< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-20-04|| ||euripides: <ugh> thanks. What is sjkbase ? Actually I find reading games blind is good practice. |
|Dec-20-04|| ||ughaibu: On your edit preferences page there's a choice of java viewer, sjkbase is one of the choices. |
|Dec-20-04|| ||Backward Development: ...Na5 seems correct. ok, now where was I?
15.Nxc7? (an interesting idea but poor execution.) Qxc7
16.b3 Nb5? (a good move forcing the queen exchange, but not the best. the easily overlooked Qa5! is winning)
18.bxc4 Nd4(a difficult endgame has arisen with likely prospects of a draw. this would be a good exercise of both attacking and defending technique. white has a ragged pawn structure, and the knight sits well on d4, although it's lifespan looks slim. after the likely exchange of white's bishop for black knight, the opposite square bishop ending is clearly drawn. black must make use of his lines to quickly activate his rooks and attack the weak pawns. he must not exchange rooks until a decisive advantage has been made(passed pawn, stronger king position, etc.) proper play should bring a draw, though black seems to hold all of the chances.)
20.Bxd4(the necessary plan. white must hold an opposite square bishop if he hopes to draw) exd4?!(Rxd4 appears won, as the rook exchanges lessens white's counterplay and the passed pawn is winning.)
21.Rfe1 Rac8!(the correct choice over the tempting ...d3? e5!)
24.Rd2?(yet another blunder, but more than likely a time scramble.) Rc2?(once again a good move, but not the best. ...Bh6 wins.)
25.Rxc2??(losing, and badly. Red1 hangs on, but there wasn't much to play on for.) dxc2
28.g3 Bb2 (a good game sprinkled with errors, but still enjoyable. i would consider in the future to hold on to your bishops as black in the KID and along with studying Petrosian, Bronstein of course is excellent with the opening.)0-1
|Dec-20-04|| ||suenteus po 147: <Backward Development>, <euripides> Thank you both for your analysis. 13...Na5 was in fact the move. I was typing from memory. I had a non-algebraic score in front of me for reference and between recalling the board position and translating I knew one or two errors might slip in. Anyway, I appreciate your advice and suggestions along the KID. I plan on trying them in the near future when I have more time to practice online. |
|Dec-20-04|| ||euripides: <ugh> thanks |
|Dec-20-04|| ||Backward Development: sp147:
no problem. i hope to go the the Clark County Chess Club this evening. I believe i posted a while ago on the David Vigorito page that i would go to his simul, but wasn't able to make it. Today , thanks to winter break, i should be there for the first time to check it out. Hope to see you there! i'm going to try out my sicilian novelty (1.e4 c5 2.nf3 d5!?)
|Dec-21-04|| ||Backward Development: Funnily enough, I played sp147 in an informal tourny this evening and played....the same opening that he played in the game that i analyzed. obviously, it was an interesting game.
a comedy of errors which ends up being decided on time.
i'll post annotations in the morning.
Rg5??(not a typo)...Qxh6
0-1 on time.
|Dec-21-04|| ||suenteus po 147: <Backward Development> After perusing the Opening Explorer on this line, I find that my 6...Nbd7 is the novelty. Most black-side KID players seem to prefer Nfd7. I wonder why? Seems too cramping for me. The king's bishop is meant to be effective later as I see it, though I didn't develop it that way in our game :) |
|Dec-23-04|| ||Backward Development: ok now that i have some time i've analyzed our game.
d4 nf6 c4 g6 nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 nf3 Bg4 Be2 Nbd7 h3 Bxf3 Bxf3 0-0(at this point we were both out of book, the novelty according to my DB is my h3. This is a typical position in KID games. White has a space advatage and the two bishops, but after the center is closed, it may be difficult to show the value of them. Black's advantages are his flexible position with many resources for counterattack.) Be3(at this point i said, 'I think i'll castle queenside and mate your king.' Obviously, i probably shouldn't have pulled the rabbit out of the hat yet, but in several moves my strategy becomes obvious.) e5 d5(when i do castle queen side, it is probably better for the center to be closed, so my king is safer.) c6?(this move could have waited, better was the typical KID maneuver ...h6 followed by Kh7 to keep the black bishop home.) Qd2 c5?(A tempo has been wasted that could have been put to use in counterattack.) h4!?(I thought to immediately pursue the attack was more flexible than commiting my king early.) Nb6?!(a distracting maneuver, which blocks the b-pawn, the blockading...h5 could be considered.) Be2? (this hasty move was a blunder that lessened the force of the attack. b3 was simple and good.) Qd7!(the counterplay on the other wing is beginning.) b3 a5(This is a very dynamic position. I was pleased with my own resources and play so far however, and quickly made a second-rate move.) 0-0-0?(the idea is simple; double the rooks on the h-file, trade off the black bishop, sac sac mate right? unfortunately, i underestimated black's defensive maneuver ab ab Ra1+ and after the rook exchange, there is equality. a better move was the immediate h5!) a4 h5(better than ba Nxa4 Nxa4 Qxa4 when black's attack is more potent.) gh?(conceding the initiative. there's a strong tactical shot after ab ab Ra1+ Kc2 Nxe4! and the knight is untouchable because of Ra2+) Bxh5 Nxh5 Rxh5 ab ab Ra1+!(a defensive resource which i underestimated when i played 0-0-0. after the rook exchange, my king is in as much danger as black's.) Kc2 Rxd1 Kxd1?(stubbornly holding the bishop battery in place, but allowing black's next move.)
