of deep analysis on a Pentium 4 to come up with this line (and it may still not be best play).
|Jan-01-04|| ||chankins: patzer, in Fritz's line 15.Rd1 seems bad to me. What does Fritz think about 15.Qe4 ? I don't see any way for black to equalise. |
|Jan-01-04|| ||crafty: 13...♘c6 14. ♕b7 ♕a5+ 15. ♔f1 ♘xd4 16. ♖d1 ♕c5 17. ♕e4 = (eval -0.03; depth 16 ply; 1000M nodes)|
|Jan-01-04|| ||Marnoff Mirlony: Nice game, Bears092. I like that tactic. |
|Jan-01-04|| ||chessgames.com: It might be cooked; White wins the exchange, but the queen trapped out of play seems to make up for it. This problem was taken from Znosko-Borovsky's "The Art of Chess Combination." Touché! |
|Jan-01-04|| ||kevin86: Happy New Year!!! Actually,losers are those who don't play chess!! May it be a great year for everyone,PEACE!|
Bi-lateral double attacks add spice to this game.
|Jan-01-04|| ||bilikidder: <chankins: If 15.Qe4 (subvariation of patzer2’s line)> then Black plays 15…Qa5+ 16. Kf1 Nb3 (attacking the R and threatening royal fork …Nd2) and Black exchanges N for R. If 16. Kd1 Nb3 (threatens R and mate) also exchanging N for R.|
<Art of Combination> I've got this book, Znosko-Borovsky calls this the "famous Monticelli trap" on page 82. LOL!
|Jan-01-04|| ||patzer2: <chankins> My thanks to <bilikidder> for answering your question. If you still think Fritz 8's line is suspect, note that <Crafty> gives Black equality with an entirely diffent approach with 15...Qa5+ (and with an even better evaluation for Black).|
P.S. Happy New Year to all Chess fans and visitors to ChessGames.com. May 2004 be a happy and prosperous year for you. My thanks to the folks at ChessGames.Com for providing this terrific forum for fans to enjoy and learn more about Chess, while getting the opportunity to share information and opinions about some of the greatest games ever played.
|Jan-02-04|| ||Calli: After 13. Qxa8 Nc6! 14. Qb7 Nxd4 15. Rd1 Qe5 16. e3 Nc2+, I don't get 17.Kf1? (stupid computer!) Instead 17.Ke2 Qxb2 18.Rd2 and I still like White. |
|Jan-02-04|| ||patzer2: <Calli> After 13. Qxa8 Nc6! 14. Qb7 Nxd4 15. Rd1 Qe5 16. e3 Nc2+ 17. Ke2, Fritz 8 gives 17...d5 18. cxd5 Qh5+ 19. Kd2 Nb4 20. a3 Nxd5 21. Qc6 Qf5 22. f4 Qf6 23. Qc2 c5 as equalizing (+0.25 @ 15/42 depth & 739kN/s).|
And even if there is a sure White win in this Fritz 8 line, then there is still the Crafty line to consider which may be offer an even better chance for equality for Black.
However, I must agree with much of your sentiment here as I personally like White's side of this position (even if it is "equal") because White's moves are easier to find than Black's. Also Black is fighting for drawing chances, while White has winning chances with a draw pretty much in hand. And as I stated earlier, as a human player looking for the best practical chances, I would have preferred to have played 9...f5 or 9...d5 and have avoided Fritz 8's 9...Nxc6!? and all of these complications.
Still I think Fritz 8 has found a clever resource that gives Black drawing chances, and makes the dogmatic "white to move and win" statement about this position (10?) premature at best.
In any event, I hope you learned something about the technique of playing the exchange down (knight versus rook positions). I know I did.
So, thanks for analyzing the position and putting it into perspectrive.
|Jan-02-04|| ||Calli: <Patzer2> After 13...Nc6 14.Qb7 Nxd4 15.Rd1 Qe5 16.e3 Nc2+ 17.Ke2 d5 18.Rd2 (not Kd2) Qxb2 (what else?)19.Qxa7 (threat Qa4) and White is on top. |
|Jan-02-04|| ||patzer2: <Calli> After 13...Nc6! 14.Qb7 Nxd4 15.Rd1 Qe5 16.e3 Nc2+ 17.Ke2 d5 18.Rd2 (not Kd2), Fritz 8 gives 18...Nb4 19. a3 Qe4 20. Rc1 Na2 21. Rcc2 Qh1 22. Rd1 (to prevent 22...Nc1+) 22...Qe4 23. Rdd2 = (0.00 @ 15/15 depth & 679kN/s). It is a draw by perpetual after 23...Qh1 24. Rd1 Qe4 etc. |
|Jan-03-04|| ||Calli: "After 13...Nc6! 14.Qb7 Nxd4 15.Rd1 Qe5 16.e3 Nc2+ 17.Ke2 d5 18.Rd2 Fritz 8 gives 18...Nb4 19.a3" |
I think Fritz is still a little tipsy from New Year's Eve. If 18...Nb4 then 19.cxd5 Nxd5 20.Qxa7. Black can interpose 19...Qe4 20.Rhd1 Qc4+ 21.Kf3, but I don't see how that changes anything.
