< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 11 ·
|Jul-26-12|| ||Eyal: <Whatís the modern state of theory in that variation? The same as before: itís alive, but the only people who decide to enter into it are those who are prepared to play, for example, the Botvinnik Variation of the Slav. Except there are even fewer playing the Polugaevsky. In order to play and understand that variation you had to have read Lev Abramovichís brilliant book about it. The majority of contemporary youngsters, however, havenít even heard of the book, although for our generation it simply sent a chill down your spine!|
Alas, those hellish torments and triumphs of the spirit about which Polugaevsky wrote are simply unknown to them. And Nakamura went for the variation for one simple reason: it was 10:1 that Wang Hao wouldnít expect such an opening choice from him.> (from Vlad Tkachiev & Evgeny Atarov's round report, http://whychess.com/en/node/2449)
|Jul-26-12|| ||perfidious: <FSR> Did you ever play the Polugaevsky?|
|Jul-26-12|| ||FSR: <perfidious> No, too many lines to memorize. And I played the Classical Sicilian a lot more than I ever played the Najdorf. Partly I did so because about half the time you end up facing an Anti-Sicilian, and against almost all the Anti-Sicilians I'd rather have ...Nc6 on the board than ...d6. The one exception, and an annoying one it is, is against 3.Bb5.|
|Jul-27-12|| ||perfidious: <FSR> Me either, though the Najdorf was my choice from 1975-1978. Closest I ever came was one time against a friend and fellow club member who liked the main line, when I played the Poisoned Pawn.|
Back in those days, IIRC there were a lot more players willing to go down the main lines. Those times I faced 2.Nc3, it was someone who actually wanted to play some form or other of the Closed, instead of a spoilsport who wanted to steer the game away from Najdorf lines.
In my opinion, objectively, 3.Bb5(+) doesn't offer an advantage, but White gets the game he wants and avoids reams of theory. Even tried it a time or three myself.
You mentioned the Classical; for all the different openings I played, not once did the Classical find its way into my repertoire. Never even occurred to me to have a go, probably because there were too many other things.
|Jul-27-12|| ||FSR: <perfidious> Strange that you never played it. The only bad thing about the Classical is 6.Bg5! IMO, there's still no clear way to equalize against it. You pretty much have to accept positions with doubled f-pawns, and if things go wrong, you get crushed.|
|Jul-27-12|| ||FSR: <perfidious> I don't like 2...Nc6 3.Bb5 for Black (maybe 3...d6 is best), but 2...d6 3.Bb5+ seems candy-assed. Black can equalize with 3...Bd7 and 11...d5!!, e.g. Delchev vs Ivanchuk, 2003; play for the win with 3...Nd7; or play 3...Nc6, transposing into the aforementioned line.|
|Jul-27-12|| ||perfidious: <FSR> In my Najdorf days, I always played 3....Bd7 against 3.Bb5+, but today I'd likely try 3....Nd7. In the blitz events we had at Harvard in the 1980s, Christopher Chase would play 3....Nd7 against me, the reason I'd play 3.Bb5+ in the first place-given Chris' playing tendencies, it was a sure thing there would be no drawing line.|
For all the aggro in the play of John A Curdo, he specialised in Bb5, though in John's case, it was more a means of avoiding theory than anything. John had played 2.c3 against the Sicilian before that (ca 1970) when it remained an obscure sideline.
|Jul-27-12|| ||Atalante: The usual fare with the Polugaevsky and other very sharp lines is to study them in detail, rarely if ever get a chance to play them and end up forgetting most of the analysis.|
|Jul-27-12|| ||vinidivici: wow since a long time i hadn't seen the new games so exciting like this until this game.|
This deserves the GOTD
|Jul-28-12|| ||FSR: <Atalante: The usual fare with the Polugaevsky and other very sharp lines is to study them in detail, rarely if ever get a chance to play them and end up forgetting most of the analysis.>|
True. A friend of mine who made a study of one of the super-sharp Najdorf lines (the Poisoned Pawn, I think) said that no one ever let him play it. Few amateur players are going to be booked up on the White side of lines like that, so they're probably going to avoid them, especially if they figure you <are> booked up on them.
