| Aug-10-04 | | Shah Mat: the king plays ring around the G-pawn before he is mated. |
|
| Aug-10-04 | | who: Why not 24...Qa4 |
|
| Aug-10-04 | | marcus13: ON 24. ... Qa4 25.Bxa6 is winning. This is a nice exploitation of the pin by Nimzo. After 24.Ff1 Black has no defense against all threats and must lose material. |
|
| Aug-10-04 | | Shah Mat: it looks like a good move to me...i mean, better than 24)...Qc7. i spent awhile trying to figure out how black could come out without losing the exchange...and there isn't really any way, because his piece is occupying hte b4 square. 21...Qa5 is a poor move, because the only way i can see black achieveing equality after the dogpile on b4 is hopping the knight to d5. |
|
| Aug-10-04 | | patzer2: Although White still retains a clear advantage, better than 21...Qa5? (dropping a piece to the pin threats) for Black was 21...Qc8. After 21...Qc8 22. Rxc3 Nc7 23. Ra5 Nbd5 24. Bb2 Nb5, White has a pawn plus advantage, but Black has counterplay in an unbalanced position. After 21...Qa5?, White takes advantage of Black's self made "pin" predicament by beginning the "overloading of pieces" attacking the "pinned piece" with 22. Rfb1! After 23...Rfb8, Black has calculated correctly that he has four defenders against only four attackers on the pinned piece, but he apparently didn't see ahead to 24. Bf1! With 24. Bf1!, White undermines the Black position with the threat of 25. Bxa6 (deflection via removing the guard) 25...Qxa6 26. RxN RxR 27. RxR RxR BxR(b4), which wins a piece with decisive advantage. Note that Black's weak "counter pin" with 26...Qa5 still gives White a decisive material advantage after 27. Rxb7! with two Rooks and a Bishop against the lone Black Queen. |
|
| Aug-11-04 | | Shah Mat: <patzer2> your line, 22. <Rxc3> Nc7 23. Ra5 Nbd5 24. Bb2 Nb5, is impossible because the bishop occupies the c3 square. Could you clarify please? |
|
| Aug-11-04 | | Shah Mat: ahh you must have meant Rxa3, but i think Nb5 is a blunder...i'm working on a reply line, but my wife is calling me to bed...and between working on chess positions and my wife, well, chess asks my attentions, while my wife demands them...although the decision is never easy; they are both pleasurable activities =) |
|
| Aug-11-04 | | patzer2: <Shah Mat> Thanks for the correction. I did intend 22. Rxa3. So to restate, as an immediate alternative to 21...Qa5?? I like 21...Qc8 22. Rxa3 Nc7 23. Ra5 Nbd5 24. Bb2 Nb5. Although White has a clear but smaller advantage here, it is just not as large as in the 21...Qa5?? line. In this line, White should be able to maintain a small but clear advantage after 25. Qc4 or 25. Rc1 followed by 26. Qc4. The idea is to exchange off one of the Black Rooks and maintain a grip on the a-file. Then hopefully, with the extra passed white a-pawn to gain a winning advantage. However, as a lot of Benko Gambit games have show, this is not so easy, especially after Black has gained a good share of the center. My point is not that 21...Qc8!? gives Black any advantage or that it is even an equalizing line, but simply that it is the best move in a bad position -- giving Black some counterplay and counterchances. In fact, with careful maneuvering by White, it may result in a lost endgame. However, it is certainly it better than losing immediately with the blunder 21...Qa5?? in a self-made losing pin. So, where would I have varried earlier in this game? Well after 1. Nf3 I don't think 1...f5 (the traditional Dutch I believe is positionally unsound) is a good reply against a positional genius like Nimzowitsch. The opening explorer indicates that after 1. Nf3 f5 2. b3, White wins 41% versus only 18% wins for Black. And Black doesn't do much better against 2. d4 or 2. g3 in this line. Better than 2...b6 is 2...d6 as in D Juswanto vs Hoang Thang Trang, 2004, where Black loses in the middle game but still gets some equalizing chances out of the opening.
