User Profile Chessforum
Member since Feb-01-09 · Last seen Apr-17-14

"The position you see in the diagram is like an empty canvas standing on an easel. If you have any aptitude, talent or, no less important, desire, then boldly take up your brush and paints, decide upon the necessary color and embark upon your creative work. But how should one begin? I cannot say what feelings artists experience at that moment, but, whenever I have to start a game with an 'empty' chess board in front of me, I cannot stop thinking that today, right now, I have the very fortunate possibility of playing the most beautiful, the most fighting, and the most profound game since the time of my birth and since long before it" ~ David Bronstein

Pin, Undermine, Overload, Crunch



Akobian's "Last Stand" pg 70

FUN PUNS: Pun Submission Page

ChessBookForum: ChessBookForum chessforum

Once's Book: B Shipov vs Nezhmetdinov, 1963

Game Collection: US Championship 1963/64


Great Positional Games: Game Collection: Positional Masterworks


Training: Page 8

Chess Exam and Training Guide:

Endgame Tablebase:


PGN Editor:

PGN Viewer:


Analysis Board:


Playing Zone: Chessgames Playing Zone


Web Query for Nalimov Endgame Tablebases



WC rankings vs #2: Tata Steel (2013)

History of the World Chess Championship
Aronian vs Anand Tata Steel 2013: Aronian vs Anand, 2013



Word Codes:


Game Of The Week

[Event "Rapid Match"]
[Site "Lillehammer NOR"]
[Date "2013.06.29"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Predojevic, B."]
[Black "Carlsen, M."]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B22"]
[WhiteElo "2616"]
[BlackElo "2864"]
[PlyCount "113"]
[EventDate "2013.??.??"]
[Source "Mark Crowther"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 e6 3. c3 d5 4. exd5 Qxd5 5. d4 Nf6 6. Na3 Nc6 7. Nb5 Qd8 8. dxc5 Bxc5 9. Qxd8+ Kxd8 10. Bf4 Ne4 11. Ng5 Nxg5 12. Bxg5+ f6 13. Be3 Bxe3 14. fxe3 Ke7 15. O-O-O Ne5 16. Be2 Bd7 17. Nd4 Rac8 18. Rd2 Rc5 19. Rhd1 Rhc8 20. Nf3 Ba4 21. Re1 Nf7 22. c4 Bc6 23. b3 Nd6 24. Kb2 a5 25. Nd4 Be8 26. Red1 Re5 27. Bf3 Ne4 28. Bxe4 Rxe4 29. Re1 Rc5 30. Nc2 e5 31. Na3 Rg4 32. Nb1 b5 33. cxb5 Bxb5 34. Nc3 Bc6 35. e4 h5 36. a3 h4 37. Re3 Ke6 38. Re1 g6 39. Re3 f5 40. exf5+ gxf5 41. g3 Bh1 42. Ne2 Rd5 43. Rc2 Be4 44. Rc4 Rd2+ 45. Kc1 Ra2 46. h3 Rxe2 47. Rxe2 Rxg3 48. Rc5 Rxh3 49. Rxa5 Rxb3 50. Ra6+ Kd5 51. Ra5+ Kd4 52. Ra4+ Kd3 53. Rh2 f4 54. Rxh4 Ke3 55. Rb4 Rxb4 56. axb4 f3 57. Rh1 0-1


>> Click here to see morfishine's game collections. Full Member

   morfishine has kibitzed 8094 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Apr-17-14 V Nielsen vs C F Delcomyn, 1894
morfishine: Throw a dart, everything wins
   Apr-16-14 Leko vs Kamsky, 2008 (replies)
morfishine: <Gilmoy> Very nice post!
   Apr-16-14 L T Haller vs Robbins, 1884 (replies)
morfishine: 30...Rxh2+ 31.Kxh2 Qxg3+ 32.Kh1 Qh4+ 33.Kg2 Rg3# *****
   Apr-15-14 Tomashevsky vs W So, 2013 (replies)
morfishine: <Rookiepawn> Good point! Probably the hardest aspect of visualizing a continuation is making the very best moves for both sides *****
   Apr-15-14 Benko vs W Hartmann, 1984 (replies)
morfishine: <21...Qxg2+> 22.Kxg2 Bf3+ 23.Kg1 Nh3# *****
   Apr-14-14 L Josteinsson vs Petursson, 1984 (replies)
morfishine: <26...Nxf3+> and Black mates the next move: 27.gxf3 Qh2# ...and who knows why Black took an extra turn; but it hardly matters at this point since Black's position is so overwhelming that even 26...Qxf3 wins on the spot: 27.gxf3 Nxf3+ 28.Kh1 Rxh2# *****
   Apr-13-14 J Moses vs O Cruz Filho, 1938 (replies)
morfishine: <psmith> Yes, 22...Qxd4 is a great find! But in your second point, after 25.Qg4 Be8 <26.Rh3> is not possible: the rook is still on <e1> *****
   Apr-13-14 morfishine chessforum (replies)
morfishine: <cro777> An interesting coincidence: After the Candidates I was musing to myself: "What Anand needs is Kramnik as his second!". At almost the exact same time <DcGentle> mentioned to me that Kramnik was good friends with Anand and would make a great second. I had no ...
   Apr-12-14 Morphy vs T W Barnes, 1858 (replies)
morfishine: FWIW: Barnes had the best record of any English player vs Morphy winning 8 & losing 19
   Apr-12-14 Kramnik vs Fressinet, 2013 (replies)
morfishine: I remember this contest This game is a super example demonstrating the difference between "making bad moves" or blundering, and missing an opponent's move. In this case, Kramnik dismissed or undererstimated the strength of Black's piece-sac after 11.b5? hxg4! and now Kramnik is ...
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Booked Up

