|Jun-19-04|| ||shr0pshire: Short plays a very boring game. Both players trade down to an endgame which I think is a horrible strategy for white. Nigel Short is definately going to win against a foreign master in an equal endgame 8 times out of ten. |
Nigel played very safe, and let his endgame knowledge carry him to the victory.
White should be flagellated for this poor plan.
I dont' think that this game is up the 2700 level that nigel's rating says he should be playing at.
|Jun-19-04|| ||dragon40: <shr0pshire> I agree, but let's also look at it from Nigel's point of view...he might be marshalling his strength for the tougher batles to come. I defnitely can understand his thinking if that is what he is doing, though I do not necessarily agree with it! He won which is what he wanted to do, especially with the BLACK pieces which almost guarantees him going to the next round:) |
|Jun-19-04|| ||shr0pshire: Agreed, I was just looking for a stronger showing from Nigel Short, but whatever gets the win is the most important. And if he wants to save his strength then so be it.|
However white should still be beaten (flagellated) for his poor plan of trading off pieces, and letting Short trade off pieces.
|Jun-19-04|| ||Gypsy: White should not loose endgames like that. (In fact, White position seems the one with some initial winning chances.) Where did White go wrong? For openers, 21.Rxe8 Rxe8 22.Kd2 was preferable to the retreat 21.Rd1. Second, the push b3, c4, bxc4, c5, cxb6 is more than dubious. And so on. Short's concluding manuever is very nice. |
|Jun-19-04|| ||marcus13: I have an important think to explain. It is not important how you win a game, the important is that you don't lose. To beat someone fastly you need cooperatrion from your opponent. If your opponnent doesn'T do any mistake you won't be able to win. The way you win the game only matter for spectator. |
|Jun-20-04|| ||Chessical: <Gypsy> Perhaps you are a liitle too hard on Ali Kadhi. |
Having played <34.Rf2>, why not continue: <35.f5> gxf5 36.Rxf5 Nd6 37.Rh5 Re7 38.a4; it is hard to see how Short would win.
|Jun-20-04|| ||acirce: <Nigel played very safe> I don't think that sounds like a safe strategy.... the risk of drawing was very big. |
|Jun-20-04|| ||Gypsy: <Chessical: <Gypsy> Perhaps you are a liitle too hard on Ali Kadhi. Having played <34.Rf2>, why not continue: <35.f5> gxf5 36.Rxf5 Nd6 37.Rh5 Re7 38.a4; it is hard to see how Short would win.> Oh I absolutely aggree <Chessical>, I was actually trying to give the guy a break, yesterday, and decided against posting more about places where he was lost for the right plan. |
Lets return back to the position after the move 20: Both kings are on the Q-side; White has 3:2 pawn majority on the K-side; Black has 4:3 pawn majority on the K-side; and the rooks are cuting off the kings and at least one pair will exchange on the central files. Under such circumstances, I believe, it is White who has good winning(!) chances. Moreover, White has a simple strategy to play: Mainly, keep K-side pawns at home and march forward the Q-side pawns. (It may win, it may draw, but it shall not loose!) So, as you see, I completely aggree with your suggestions.