chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

 
Chessgames.com User Profile Chessforum

agb2002
Member since Jun-28-08 · Last seen Nov-18-17
I'm an applied mathematician who lives in the south east of Spain.

My approach to the puzzles is similar to that of David Zechiel (User: dzechiel): I first write the variations I find in a reasonable amount of time (using the puzzle diagram only) and post them before watching the game or other's comments. Then I have a look at them and try to be critical with my work. I apply the touch-move rule to my posts (see Unzicker vs Fischer, 1960). I hope to improve my tactical vision this way.

Often I cannot even spend a couple of minutes looking at the diagram (work, family, other interests, etc.) so I try to blind solve it along several breaks. My first attempt was R Vera vs S Garcia Martinez, 2001 and although the variations I found were not very deep I felt quite satisfied with the experience.

>> Click here to see agb2002's game collections.

Chessgames.com Full Member
   Current net-worth: 1,004 chessbucks
[what is this?]

   agb2002 has kibitzed 4432 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Nov-11-17 A Chandra vs W So, 2016 (replies)
 
agb2002: Black has two extra pawns. White threatens Rcxd4 (aiming at d8) and Nxe6 could be feasible if the black knight moves or is eliminated. The position of White's royal family suggests 23... Qd2, however this loses to 24.Rcxd4. Another option is 23... Nf3+ 24.Kg2 Nd2 but is met with ...
 
   Nov-09-17 J Salas Romo vs H Appel, 1945 (replies)
 
agb2002: White has the bishop pair for a bishop, a knight and a pawn. Black threatens gxf5. The first idea that comes to mind is 21.Rxd6+ cxd6 (21... Ke7 22.Rd7+ Ke8 23.Nf6#; 21... Ke8 22.Nf6+ Ke7 23.Bc5+ Ne5 24.Rxe5#) 22.Bxb6+ Ke7 (22... axb6 23.Qxb6+ Ke7 -23... Ke8 24.Nf6#- 24.Qc7+ Ke8 ...
 
   Nov-05-17 Botvinnik vs Vidmar, 1946 (replies)
 
agb2002: This is the first example of the second chapter of Koblents' "Ajedrez de entrenamiento", a short but very good training manual, which coincidentally I started to re-read yesterday.
 
   Nov-04-17 Carlsen vs Li Chao, 2015 (replies)
 
agb2002: <offramp> 1... Qd1+ 2.Rxd1 Ne2+ 3.Bxe2 Nb3#.
 
   Nov-03-17 T Wedberg vs M Valvo, 1987 (replies)
 
agb2002: The material is identical. The white bishop is trapped. Both 45.Bxa6 Bxa6 and 45.Be8 Kxe8 46.Rxe6+ Kf7 47.Rxb6 Ke7 don't seem to give enough compensation. This leads to 45.Rxb6 axb5 46.axb5 followed by a pawn roll supported by the king and the rook.
 
   Nov-02-17 E Valdimarsson vs N Grandelius, 2016 (replies)
 
agb2002: White has a knight for a bishop. Black threatens Rxg2+ and Bxc4. The white king can close a mating net with 45.Kf2. For example, 45... Rc1 46.h3+ Kf4 (46... Kh4 47.Nf5+ Kh5 48.Rxh6#; 46... Kh5 47.g4+ Kh4 48.Rxh6#) 47.Ng6+ Kf5 48.g4#.
 
   Oct-29-17 K Harandi vs Balashov, 1979 (replies)
 
agb2002: Black has the bishop pair for a bishop, a knight and a pawn. White threatens f5 and h3, trapping Black's lsb. Black can try and exploit a number of pins with 18... exf4 19.gxf4 (19.Rxf4 Bg5 gets an exchange for a pawn) 19... Be2: A) 20.Qxe2 Qxc3+ 21.Kc1 (21.Kb1 Qb2#; 21.Ka3 Be7+ and
 
