|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-05-05 | | Resignation Trap: <JSYantiss> Sooory, but I planned a similar pun for a Kramnik-Leko game, but I didn't get to use it at that time (like Anand's 23.Qd2 wasn't used against Kamsky), and I just couldn't hold out any longer. |
 |
Oct-17-05
 | | Hesam7: Fruit confirmed my line, after 23... Nxe1 24. Nxe1 Ra1. Fruit gives: 25. Nxh6 Bxh6 26. Qxh6 Nxd5 27. Rxg6 fxg6 28. Qxg6 Kf8 29. Qf5 Kg7 30. Qg5 Kf8 31. Qf5 (eval: 0.00) Depth: 18
2220M nodes
670K nodes/sec
It seems that Anand's novelty leads to a dead draw unless he intended something other than 24. Nxe1 in reply to 23... Nxe1. |
|
Oct-27-05
 | | patzer2: <Hesam 7> Fritz 8 also seems to confirm your opinion and your Fruit program's analysis that Black can force White to accept a draw by perpetual check after <23.Qd2> and your suggested reply <23...Nxe1> 24. Nxe1 Ra1 25. Nxh6+ Bxh6 26. Qxh6 Nxd5! (not 26... Rxb1? 27. Rxg6+ fxg6 28. Qxg6+ Kf8 29. Bh6+ Ke7 30. Bg5+ Kf8 31. Qh6+ Kg8
32. Bf6 Rxe1+ 33. Kh2 Qc7 34. Qh8+ Kf7 35. Qg7#). Per Fritz 8, play might continue 27. Rxg6+ fxg6 28. Qxg6+ Kf8
29. Qf5+ Kg7 30. Qg5+ Kf7 31. Qh5+ Ke7 32. exd5 Qd4 33. Bg5+ Kf8 34. Bh6+ Ke7
35. Bg5+ Kf8 36. Bh6+ (0.00 @ 16 dept & 1433kN/s) with a draw by perpetual. However GM Shipov in his analysis at http://www.chesspro.ru/events/sanlu... seems to be of the opinion that Anand's <23. Qd2!!> (exclamation marks are Shipov's; I prefer ChessBase's 23. Qd2!?) is a forced win. Shipov says <I believe, Black is lost. Take my word on that. After 23...Nxe1 simple 24.Nxe1 is sufficient as Black loses after 24...Ra1 25.Nxh6+ Bxh6 26.Qxh6 Rxb1 due to 27.Rxg6+ fxg6 28.Qxg6+ Kf8 (also bad is 28...Kh8 29.Qxe8+ Kg7 30.Qe7+ Kg8 31.Qe6+! etc) 29.Bh6+ Ke7 30.Bg5+ Kf8 (30...Kd7 31.Qf7+) 31.Qh6+ Kg8 32.Bf6  Rxe1+ 33.Kh2> However, since Shipov does not mention the possibility 23...Nxe1 24. Nxe1 Ra1 25. Nxh6+ Bxh6 26. Qxh6 Nxd5!, but only analyzes the greedy 26...Rxb1? here, I suspect your Fruit program has probably improved over GM Shipov's analysis.
By the way are you using the 2780 rated Fruit 2.2 program described at http://www.fruitchess.com/playing-s... ? |
|
Oct-28-05
| | Hesam7: <patzer2> thx for the input. IMO Shipov was mistaken (well I guess he wasn't using engines) and it is a draw since after 23... Nxe1, 24. Nxe1 is forced. It seems that you are looking back into San Luis games. Is that right? |
|
Oct-28-05
| | patzer2: <Hesam7> Thanks for the reply. Yes I am looking back into the San Luis games. My work sometimes takes me away from the computer for a week or so, and I'm playing catchup. Also, I find it is good to let the smoke clear for at least a few days on these super GM tournament games and to take my time on the analysis. Afterall, the super GMs sometimes spend months and years finding these lines. By allowing a little time for GMs to post their analysis and taking my time with my own computer assisted analysis, I can better understand their subtleties. In this case, I strongly suspect you are correct that GM Shipov was mistaken in his assessment of <23. Qd2!!> as a forced win, but the position is so complex I wouldn't be surprised if Anand or another analyst came up with an improvement on the computer analysis. If Anand plays into it again, that might be a clue. However, for now it looks to be that <23. Qd2!?> offers winning chances only if Black misses the best defense, but otherwise (with Black's best play) only seems to lead to a draw by perpetual check. |
|
Oct-28-05