|Dec-23-04|| ||Backward Development: Part Two
...Qg4+!(my opponent made this move with a grin, and it can be seen that the initiative has switched hands. Note that the pawn grab would be very risky if their were still two rooks on the board.) Qe2 Qxg2 Bh6?(The attack has been thwarted! what am i trying to prove?) Qg6 Rg5??(nope, not a time trouble blunder, to believe i actually calculated a sequence when i made this move...clearly the losing move. just for the record here was the variation i calculated. ...Qf6?? Rxg7+ Kh8 Qh5 Rg8?? Rxh7+! Kxh7 Bf8+ Qh6 Qxh6#) Qxh6 Qg4 f6 Rh5 Qg6 Qxg6 hg Rh1(I could have resigned here, if not for a drawing resource if my opponent didn't play strongly. If i held my rook on one of the open files, the a or the h, and didn't allow my opponent to penetrate, a rook exchange would jeopardize his chances for a win.) f5!(simple and strong, but played with the wrong idea in mind) ke2 f4?(a positional error that was just what i was hoping for. Black has an extra piece, a bishop. why would he lock the bishop behind the pawns? better was to open up the position so his extra piece could make it's prescence felt.) kf3 Nd7?(better was Ra8! and the rook could breakthrough into my position.) Ra1!(here i found the resource, but as you can later see, my king was bought for a pawn.) g5 Ra7?(better was Nb5)Nf6 Rxb7??(this move takes it too far and throws away the drawing resource, as well as seperates the rook from the king.) g4+ kg2 f3+ kg3 Ra8?!(correct but mistimed. ...Bh6! wins as in Nd1 Bf4+ Kh4 Ra8! with material loss to follow.) b4?(allowing Ra1) Ra3?(...Ra1! wins quick b5 Rh1 Rb8+ Kh7 Rh8+ Kxh8 b6 Rh3#) Nd1 Nxe4!(decisively opening up the position.)
kxg4 rb3 b5 Rb1(...Nd2!) ne3 nxf2+? kxf3 nh3(here black has only the material advantage, my passed pawn is getting stronger.) b6 Bf8 Rb8 Kf7 Nf5 Ng5+ Kg4 Ne4 b7 Be7(here someone said i missed a win by Nxe7 Kxe7 Rh8 since the pawn can't be taken, but after Nf6+ black wins.)
Nh6+ kg6??(now white is winning.) Rg8+ Kxh6 b8=Q Nf6+ kf3 Nxg8??(Rxb8 wins)
Qxg8??(Qxb1 wins) 0-1
|Feb-19-05|| ||suenteus po 147: <Backward Development> Just took the time to review your annotations to our game. Almost as interesting as your analysis is your comments on what is said or thought in the game. You made it very entertaining as well as instructional, which is to be applauded (it's one of the characteristics I love about Bronstein's and Evans's annotations). I do have one suggestion for future annotations: keep the move number in front of moves, <1.>d4 Nf6 <2.>c4 g6 etc. It helps keep things clear, like who is making the questionable move and where you are in the game :) |
|Mar-09-07|| ||drukenknight: Attacking the Kings Indian, I like to bull rush these K-ind/Pirc players who play ..g6 in response to e4. It's no better strategy than anything else but at least white can keep the iniative for a long time. Here is a nice quick demolition of the fianchetto. We should make a collection of these in order discourage these jokers who dont know how to play the Spanish...|
1. e4 e6
2. d4 d6
3. Bd3 Ne7 Leonardo/Dimieri 1987 is the only I coufd find that got this far.
4. Be3 (the novelty) g6
5. Nf3 Bg7
6. h4 O-O
7. h5 gxh5
8. Ng5 Ng6
9. Nxh7 Re8
10. Bg5 f6
11. Nxf6+ Bxf6
12. Qxh5 Qd7
13. Bxf6 Kf7
14. e5 and 1-0
|Mar-09-07|| ||ganstaman: What you really showed is how easy it is to defeat players who don't know how to play the opening that they choose. Black was playing a system he didn't quite know. If he's going to include ...e6, then he would likely be better with ...b6, ...Bb7, and ...Nd7 as well and hold off on castling for a while. Especially after 6. h4, 0-0 looks weak.|
Also, 7...gxh5 isn't a move that should even cross his mind. I don't think that a game of this calibre says much about the opening.