|Jul-28-12|| ||FSR: <perfidious> Another good thing about the Classical - at least in online blitz games, which is almost the only form of chess I play these days - is that many people play 6.Be3 against it. Then when I play 6...Ng4, they often get very confused and lose quickly.|
|Jul-28-12|| ||QueentakesKing: Clap!clap!clap! Very satisfactory play by Hao. Exposed Nakamura's unfamiliarity with this variation? I say Hao had a better 'chopsticks'.|
|Aug-03-12|| ||Abdel Irada: <zoren>: Part of your link seems to be missing.|
|Aug-03-12|| ||perfidious: <FSR> The line 11....d5 in Delchev-Ivanchuk seems to take all the life out of the position. Once the centre dissolves, there isn't much to play for, except an early train home.|
|Aug-03-12|| ||trnbg: I don't get the pun. Can someone explain?|
|Aug-03-12|| ||tpstar: The British pop group Wang Chung needed one more song to finish "Mosaic" in 1986, so they threw together "Everybody Have Fun Tonight" with the tag line "Everybody Wang Chung tonight" at the last minute. The catchy tune reached #2 on the Billboard Hot 100, but don't watch the video.|
Clever, albeit the idea has been used before. =)
|Aug-03-12|| ||Juninho: well I remember a fantastic variation:
instead of 10. exf6
10. Qe2, Nbd7 11. 0-0-0, Bb7 12. Qg4!, Qxe5 13. Bxb5!, axb5 14. Ncxb5, h5? 15. Nc7, Qxc7 16. Nxe6, Qe5 17. Nc7!! and white wins
Has Nakamura known this variation? cause I don't read an improvement for black.
|Aug-03-12|| ||Juninho: Nfd7 instead nbd7 sorry|
|Aug-03-12|| ||Eyal: <Juninho: well I remember a fantastic variation: |
instead of 10. exf6
10. Qe2, N[f]d7 11. 0-0-0, Bb7 12. Qg4!, Qxe5 13. Bxb5!, axb5 14. Ncxb5, h5? 15. Nc7, Qxc7 16. Nxe6, Qe5 17. Nc7!! and white wins
Has Nakamura known this variation? cause I don't read an improvement for black.>
It's a very nice opening trap, but Nakamura surely wouldn't have fallen for that. Black's losing mistake here (as noted, actually) is 14...h5 - he can play instead Rxa2, f5, or Nf6. The original game where it was played is apparently Bereziuk vs A Izhnin, 1976, and the databases show several later games - typically from open tournaments - where unsuspecting victims fell for it (such as D Griffith vs K Hopps, 1982).
|Aug-03-12|| ||Eyal: Nakamura's description of the game: <The third round featured a matchup with the number 1 ranked Chinese player, Wang Hao. Amongst top players, Wang Hao is one of the few whom I am not very familiar with having only played him on two previous occasions. The game quickly got very complicated when I chose the extremely sharp Polugaevsky Variation of the Sicilian Najdorf. We were both blitzing out our opening moves until the 15th move when I avoided the main line [I suppose he means 15...Qxb2] and chose something offbeat. My main reasoning behind this decision was to try and create complications while attempting to confuse my opponent. This turned out to be correct as I quickly obtained an advantage and kept up the pressure. Unfortunately, this required using massive amounts of time and just when victory was in sight, I could not find the knockout blow. To compound my problems, I made a horrendous blunder on move 26, completely overlooking a very thematic double sacrifice. I attempted to try and hang on, but Wang Hao showed no mercy and I eventually resigned on move 47 when I was down two pawns and their was no hope> (http://hikarunakamura.com/809/)|
|Aug-03-12|| ||kevin86: The pin will get the queens off the board and a much easier win for white.So,black resigned.|
|Aug-03-12|| ||drnooo: not only is Nakamura's description of the roiling waters of this game suitably lively, he is, wonder of wonders, even using correct grammar, not often seen among elite gms.
Be interesting to see how he palavers in person.
Only slightly off key, it would be entertaining to know what the top ten
read, music they go for, how extensive their movie lists are, for starters. Point being in interviews, you never hear asked anything but the usual boring stuff, never getting much dimensionality. Somewhere someone DID ask Krammnik about literature and he came up with Brothers, Dostoevsky, which surprised me that they even bothered to vemtire that far.
Someone else asked Aronion about his favorite dishes. With fairly entertaining answers by him.
Right now for instance, even my knowing people who were fairly intimately involved with Fischer, none of them can tell me much of what he liked to read, movies, and only his being a d.j. gave entrance to any musical favorites he might have had.
Tal was supposedly extremely well read, but nobody seemed at all interested in finding out much of the specifics. Who knows, he might have been an extremely acute critic of Russian literature from Chekhov to Pushkin.
|Aug-04-12|| ||FSR: <perfidious: <FSR> The line 11....d5 in Delchev-Ivanchuk seems to take all the life out of the position. Once the centre dissolves, there isn't much to play for, except an early train home.>|
White actually has to be a little careful. In CG.com's database Black has scored +7 =18 -2 after 11...d5! Opening Explorer But then again, there's G Vescovi vs Areshchenko, 2004. Don't ask me why White hasn't tried to repeat that glorious success. Opening Explorer
|Nov-13-12|| ||Cemoblanca: The position after 33.Nxd6+ looks simply amazing & it's pretty impressive how the horses retire after a day's work! ;) Without any doubt 1 of my fav 2012 games! Good job Wang Hao! :)|
|Dec-05-12|| ||ksanat: wt a game!!!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 11 ·