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 145 OF 145 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <morfishine>: In an interview, Anand talked about preparing some "surprises" for next November, as I have read somewhere. If he can find something new in any playable opening, this would benefit him more than Carlsen, whose games rely on later phases of the game.

Kasparov was famous for his opening preparation, because he could seize the initiative early in the game and exploit this to a win. If Anand can emulate Kasparov in this regard, it would give him great chances. But Carlsen is also known for the early deviation from the mainlines...

With finding something decisive against the Berlin wall, Anand would have a strong argument to play <1. e4>, otherwise... I dunno. Perhaps he will prepare something in the English. Anand knows what to do, I hope. It's not the first time he encounters Carlsen, fortunately. :-)

Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: <DcGentle> At the very least, if Carlsen offers a Caro-Kann, Anand should play the advance variation, at once! :)
Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <morfishine>: Obviously the push of the a-pawn in the advance variation is still not very much known on GM level, apparently. I could tell you a reason or two for this. For example there was no publication of The World vs Akobian, 2012 in any renowned magazine, although it was deserved. But even this point was mooted, so no one needs to wonder.
Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: <DcGentle> You mean the e-pawn, right?

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 <3.e5>


Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <morfishine>:

In this line, the start of the game went like this

<1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. e5 Bf5 4. Nf3 e6 5. Be2 Nd7 6. O-O Bg6 7. a4 Ne7 8. a5 Nf5 9. c3>

and the a-pawn is pushed twice: <7. a4> and <8. a5>. The fact that Black did not prevent White's 8th move was considered an inaccuracy, but there is analysis that also blocking this pawn is already too late.

And of course <9. c3> was leading to the closed game which gave White so much advantage later on. In my view this move refutes Black's <6... Bg6> maneuver, and I haven't seen any game that featured the same opening line since we played it. Most GMs play <Nc3> and don't push the a-pawn at all, which of course is not as strong as White played here.

Position after <9. c3>:

click for larger view

Black to move has already lost, according to game analysis available.

Of course one can even argue that Black should be losing earlier, but more analysis is required, although I have done a lot already. At least it's doubtful that Black can ever get a good game with this variation, if White doesn't blunder.

Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: Human minds still critical to chess evaluation.

"Much had been made of Viswanathan Anandís and Magnus Carlsenís team of seconds. Over the years, the technology that players use and how they use it have become just as important as members of their backroom team...An idea was sprouting in the mind of chess players around the world: if a computer could play the game better than humans, then surely they would make a better second than a human!"

GM Susan Polgar thinks that the computer cannot replace humans in a playerís backroom team:

"The role of seconds is equally important. Different software give different evaluations. Therefore, you need competent seconds who are able to <properly translate the evaluation and make the correct judgement>."

The role of Nakamura's second Kris Littlejohn, who is not even an International Master, is also very interesting:

"Kris has built a computer for Nakamura, a Nehalem i920 3.2 GHz processor-based tower with 6 GB of RAM. Once he knows which players Hikaru will be going up against, he analyses the openings commonly used by Hikaruís opponents. He uses branching to predict possible moves that a given opponent could play."

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <cro777>: Interesting. But more is needed than just an interpretation of an eval, in my opinion. For sure this is helpful, but as we know, that's not the end of it. Carlsen will play moves not being predicted by any current software, and not even a supercomputer might help in these cases, because even the fastest box can only produce the results any software will allow them to produce.

We live in interesting times, anyways.
Engines have become strong and have to be called assistants to be taken seriously. But they are not perfect yet.

Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: <DcGentle> As far as Carlsen is concerned it would be interesting to use the Play Magnus app to try to predict his moves. But you may start working on a program, similar to Kris' one, for our next GM challenge. The other grandmasters are more predictable.
Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <cro777>: Whether my engine is ready to go in a few months, I dunno yet. It's a complicated endeavor. You see, I am employing a new method not having been tried before in chess. Currently I have problems to get the knowledge into the the algorithm, especially positional knowledge, which is not easy to describe in the first place.

Fundamentally this method will open up totally new possibilities, for example the program could search for Zugzwang situations or even a fortress or blockade to avoid or to build, respectively.

But the devil is in the details.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: There is life on my forum, if someone is interested.
Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: <DcGentle: I am employing a new method not having been tried before in chess.>

This is a very interesting and long range project (a new paradigm). But a predictive model like the one that Kris had built for Nakamura should not be a difficult task for you.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: <cro777>: Well, <lambda> has created a script that acts like an interface to steer an engine in order to explore several possible lines like a human analyst would do. Of course a human, who knows a lot about chess, would avoid some lines that the <lambda> script must travel along, because it lacks experience.

I could program something like this as well, but I wanted a new kind of engine, which additionally might not necessarily need the fastest processor on the market to work well.

Current methods must wade through millions of positions because they have no clue where to search. And still they can miss some decisive positional features of variants available. There is a better way, I hope.

Premium Chessgames Member
  DcGentle: Today I was shocked. <chrisowen> answered to <Sally Simpson> on plain English! : Tarrasch vs Kolb, 1894


Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: <DcGentle> Yes, from time to time, <CO> will post in plain English. Not often, but occasionally. <CO> is a very strong player
Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: Today, at the Women's FIDE Grand Prix, five games out of six ended in white victories. The only game that was not won by the white pieces, but it certainly could have, was Stefanova vs Kosteniuk.

Position after 57...Ke4

click for larger view

In the diagram position Stefanova played 58.f8=Q? and the game ended in a draw.

She could have won, for instance, by playing 58.g6

58. g6 Nxg6 59. Kxg6 Kd3 60. Nb7 Be7 61. Na5 Bb4 62. Be5 Kc2 63. Nc4 Bc5 64. Bd6 Bxd6 65. Nxd6 b2 66. Nc4 b1=N 67. f8=Q

Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: <cro777> A pity; 58.f8=Q has to be called a slip, maybe due to length of the game, who knows
Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: Chess is sometimes a game of work!

In the crucial game for the 1st place in the 2014 Polish Championship: <Duda, Jan-Krzysztof (2563) - Wojtaszek, Radoslaw (2713)>, after

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 h6 8. Bh4 Qb6 9. Qd2 Qxb2 10. Rb1 Qa3 11. e5 dxe5 12. fxe5 g5 13. exf6 gxh4 14. Be2 Qa5 15. O-O Nd7 16. Kh1 Qg5 17. Rf4 e5 18. Nd5 exd4 19. Qxd4 Kd8 20. Bg4 Bc5 21. Qd2

click for larger view

Wojtaszek played 21...Bd6!

"Such a move is just impossible to find over the board. It is clear that Wojtaszek knew it and yes, chess is sometimes a game of work!" (GM Arkadij Naiditsch)

The game continued:

22. Qa5+ b6 23. Rxb6 Bc7 24. Bxd7 Qe5 25. Kg1 Rb8 26. Qb4 Bxb6+ 27. Nxb6 Qe3+ 0-1

Duda is just 16 years old. It seems he fell into some nasty home preparation. (Wojtaszek is known as a "theoretical beast", especially in his main repertoire).

"We can see one more time how much chess has changed. On the top level, analyses are deep and players have to remember a lot not to get in deep trouble in the early stages of the game." (Naiditsch)

Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: <cro777> Now thats a sharp, exciting game!

Speaking of preparation (or work), do you think Anand's legendary preparation acumen will be enough for him to have a reasonable chance of victory vs Carlsen? I think Anand needs to prepare comprehensively, that is tournament-wise and match-wise, to maintain the balance [ie: not lose control of the match]. Also, Anand could benefit from a basic overhaul in his approach to match-play in general. I think it would be wise for Anand to thoroughly prepare one or two lines (besides 1.e4) in an attempt to keep Carlsen somewhat off-balance. The main point here would be to strive for super-solid positions that have zero-chance of losing

With that said, I think Anand should "go for the throat" early, so to speak, and try to net a victory, ideally within the first 2-games. The view here (in such a short match) is to get the lead early, stay unbeaten through the middle stages, then save his remaining preparation for the last 3 games or so. Sort of like what Kramnik did in last year's Candidates, maintaining his position, and going all out in the later stages. The difference here is Anand would try to gain a win early, first.


Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: <morfishine> Anand is changing his style of play. Could he play against Carlsen like he had played at the Candidates tournament (where he played dynamic chess and a good endgame).