Finally, I don't see what this game has to do with the King's Indian. And nice attack by you.
|Mar-10-07|| ||drukenknight: Okay, now I feel really stupid because I actually played 9 Rxp and lost. So thanks for that...|
Moreover, there are lots of lessons to be learned from even amateur games. Lessons for beginners as well as advanced players. In this case, I violated a very basic precept when I played Rxp and beginners can learn a lot from that.
But lets talk about more advanced skills. You criticized black's defense, okay tell us where he made the losing move? Was it 00?
As far as who would capture with the g pawn on h5....Bobby Fischer, that's who! Here, isnt this the greatest Benoni ever played:
Spassky vs Fischer, 1972
|Mar-10-07|| ||ganstaman: Well, Fischer was a genius. Even so, there are huge differences. He captured a bishop after white castled, whereas your opponent captured a pawn (opening a file) behind which was your rook. Fischer had actually developed a bit before opening up his king while your opponent looked more cramped.|
Sure, we can learn a lot from every game. But I feel the lesson here is different than what you proposed.
As for improvements, I'd need more than the 5 minutes I have now for this post. But playing through the game yesterday, it seemed to me that black allowed the attack to come to him, and instead of preparing some defense (even something as simple as making it easier for him to get more pieces to the kingside), he just castled and opened lines for you. Ok, I'll be back tonight with something hopefully more concrete.
|Mar-10-07|| ||drukenknight: Okay one thing you said was that "black allowed the attack to come to him." However, this is one of the pts. I made originally, as white I can nearly often dictate the tempo of the game by playing at least two (or 3) pawns forward and advancing them. I never fail to get an attack going. But of course, it does not force a win. As black, he has to learn how to defend this because I guarantee you that black cannot simply avoid being attacked, it comes with chess, something has to give: at some pt in the game one has to give up material, or allow an attack, or give up space or tempo. |
YOu cannot carry out all four strategies at once, you have to give somewhere. So there is a lesson to be learned in there somewhere. So when you say; "black allowed..." you are confusing beginners, somethings have to be allowed.
It is like when you play over a game that went 40 moves, and the comments say on move 9, "he should not have opened up the game" or on move 11 "he should not have weakened the white squares" etc. And the beginner is left trying to remember all these "not to dos" in certain opening patterns that he will never get it straight. There comes a time when you have to allow some weakness, it is impossible in well played game to both win material and mate the K, impossible!
That is why I like to collect these attacks on fianch'o'd position. I know I can generate at attack, if I can remember some patterns it would help me...
Okay go back to beginner lessons: how did I mess this up? I saw that if I could get my Q and R on the h file I would have a won game, but I quickly saw that there were two ways to capture on the h file, Rxp or Nxp. Both seemed equally good, but one would lose a N and the other simply gained material. So......I figured just take the pawn, I will still win the game.
This makes no sense in terms of chess theory. It makes no sense to think that I can actually win a pawn AND generate an attack on the K. YOu can't pursue both strategies. And another way to think; if I drop material in a correct manner I should be able to generate an attack. Therefore if I am thinking of mating the K and material is equal the issue should be how do I drop material? These strategies are related to one another.
Even more simpler way to think: Tarrasch said: "If you see two moves that are equally good: Look for another move!"
Well he had a pt. If you see two equally good moves, rarely if ever (in a well played game) are they both equally good. Almost never. I should have listened to Tarrasch and begun to think: which pawn is better to take h7 or h5?
As soon as I grabbed the pawn my opponent demonstrated the difference, he played ...h6 to block the attack. But of course, you see the theory of chess is not hard to understand, memorizing 15 moves deep is hard but theory is not.
So this is another reason I am showing this. The beginner player reads a book on chess and they tell him to look at position after black 10th move. And he sits there at that pt in the game and starts to look at all the lines emanating from there. But really, the master has already been working that stuff for several moves previously and he has rejected certain lines out of hand, in much the same manner outlined above.
