< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 30 OF 30 ·
|Nov-15-16|| ||john barleycorn: <OhioChessFan:... what chess cliche principle points in the opposite direction of keeping the passed Pawn under guard?>|
Let it pass, it is going to lose its way. (When it is a blonde passer)
|Nov-15-16|| ||Once: <HeMateMe: If so, why do the best chess software programs (komodo, Stockfish) produce unreal tactical shots? Did someone turn off their opening book?>|
We're talking about two different things. On the one hand we have openings which appear to be sharp and tactical, such as the king's gambit. On the other hand, we have a computer's ability to spot tactics in any position.
Openings like the king's gambit lead to exciting chess at club and tournament level where defensive technique is not so good. White will give away material and often accept a poor pawn structure in return for an attack.
But at higher levels, GMs and super GMs know how to defend against premature attacks. As black, they will give the gambit material back and then try to punish white for attacking too soon. We often see a lot of material being exchanged and then a slow positional grind as white's poor pawn structure gets tortured.
What the likes of Morphy, Capablanca and Fischer knew was that white gets more of an edge by building slowly on the advantage of moving first. Morphy started his chess career playing gambits but against the stronger opponents he nearly always chose "less exciting" openings such as the Ruy Lopez.
I think that's also why Fischer tried to prove that the KG had been busted. It hadn't been busted of course, but what I think he was saying was that it ought to be wrong on general principles.
There is nothing wrong with attacking chess. Computers will find stunning tactics that humans will miss.
But knowledge and experience has shown that at the highest levels of chess we have more chance of getting to those tactically rich positions if we build gradually rather than launch a premature attack.
|Nov-15-16|| ||WorstPlayerEver: So this is what they call Random chess? Moving pieces at random in the endgame lol|
|Nov-15-16|| ||john barleycorn: <Once: ...
I think that's also why Fischer tried to prove that the KG had been busted. It hadn't been busted of course, but what I think he was saying was that it ought to be wrong on general principles. ...>
Fischer did not bust the KG. (Just showing one variant can be altered favourably).
I still go with Spassky's assessment: The KG does not give you much as white but neither do the Giuco Piano or Ruy Lopez.
|Nov-15-16|| ||WorstPlayerEver: <Once>
Yeah, I'd like to see a KG. But one needs 3150+ elo to play the darn thing at the appropriate level ;)
|Nov-15-16|| ||OhioChessFan: <key: "Pawns are expendable early in the game and worth their weight in gold in an endgame." >|
I'll almost give you that.
|Nov-15-16|| ||keypusher: < OhioChessFan: <key: "Pawns are expendable early in the game and worth their weight in gold in an endgame." >
I'll almost give you that.>
That's...fairly generous of you, actually. I should have focused more on Rf7+ and Rf2 not being what Nimzo was talking about anyway.
My overall point stands, though. <Aphorisms don't win endgames.> Hey, maybe I can get people to start quoting that.
|Nov-15-16|| ||OhioChessFan: Yeah, but then it would become a cliche.|
|Nov-15-16|| ||whiteshark: CM <Radio Jan> rant on Game 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBt...|
|Nov-15-16|| ||patzer2: <keypusher> Are you suggesting endgame play at the Super GM, World Championship level, is all raw calculation without any reliance on general positional principles applicable to the endgame?|
|Nov-15-16|| ||mistreaver: I tried doing somewhat deep analysis of the game.
It is available here on the link:
|Nov-16-16|| ||Once: <WorstPlayerEver: <Once>
Yeah, I'd like to see a KG. But one needs 3150+ elo to play the darn thing at the appropriate level ;)>|
Actually, the higher the ELO the more likely that the KG would fizzle into a draw or a slight black advantage. The KG is a good choice at club level, it's a dodgy choice at GM level and at 3150+ ELO it would be tantamount to giving up all of white's opening advantage.
|Nov-16-16|| ||pietah: < Another miraculous draw for Karjakin which will boost his self-confidence further. For Carlsen the exact opposite. Probably a bag of nerves after 11 draws. >
I don't think it works that way. Like in soccer, it is much more exhausting to defend in time-trouble than it is to attack. And we have eight games to go. Winning this game and relax is not an option anyway. Maybe Carlsen doesn't mind to play eleven draws and win de last game...
A very interesting game to watch, but also in this game the Carlsen's reflex is to play save with an advantage. When Carlsen wins a game, the match will change, Karjakin has to take risks. It might be more interesting to see Karjakin win the first game, then we will see what Carlsen is capable of.|
|Nov-16-16|| ||keypusher: <patzer2: <keypusher> Are you suggesting endgame play at the Super GM, World Championship level, is all raw calculation without any reliance on general positional principles applicable to the endgame?>|
Of course not. But it's a lot closer to pure calculation than it is to Nimzowitsch's bromides.
|Nov-16-16|| ||beatgiant: <patzer2>,<keypusher>
In the pawn racing type situation around move 72 of this game, it's very important to avoid loss of time. But, it's not generally obvious whether the best use of time is to forward one's own pawn or to slow down one's opponent's pawn. It depends on the specific position.|
Here, the world champion, one particularly noted for endgame prowess, made the wrong decision, and I don't think we can call it obvious. So in that sense, I agree with <keypusher>.
