Aug-14-17
 | | ajk68: Naka not showing much respect Kasparov. Playing on in a clearly drawn endgame. |
|
Aug-14-17
 | | saffuna: Agree. It's disrespectful. |
|
| Aug-14-17 | | zborris8: <ajk68 - playing on in a drawn game> Nakamura's last move was an Illegal promotion - the pawn never reached h8. This is an automatic forfeit: https://youtu.be/Iw3rsUIC3RU?t=10101
Kasparov could have taught him a lesson. |
|
| Aug-14-17 | | RookFile: Is that a rule? I've never heard of it. |
|
| Aug-15-17 | | zborris8: It was stated by GM GSerper in his article, and I took his word for it. <GM GSerper: <"You are supposed to first push the pawn to b8 and only then replace it with a queen.">> He cited this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Prk... Now he's just edited his article as a lot of people have taken notice. <GM GSerper: <[In fact removing the pawn and putting the new piece on the square of promotion is allowed, in any order. — Ed.]>> Do You Know How to Promote a Pawn? -by GM GSerper |
|
| Aug-15-17 | | zanzibar: FIDE handbook gives this:
<4.6
The act of promotion may be performed in various ways: the pawn does not have to be placed on the square of arrival, removing the pawn and putting the new piece on the square of promotion may occur in any order. If an opponent’s piece stands on the square of promotion, it must be captured.> https://www.fide.com/component/hand... But these rules are stated only valid to July 1, 2017 (?). Not sure about USCF rules on the matter (aside- FIDE disallows the upside-down rook often used in US play to denote a queen). |
|
| Aug-15-17 | | MKalafatas: I'm thinking young Garry would've plumped for 13...fxe5 in place of 13...Be6 --- and not taken very long about it, either. |
|
| Aug-15-17 | | Strelets: Well, that lasted for about thirty moves more than it needed to. |
|
Aug-15-17
| | ajk68: Commentary pointed out that Naka missed the win. A typical knight screening the pawn from the bishop would have led to promotion. |
|
Aug-16-17
 | | chessgames.com: We tested this game with our upcoming Stockfish feature, you can see the results here: Nakamura vs Kasparov, 2017 [eval]. The skinny is this:
Kasparov's 38...Ke5 was inaccurate: 38...g5 would lead to equality, but after Naka played 39.Ke3 the eval was +1.08 in White's favor. Kasparov's 44...Kc5? was a big mistake because he opened himself up to 45.a4!! Bf6 46.a5 Kb5 47.Nh2 Bg7 48.a6 Kxa6 49.Ng4 Bf8 +- +6.72 (42 ply) — but lucky for him Naka didn't see it and played 45. Nd4? instead, keeping the game level. Kasparov's 44...Bb6? was a losing move, and Naka correctly replied with 48. Nf4 +- +10.26 (42 ply) But as luck would have it for Gazza, Nakamura let the win slip through his fingers with 52. Ke4? — instead he could have gone on to win with 52.Kc4 Bf2 53.Kb5 Ke8 54.Kc6 Kd8 55.Kb7 Be1 56.Ne3 Kd7 +- +128.34 (75 ply). (Note that enormous evaluations over 100 like that is Stockfish's way of saying "It's virtually certain there is a forced mate, even though the details are not fully computed." The huge ply depth is an indication that tablebase was heavily used.) After 52...Ke6 Stockfish calls the game a draw (+0.15), and soon it was evaluated as a rock-solid tablebase draw, and it remained so for the rest of the game. If anybody can poke holes in that analysis I'd be very appreciative as it would help debug this upcoming feature. |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | zanzibar: <chessgames> I would think it mandatory to enhance your playback to allow variations in you intend to do this right. Comments just don't cut it, I'm afraid.
. |
|
Aug-17-17
 | | offramp: Has there ever been any other game which had, in successive moves, B on R1 to R8 then back to R1? |
|
| Aug-17-17 | | Duracell: For the promotion rules: I don't know! FIDE rules are free, but you must pay for USCF rules... That's odd and bad. |
|
Aug-17-17
 | | perfidious: USCF are still trying to recoup legal costs incurred in defending a case from a while back--I shall not name names, but two of the parties used to post here on a great many occasions. |
|
| Aug-17-17 | | acirce: <FIDE handbook gives this:
<4.6
The act of promotion may be performed in various ways:the pawn does not have to be placed on the square of arrival, removing the pawn and putting the new piece on the square of promotion may occur in any order. If an opponent’s piece stands on the square of promotion, it must be captured.> https://www.fide.com/component/hand...
But these rules are stated only valid to July 1, 2017 (?).> Here are the updated rules, they say exactly the same thing. I dunno where the rumours come from. https://www.fide.com/component/hand... |
|
| Aug-17-17 | | Petrosianic: <I dunno where the rumours come from.> From zborris8. He assured us that Naka's way was an automatic forfeit. |
|
| Aug-17-17 | | zborris8: It all stemmed from Chess.com's discussions about this game which referred to rules of promotion laid down in this article: DO YOU KNOW HOW TO PROMOTE A PAWN? Grigory Serper
https://www.chess.com/article/view/... "As you probably know, an illegal move is punished by an instant loss in blitz, so it is extremely important to follow the official rules. The woman who played White promoted her pawn by playing b7-b8=Q; what could go wrong? Well, she put her new queen on b8 and simply removed the b7 pawn from the board. As the result she lost the game for an illegal move. It is both funny and sad to watch arbiters teach an international master how to promote a pawn. That is, you are supposed to first push the pawn to b8 and only then replace it with a queen." Irony between the article's title, and the titled author getting it wrong. |
|
| Aug-19-17 | | zanzibar: <<Duracell> For the promotion rules: I don't know! FIDE rules are free, but you must pay for USCF rules... That's odd and bad.> I agree. It is unfortunate.
A local library has a copy (or had(?)) of the USCF rules. Maybe I'll check it out again and look up the rule. I am curious to see if they are specific about it. |
|
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
