|Oct-05-12|| ||KingV93: Gutsy, to play with the Queen against a Rook and 2 minor pieces, and brilliant to trade down and win with the pawns against a lone Knight. Good game!|
|Oct-05-12|| ||xthred: Why does White stutter on move 38?|
|Oct-05-12|| ||Razgriz: Great game. Only if the king was closer to the queenside then it may have be more exciting.|
|Oct-05-12|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: I used to play the 4.e3 English, and this game brings back a few memories of what can happen when White neglects development (although I would lose in far more mundane fashion).|
|Oct-05-12|| ||FSR: <xthred: Why does White stutter on move 38?>|
He was probably hoping that Black would play 38...Qxd4, when White would be a tempo up on the game continuation.
|Oct-05-12|| ||RookFile: Right. In other words, there was no harm in what he did. He had to either take the queen immediately, or move it to d4 to protect the bishop. With correct play by black, either choice leads to the same position, but 38. Bd4 offered black a chance to err by 38......Qxd4.|
|Oct-05-12|| ||ninja warrior: Great to see a game by Ken Plesset as game of the day!! Rest in peace, Ken... I knew him well, as he was the strongest player in my town of Sequim, WA & i've played many games with him over the years. he took me on as sort of a chess mentor when i was a young man and knew nothing but tactics. we travelled to Las Vegas together by car for the 2000 US National Open (I played Nakamura in a simul there and drew my game against him--a crazy, chaotic fighting draw!) and i remember an enlarged copy of a news article detailing his loss vs. Spassky in a simul, hanging in his living room (Spassky offered Ken a draw and Ken refused, as Ken had THREE of Spassky's pieces en prise!! <--that game is in Ken's profile games...) also, Ken i believe won a World Correspondence Chess Championship with 10 wins, no draws, no losses... the golden knights tournament of some year if memory serves. the man had a deep love of chess and did much to further the advancement of chess in his lifetime... he was a good friend and it was sad to hear of his passing...|
|Oct-05-12|| ||Tired Tim: And the pun? Is this another that doesn't travel over the Atlantic to the home of Patsy and Edina?|
|Oct-05-12|| ||FSR: <Tired Tim> I guess you already knew (I didn't) that <Absolutely Fabulous> was a British television series. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolu... The only relationship to this game that I can see is that the game was played in the the USCF "Absolute" Championship.|
|Oct-05-12|| ||goodevans: For the second time this week the GOTD features at least the prospect of <R + 2 minors vs Q> (see kibitzing on Carlsen vs Topalov, 2010). The difference this time is that black has a bucketfull of pawns as well so you'd think he'd have the advantage.|
It seems to me that <34...g6> was instrumental in black's rapid demise, creating a whole bunch of dark square weaknesses around the king that white was able to exploit to produce a winning endgame. I think if black had held onto all three K-side pawns then white wouldn't have been able to trade R + minor for Q to the same effect.
|Oct-05-12|| ||FSR: <goodevans: ... It seems to me that <34...g6> was instrumental in black's rapid demise, creating a whole bunch of dark square weaknesses around the king that white was able to exploit to produce a winning endgame.>|
Say what? Black <won> the endgame.
|Oct-05-12|| ||goodevans: <FSR: ...Say what? Black <won> the endgame.>|
|Oct-05-12|| ||goodevans: ... but I still think <34...g6> was an inferior move.|
|Oct-05-12|| ||wildrookie: How come Black won this game? Why wasn't White able to stopthe advance of Black pawns with his White knight?|
|Oct-05-12|| ||sagahelten: According to Fritz, Black had an easier win after 32.Rd8. He could have played 32...Qe3+ 33. Kg2 Qe2+ 34. Kg3 h4+! 35. Nxh4 Rxd8 36. Rxd8+ Kh7 37. Bd4 Qe1+ 38. Bf2 Qe5+ 39. Kg4 g5 40. Ng2 f5+ 41. Kxg5 Qe7+ and Black wins|
|Oct-05-12|| ||dakgootje: <How come Black won this game? Why wasn't White able to stopthe advance of Black pawns with his White knight?>|
Might in numbers!
There are too many pawns for that poor limited-distance knight.
Say for instance the game continues 43. Ne6 Kb3 44. Nc5+ Kxa3 45. Nxb7 Kxb4 and white will have a terrible time stopping that a-pawn. White will probably have to sac the kniht - and then the k-side pawns just roll down the board.
Doesn't really seem like white could've done much better from move 40 and on either. Blacks g/h pawns are fairly slow, so there's time to attack the a/b/c pawns. Knight is best suited for that. However, it isn't all that well equipped for capturing those pawns - so black has time enough to do some pawn-killing as well.
|Oct-05-12|| ||kevin86: A knight cannot stop FOUR pawns.|
|Oct-05-12|| ||master of defence: I donīt see a win for black after 43.Kg3.|
|Oct-05-12|| ||goodevans: <master of defence: I donīt see a win for black after 43.Kg3>|
I tried to put together an analysis of this but there are so many variations that I just gave up. In essence though the key is that at least one of the white pawns is doomed and so black will have majorities on both sides. That's just too much for the poor K and N to cope with.
I would recommend you try it yourself at +final+position">http://www.chessvideos.tv/endgame-t... and I guarantee you'll soon convince yourself that that's the case.
|Oct-05-12|| ||bischopper: go ahead the pawns for gain time and to close the king and to help together|
|Oct-14-12|| ||DarthStapler: I don't get the pun, are the players gay or something?|
|Oct-14-12|| ||perfidious: <Darth> See the response of 5th October to <Tired Tim> by <FSR>.|