< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 12 ·
|Dec-13-09|| ||kb2ct: |
Kramnik is lost.
|Dec-13-09|| ||ajile: ???????
|Dec-13-09|| ||zanshin: <The decisive mistake may have already been made a move earlier with 39.Qc2 (instead of Kc1)>|
<Eyal> I went thru the game with Rybka and that's where the evals suddenly increased for Black.
|Dec-13-09|| ||hedgeh0g: The Kramnik game is probably drawn. I would have liked to see Howell win, however, partly because I'm half English and partly because I hate the Petrov and drawing mentalities.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||zanshin: I wonder if <CG> will give us another game.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||Jack Kerouac: <agile> That bishop check is lethal.....|
|Dec-13-09|| ||An Englishman: Good Afternoon: I hope that CG will soldier on with either of the remaining games, as they remain quite complex, but I must check La Liga and then run off to do errands. Nice chatting with everyone!|
|Dec-13-09|| ||whiteshark: <waustad> and if he was thinking about this position, |
click for larger view
it's from Tarasov - Kochnoi, URS-ch Yerevan 1955, <and not in the database here> :D
|Dec-13-09|| ||Ulhumbrus: <chessgames.com> Are you going to broadcast any other games today?|
|Dec-13-09|| ||tpstar: <another game> They went out back to rotate the donkey.|
Q + N can be an endgame advantage over Q + B as the powers of Q & N complement each other better, yet in this instance White's unsafe King proved fatal. Congratulations to Carlsen.
|Dec-13-09|| ||waustad: Naka is toast|
|Dec-13-09|| ||chessgames.com: That's it for today. We'll be back tomorrow morning at 9:00am Eastern for the penultimate round of the 2009 London Chess Classic. Hope to see you then!|
|Dec-13-09|| ||eternaloptimist: <tpstar> how is it that a + complement each other better than a + ? i've heard that b4, but it seems like it would be the opposite because the & can both control diagonals. please elaborate on that.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||whiteshark: this kind of endgames depends on some factors, e.g. king's safety, strength of pawn shield or type of position (open/closed). At least these three were favourable for black here.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||TheBB: <eternaloptimist> I guess it's a matter of trying it out. I'm not very good, but I can "feel" how the queen and knight fit together. It may be so simple that the bishop's moves are a strict subset of the queen's, while a knight has genuinely unique moves.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||ajile: <Jack Kerouac: <agile> That bishop check is lethal.....>|
When I left the position looked equal.
|Dec-13-09|| ||Landman: <eternaloptimist> The theory I've heard is that Q+B's capabilities overlap, and the Q+N are a bit more compltementary. Sounds right to me.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||eternaloptimist: <shark & TheBB> thx for ur input.
<shark> it does indeed depend on those factors that u pointed out. in this case the + prevailed over the + because of ni's weak e-pawn & the threat ...d3+. i think that whether or not u have s or not on both sides of the board is very important because the has a speed advantage over the . if s r on both sides of the board then the will win in most cases because the is too slow & awkward to have time to defend its s.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||ajile: <eternaloptimist: <shark & TheBB> thx for ur input. <shark> it does indeed depend on those factors that u pointed out. in this case the + prevailed over the + because of ni's weak e-pawn & the threat ...d3+.>|
The fact that White played a wrong move also might be a factor. 39..Qc2?
|Dec-13-09|| ||eternaloptimist: that's true <ajile>. also, the spite check 40.c8+?! didn't help matters for ni either.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||keypusher: <eternaloptimist: <tpstar> how is it that a Q + N complement each other better than a Q + B? i've heard that b4, but it seems like it would be the opposite because the Q & B can both control diagonals. please elaborate on that.>|
<TheBB>'s answer is as good as any. The idea that the Queen and knight complement each other better goes back to Capablanca. But if I recall correctly, John Watson looked at the statistics and found that Q+B outscored Q+N.
A lot depends on the player, as well as the position. I'd rather have the Q+B myself. As an illustration, if you put a white king on g1, a black queen on h3 and a black bishop on c5, I think you'll agree that the queen and bishop are complementing each other very well.
|Dec-13-09|| ||eternaloptimist: it's good to see people replying to my posts in a positive & helpful context @ this game. a pretty good bit of time either people only comment if they disagree w/ me or they ignore my comments altogether. although, i don't mind people disagreeing w/ me some. thx guys.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||eternaloptimist: <keypusher: ...As an illustration, if you put a white king on g1, a black queen on h3 and a black bishop on c5, I think you'll agree that the queen and bishop are complementing each other very well.> LOL :D yes, they would be "complementing each other very well" because the white would be checkmated. thx for ur interesting comments...the opinion of capa, the research of watson & the humor as well.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||notyetagm: Another well-played game by Carlsen.|
|Dec-13-09|| ||GreenFacedPatzer: Games like this just demonstate how I don't understand endgames, particularly endgames with queens still on the board. Five moves before the end, I'd've said this was a dead draw. Pawns are symmetrical, there's a Q+N vs Q+B imbalance, but ordinarily I'd be hard-pressed to turn that into anything like a winning advantage in a position like this.|
And in five moves, without any move from white that looked horribly wrong to me, it's all over.
Like I said, I don't understand these endgames. :)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 12 ·