|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-08-08 | | zooter: <D4n> & <Whitehat1963> Nc3 is met by Bb4 where Black isn't all too bad |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | patzer2: <TheaN>< 11.Qb5 11....Bxe3? 12.Qxd5+
11...Nd7 ...nothing works to the double attack threat> Please check again. the King is in check after 12. Qxd5+ and 11...Nd7 is an illegal move. So after the double attack created by 11.Qb5 Bxe3? 12.Qxd5+, either the King must move or the Rook or bishop must interpose (can't capture the Queen here), after which the capture 13. Qxe4 completes a double attack (the "Queen Fork" double attack 12. Qxd5+ threatened the pawn on e4 and checked the King). Of course this is not best play. Better is 11. Qb5 Be3 12. Nc3! a3 13. Qxc5 Qxc5 14. Bxc5  , completing the other part of the double attack threat created by 11. Qb5! (i.e. Lose the Queen if you move the Bishop or lose the Bishop if you protect the Queen). |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | patzer2: Here's a breakout of the combination with Fritz 8, featuring both 11. Qc4! and 11. Qb5! : 11. Qc4!
[11. Qb5! Be6 (11... Bxe3 12. Qxd5+ Kh8 (12... Rf7 13. Qd8+ Rf8 14. Bc4+ Be6 15. Bxe6+ Kh8 16. Qxf8#) (12... Be6 13. Qxe6+ Kh8 14. Qxe4 Nd7 15. Bd3 Nf6 16. Qxb7 ) 13. Qxe4 Bb6 14. Qe7 Nd7 15. Nc3 Bc5 16. Qg5 h6 17. Qh4 Re8+ 18. Be2 Bb4 ) 12. Nc3 a6 13. Qxc5 Qxc5 14. Bxc5 Rxf4 15. Be3 Rf8 16. Nxe4 (3.69 @ 14 depth)] 11... Be6 12. Qxc5 Qxc5 13. Bxc5 Rxf4 14. Nc3 Rf5 15. Be3 (3.12 @ 14 depth). If anything, 11. Qb5! actually evaluates slightly better than 11. Qc4! However, the difference, in a clearly won position for both moves, is so slight it's practically meaningless. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | Nikita Smirnov: This was just to easy.It took me 15 or 30 seconds to answer.But the move is pretty nice. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | kevin86: This one is easy-it looked too easy. White's final move is both a double attack and a pin. Both queen and bishop are undefended for black and both cannot be saved. The exchange of queens gives white an extra tempo with the check to capture the hanging bishop. If 11...♖d8 (hoping for 12 ♕xd5+? ♖xd5 defending the bishop or 12 ♕xc4 ♕d1+ and the play can be iffy for white) 12 ♗xc4 and the queen is still pinned and cannot make counterplay.n |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | YouRang: I found 11.Qb5 pinning the bishop and threatening 12.Bc4, which would win the queen (if black foolishly tries to save the bishop). Then I looked at the answer and saw that 11.Qc4 also wins the bishop. I sort of like Qb5 better, though. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | TheaN: <Please check again. the King is in check after 12. Qxd5+ and 11...Nd7 is an illegal move. So after the double attack created by 11.Qb5 Bxe3? 12.Qxd5+, either the King must move or the Rook or bishop must interpose (can't capture the Queen here), after which the capture 13. Qxe4 completes a double attack (the "Queen Fork" double attack 12. Qxd5+ threatened the pawn on e4 and checked the King).> Err, patzer, you are noticing that all those moves are '11....' I hope? I was pointing at any possible defense against Qb5. <Better is 11. Qb5 Be3 12. Nc3! a3 13. Qxc5 Qxc5 14. Bxc5> And this doesn't make sense at all 12....a3 is impossible, 13....Qxc5 is bizarre. Aren't you switching sides and/or squares here? |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | hovik2003: I only considered 11.Qb5 with winning 12.Bc4 or 12.Qxc5 next(depending on black's reply), but I didn't see 11.Qc4 at all, ofcourse that was my choice after brief look at the position. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | YouRang: <Prudov: Two dangling black pieces and an open diagonal to the black king. Reminds me of another 11-move game: Euwe-Cortlever, Beverwijk, 1940.> Welcome to the site, <Prudov> :-) BTW, a little tip: If you insert the URL for any game on this site, it comes out as a nicely formatted link, as follows: Euwe vs Cortlever, 1940 |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | johnlspouge: <YouRang and Prudov>: I am trying to decide whether I would prefer to be NN or Cortlever...and I have the sensation of choosing between death by hanging or death by guillotine. <Yecchhh!> |
|
Jan-08-08