But in the general case, <patzer2> is right that passed pawns are a top priority for the endgame. Also <patzer2> is the last person I'd ever imagine guilty of posting vague or cliched kibitzing. So, a big thumbs up for him too.
Can we all sing "we are one" now? ;-)
|Nov-16-16|| ||keypusher: <beatgiant>
<Can we all sing "we are one" now? ;-)>
Certainly not. But I will modify my first kibitz.
<Comments like this make me <battier>.>
|Nov-16-16|| ||keypusher: By the way, if anyone wants a free lesson in endgames and humility, try crafty from here:|
Even with 72.Rf7+ Ke6 73.Rf2, I can't figure out how to do it.
|Nov-17-16|| ||beatgiant: <patzer2>,<keypusher>
I tried playing it out with <keypusher>'s crafty link. I managed to pick off the h-pawn, but meanwhile Black swapped his rook for White's knight and b-pawn for a tablebase draw. |
<patzer2> If you have time, post Komodo's win from the position?
|Nov-17-16|| ||patzer2: <beratgiant> What I have for Komodo is from the "cloud" quick look on Deep Fritz 15, which now gives the strongest winning line as 72. Rf7+ Ke4 73. Kg4 (+250, Komodo 10.2 @ 62 depth).|
In his analysis of the game at http://en.chessbase.com/post/new-yo..., GM Sierawan gives the winning line 72. Rf7+ Ke6 73. Rf2! h3 74. Kh4 Ra1 75. Nb7 Ra3 76. Rd2! Ke5 77. Nc5 h2 78. Rxh2 Kd5 79. Rc2 .
Earlier, Sierawan indicates White missed a "golden opportunity" for the win with 71. Re1!! (instead of 71. Na5?!).
|Nov-17-16|| ||Atking: As well R+B vs R, R+N vs R usually draws. Chess has a strong drawish tendency at this level. The real challenge is to win from an approximate equal position. Here Carlsen wasn't far from succeeding.|
|Nov-17-16|| ||keypusher: <patzer2: <beatgiant> What I have for Komodo is from the "cloud" quick look on Deep Fritz 15, which now gives the strongest winning line as 72. Rf7+ Ke4 73. Kg4 (+250, Komodo 10.2 @ 62 depth).
In his analysis of the game at http://en.chessbase.com/post/new-yo..., GM Sierawan gives the winning line 72. Rf7+ Ke6 73. Rf2! h3 74. Kh4 Ra1 75. Nb7 Ra3 76. Rd2! Ke5 77. Nc5 h2 78. Rxh2 Kd5 79. Rc2 .>|
Thanks for this. Stockfish and a human GM provide the following on chessbomb
<72. Rf7+ Ke4 73. Kg4 h3 74. Rf4+ Kd5 (74... Kd3 75. Rf3+ Kd4 76. Rxh3) 75. Rxb4 h2 76. Kh3 Ra1 77. Rb5+> (Delchev)
<72. Rf7+ Ke6 73. Rf2 h3 74. Kh4 Kd5 75. Kg3 Ra1 76. Rf5+ Kd4 77. Nc6+ Kc3 78. Rf3+ Kb2 79. Kxh3> (Stockfish)
What Crafty was doing was just running the pawn straight to h2 combined with advancing the king toward the pawn on b3. As with <beatgiant>, quite a few times I'd win the h-pawn but then Crafty would give up the R for my knight and pawn and then draw with K+P against R. I did manage to find a few lines in which I'd win the pawn and prevent the exchange sacrifice, but even then it's a real struggle to get the white pieces coordinated.
I'm sure Seirawan is right that 71.Re1 would have been a lot easier.
Needless to add, <beatgiant> is right about you as a poster. You're one of the best.
|Nov-17-16|| ||patzer2: <keypusher> Thanks! I find your posts interesting and thought provoking, and learned something from this exchange.|
|Nov-17-16|| ||Eyal: Position after 72.Rb7?:
click for larger view
There's an interesting subtlety of timing related to 72...Ra1! that was played here by Karjakin to save the game: it's crucial to play this move when the h-pawn is still on the 4th rank; otherwise White could gain time by checking on b5 with the rook (while defending the knight) and then taking the pawn. E.g. 72...h3? 73.Kh4 Ra1 (73...h2 74.Kh3 is the same thing) 74.Rb5+ followed by 75.Kxh3. On the other hand, after 72...Ra1! 73.Rb5+ Kf4 (as played in the game), 74.Kxh4?? leads to mate by 74...Rh1.
|Nov-18-16|| ||jerseybob: If Karjakin repeats the Berlin (and as I write this, the first 6 games have been drawn), Carlsen's gotta try 4.d3, a move Kasparov should've tried against Kramnik in 2000 btw. It keeps the e-pawns on the board and postpones a decision till later in the game, something that should ideally suit Carlsen's style.|
|Nov-19-16|| ||cormier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEH... game 3 m - c|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 30 OF 30 ·