| | patzer2: Does anyone know of any GM analysts who've looked at Hesam 7's and Fruit's defense of 23. Qd2!?, allowing Black to force a draw and contradicting several GM analysts claiming it is a forced win for White. I found where Goran Urosevic at http://chesslodge.blogspot.com/2005... endorses the idea that the line given by Hesam 7 and Fruit most likely leads to a forced draw. However, so far GM Shipov (see link above), William Pien at http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/fid... and apparently Zsusza Polgar (according to JMelton's post above) appear to have endorsed the idea that 23. Qd2!? is a forced win for White. Perhaps some of our GM, IM or Master kibitzers on this site would like to weigh in with an opinion? I ran the line in question, 23. Qd2!? Nxe1 24. Nxe1 Ra1 25. Nxh6+ Bxh6 26. Qxh6 to 18 depth & 1171 kN/s on Fritz 8 and a 2 GHZ AMD processor with the following results: Anand,V - Adams,M
click for larger view(26...? Black to move)
Analysis by Fritz 8:
1. = (0.00): 26...Nxd5 27.e5 Rxb1 28.Rxg6+ fxg6 29.Qxg6+ Kf8 30.Qf5+ Kg7 31.Qg5+ Kf7 32.Qf5+ Kg8 33.Qg6+ 2. = (0.00): 26...Re5 27.Nf3 Rxb1 28.Rxg6+ fxg6 29.Qxg6+ Kf8 30.Qh6+ Ke8 31.Nxe5 Rxc1+ 32.Kh2 Qxf2 33.Qe6+ Kf8 3.  (0.62): 26...Re7 27.Be3 Qd8 28.Bd4 Re5 29.Bxe5 dxe5 30.Qc1 Na2 31.Qd1 Nb4 32.Ra3 Rxa3 33.bxa3 Na6 34.Bc2 Qd6 4. (0.69): 26...Qd4
|
|
| Nov-16-05 | | Goran: I really believe Adams had resources to pull the draw. He was probably too shocked with Qd2 |
|
| Dec-14-05 | | AdrianP: "[Kasparov] reveals that he already discovered Anand's spectacular novelty [viz 23 Qd2!?, I guess] Nagainst Adams in San Luis back in 1989." (New in Chess) |
|
| Dec-14-05 | | alicefujimori: <AdrianP>That is no suprise since Kasparov has analyzed that position for so long during his preparations for his matches against Karpov. |
|
Dec-14-05
 | | TheAlchemist: After a brief analysis with my CM10 I found some another beautiful line, that also seems drawish, however: 23...Nxe1 24.Nxh6+!? Bxh6 25.Qxh6 Nxf3+ 26.gxf3 Re7
(Or perhaps 26...Re5 27.f4 Ra1 28.f5! Rxf5 29.exf5 Rxb1 30.fxg6 Rxc1+ 31.Qxc1 with an, I would say, unclear position) 27.Be3 Qd8 (the only move, after 27...Qc7 28.Bg5 or 27...Qa5 28.Rg4) 28.Bd4 Re5 (the only move) 29.f4 Ra1 30.fxe5 Rxb1 31.Kh2 Qf8 (the only move) 32.Rxg6+ with perpetual check I don't know if everyhing here is correct. <Hesam7> What does Fruit have to say about the position after 26.gxf3? |
|
Dec-14-05
| | Hesam7: <TheAlchemist> After: 23... Nxe1 24. Nxh6+? Bxh6 25. Qxh6 Nxf3+ 26. gxf3 27. Be3 Qd8 28. Bd4 Re5 29. f4 Qf8! Fruit gives:
30. Qxf8 Kxf8 31. fxe5 Ra1 32. exd6 Rxb1 33. Kh2 Ke8 34. h4 Rd1 35. Bc3 Nd3 36. h5 gxh5 37. Rg7 Nc5 38. d7 Kxd7 39. Rxf7 Kd6 40. Rf6 Kc7 41. Be5 Kd8 42. Rf8 Ke7 43. Rh8 Nxe4 44. Rh7 Ke8 45. Rxb7 Rxd5 (eval: -1.50) Depth: 23
4935M nodes
750K nodes/sec |
|
Apr-24-06
 | | notyetagm: This game just won the Chess Informant Best Game Prize, yet another one for Anand. Anyone know how many Informant Best Game Prizes Anand has now won? |
|
| Apr-24-06 | | Jim Bartle: Through Informant 64 (up to 1995) his only #1 game was against Ftacnik at Biel 1993. Two losses to Kasparov in 1995 were also rated as the best games. |
|
| Apr-24-06 | | you vs yourself: <notyetagm> How many best game prizes do they give out each year? Didn't you say Topalov won one for his win over Anand? |
|
| Apr-24-06 | | Jim Bartle: They rank one game as the best from each issue of Informant, and there are three per year now. |
|
| Apr-24-06 | | you vs yourself: <Jim Bartle> Thanks! |
|
May-17-06
| | notyetagm: <Jim Bartle: They rank one game as the best from each issue of Informant, and there are three per year now.> Yes, Topalov won the previous one for his win over Anand at M-Tel 2005. Anand just won the most recent one for this victory over Adams at San Luis 2005. And the next Best Game Prize award is going to be a fierce battle between Anand's ...  c7!! victory over Karjakin and Topalov's double exchange sac on e4 win over Aronian, both from Corus 2006. |
|
| Aug-08-06 | | positionalgenius: Adams only defense to this kasparov-grade attack was 23...Nxe1.Still he would have only a draw at best.Great Anand game... |
|
| Aug-18-06 | | dravid: One of Anand's finest! |
|
| Feb-22-07 | | Brown: 23.Be3 is more natural and probably better. |
|
| Apr-22-07 | | Atking: <TheAlchemist: After a brief analysis with my CM10 I found some another beautiful line, that also seems drawish, however: 23...Nxe1 24.Nxh6+!? BxNh6 25.QxBh6 NxNf3+ 26.gxNf3 Re7!> With the idea of Qd8~Qf8 < (Or perhaps 26...Re5 27.f4 Ra1 28.f5! Rxf5 29.exf5 RxBb1 30.fxg6 RxBc1+ 31.QxRc1 with an, I would say, unclear position)> I will prefer White here. To say 31. ...Nd3 32.gxf+ Kxf7 33.Rf3+ If Ke then Qg5 or Qh6 R+Q will trap the King. Else Kg then Qf1!. White has a clear advantage here too. Therefore 26. ...Re7! looks deepest. But instead of "your" 27.Be3?! (Black Queen want to go to f8. This helps) why not pursuie his way by 27.Bg5 ? 27. ...Qd4 28.BxRe7 Qe5 29.Qh4 Kg7 30.f4 Qxb2 31.Bxd6 QxBb1+ 31.Kh2 Qxe4 32.Be5+ Kf8 33.Re3! 27. ...Nxd5 is probabbly the point but I'm not sure that'enought. 28.exNd5 Re1+ 29.Kh2! Qxf2+ 30.Rg2 Qxf3 31.Bxg6 fxBg6 32.Qxg6+ Kf8 33.Bh6+ Ke7 34.Qh7+ Qf7 35.Rg7 looks good for White. I really like Anand's 23.Qd2!! clearly deeper than the oubvious 23.Be3 Maybe an intuitive move. With Bc1 and Bb1 Black7s counter on queen side is one tempo slowest and the Queen could be stronger than a R+N+B if the King is without pawn to protect him. |
|
| Mar-06-08 | | Udit Narayan: looks like both Adams and Kasimdzahnov are testing their earpieces to see if Fritz is coming loud and clear :) |
|
Dec-26-09
| | Hesam7: After 19. ... Qb6 20. Nf5:
click for larger view<1) 20...g6 21 Nf1!. I very much liked this move: 21...gxf5? 22 Rg3+ Kh8 23 Bxh6! or 22...Kh7 23 Qh5 Ne5 24 exf5. But 21...Rxa3 is acceptable: 22 bxa3 Nxd5 23 exd5 Rxe1 24 Qxe1 gxf5 25 Be3 Qd8 (DeFirmian vs A Ivanov, 1996), 25 Bxf5 Ne5 (A Volokitin vs S Azarov, 2007) or 25 Ne3 Qd4 26 Nxf5 Qxd5 27 f3 - it seemed to us that here Black 's defence was difficult, but after 27...Qe5 he holds on;2) 20...Ne5. This looked extremely dangerous because of 21 Rg3 g6 22 Nf3, although after 22...Ned3 nothing decisive for White is apparent: 23 Be3 (if 23 Qd2, then 23...Nxe1, but not 23...Bxd5? 24 Nxh6+! Anand vs Adams, 2005) 23...Qd8 24 Bxd3 Nxd3 25 Nxh6+ Bxh6 26 Bxh6 Nxe1 (26...Qf6!?) 27 Qxe1 Qf6 or 24 Bxh6 Qf6!; a universal maneuver. Now 25 Bxf8? Kxf8 is unfavorable, but Kotronias's recent attempts 25 Qd2 and especially 25 N3h4!? are interesting. We analyzed 19...Qb6 20 Nf5 a great deal and considered it promising for White (a part of this analysis is still topical today!), but modern theory and practice do not confirm our optimism.> -- from "Kasparov vs Karpov 1986-1987" by Kasparov when commenting on 19. ... Rxa3!? in Kasparov vs Karpov, 1986. |
|
Oct-19-10
 | | sevenseaman: 25. Qxh6. The Q abandons defence of f2 to go on the offensive but Anand was equal to the half-baked Adams attack deep in his own barracks. |
|
| Apr-06-11 | | Jaideepblue: Anand prepared 23. Qd2 against Kamsky in their 1995 match. It came into use a decade later though! |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
sac: 25.Qxh6