 | | egilarne: <Prudov> Nice little combination trick by Euwe! Thanks! |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | patzer2: <TheaN> Good catch! Guess I did switch sides for a couple of moves. So thanks for the correction. I meant to post 11. Qb5! <Be6> 12. Nc3! <a6> 13. Qxc5 Qxc5 14. Bxc5 Rxf4 15. Be3 Rf8 16. Nxe4 as the best play line. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | patzer2: <TheaN> My apology. I did miss that <all those moves were 11...> So after 11...Nd7 12. Bc4 Black has simply succumbed to the worse of white's dual threats (i.e. double attack) by giving up the Queen instead of just a piece. Same thing applies to 11...Rd8 12. Bc4 . |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | TheaN: <So after 11...Nd7 12. Bc4 Black has simply succumbed to the worse of white's dual threats (i.e. double attack) by giving up the Queen instead of just a piece. Same thing applies to 11...Rd8 12. Bc4 .> Yep. That was my point. And I was guessing you meant Be6 and a6 as that made sense, but I thought you'd want to correct it yourself and you did XD. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | zenpharaohs: I couldn't decide whether 11 Qc4 or 11 Qb5 was better. Rybka rates them about equal. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | YouRang: <zenpharaohs: I couldn't decide whether 11 Qc4 or 11 Qb5 was better. Rybka rates them about equal.> They probably are equal as far as a computer would be concerned. I give a tiny edge to Qb5 because it gives black an opportunity to make a bigger blunder (if he doesn't see the queen-winning threat of Bc4). Computers don't think that way. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | Terry McCracken: From a human viewpoint, I feel 11. Qb5! best for all the reasons given. I too looked at Qc4 and then Qb5 and stuck with it. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | Steve Case: I went with B5 because I saw that it wins the Bishop. I didn't consider that C4 was equivilent to "Trading when your up" as someone up thread pointed out. So C4 is better because it forces the Queen trade while winning the Bishop. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | dzechiel: <Steve Case: So 11 Qc4 is better because it forces the Queen trade while winning the Bishop.> This is an important concept. Since white knows that he will go up a piece in the combination, he should clearly use the line that also forces the exchange of queens. Once a player is ahead in material, it benefits that player to exchange equal material off of the board in order to increase the percentage of his advantage. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | schnarre: I had looked at 11. Qb5 as well, but ended up rejecting it in favor of Qc4 (11. Qb5 Qd1+, 12. Kxd1 Rd8+, 13. Ke2 Bg4+, 14. Ke1 Bxe3 or 13. Ke1 Bb6 [if 13...Bxe3? then 14. Qb3+ Kh8, 15. Qxe3], 14. Bxb6 axb6, 15.0-0 Nc6) I had also looked at 11. Bxc5 Qxc5, 12. Qc4+ Qxc4, 13. Bxc4+ Kh8, 14. 0-0 favoring White. Qc4 just had that nice simple resolution! |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | aazqua: I thought Qb5 was a better answer. I suppose they're both good enough. |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | johnlspouge: Some people have presented arguments in favor of Qb5 over Qc4. Who of them would play Qb5, and later in the game, when presented with the opportunity of trading Qs with all else even ("ceteribus paribus"), would defend the notion of avoiding the trade? As <dzechiel> points out, when at a material advantage, trading pieces is generally good strategy. It is the confluence of capturing the B and trading Qs that makes trading Qs appear less attractive. It is too bad that <UdayanOwen>, our resident psychologist, is unavailable to explain this curious phenomenon of human evaluation :) |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | Terry McCracken: < johnlspouge: Some people have presented arguments in favor of Qb5 over Qc4. Who of them would play Qb5, and later in the game, when presented with the opportunity of trading Qs with all else even ("ceteribus paribus"), would defend the notion of avoiding the trade? As <dzechiel> points out, when at a material advantage, trading pieces is generally good strategy.
It is the confluence of capturing the B and trading Qs that makes trading Qs appear less attractive. It is too bad that <UdayanOwen>, our resident psychologist, is unavailable to explain this curious phenomenon of human evaluation :)> I think you meant "ceteris paribus";)
To the main issue. What move is better?
IMO Both and Neither! Why do I say this you ask? Am I between Quantum States? Well it's really very simple. A couple of reasons and I think it will clear up the "confluence phenomenon" in the process;) One, computer analysis is about equal and two, I would choose either depending on circumstances; e.g. I'm playing a human, especially a weaker human, I set a snare with 11. Qb5!? with the the extra threat of 12. Bc4 threating the win of Black's Queen. I'd play 11. Qc4 if my opponent is close in strength,(an obvious blunder), and the win of the Bishop forces resignation. No need to add insult to injury!:-0 |
|
| Jan-08-08 | | D.Observer: If <NN> continued, how will the game go on? |
|
| Jan-09-08 | | johnlspouge: <Terry Macracken: I think you meant "ceteris paribus";)> Quite correct, and thanks for correcting the slip. "Ceterus" is 2nd declension, as clearly displayed by the form "et cetera". |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