So the beginner looks at positoin on move 9 and starts to calculate 10 moves deep in every direction, but really there is a more powerful way to think, anyone should quickly realize the question on move 9 is:
which pawn is more valuable to black?
|Mar-10-07|| ||drukenknight: Okay while Ganstaman is working on the problem, I will give another example of this dictum of Tarrasch that comes up over and over, look at the Alek defense, game I posted on this page, Feb 27 post. One problem to solve is did white mess this up and if so, how? Look at move 23, white has two good moves to make, or does he?|
Alekhine's Defense (B02)
|Mar-12-07|| ||drukenknight: Oh whatever happened to Ganstaman? I thought this stuff was real easy to demonstrate,I guess he has some club activities to go to. Hey, speaking of which if you are out driving at night and see a car approaching you with its headlights off, do not, repeat DO NOT flash your headlights at the car.|
|Mar-17-07|| ||ganstaman: I have returned from Spring Break. Hope you didn't wait up all night for me.|
I don't think you understood much of what I said. I, personally, don't even remember much of what I said. Let's hope this doesn't miss the point, then.
Amateur games are great for learning. Your game, though, is not a King's Indian (E90) and therefore belongs elsewhere. Still, we can learn from it here since you already put it here. The opening was played poorly by black, and so what we can learn is how to not play this type of opening.
It's one thing to be passive and hold back your pawns and pieces, but quite another to hold back your pieces and open lines of attack for your opponent at the same time. Why did he play moves like 7...gxh5 and 10...f6? He actively led your attack to his king, and that is the mistake he made. Look at how Fischer followed up his ...gxh5 move. Also note how white had already castled kingside there. There are <huge> differences in the positions.
Maybe then you are right -- black didn't <allow> the attack, he <invited> it and <pulled> it around his own king.
Before I confuse myself too much, I'd like to end with this quoted paragraph. <This makes no sense in terms of chess theory. It makes no sense to think that I can actually win a pawn AND generate an attack on the K. YOu can't pursue both strategies. And another way to think; if I drop material in a correct manner I should be able to generate an attack. Therefore if I am thinking of mating the K and material is equal the issue should be how do I drop material? These strategies are related to one another.>
What are you talking about? Why is it counter to theory that you can win material and go on the attack? Often both are signs that you are winning, so occuring together is quite natural. Suggesting that you should look for ways to lose material in order to attack is dangerous, as most of us aren't Tal and will lose quickly if we attempt to sac just on 'principle.'
|Jun-25-08|| ||kellmano: I'm a big fan of playing the Kings Indian as black, cos (a) you quite often get the opportunity to play it and (b) I like the simplicity of engineering ....f5 then lobbing the pawns down the board in front of your king (see today's GOTD)|
I often lose because i am a bad player, but i rarely lose because of white's queenside play. In fact the white move Bg5 though rarely played by GMs is the one that gives me most problems as it prevents the simple plan described above. Could anyone explain to me black's strategic goals when white plays Bg5?
|Feb-25-09|| ||nummerzwei: Hello!
I've just read the discussion on this page,
which I found quite interesting.
This encouraged me even more to show you a nice internet game I've played recently.
I had the white pieces , but I don't know who my opponent was.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 d6 5.Nf3 c5 6.dxc5? Qa5
7.Bd3 dxc5 8.h3 0-0 9.Be3 Nc6 10.0-0 e5 11.Nd5 NxNd5
12.exNd5 Nd4 13.NxNd4 cxNd4 14.Bd2 Qb6 15.f4 Qxb2?!
15.fxe5 Bxe5 16.Bh6 Re8 17.Qf3 f6 18.Rae1 Qb6! 19.c5 Qd8
20.Bf4 Bd7 21.h4 Qe7 22.h5 g5? 23.RxBe5 fxRe5 24.Bxg5 Qg7 25.h6 Qf8 26.Qg3 1:0
Obviously, my opening treatment is not to be recommended.
I had simply overlooked 6…Qa5. Alternatives for black are 13...exNd4 and 15...Qd6.
I don't believe taking on b2 was good, but perhaps 16...Bg7 and 17...f5 are still improvements. However, it's hard to seriously recommend such moves.
At the end, the simpler 23.BxBe5 followed by 24.Rxe5 would have won as well, but I had prepared the exchange sac, which also wins by force.
|Jan-17-10|| ||mysql: Can anybody provide an overview of the idea behind the Makagonov variation?|
|Apr-24-10|| ||rapidcitychess: Does anyone know much about the old exd line? I would like to learn about this.|
|Mar-18-15|| ||Alex Schindler: I was hoping to find kritz v Richter, a miniature in the Danish gambit declined. I'm new to the site so I'm not sure how to upload it even if I have the 14 moves at hand|
|Mar-18-15|| ||Alex Schindler: Oops, I meant to put that on the leonid kritz page. I'm not doing a great job at this technology thing.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·