Reviewing previous posts is all too rare and therefore worthy of praise. However, if you did it more carefully, you'd find that Ba4 has been found by someone else.

Hard to tell. Both require more analysis than I can fit in my silicon monster's memory. Both include traps and positions that require deep analysis before proceeding. So far, I've seen a slight edge to Ba4, but not as much as I initially thought it would be. In the best lines I found, the difference is about 0.30-0.40 points, after descending full 10-15 moves. There is just too much uncertainty in these lines.

Dynamic Evaluation: As it stands, the knight on e3 is en-prise. The white diagonal a4-e8 looks tempting but b5 or c6 would close it.
The white diagonal, b1 -h7 may be use to effect.
Reasonable move, Bf5 (pin bishop to Queen)has support of Ne3 and g4.
Candidate move Bf5
What if, Bh7+, Kg7 , Nf5+ Bxf5 Bxf5
candidate move Bh7
Then we have, Rh8+, Kxh8, Qh1+ Kg7, Qh7#. looks good. candidate move Rh8

9.Rh8+ ...Kxh8 30.Qh1+ ...Kg7 31.Qh7#

PM=

Had the right idea, just lacked finesse.

Gennadi Kuzmin - Ajai Choudhary, New Delhi 1984

Analysis by Fritz 11: depth 21/48 time 10min 19

1. (1.15): 29.Rh1-h8+ Kg8-g7 30.Rh8-h7+ Kg7-g8 31.Bc2-d3 Nf4-h5+ 32.Rh7xh5 d4xe3 33.Qd1-h1 Kg8-f8 34.Ra1-d1 Qd7-a4 35.Rh5xg5 Kf8-e7 36.Rg5-g8 Rd8-d5 37.Rg8xe8+ Ke7xe8 38.f3-f4 Qa4xa2 39.f4-f5

2. = (0.21): 29.c3xd4 Qd7xd4 30.Rh1-h8+ Kg8-g7 31.Rh8-h7+ Kg7-f8 32.Qd1xd4 Rd8xd4 33.Rh7-h2 Nf4-d5 34.Ra1-e1 Nd5xe3 35.Re1xe3 Be6-d5 36.Bc2-b3 Bd5xb3 37.Re3xb3 b7-b6 38.Rb3-c3 c7-c5 39.Rc3-a3 Re8xe5 40.Ra3xa6

Thanks.

<On another topic, I think I'll stick to 100% and trademark/copyright that phrase, as google seems to indicate that nobody else used it before :-)>

29.Nf5 attacks e7...d4xc3 not playable

... Bx[N]f5 30. Bx[B]f5 Q --

31. Rh8+ (...Kg7? 32. Rh7+)

Kx[R]h8 32. Qh1+ Kg7/8

33.Qh7+ Kf8 34.Qh6+ Ke7

35.Qxg5+ Kf8 36. Qx[N]f4

The game text is incomprehensible - to me at any rate -

Well I saw a lot of posts and they were yammering on about Bd3??

Sorry for missing your post...but you could be a little less arrogant!!

The moves displayed were rough work and I doubt you could do better in five min.

So don't be so bleeding disrespectful!

Ba4! is by far the better move!

So you really haven't found it!

Or if 31. Qh1 Ne2+ 32 Kg2 Nf4+ 33 Kg3 (33 Kf1 Qb5+ 34 Kg1 (34. Ke1 Qe2# ; 34. c4 Bxc4+ 35. Ke1 Qb4+ 36. Kd1 dxe3+ 37. Kc1 Qd2+ 38. Kb1 Qxc2+! and wins (forced mate!)BUT there is also 25. Kg1 Ne2+ 26. Kg2 Nf4+ etc ) Ne2+ 35 Kg2 perpetual or if 35. Kh2 Qxe5+ 36 Kh3 Qg3# or 36. Kg2 Nf4 + or Qg3+) so it is draw or Black wins or it is disruptive.

No-one as White analyses all this: one just sees the knight and Q checks even though White threatens mate in 2 he cant win.

I don't have a computer "engine" dos that is all my own analysis - all I do is my own.

31. Bd3 is clever - it's kind of "pause "move or zwischenzuggy or zuggwangy move! but I think my move is fun also!

I didn't look at 31 Ba4 but it looks pretty good - to attack the Black Q is always a good idea!

click for larger view

the (obvious - or should have been!) after the hubristic 32 Qh1 Qe6! which probably wins....stupid of me!

