Feb-07-12
 | | Robin01: Looks more like a Grunfeld than a KID. |
 |
Feb-07-12
 | | whiteshark: <Robin01: Looks more like a Grunfeld than a KID.> There are probably hundreds (if not thousands) of misclassified GID games in this database. It seems it's not on the ceegee high priority board.
Makes the KID/GID statistics imo a priori worthless. |
|
| Feb-07-12 | | King Death: This game is more like Morphy-NN than a modern game. The young GM got a hard lesson here. |
|
Feb-07-12
| | whiteshark: <Novelty of stem-game: 9. ...b6> <9...e5> worked in C Ward vs C Seel, 2004 |
|
| Feb-07-12 | | King Death: One thing I just realized about this opening, it winds up in a position that looks like the old Simagin line against the Grunfeld Exchange after 9...b6, but if I remember right when White plays f2-f3, it's hard to make a dent in the center by playing the usual way so Black has to be ready for a quick attack with h2-h4-h5, and the move played in the game noted by <whiteshark> is probably better. Maybe all of this is so much crap but it's something I haven't really looked at in probably 25 years. |
|
Feb-07-12
 | | kdogphs: Okay... I sacrifice pieces and get bombed off the board... Jobava does the same and bombs Robson!!! UNFAIR!!! |
|
| Feb-07-12 | | Ezzy: Perhaps Robson was trying the 'Nigel Short king walk' - Short vs Timman, 1991 - to try and mate his opponent in the middlegame, but went a bit wrong :-) |
|
Feb-07-12
 | | cro777: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.f3!? Nc6!? 4.Nc3 d5 5.cxd5 Nxd5 6.e4 Nxc3 7.bxc3
click for larger view
The standard Grunfeld Defense, but with the included moves f3 for White and ...Nc6 for Black. The further struggle went in Grunfeld style, however it's hard to relate it directly to the mentioned defense. In general, the variants after 3.f3!? that don't develop into the major openings are usually referred to "Anti-Grunfeld". (GM Mikhail Golubev) |
|
| Feb-07-12 | | timhortons: 
click for larger view18...e6
19...f5
could have stem the tide.
21...f5 is like opening a damn only you get drowned with it. |
|
| Feb-07-12 | | galdur: I think it was pretty much resignable after 19.Qa3. |
|
| Feb-08-12 | | Penguincw: Jobava had no need to castle in this game. |
|
| Feb-08-12 | | drukenknight: did he have a need for 20 Qe3? |
|
| Feb-08-12 | | Refused: <timhortons:
click for larger view
18...e6
19...f5
could have stem the tide.
21...f5 is like opening a damn only you get drowned with it.> I haven't checked it with an engine but 18...e6
19.Qa3 f5
20.exf6 doesn't look very pleasent for black neither
the pawn g6 is marked as dead meat in the near future and I doubt the black King will get very happy.
e.g. 20...Rxf6 21. Bg5 and I would not be too happy with that position. The Bishop pair aiming for the king side and the rook on h1 should be enough to have some. On a further note 3...Nc6 in combination with 4...d5 looks like a safe into trouble.
Basically Black got into a position similar to the (old) exchange variation of the Grünfeld Indian, which is already very pleasent to play for white imho. But instead of being able to attack the center with c5 now there is this stupid Knight on c6 blocking the c-pawn. And white has a rocksolid centre for the moment. And Jobava starts to attack the black's kingside before Robson was able to challeng him in the centre. Very logical and consistent play by Jobava. |
|
| Feb-08-12 | | King Death: < Refused: ...Basically Black got into a position similar to the (old) exchange variation of the Grünfeld Indian, which is already very pleasent to play for white imho. But instead of being able to attack the center with c5 now there is this stupid Knight on c6 blocking the c-pawn. > See my note above, in re the Simagin variation where Black delays ...c7-c5.
Here's a game by a strong GM in this, Yusupov vs Gulko, 1989. |
|
| Feb-08-12 | | timhortons: thanks for your analysis refused, mine is computer asisted, all my kibitz regarding games are actually computer asisited,i just want to make that clear.Thanks for the input. |
|
| Feb-09-12 | | Refused: <King Death: < Refused: ...Basically Black got into a position similar to the (old) exchange variation of the Grünfeld Indian, which is already very pleasent to play for white imho. But instead of being able to attack the center with c5 now there is this stupid Knight on c6 blocking the c-pawn. >
See my note above, in re the Simagin variation where Black delays ...c7-c5. Here's a game by a strong GM in this, Yusupov vs Gulko, 1989.> Well yes and no. The game between Yupov and Gulko and this one differs in one important respect.
Yusupov played Bc4 before Black played Nc6.
The difference is not trivial. A standard move for black in the old main line of the GID-exchange is Na5 to kick the Bishop from c4. That was possible for Gulko, and he gained the time to play c5 the next move.
Here Jobava placed is Bishop on d3 thus Robson's 10...Na5 kicked thin air and Jobava could proceed with his assault without having to spend a tempo for Bc4-d3
Another difference is Yusupov had castled very early on, Jobava didn't. Thus the white rook was standing on h1 and was ready to support the assault.
Note: with the closed center Jobava's King was in no danger whatsoever in the middle.
So my point is, with the light squared Bishop on c4 it's a different story imho. Without the Bishop on c4 the conception to play Nc6 before attacking the center with c5 first might have been a bit too much.
On another note. I don't play the GID as black, since I feel black has too many problems to solve. And I love to play the old exchange variation against it, if black can't mount enough pressure against the white centre he risks getting crushed on the kingside. I like my fortified centre and I find the position quite comfortable to play. So maybe I am missing something important here. A prototypical game.
P H Nielsen vs McShane, 2003 |
|
| Feb-09-12 | | King Death: <Refused> Where did I say the position was exactly the same? |
|
| Feb-09-12 | | Refused: < King Death: <Refused> Where did I say the position was exactly the same?> You did not, and neither did I say you did.
I just pointed out the differences between Yusupov-Gulko and Jobava-Robson, and why I think the Nc6 was doomed to fail here, while Gulko could play it back then. |
|
Feb-18-12
 | | Zenchess: 21...f5?? was suicidal. 21...Rh8!, contesting the open file, appears to hold. |
|
Feb-19-12
| | whiteshark: Position after <24... Kxe5> "It is hard to believe that the position below is from a game between 2 gms, but it is true! The Black King is centralized on a board filled with hostile pieces. <Certainly not the kind of thing Steinitz meant when he wrote <"The King is a fighting piece.">> Your task, should you accept it, is to deliver mate to the Black King in exactly 7 moves. Good luck!" -Kevin Spraggett |
|
sac: 26.f4+