   Oct-28-17 Qi Jingxuan vs Liu Wenzhe, 1987 (replies)
 
agb2002: Black has a knight and a pawn for a rook. White threatens Rxb2 and this rook also x-rays the knight. The prosaic 20... Qh1+ 21.Ke2 Re8+ 22.Kd2 seems to end up a piece down. The obvious 20... Nd7 can be met with 21.Qxf8+ Kxf8 22.Rxb2 with more or less balanced material. The position
 
   Oct-27-17 Nakamura vs Topalov, 2016 (replies)
 
agb2002: White has a rook and a bishop for a knight and a pawn. Black threatens Ng4+, winning. This suggests 37.Rg5: A) 37... Rxb1 38.Qxb1 Ng4+ 39.Rxg4 Qxg4 40.Qd3 followed by Qd4 and Qe4 or Qf4, etc. B) 37... Ne4 38.Rxd1 Qxd1 39.Qf4 looks winning (39... Nxf2 40.Bxf2 Qe2 41.Qe3).
 
   Oct-26-17 J van Foreest vs S Kutzner, 2016 (replies)
 
agb2002: <Caissalove: The'solution' of 62.Rb4 would only have drawn if black had found 62...f4!> I saw 62... f4 but forgot to analyze it. My impression is that after 63.Rxf4 g5 64.Ra4 White has f5 for the bishop to close the mating net.
 
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Calculo, luego existo

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Sep-25-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: Now in Baltimore MD. About 10000 miles in three days.

<OCF> I didn't know that song by CCR.

Sep-26-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: Today in Milwaukee WI.

Impressive aerial night view of Chicago.

Sep-28-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: Good, energetic concert by The Black Keys yesterday in Chicago.

About to fly to Cleveland.

Sep-30-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: In Houston now.
Sep-30-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: Where in the world is agb2002?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozY...

Oct-01-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <OhioChessFan: Where in the world is agb2002?>

LOL. Tonight in Buffalo. Tomorrow in New York, London and back to Spain.

Business this time. Tourism next. Perhaps.

Oct-01-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: Shuffle Off to Buffalo- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h0...

New York, New York- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btF...

London Calling- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfK...

Never Been to Spain- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKS...

Dec-25-14  wordfunph: <agb2002> Merry Christmas!
Jan-01-15  CHESSTTCAMPS: <agb2002 from 12/26 POTD <Nice to see you again Phil!>>

Thanks. It's always nice to see you and your analysis, also!

Happy New Year!

Jan-02-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: Happy New Year to you and your family, Phil!
Jul-06-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Fusilli: Hola amigo! Como van los posibles planes de mudarse a la tierra del tio Sam?
Aug-19-16  Patriot: Hi <agb2002>! Just thought I would answer here...

<That's very true. Still the problem is how to differentiate between the essential and the superfluous?> I think this depends on the time remaining on the clock. Clock time remaining determines if you should be using "blitz logic" or "slow logic". In blitz, I would only focus on "scary" moves where someone could lose a piece. Moves that are purely defensive don't really count as worth considering because that takes too much time. But in a slow game, a defensive move could minimize an edge and therefore perhaps it was better to play a simple developing move. For example, if white had a 0.4 pawn advantage and started an attack which is easily defended then the advantage could go down to 0.1 whereas developing a knight would maintain the 0.4 evaluation. Therefore purely defensive moves could be considered a refutation.

Aug-20-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: Hi <agb2002>! Just thought I would answer here...>

Why not? You're more than welcome.

<<That's very true. Still the problem is how to differentiate between the essential and the superfluous?> I think this depends on the time remaining on the clock. Clock time remaining determines if you should be using "blitz logic" or "slow logic".>

I'm far more interested in the "slow logic" than in "blitz logic". The basic rationale is that one should learn to walk before trying to run (I mean any time control, not only blitz). However, just 'walking' proves to be incredibly difficult.

Another serious problem I have is that I tend to proceed in iterative ways (test and error) and this is not adequate in chess because one cannot take moves back.

