|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Aug-02-03 | | PVS: Anderssen had this game won until he played the stupefying 29...Kf7 rather than the obvious 29...Bxf6. |
|
| Aug-02-03 | | uglybird: 29...Bxf6 was not winning as 30.Qxe6+ followed by 31.Rc2 will leave White with much the better game. |
|
| Aug-02-03 | | Calli: uh, hmm, 31.Rc2?? Qxc2 If you meant Rc7 then of course Rxg2 mates. <PVS> is right. |
|
| Aug-02-03 | | uglybird: Sorry about that, not enough sleep last nite. I'll make sure not to do any driving tonite. |
|
| Aug-02-03 | | Sylvester: So if Anderssen had it won, where did Staunton go wrong in the first place? |
|
| Aug-02-03 | | Calli: Can't point to a blunder, but generally he does little to slow Anderssen's attack. I would prefer 16.exf6 for instance. It gives Black doubled rooks on the half-open file, but allows White to defend with Be3, f3 etc. |
|
| Aug-02-03 | | knight errant: I concur with Calli, it is hard to point to a blunder. My hunch after looking at the board following 21...Qe8 is there might be a better reply for white than the text move. |
|
| Feb-18-04 | | InspiredByMorphy: 29. ... Bxf6
30. Qxe6+ Kh7
31. Kh1 Rxg2
32. Rxg2 Rxg2
33. exf6 Qg3
34. Qf5+ g6
35. Rxc7+ Kh6
36. Qxf4+ Qxf4
37. Bc1 Rh2+
38. Kg1 Rd2
39. Bxd2 Qxd2
40. f7 Qxd4+
and Black wins. |
|
| Feb-18-04 | | drukenknight: see how stuanton drives back the B w/ a3? He is ahead in material (by one pawn) he should strive to exchange instead his is going for a spatial advantage but that seems wrong to me. Does Nd2 instead of a3 work better? the passed e pawn is complicating things here. Maybe he should have take 16 exf6 e.p. in order to exchange but I can see why not. Hmmm. having failed to exchange ASAP; white is hemmed in for awhile by his own pawns and black may get an attack in. 24...Rg3 why not get the N to g4? down in material must attack, moving the R doesnt bring it any closer to the K it is already in line. Just some random thoughts, maybe there is something to think about in there... |
|
| Feb-19-04 | | InspiredByMorphy: 16. exf6ep Nxf6
17. Bf4 Bd6
18. Bxd6 Qxd6
19. Rac1 c6
20. Ne5 Rb4
21. Qxc6 Qxc6
22. Rxc6 Rxb2
23. Ra6 Rb4
24. Nc6 Rc4
25. Ne7+ Kh8
26. Rxa7 Rxd4
27. Nf5 Rg4
28. f3 Rg5
29. g4 Rg6
30. a4 Ne8
31. Nd4 h5
32. h3 Nd6
33. Ra5 hxg4
34. hxg4 Nc4
35. Rxd5 Ne3
36. Rh5+ Kg8
37. Re1 Nxg4
38. Kh1 Nf2+
39. Kh2 Rd6
40. Nf5 Rdf6
41. Nh4 Ra8
42. a5 Rfa6
43. Kg3 Nd3
44. Ra1 Nb4
45. Nf5 Nc6
46. Rg5 R8a7
47. Rc1 Nxa5
and draws. |
|
| Feb-19-04 | | InspiredByMorphy: 24. ... Ng5
25. Ng4 Qh4
26. Qf2 Qxf2+
27. Kxf2 Ne6
28. Kg1 h5
29. Nf2 Rb8
30. Nd3 Rb7
31. Rc6 Kf7
32. Rfc1 Rh6
33. R1c2 Bg5
34. Nc5 Nxc5
35. R6xc5 c6
36. Rxc6 Rxc6
37. Rxc6 a5
38. Bc3 axb4
39. e6+ Kg6
40. Bxb4 Be7
41. Bxe7 Rxe7
42. Rd6 Kf6
43. Rxd5 Rxe6
44. a4 Re1+
45. Kh2 Ra1
46. a5 g6
47. Rb5 Ra4
48. Rb6+ Kf7
49. a6 Rxd4
50. Rb7+ Ke6
51. Rh7 Ra4
52. a7 Kd5
53. Rg7 and wins. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | ColonelCrockett: 18.Ne1 seems a questionable reply to the pawn sortee. The idea of attacking the pawn directly can be weeded out of White's options by analysis I think. White should have saved time by simply playing Bb2 and Rc1 instead he complicates his own king's defense by f3? (which loosens g3 as the play shows). I suppose Black could have forced something like f3 but I would never have made the concession voluntarily, especially against a knight whos only real future lies on g5. That's just my personal opinion, I don't presume to compare myself to either player. |
|
| Oct-09-07 | | nimh: Rybka 2.4 mp, AMD X2 2.01GHz, 10 min per move, threshold 0.25. Staunton 6 mistakes:
17.b4 0.65 (17.Ne1 0.92)
19.f3 1.04 (19.Nd3 1.40)
22.Rac1 0.62 (22.Nf2 0.91)
26.Qc6 0.00 (26.Rg1 1.41)
27.Rg1 -0.89 (27.Ng4 0.00)
29.Nf6+ -2.21 (29.Rh1 -1.22)
Anderssen 6 mistakes:
12...Bxf3 0.73 (12...Bf5 0.00)
17...f4 0.95 (17...Qd7 0.65)
18...Rh6 1.40 (18...Qd7 0.98)
23...Rg6 0.94 (23...Ng5 0.65)
25...Rf5 1.41 (25...Qh4 0.96)
29...Kf7 #1 (29...Bxf6 -2.21) |
|
| Oct-11-07 | | nimh: Correction, new threashold 0.33.