Anand also promissed to change his team of seconds. In Chennai, the most creative of his seconds was Sandipan Chanda. Sandipan was also his second at the Candidates tournament. The other core members of his team were Sasikiran, Leko and Radoslaw Wojtaszek.

Anand said: "I am planning to re-jig my core team and there would be a couple of surprises. Ideas are being thought about." As GM Harikrishna pointed out:

Anand needs, in his core team, a player(s) who can think like Carlsen!

Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: <cro777> An interesting coincidence: After the Candidates I was musing to myself: "What Anand needs is Kramnik as his second!". At almost the exact same time <DcGentle> mentioned to me that Kramnik was good friends with Anand and would make a great second. I had no idea they were such good friends and my wondering was purely in jest. Perhaps it will come to be. Somebody like a Kramnik would be beneficial from a positional perspective while also enhancing Anand's general match preparation, IMHO.


Premium Chessgames Member
  Patriot: Hi <morf>! Here is Dan's response to the "theory" I had:


"Playing potential increases with knowledge." - I don't believe this; I think abilities are more important and your potential abilities limit your playing potential, as you develop those abilities and pick up knowledge.

But yes, you get diminishing returns on areas where you are already good. Your "chain" is only as strong as your weakest link, often.

And yes, doing things way above your level also often gets diminishing returns.

Hopefully you can balance your play and theory! :)

The triangle: Study - Play - Get Feedback as in the NN "The Improvement Feedback Loop" -----------------

<<When you look at it from this angle, it's easy for me to see that many Saturday and Sunday problems are ridiculously too advanced for me at my stage of improvement. Sure, I may figure them out if given enough time but I think there is very little to be gained from this (for my level). It's like a 6th grader trying to work out a college level math problem, and even if they accomplish this with much effort it is misleading to believe they are just as good as a college level student.> I have mixed feelings about this comment. Don't sell yourself short. If you can work through a problem (even though it may take a lot of time) its not an issue of knowledge, but an issue of calculating speed or pattern recognition or both. After all, one has arrived at the correct solution, so that has to be a plus. I would think a 6th grader would be thrilled to find the correct answer and could care less about how much time it took.> I had some mixed feelings about my own comment as well but decided to throw it out there and see what your opinion is. It may be a better analogy if I said it wouldn't be very useful for a 6th grader to attempt college level algebra, before they learn the basics leading up to it. It's sort of like playing someone 500 rating points higher. It may turn out to be dehumanizing if done too often. Dan suggests 150-200 rating points higher at the most so that you are punished for bad moves, but they are not so high that they don't make some mistakes that give you a fighting chance.

Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: Good news for endgame lovers: the re-introduction of adjournments.

The second edition of the ACP Golden Classic will be held from July 12-20 in Bergamo, Italy.

The interesting part of this "unusual" tournament is that the players will be competing under the same time control as was used in the World Championship matches in the Golden Era of chess: 2,5 hours/40 moves + adjournment.

According to organizers, the re-introduction of adjournments should "provide an occasion for producing highly spectacular and imaginative chess, by giving the seven gladiators the most important ingredient needed for exploiting their skills and fantasy: time to think... Hopefully the formula of the event should finally present chess lovers worldwide with a selection of high-level endgames".

Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: Asked if he would consider working as a second for Anand, Kramnik said: "To be honest, I donít know. I havenít thought about that at all...If Vishy makes an offer I can think about it."
Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: The lost art of common (positional) sense in chess.

GM Lars Bo Hansen: " I am staunch advocate of the value of logical thinking and common sense in chess. Even in this time and day where analysis engines point out one exception to the old dogmas in chess after the other and where concrete variations seem to be the norm, I believe thinking logically and applying common sense can take you a long way in chess.

In round 3 of the Danish Championship, logic and common sense helped three Grandmasters win instructive games that are worth studying. In all of these games, logical thinking and common (positional) sense were more game-deciding factors than sharp calculations or intriguing combinations.

Premium Chessgames Member
  cro777: "Over the past two decades, the influence of powerful chess programs has profoundly changed the game of chess. Chess has become a much more concrete game with precise calculations. The narrow specific approach to each position has virtually replaced the more intuitive and general approach developed by the old masters. For young aspiring chess players, this computer development comes with many pitfalls. To be successful in chess, building understanding and logical thinking must precede the use of computer-assisted analysis." (Lars Bo Hansen: "The Lost Art of Common Sense in Chess (What Would A GM Do?)")

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 145)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 145 OF 145 ·  Later Kibitzing>

Times Chess Twitter Feed
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 users.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
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, its employees, or sponsors.
Participating Grandmasters are Not Allowed Here!

You are not logged in to
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 | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Little ChessPartner | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2014, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies