< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jan-05-12|| ||Billy Vaughan: 23. Qh5 is a beautiful escape but one that I saw. I would not have been able to coordinate the knights to fight off the subsequent queen invasion.|
|Jan-05-12|| ||Domdaniel: <SimonWebbsTiger> Tak. Fine 'zine, Skakbladet. Some day I'll concentrate on the language for long enough to talk to my Danish relatives, rather than just reading 'Skakdansk' with a bad Swedish accent.|
< He actually became a stronger player when he retired!>
Just the kind of person I like to hear about. It can be done.
|Jan-05-12|| ||King Death: <Domdaniel> Your analysis looks good and I don't see any way out either after the quiet move 24...Qh7. In the middle of an attack, what human would come up with that over the board? Not many I suspect.|
|Jan-06-12|| ||Domdaniel: <King Death> Yeah, not many. But it's funny: when I saw it first, with computer help, my attitude was "that's *such* a computer move, no human would find it!".|
But now -- after analyzing it, and seeing the direct attacking logic of the move -- I've changed my mind. I think most strong players, IM or better, would find it in a puzzle setting. As would a few weaker ones.
Over the board, mid-game, it's a bit harder. And harder still when you're trying to pick yourself up after having your 'forced win' snatched away. Shock is a big factor.
I think Kasparov, and a few others, would have found it in advance, when calculating whether the sacs led to a forced win for Black. He'd have seen that Qh5 was a possible defence, and kept digging until a solution was found.
|Jan-06-12|| ||Shams: <King Death> <Domdaniel> Reading your thoughts on 24...Qh7 the last couple days brings to my mind an old question: to what extent is it possible, or desirable, to see the board through new eyes with every move?|
|Jan-06-12|| ||Domdaniel: <Shams> A very innaresting question, that. It has the potential to throw the old nostrum "Always have a plan" right out the window.|
I suppose engines do it, to a degree, although hashtables store past analysis. But they're not burdened by emotional attachment to a plan, or thrown by the shock when the game takes an unexpected turn.
It's one reason I prefer to play OTB chess -- the margin of human fallibility, the poker bluff, the crazy swindles. Of course I've thrown away plenty of won games, but I've rescued a few lost ones too.
Ideally, one should be able to see the board afresh each move. It's often the case in tournaments that a passing kibitzer will see, at a glance, a winning move which neither player has seen. The same goes for my comment about ...Qh7 being easier to find if set as a puzzle.
But pretty much all combinations are easier in puzzle form. And maybe seeing the board afresh is dangerously narrow or low-ply ... maybe the longterm view is also important.
So now we want to be able to see the game afresh, without forgetting our plans and evaluations? Maybe the two are pulling in different directions. Maybe they're mutually exclusive.
Or maybe Kasparov knows the answer, but reveals it only during the 2nd year of intensive and expensive lessons, and neither Carlsen nor Naka lasted the course...
Food for thought, though. I always like a bit of that.
|Jan-06-12|| ||King Death: <Domdaniel> The reasons I find 24...Qh7 difficult in this position for humans even at the international level are psychological. The first is that it's well known that long retreating moves like 24...Qh7 are often missed by even a strong player. Sure if the position was presented as a problem with Black to make his 24th move, I think more people would come up with it. But to foresee it? It seems like that's something different.
The second reason is that Black has spent the last few moves throwing his pieces at the enemy king and he now has to adapt to a very different situation where the nature of play is changed. Even the best players canmake mistakes when faced with that.|
|Jan-06-12|| ||Domdaniel: <King Death> I agree with every word you say. I was suspicious of the 'retreat' aspect at first -- and engines can be untrustworthy when there's a very unbalanced level of material combined with an attack.|
But I think the *very* best human players find these moves. I saw a video recently where Kasparov annotated a win against Karpov: in the middle of a sacrificial attack he pauses to make a quiet King move. Finding it seemed to give him extra pleasure (and the main reason was so that he could offer to sac another Rook without being checked).
Yes, they can make mistakes. Even the best won't find a move like ...Qh7 every time. But they sometimes do.
Speaking of engine saves, I dimly remember a nice game Nigel Short played in Gibraltar about five years ago. It was shortlisted for the best game prize, but didn't win.
The opponent was a strong woman player, possibly from Ukraine, and the game ended with an unusual sacrificial mating combination.
Later, with an engine, Short found a hole in his plan -- his opponent had what he called a 'ridiculous' saving move, the sort that only an engine finds. I think it might have been ...Rh7, ironically.
Must try to dig it out. I remember it as being more counter-intuitive than ...Qh7 is here, where much of the difficulty is recovering from the shock of still having to play on.
< Black has spent the last few moves throwing his pieces at the enemy king and he now has to adapt to a very different situation where the nature of play is changed>
I reckon he *over*-adapted. As I said earlier, the combination is still alive and flourishing after 24.Rf4 ... he needs to play ...g5 while maintaining the mate threat, and only ...Qh7 fits.
But yes, retreating moves that 'really' attack are hard to foresee. Which is why a few of them have gone down in history as key moments in great games.
|Jan-06-12|| ||Domdaniel: This looks like the Short game: Short vs N Zhukova, 2006|
Complex and clever, but not a patch on this in terms of drama.
A few moves were suggested in the kibitzing as saves for Zhukova. I think the 'computer move' was probably 22...Qh6.
click for larger view
The actual finish was 22...Qe5 23.Rh4+ Kg8 24.Bf4 d3 25.Bxe5 dxe2 26.Nf6+ 1-0. Mate is forced.
I knew it had some vague similarity to this. So the Queen is just one square out. I suppose it's counter-intuitive because it seems to permit a discovered attack on the Queen - but nothing violent works for White, so he has to retreat with 23.Bd2 or Bc1.
Distinctly less amazing than I remembered it. Or else this game has raised the amazingness bar...
|Jan-06-12|| ||Shams: <I saw a video recently where Kasparov annotated a win against Karpov: in the middle of a sacrificial attack he pauses to make a quiet King move.>|
Yes, <Kh2!>. I think he actually got to play this move twice against Karpov in WCC play, which must have been extra special.
|Jan-06-12|| ||acirce: I suppose it was this game: Kasparov vs Karpov, 1990|
|Jan-06-12|| ||Xeroxx: why didn't black win?|
|Jan-06-12|| ||Domdaniel: <Xeroxx> Black played a brilliant combination, with multiple piece sacs. Then, White found 23.Qh5! which gives up the Queen but gets the King out of the mating net.|
But Black should have won anyway. The key is 24...Qh7.
If you scroll back to the start of the page, skip over four short posts, then two by me ... you reach an analysis starting "It gets better".
It contains all you'll ever need to know.
Well, maybe not *all*. But you'll be able to discuss the game at parties, if you go to that kind of party.
|Jan-07-12|| ||Xeroxx: Can't break through the Sigfred line.|
|Jan-22-12|| ||Shams: In addition to <acirce>'s link I found the other Kh2 game from Kasparov:
Kasparov vs Karpov, 1986|
|Oct-19-12|| ||wildrookie: Where are you...From?|
|Feb-12-19|| ||Steve.Patzer: 41....cxd4 draws|
|Feb-12-19|| ||Phony Benoni: I'm glad to see this game to make the grade, if only as a tribute to the analytical and commenting skills of <Domdaniel>.|
|Feb-12-19|| ||Penguincw: Ah, nice to re-visit a great game that you (as in me) visited (and kibitzed on it) many years ago.|
|Feb-12-19|| ||Ironmanth: Just a marvelous game! Not seen this before; thanks chessgames. What a true treasure.|
|Feb-12-19|| ||catlover: Wow...what a game. Excellent pun. Congrats, <Phony Benoni>. |
The kibbitzing on the game was especially good. <Then White finds and plays the 'miracle save' 23.Qh5!! ... although two exclams is a tad generous for a move that is (a) forced and (b) losing.> I love it!
I would not have found 24...Qh7 in a million years.
|Feb-12-19|| ||spazzky: According to the engine 24...f6 wins
2) -4.31 (33 ply) 24...f6 25.Nd1 Qh2+ 26.Kf1 Qh1+ 27.Ke2 Qxg2+ 28.N1f2 b6 29.Rf3 gxf2 30.Rxf2 Qh3 31.Kd2 g5 32.a4 Kb7 33.Ree2 Rh8 34.Re1 Qg4 35.Ree2 Kc7 36.Rh2 Rh3 37.a5 Qh4 38.Rxh3 Qxh3 39.Nf2 Qh4 40.Nd3 Kd6 41.c3 Qe4 42.axb6 axb6 43.Rf2
And even 24... Kc7 is winning!
|Feb-12-19|| ||dumbgai: Wow, great game. Black must be gutted to see his brilliant attack foiled by white's equally brilliant defense.|
|Feb-13-19|| ||mckmac: <Phony Benoni> <Catlover> I think the kibbitzing on this game shows just what an asset Domdaniel was to chessgames.com. Quality, detailed analysis, personal stories of great interest, comedy and good humour, he really brings it all here. Gerry could have written a very special chess book, had he chosen to. What a loss.|
|Feb-14-19|| ||zanzibar: If nothing else, <DomD> was an innaresting person, no question.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·