|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-27-11 | | erniecohen: I think that <maxi> is suggesting taking on b2 without trying to grab the rook, e.g. 7...♕xb2 8. e6 ♘f6 9. ♘e2 ♘a6 10. 0-0 ♘b4 11. ♕c3 ♕xc3 12. ♘b1xc3 ♘xc2 13. ♖b1 b5 14. a4 fxe6 15. axb5 ♘a3 16. ♖b2 cxb5 17. ♘xb5 ♘xb5 18. ♖xb5 = :
click for larger view |
|
| Dec-27-11 | | Tigranny: Why not 27...Kh7? |
|
| Dec-27-11 | | mrbasso: The practical results after 7...Qxb2 8.e6 are disastrous for black (+9 =1 -0 in my database). |
|
| Dec-27-11 | | Shams: <mrbasso><The practical results after 7...Qxb2 8.e6 are disastrous for black (+9 =1 -0 in my database).> Wow, how big is your db? Even the really slutty 365chess.com database has only two games in this line, both white wins from strong masters. Here's one: http://www.365chess.com/view_game.p...
In both games White did indeed meet 7...Qxb2 with 8.e6. But Shredder absolutely hates this line for White! I mean, the eval is -3.65 at 14/14. Shredder line: <8...Qxa1 9.Qb3 fxe6 10.Qxb7 Nd7 11.Qxa8+ Kf7 12.Qxc6 Qxb1+ 13.Ke2 Ngf6 14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Qxd7 Qxc2+ 16.Ke1 Qb1+ 17.Ke2 Qxa2+...> |
|
| Dec-27-11 | | erniecohen: <Shams> No wonder Shredder hates this line, if it thinks 10. ♕xb7 is a good movefor white. Instead, 10. ♘f3 b5 11. 0-0 ♘h6 12. ♘b1d2 ♕xf1+ 13. ♔xf1 looks good for White. |
|
| Dec-27-11 | | Shams: <ernie> Yes, you are right about 10.Nf3. But now Shredder is deviating previous to that, preferring 9...b5 instead with an eval of -1.35 and giving a line wherein Black's Queen is able to dart back onsides. Sorry, I am not a particularly savvy engine user. |
|
| Dec-27-11 | | erniecohen: <Shams> Give the line, please. |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | Shams: <erniecohen> 8.e6 Qxa1 9.Qb3 b5 10.Nf3 Nf6 11.0-0 Ne4 12.Bc1 Nc5 13.dxc5 Qf6 14.Re1 fxe6 15.Bg5 Qf7 16.Nd4 e5  (-1.35) 14/46 |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | erniecohen: <Shams> Well, the line isn't too unreasonalbe, but the final evaluation is. Black is in serious trouble, despite his material advantage. His ♔ is trapped in the center, he has no way to develop is ♖ and ♗ without giving up material, his ♕ is practically stalemated, and he has no way to defend his queenside from invasion of the White ♕. Play might continue 17. ♖xe5 ♘d7 18. ♖e6 ♖c8 19. ♕a3 ♖h6 20. ♗xh6 gxh6 21. ♕a6 ♖c7 22. ♖xc6 ♕f4 23. ♘e6 ♕c1+ 24. ♔h2 ♘b8 25. ♘xc7+ ♔d7 26. ♕xb5 ♕f4+ 27. ♔g1 ♕c1+ 28. ♕f1 ♕xf1+ 29. ♔xf1 ♘xc6 30. ♘xd6  |
|
Dec-28-11
 | | maxi: What does the 46 in 14/46 mean, please? |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | Chicago Chess Man: <erniecohen> in the line you gave, why wouldn't black play 18...Nxc5....? |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | erniecohen: <<Chicago Chess Man>: <erniecohen> in the line you gave, why wouldn't black play 18...Nxc5....?> Because after 19. ♕c3, queenside slaughter ensues, e.g. 19... ♘xe6 20. ♕xc6+ ♔d7 21. ♕xa8+ ♔d2 22. ♕c6+ ♔d8 23. ♕xd5+ ♔c7 24. ♘xe6+ leads to checkmate or wins the ♕. |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | Shams: <erniecohen> Thanks for your analysis, I'm convinced. 8.e6 is a nice move. |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | Shams: <maxi> <What does the 46 in 14/46 mean, please?> You've caught me. I don't know. I only appended those numbers because I have noted that other people append stuff when they post engine lines, and those numbers are what Shredder gives me. |
|
Dec-28-11
| | maxi: <Shams> The first number, 14, is the number of plys, that is, the moves for both sides that are being calculated ahead before there is a position evaluation. In this case it would be 7 moves ahead, and then the evaluation gave a disadvantage of 1.35 Pawns for Black. Perhaps somebody else would be kind enough to enlighten us about the meaning of the 46. |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | erniecohen: <Shams> 8. e6 is the right response to 7...♕xb2, but it is objectively not nearly so strong as one would think from the historical results. Black can achieve equality or better with careful play. |
|
| Dec-28-11 | | erniecohen: The second number is the selective search depth - essentially, how far the engine is searching in certain forcing/critical lines. |
|
Dec-29-11
| | maxi: <erniecohen> I had suspected that was the meaning of the second number, but I found it hard to believe that the forcing lines could go so deep, 46 plies for a branching of only 14! Remarkable programming! |
|
| Dec-29-11 | | erniecohen: <maxi> The long lines aren't necessarily forcing, they're basically just whatever the engine thinks it needs to get past tactics to a meaningful positional evaluation. So for example it normally includes all possible checks and captures, no matter how silly-looking. |
|
Dec-29-11
| | maxi: Granted, <erniecohen>, but still there is a big difference between 46 and 14. I wonder what is going on. |
|
Dec-30-11
| | maxi: Anyway, going back to the opening, what I got from this game is that 6.Bd3 basically refutes 5...Qb6, since 5...Qb6 6.Bd3 BxB 6.QxB Qxb2 7.e6 leaves White with an advantage. In my view the main strenght of 7.e6 is not so much the weakening of the Black King, but impeding Black's Bishop to act along the f8-a6 diagonal and thus coming to the aid of the Black Queen. |
|
Dec-30-11
| | maxi: So perhaps the way to go for Black would be to follow Capablanca's idea in the Caro-Kann and play 7...Qa6, as in Shirov-Anand 2011. |
|
Jan-01-12
| | maxi: The link is Shirov vs Anand, 2011 |
|
Jan-01-12
 | | kamalakanta: Black does not take the rook....remains with an extra pawn... 7...Qxb2 8.Ne2 e6 9.0-0 Na6, and consolidates.... |
|
Jan-01-12
| | maxi: <kamalakanta> That is not the line under discussion, since 8.e6 seems better than 8.Ne2. Can Black consolidate after 8.e6? In the line I gave before the numbering is not right (although the moves are). The correct numbering is 5...Qb6 6.Bd3 BxB 7.QxB Qxb2 8.e6 |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