Also to be considered is 2...Nf6 as in Van Wely vs J Van Mil, 1993 or Fedorowicz vs Lombardy, 1977. 4...Bxf3 is a positional blunder as the loss of Black's Bishop on the light squares is a much bigger weakness than the doubled White pawns. Preferable was developing with 4...Nf3, which at least allowed Black to get to the endgame before losing to a higher rated player in Wojtkiewicz vs C Garma, 1997. |
|
| Aug-11-04 | | Shah Mat: Great kibitzing patzer2!
well theres no question that your line 21...Qc8 definitely puts black in a better position than 21...Qa5. the followup i was thinking of to 24...Nb5 was something like 25 Bxd5 Nxd4 (...cxd5 loses to 26 Rxb5) 26 Bxe6+ and hten either 27...Nxe6 or ...fxe6. if black recaptures the bishop right away with 25)...exd5 hes left with dbld pawns and the powerful d5 post for his Knight is no longer a threat. And 25)...Nxd4 (probably blacks best reply keeps the pawns balanced (with white ahead by oen of course) but hte Knight loses all his scope. However, if in your line, if say 24)...f4 and suddenly black has counterplay on both sides of the board because hten whites Bxd5 is met with Kxd5 and that Knight isn't going anywhere. White is still winning in these positions, but someone has to try to save black. =P |
|
| Aug-11-04 | | Shah Mat: err Kxd5 = Nxd5 |
|
| Aug-11-04 | | patzer2: <Shah Mat> In the line under discussion, You make a good point about 24...Nb5?! being questionable after 25. Bxd5. However, after 24...f4!? 25. Be4! I think White will hold the position and retain a strong initiative. Maybe the simple 24...Qb7 might hold out some hope of exchanging Queens and surviving to a drawn ending. |
|
| Aug-12-04 | | Shah Mat: yah 24...f4 looked strong at 2am, but you're right; its a dodgy move. any move for black looks dangerous. bad positions force bad moves. |
|
| Jul-11-06 | | RookFile: good game. |
|
| Jun-03-07 | | notyetagm: Position after 23 ... ♖f8-b8
click for larger viewLook at the Black b4-knight. It's not often that you see a <LOOSE> piece that is <LOOSE> with four(!) piece(!) attackers (White b3-,b1-rooks, c3-bishop, d2-queen) offset by four(!) piece(!) defenders (Black a5-queen, a6-knight, b7-,b8-rooks). |
|
| Jun-03-07 | | notyetagm: 24 ... ♕a5-c7!? is a pretty ingenius move in a losing position. Position after 24 ... ♕a5-c7!?
click for larger viewThe point is that after Black loses a piece by 25 ♗c3x♘b4 ♘a6x♗b4 26 ♖b3x♘b4 
click for larger viewBlack has 26 ... ♕c7-a5!?
click for larger viewexploiting the tactical points that the White b4-rook is <LOOSE> and line up diagonally with the <UNDEFENDED> White d2-queen to create a <PIN>. Black is still losing but the whole point of this little queen maneuvre is that it creates a <MATERIAL IMBALANCE> of ♕ versus ♖♖♗ instead of leaving Black just down by a piece. That is, Black plays ♕ vs ♖♖♗ instead of ♕♖♖ vs ♕♖♖♗. This <MATERIAL IMBALANCE> at least gives Black something to pin his hopes on. For example, I've been very impressed in Magnus Carlsen's ability to save worse/losing positions by giving <PERPETUAL CHECK> with his queen, as in Game 6 of his match with Aronian and one of his games with Ivanchuk at Amber. Tartakower was probably thinking the same thing, that as long as he kept his queen on the board he might be able to salvage a half-point with a <PERPETUAL CHECK>. |
|
| Oct-08-07 | | notyetagm: Position after 26 ♖b3x♘b4:
click for larger view"Understanding Chess Tactics" by Weteschnik, Chapter 2 The pin, page 48: <Every attacked piece of yours standing in front of another of your pieces should be considered as pinned> Position after 26 ... ♕c7-a5!?:
click for larger viewWeteschnik's quote paraphrased:
<Every attacked piece of yours (White b4-rook) standing in front of another of your pieces (undefended White d2-queen) should be considered as pinned (26 ... ♕c7-a5!?)> |
|
| Sep-05-09 | | WhiteRook48: black was zugzwanged |
|
|
|
|
Kibitzing
Annotations by 