Aug-20-16  Patriot: <agb2002> <I'm far more interested in the "slow logic" than in "blitz logic". The basic rationale is that one should learn to walk before trying to run (I mean any time control, not only blitz).> Absolutely! It's easier to adjust down--once you know how to analyze very well, you can trim that process in fast time controls.

<Another serious problem I have is that I tend to proceed in iterative ways (test and error) and this is not adequate in chess because one cannot take moves back.> I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you mentioned taking moves back. By iterative I assume you mean methodical as in an algorithm, testing each try. But the moves you consider are not random moves--they are usually critical and those are the ones you want to look at.

Aug-21-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <<Another serious problem I have is that I tend to proceed in iterative ways (test and error) and this is not adequate in chess because one cannot take moves back.> I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you mentioned taking moves back.>

If I try to improve some details or features in the design of a machine, algorithm, data structure, etc. and the modification turns out to be a mistake I can undo it. However, we cannot take back a move in a real game.

You don't need to be a doctor to suffer some kind of "professional deformation".

<By iterative I assume you mean methodical as in an algorithm, testing each try.>

Yep. And error control is usually an essential part of many iterative algorithms. As long as one can reduce it below the prescribed tolerance in the long or preferably not so long run everything is ok.

In chess one should be accurate always and this makes an essential difference.

Aug-21-16  Patriot: <agb2002> How are you taking moves back? If you are thinking ahead you have to sometimes reverse course.

<In chess one should be accurate always and this makes an essential difference.> I think accuracy is needed whenever you have competing main candidates. But if a line is simply winning you don't have to be totally accurate.

Aug-22-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: <agb2002> How are you taking moves back? If you are thinking ahead you have to sometimes reverse course.>

I meant that when in a real game and in doubt if the chosen move eventually fails then it is not possible to go back and try any of the alternatives.

<<In chess one should be accurate always and this makes an essential difference.> I think accuracy is needed whenever you have competing main candidates. But if a line is simply winning you don't have to be totally accurate.>

Accuracy is important in every position, no matter whether one is about to start a combination, an attacking or defensive maneuver or a simplification to enter the endgame. For example, there can be some hidden details in that endgame which ruin the victory or even the draw.

However, an essential factor is energy. I normally prefer the (apparently) easiest, simplest and less energy demanding path than the shorter, more complex but more accurate alternatives, tipically chosen by engines.

Aug-23-16  Patriot: <agb2002> <I meant that when in a real game and in doubt if the chosen move eventually fails then it is not possible to go back and try any of the alternatives.> Ok, so you are saying you try a move to see what happens. Since I am usually playing no more than G/15, if I see an interesting try I spend a moment looking it over and if it looks interesting I play it.

<Accuracy is important in every position, no matter whether one is about to start a combination, an attacking or defensive maneuver or a simplification to enter the endgame. For example, there can be some hidden details in that endgame which ruin the victory or even the draw.> I disagree--accuracy is not important in every position. My Chess instructor (a master) teaches that all you need to do is prove a move is best (or even adequate) in a reasonable time. If a move is clearly best, it's a waste of time further proving it.

<However, an essential factor is energy. I normally prefer the (apparently) easiest, simplest and less energy demanding path than the shorter, more complex but more accurate alternatives, tipically chosen by engines.> I agree 100%! Computers won't miss a detail and get mated but human players can, no matter how good they are. Play for the easy and obvious win and your opponent will probably resign.

Aug-24-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: ... Ok, so you are saying you try a move to see what happens.>

I meant that competition chess game is kind of a sequence of one shot situations while in many other activities it is possible to redo something and to improve it someway to avoid trouble.

<Since I am usually playing no more than G/15, if I see an interesting try I spend a moment looking it over and if it looks interesting I play it.>

One of the useful aspects of shorter time controls is to experiment opening plans (so you try a move to see what happens) to gain some experience, perhaps very superficial but better than plain ignorance, a most familiar feeling to me.