Staunton 4 mistakes:
19.f3 1.04 (19.Nd3 1.40)
26.Qc6 0.00 (26.Rg1 1.41)
27.Rg1 -0.89 (27.Ng4 0.00)
29.Nf6+ -2.21 (29.Rh1 -1.22)
Anderssen 4 mistakes:
12...Bxf3 0.73 (12...Bf5 0.00)
18...Rh6 1.40 (18...Qd7 0.98)
25...Rf5 1.41 (25...Qh4 0.96)
29...Kf7 #1 (29...Bxf6 -2.21) |
|
| Oct-11-07 | | Whitehat1963: <nimh> Why don't you try this with the games of Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine and Rubinstein? |
|
| Oct-12-07 | | nimh: Their turn hasn't come yet. Great players like Anderssen, Morphy and Steinitz are awaiting already. |
|
| Oct-12-07 | | whiteshark: I looks to me as if <nimh> is a little impostor. Posting blunder check analysis for 21 games (with 10 minutes per ply) only yesterday can't be the thruth at all. Just a small calculation [assuming each game has 20 moves = 40 plies (as I didn't count them)]: 40plies x 10 mins/ply x 21 games = 8,400 minutes,
whereas 1 day consits of 1.440 minutes only
:D |
|
| Oct-12-07 | | nimh: All I needed to do was to remove inaccuracies smaller than 0.34. |
|
| Oct-12-07 | | whiteshark: That's not my point <nimh>. You lead us to believe that it is a 10 minutes per ply analysis and I have my doubts about it due to the my rough time calculation... So, please, clarify that! |
|
| Oct-12-07 | | nimh: Because it is indeed a 10 min per ply analysis. Don't let yourself to be misled by the fact that I reposted most of previously analyzed games in order to fix them by new threshold. |
|
| Oct-12-07 | | whiteshark: Thanks for your explanation, <nimh>. And, of cource, continue as you like to !! :D |
|
Oct-13-07
 | | Pawn and Two: Staunton stated that his 9th move 9.Nbd2 was imprudent, with the proper move being 9.Bd2. Fritz finds both of these moves acceptable, and prefers Staunton's move (.00) (17 ply) 9.Nbd2 0-0 10.0-0, as compared to his recommendation, (-.20) (17 ply) 9.Bd2 Be7 10.0-0 0-0. It was Anderssen who went wrong first in this game.
At Anderssen's 12th move, Fritz finds Black's best continuation to be: (-.07) (18 ply) 12...Nxd2 13.Nxd2 f6 14.a3 Be7 15.f3 Bd7 16.f4 fxe5 17.fxe5. I notice <nimh> has given Rybka's recommendation of 12...Bf5 as Black's best (.00). Fritz considers 12...Bf5 to slightly favor White, (.30) (18 ply) 12...Bf5 13.Nxe4 Bxe4 14.Qxc6 Bxf3 15.gxf3. Instead of 12...Nxd2 or 12...Bf5, Anderssen played the incorrect 12...Bxf3?. Fritz now gives the following evaluation and continuation: (.75) (18 ply) 12...Bxf3? 13.Nxf3 Rb8, and now, (.95) (17 ply) 14.Ne1 c5 15.f3 Ng5 16.dxc5 Ne6 17.Nd3, or (.91) (17 ply) 14.Qxc6 Rb6 15.Qc2 Rg6 16.Be3 Qd7. Staunton incorrectly condemned his 14th move 14.Qxc6. Staunton stated, <Too hazardous. By taking this useless Pawn, he enables Black to bring his Q.R. into active play at once.> On his 15th move Anderssen slipped again. Fritz indicates that best for Black is: (.84) (17 ply) 15...Rg6 16.Be3 Qd7. Instead, Anderssen played: (1.16) (17 ply) 15...f5 16.a3 Be7. Anderssen was now at a considerable disadvantage, but in the next few moves his position improved, as neither player found the best continuations. |
|
Oct-14-07
| | Pawn and Two: At move 17, Fritz indicates an advantage for White: (1.06) (18 ply) 17.Bd2 Qb8 18.b4 Rg6 19.Rac1 c6 20.Qa4. Instead Staunton played 17.b4, which Fritz evaluates as: (.76) (18 ply) 17.b4 f4 18.Ne1. On his 18th move, Anderssen should have played: (.70) (17 ply) 18...Qd7 19.f3 Ng5 20.Nd3 Rc6 34.Qb2 Rg6, or (.82) (17 ply) 18...Ng5 19.Qa4 Qc8 20.Ra2. Instead, Anderssen made a serious error by playing 18...Rh6?. Fritz now indicates: (1.39) (17 ply) 18...Rh6? 19.Nd3! Rh4 20.f3 Ng5 21.Qa4 Ne6 22.Qxa7. At this point White has strong winning chances with either: (1.52) (18 ply) 23.Nf2, or (1.52) (18 ply) 23.Ra2. However, on his very next move, Staunton returned the favor by playing 19.f3?, instead of playing the strong 19.Nd3!. |
|
| Oct-14-07 | | nimh: <At move 17, Fritz indicates an advantage for White: (1.06) (18 ply) 17.Bd2 Qb8 18.b4 Rg6 19.Rac1 c6 20.Qa4.> In blunder check mode my machine reached 21 plies deep at that move. One should also note that Rybka is some 150 ELO points higher than Fritz, therefore I assume that my analysis is more trustworthy. |
|
| Oct-14-07 | | whiteshark: <nimh: Rybka 2.4 mp> fyi rybkaforum.net says this version is a fake:
<Vasik Rajlich <Those are fakes. :-) Vas>> http://www.rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/r... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