So I tried as in the game:

click for larger view

31 Bd3 but it played Nh5+ and after 32. Rxh5 dxe3 I could only get a draw with careful play.

But when I set the initial position up the Chessmaster immediately played 31. Ba4 and I could only manage a draw eventually but it seems 31 Ba4! may be thee best move...

All this shows that the greatest chess players all rely on a degree of inaccuracy (and 'the human factor') to win games (of course) and many of our "gerat combinations we value - subjected to computer analysis will all be probabaly found to have flaws in them - BUT they will still be full of beautiful ideas)

For example, 29. Rh8+ Kg7 30. Rh7+ <Kf8> 31. Qh1 Ne2+ 32. Kg2 Nf4+ 33. Kf1 Ng6 34. Qh6+ Ke7 35. Bxg6 dxe3 36. Bxf7 Rh8 37. Rxh8 (37. Bxe6+ Rxh7 38. Bxd7 Rxh6) Rxh8 38. Qxh8 Bxf7 39. Qf6+ Ke8 40. Qxg5 Qd2.

All right, if you see an improvement for white in this line, please share it:

31. Ba4 dxe3 32. Bxd7 Kxh7 33. Qc2+ Kg7 34. Bxe8 Rd2 35. Qxd2 exd2 36. Rd1 Nd3 37. Rxd2 Nxe5 38. Ba4 Bxa2 39. b3 Bb1 40. Bd7

or this one:

29. Rh8+ Kg7 30. Rh7+ Kg8 31. Ba4! Qe7 32. Qh1 Ng6 33. Qh6 Qf8 34. cxd4 Qxh6 35. Rxh6 Kg7 36. Rah1 Rh8

Or perhaps an improvement for black in this one:

31. Bd3 Nh5+ 32. Rxh5 dxe3 33. Qh1 Kf8 34. Rd1 e2 35. Bxe2 Qa4 36. Rxg5 Rxd1 37. Qxd1 Qxa2 38. Qc1 Ke7 39. Rh5

Hey al wazir. It is interesting that you mentioned 30...Kf8. I too was wondering why Black had not played that.

To be honest - It doesn't seem out of place in the great scheme of things.

It is possible...Although I would like to see how the engines would play it.

In your line though you missed the critical tactical shot 35. Qxg6 which gives White a won game.

LTJ

For example, 29. Rh8+ Kg7 30. Rh7+ <Kf8> 31. Qh1 Ne2+ 32. Kg2 Nf4+ 33. Kf1 33. Ng6>

33 ... Qb5+ 34. Kf2 ( dxe3+ 35. Kg3 Ne2+ 36. Kg2 Nf4 with at least a perpetual or 36..Rd2 probably winning) Qe2+ 35. Kg3 dxe3 36. Qh2 or 36. Qh6+ Ke7 37 Qxg5+ Kd7 38 Kxf4 39 Ba4+ or

<34. Qh6+ Ke7 35. Bxg6 >

35. Qxg5+ is another poss.

<dxe3 36. Bxf7>

36. Qxg5+ Kf8 37. Rh8+ Kg7 38. Qf6#

< Rh8 37. Rxh8 >

37.Qf6+ wins

<(37. Bxe6+ Rxh7 38. Bxd7 Rxh6) Rxh8 38. Qxh8 Bxf7 39. Qf6+ Ke8 40. Qxg5 Qd2. and so on...>>

But after 30 ...Kf8 my idea was 31 Nf5 which threatens mate but I am not sure

30...Kf8 31. Nf5 Bxf5 and now

a) 32. Bxf5 Qd5 (there are quite few other moves of course) and Black seems o.k.

b) 32. gxf5 and Black potentially threatens f6 etc (remembering that that opens up h3 to a possible Qh3+ in some vars)

Here's one little line:

32 ... Rxe5 33. f6 Ne2+ 34. Qxe2 Rxe2 35. Rh8#!! Lol.

Another:

32 ... d3 33. f6 Ng6 34. Qh1 Kg8 35. Qh6 seems to win.

and

32 ... what else?

This combination by Kuzmin shows the cut and thrust and difficulty of chess - nothing is certain in many positions! I would still have sacrificed on h8 as I cant resist such moves!!

If I may be excused for persistently voicing an opinion with a tiny hint of disagreement, I still see no evidence for a huge advantage of Ba4. Forward analysis at 21 or more plies-per-move, followed by a backslide seem to indicate the following as the optimal line up to move 40:

31. Ba4 Qe7 32. Qh1 Ng6 33. Qh6 Qf8 34. cxd4 Qxh6 35. Rxh6 Kg7 36. Rah1 Rh8 37. Nf5+ Kg8 38. Rxh8+ Nxh8 39. Ne7+ Kg7

A 22-ply analysis of the resulting position evaluates the position at (+1.98). I run out the rest on auto-play at 20 plies per move. Some intermediate valuations are included (21-22 plies deep, to confirm the correctness of the move chosen at 20 plies).

40. Rh5 Bxa2 41. Nf5+ Kg8 42. Rxg5+ Ng6 43. Rh5 a5 44. Bc2 c5 45. dxc5 Rd2 46. Rh2 Rxh2 47. Kxh2 Nxe5 48. Kg3 Kf8 49. Nd6 Bd5 <+1.91>

50. Kf4 Nd7 51. Be4 Bxe4 52.
Nxe4 Ke7 53. Ke3 b6 54. Kd4 bxc5+ 55. Nxc5 Nb6 56. g5 Nc8 57. f4 Nd6 58. Kd5 Nc8 59. b3 Nd6 <+2.87>

60. Ke5 Ne8 61. Ne4 Nc7 62. Nd6 Na6 63. Nb7 Nb4 64. Nxa5 Nd3+ 65. Ke4 Nb4 66. f5 Ke8 67. Nc4 Kf8 68. Nb6 Nc6 69. Nd5 Kg7 <+6.09 -- time to resign>

70. b4 Kf8 71. b5
Na5 72. Nb6 Ke8 73. Kd5 Nb7 74. Nc4 Nd8 75. Kd6 Nb7+ 76. Kc6 f6 77. g6 Nd8+ 78. Kc7 Nf7 79. gxf7+ Kxf7 80. Ne3 Kg7 81. Ng4 Kh7 82. b6 Kg8 83. b7 Kf8 84. b8=Q+ Kg7 85. Qe8 Kh7 86. Qf7+ Kh8 87. Qf8+ Kh7 88. Nxf6# 1-0

A similar procedure for Bd3 produced:

31. Bd3 Nh5+ 32. Rxh5 dxe3 33. Qh1 Kf8 34. Rd1 e2 35. Bxe2 Qa4 36. Rxg5 Rxd1 37. Qxd1 Qxd1 38. Bxd1 Rd8 39. Bb3 Bxb3 40. axb3 Rd2

A 22-ply analysis of the resulting position evaluates the position at (+1.62). The 0.36 improvement for Ba4 is not a huge advantage. Here's the rest of the game:

41. Rf5 Ke7 42. b4 Rxb2 43. Rf4 b5 44. Rf6 Ra2 45. Kf4 a5 46. bxa5 Rxa5 47. Ke4 Ra4+ 48. Kd3 c5 49. g5 Rh4 <+1.68>

50. Rb6 Rf4 51. Ke3 Rc4 52. Rxb5 Ke6
53. Kd3 Rf4 54. Ke2 Kd5 55. Rb7 Ke6 56. Rc7 Rf5 57. Rxc5 Rxg5 58. f4 Rg2+ 59. Ke3 Rc2 <+3.18>

60. Rc6+ Kd7 61. Kd3 Rc1 62. Rf6 Ke7 63. c4 Ke8 64. Kd4 Rd1+ 65. Ke4 Rc1 66. Kd5 Ke7 67. c5 Rc2 68. f5 Rd2+ 69. Kc6 Rf2 <+9.53, resignation overdue>

70. Kb7 Kf8 71. e6 Rb2+ 72.
Kc7 Ke8 73. Rxf7 Rc2 74. c6 Rxc6+ 75. Kxc6 Kd8 76. Rd7+ Kc8 77. Kb6 Kb8 78. Rd8# 1-0

Both appear to be winning, but I would give the nod to 31. Ba4

I don't have a quad computer and the time to devout a days worth of analysis.

In my rough line White wins faster with 31. Ba4 and it's seems clearer than than 31. Bd3 unless Black is foolish enough to play NxB.

This is why John von Neumann who studied game theory and other mathematical matters - did not consider chess a a game -but in reality - for us mortals chess is effectively an infinite puzzle...

For myself - a bunny or a patzer par excellence, chess is infinitely baffling!

I once looked up Infinity in the Britannica and there is big discussion of & by philosophers and mathematicians etc as to whether there is such a thing as infinity. There is no agreement on the concept...