|Jan-03-04|| ||patzer2: After 13...Nc6! 14.Qb7 Nxd4 15.Rd1 Qe5 16.e3 Nc2+ 17.Ke2 d5 18.Rd2 Nb4 <19. cxd5>, Fritz gives 19...Nxd5 20. Qxa7 Qe4 21. Rhd1 Qc4+ as a slight White advantage. (+0.34 @ 16/47 depth & 784kN/s, analyzing after 21. Rhd1).
However, a second deep analysis (of 21...Qc4 in the analysis above) gives best play as 22. Ke1 Qe4 23. Rxd5 exd5 24. Qxc7 Qb4+ 25. Qc3 Qe4 increases White's advantage with the win of the pawn (+0.59 @17/50 depth & 723kN/s). However, this line may give Black better practical chances for a draw (especially against human competition).|
However, I must confess that with an even pawn count and the exchange, it is my opinion here that White may well be able to get the queen into play with a timely Qa3 and slowly increase his advantage without going in for the exchange sacrifice and an extra pawn.
Yet, despite the even pawn count, with a centralized Knight and the more active Queen, Black still has practical drawing chances. But all the winning chances remain with White.
Given this outcome (White having an even pawn count for the exchange or Black fighting for a draw a pawn down), it seems Crafty's line, given as level (Jan 1) above, may be worth pursuing. Especially, since it keeps the position more closed than in this Fritz line, without quickly giving up the extra pawn.
Also, this line seems to confirm my earlier assessment that Black should have played 9...f5! or 9...d5! to equalize (with winning chances) and avoided these complications altogether.
Conclusion: White appears to be slightly better (and with almost all of the winning chances in the position) after 13...Nc6 14.Qb7 Nxd4, but Black has good practical drawing chances (though the play is extremely tricky and complicated). Better to have avoided 9...Nxc6!? and played 9...f5! or 9...d5! and avoided these complications. However, the 9...Nxc6!? line is a line worthy of study because (1) it illustrates positions where computer assessment may not always be best (e.g. complicating with 9...Nxc6?!) and (2) because it provides a good study in tactics and positional play (fighting for the draw) with the exchange down (knight vs. rook) in the middle game.
<Calli> With this concession (After 10. Ng5, White appears to be slightly better with winning chances), I will end my discussion of this game.
|Jan-04-04|| ||Calli: Get that computer in for repair! It thinks that being a clear exchange up is only "slightly better". Position is dead lost for black at any master level. And thats my final analysis :-> |
|Nov-16-07|| ||paladin at large: <Calli> <Position is dead lost for black at any master level. And thats my final analysis> Maybe among masters now. There was a supermaster who was an exception:|
The games below have already been kibitzed. But the context is worth noting – these were not casual games for experimentation. In 1931, a match was played in Amsterdam between two masters seeking to bolster their claim to a championship match with Alekhine:
Euwe vs Capablanca, 1931
This was the 8th game of the match (8 July 1931). Capa was ahead, having won the third game of the match, so Euwe would have drawn even, if he had won.
Capa won the 9th game of the match, with white, of course.
Euwe vs Capablanca, 1931
This was the 10th and last game of the match (10 July 1931). Capa drew more easily the second time. (Note the change of move 15:…..c5).
Consider – (1) Capa put the match lead on the line in game 8 by going into the Monticelli trap; (2) He went into it twice in succession (3) The opposition was a top GM in his prime, one noted for his hard work and devotion to the openings!
|Nov-18-07|| ||paladin at large: <patzer2> Fritz is lazy, and is simply copying Capablanca <10. Ng5 Ne4 11. Bxe4 Bxe4 12. Qxe4 Qxg5 13. Qxa8 Nc6! 14. Qb7 Nxd4 15. Rd1. And now Fritz indicates Black equalizes with 15...Qe5 = (@ 17/51 depth & 708kN/s). >|
See this game -
Euwe vs Capablanca, 1931
|Jan-25-08|| ||jovack: nice back rank threat to win the queen|
|Aug-11-12|| ||Conrad93: What is wrong with 11. Nxe4?|
|Aug-11-12|| ||Stonehenge: 11. Nxe4 f5 loses the bishop (or the knight).|
|Aug-12-12|| ||Conrad93: 11...f5 12. Nf6+ Qxf6 13. Bxb7 Nc6 14. Bxa8 Rxa8.
How does that lose a piece?
|Aug-13-12|| ||Stonehenge: Sorry :)|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·