<<Accuracy is important in every position, no matter whether one is about to start a combination, an attacking or defensive maneuver or a simplification to enter the endgame. For example, there can be some hidden details in that endgame which ruin the victory or even the draw.> I disagree--accuracy is not important in every position. My Chess instructor (a master) teaches that all you need to do is prove a move is best (or even adequate) in a reasonable time. If a move is clearly best, it's a waste of time further proving it.>

If a move is better or even adequate then it is more accurate than a number of others and therefore accuracy matters. Perhaps my concept of accuracy in this context is a bit loose.

<Play for the easy and obvious win and your opponent will probably resign.>

Not my little son, aka the phaser hitman. He will resist and strive and stand and struggle and try and try over again and will take advantage of even the tiniest chance, typically when I'm distracted serving myself another bunch of salad at dinner, to deliver a back rank mate or a crushing knight fork or the like, carefully prepared by me to reward his effort (but please don't ever tell him!).

Aug-24-16  Patriot: <agb2002> It sounds like your son is going to be one mean player! :-)
Aug-25-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: <agb2002> It sounds like your son is going to be one mean player! :-) >

He started playing blitz tournaments for children last year and got a trophy in almost all of them. Not too bad.

However, I'd prefer he doesn't pursue anything serious about chess, even if I knew he would become eligible for a sports scholarship in a top notch university.

I suspect you would have a similar opinion.

Aug-25-16  Patriot: <agb2002> Wow, congrats to your son (and proud father)! That is great to hear! This is all a testament to his teacher...you! :-)

It's tough to get far in Chess but if he makes expert or master, he could win real money in tournaments! I would encourage him to reach for his dream.

Aug-26-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: <agb2002> Wow, congrats to your son (and proud father)! That is great to hear!>

Thanks a lot!

<This is all a testament to his teacher...you! :-) >

The first time he won a tournament is particularly memorable to me: he managed to beat out the favorites (two children whose families emigrated from ex-soviet republics, another from China and a couple of nationals, all of them very aggressive players) with a perfect score.

A curious anecdote happened in the fourth round. He was already playing at board #1 and his next opponent was a girl. I noticed that her granny sat down very close to their table but didn't give much importance and continued reading a newspaper. I noticed that the tournament arbiter announced the beginning of the round but read a few lines more and then had a look at my son.

To my surprise both players were standing since the game was already over. I thought "well, it doesn't matter, this girl is probably a very good player because she reached board #1 and surely caught him in an opening trap".

Then he came to me as if everything was ok and told me that he mated her in less than a dozen moves. I was perplexed. He then told me that the girl didn't even know the very basics and her granny was pointing out the moves but missed a relatively simple mate threat!

<It's tough to get far in Chess but if he makes expert or master, he could win real money in tournaments!>

In Spain you can get about 200 if you win a local rapid tournament, not too bad for eight hours of work, but you need at least IM strength to have realistic chances.

<I would encourage him to reach for his dream.>

That's the point. He's too young to really know what his dream is. At the moment he just wants to play with other children. It is typical to see them fighting mercilessly on the board and seconds later after the game rushing to play soccer, hide-and-seek, etc. before the next round.

Aug-28-16  Patriot: <agb2002> <In Spain you can get about 200 if you win a local rapid tournament, not too bad for eight hours of work, but you need at least IM strength to have realistic chances.> Not sure how that compares with U.S. dollars but here you can win in the thousands at tourneys across America.

<That's the point. He's too young to really know what his dream is.> Yes, but I would go along with whatever current dream he has and let him have fun with it.

Aug-29-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <you can win in the thousands at tourneys across America.>

You had to take part in the bigger open tournaments to find such prizes here but then you must be a quite strong GM to have chances.

<I would go along with whatever current dream he has and let him have fun with it.>

I'm trying to introduce my children to as many activities as reasonable, including chess, airplane model construction, maths, robotics, soccer, gym workout, etc. Hope they eventually find the occupations and hobbies which really satisfy them so that they can enjoy a happy and productive life. That's probably best at the moment.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 8)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>

Daily puzzles, news, and more!
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific user and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.

You are not logged in to chessgames.com.
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:
  


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC