|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-13-05
 | | Gregor Samsa Mendel: <erikcu>--As far as I can tell, against 28.Rxd5 black can play exactly the same moves as in the actual game. After 28...Bh6 29.Qh4 Be3+ 30.Rf2 Qxh4 31.gxh4 Rf8 32.Rdd2 Bxf2+ 33.Rxf2 Rxf2 34.Kxf2 black is a pawn ahead and should have no trouble winning. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | erikcu: Yeah I see now. I wonder why I thought it was so different. :( |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | Shah Mat: im not ashamed to say i missed this one. it was tricky, with a long continuation. |
|
Jan-13-05
 | | cu8sfan: I think finding 28....♗h6 was most difficult in this combination. If you don't see this move you won't start with 25....♖xg5. I didn't find the solution and when I looked at the game I was pretty upset at first because I started a move too early (24....fxg3 e.p.). I thought how the heck can I know that White just moved 24.g4? |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | panigma: Same question I always have...why resign here? Why not play it out a bunch more moves and see if black blunders? Maybe white can somehow get a draw out of it. I equate it to any other sport...let's say football...if your team is down by two touchdowns with a minute left, you don't quit just because it is improbable that you'll win, you play it out because you never know what will happen. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | newold: <panigma> if we follow your advice, all the games would go up to mate ! but you're right in the sense of the Tartacover's saying " you can't win a game if you resign !" |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | karlzen: <panigma> This is indeed a very common question. I don't know anything about American football, but I do think I get your point. In sports you can win by just scoring points even if you're currently down a few, in chess, if you're down material and "position", it's like having a few players in your team leave the pitch. If black is not in time-trouble (and why would he be?) there's absolutely no reason to play on. If the players in question were two beginners who don't really know much about chess, then playing on is very reasonable. Here, we have a very strong GM (D Gurevich (black) has almost reached 2600) with an obvious win against a 2100 player. White would simply embarrass herself by playing on. Gurevich knows how to avoid stalemate I can assure you! :) |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | Ed Caruthers: Laura Ross is a 2100+ player who knows how easy the ending is for Black. And Gurevich is 2500+ and would win this ending 1000 out of 1000. More generally, I think you're better off getting some rest before the next game (or the drive home)instead of sitting at the board feeling helpless and stupid. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | duckets: Does anyone have a collection of games where GM's blunder away an obvious win in the endgame? Perhaps a few examples of such might help support panigma's position. In my experience, however, if a GM were to screw up, it would not be at a point in the game where material and position are so obviously one-sided. Players of this caliber don't lose games at this point. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | EyesofBlue: That's the great dillemna of life: you should know when to quit when you are going to lose; but you should never give up if you are going to win. Unfortunately, the difference between stubborness and resilence is ultimately whether you end up winning or losing. |
|
Jan-13-05
 | | beenthere240: Black is in effect 2 pawns up with one protected passed pawn and 1 potential passed pawn. I may be overestimating my skill (which is pretty weak) but I imagine I could beat Kasparov with the position following 31...Rf8. Playing on in a hopeless position is rude to one's opponent. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | newold: <duckets> I remember two games:
a game from the match Fischer-Taïmanov 1971, when in an bishop versus knight ending Taïmanov made at some moment the only loosing move a game of Hubner, in a world candidate match (perhaps against Korchnoi but I dont remember exactly) : in this game, in the ending, Hubner forget a knight fork ! but we don't know exactly the time situation for these great masters ... |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | davidwill: Hi everone
I think there is a diference between 28 cxd5 and rook takes d5 with the rook taking it will leave white with 3 pawn to 2 on the queenside which can yield a passed pawn . the ending is still winning for black but needs carful play |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | sanferrera: hey, I got an idea...why don´t we make a scorecard of how many puzzles we get right in a given week. A very informal thing, relying on the honesty of we, the regular visitors of chessgames. What do you guys thing about it? |
|
Jan-13-05
| | patzer2: My choice for today's problem solution was the deflection 25...h6! However, I must admit the deflection tactic 25...Rxg5!, as played in the game, simplifies to a won endgame much quicker. After the alternative 25...h6!, play could continue 26. Be3 Rh5 27. Qg4 Qxg4 28. hxg4 Rh1+ 29. Kf2 Rf8+ 30. Ke2 Rh2+ 31. Ke1 Rxf1+ 32. Kxf1 Rxb2 33. Rxd6 Rxb3 34. Nd1 Bf3 35. Kf2 e4! [35...Bxg4?! 36. Bxh6! gives White drawing chances] 36. Rd8+ Kf7 37. Rd7+ Kf8 38. g5! Bg4 39. Rd8+ Ke7 40. Rd5 h5 41. Bd4 Bxd4+ 42. Rxd4 Rf3+ 43. Kg2 Bf5 44. Rd5 Ke6 45. Rb5 Kd6 46. Rxb6+ Kc5 47. Ra6 Kxc4  and Black's passed pawn should be decisive. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | karlzen: <newold>, You remember correctly Huebner vs Korchnoi, 1980. However, it was much much easier to blunder for Hübner in that game after playing more than 60 moves against top opposition and with a few pieces (here there are only pawns) on the board. Fischer vs Taimanov, 1971 Now that's a real blunder, but still much easier to make than a blunder in this game and as you said, perhaps he was in time trouble. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | themindset: <panigma> to put it simply, black has a guaranteed queen. white has nothing. the only way black could lose would be if he had a stroke. |
|
Jan-13-05
| | patzer2: After seeing a super GM blunder like Short vs Beliavsky, 1992, there may be something to be said for making strong players play out their "won endgames." In the U.S., many of us like the cliche "it ain't over till the fat lady sings" (or "it ain't over till it's over") and the motto for the state of Missouri "show me." More than a few "won" U.S. football games lost in the waning moments by fumbles and interceptions returned for touchdowns. In the same sense, I've seen many "won" Chess games lost or drawn due to the blunders of strong players. |
|
Jan-13-05
 | | kevin86: I guessed the opening moves,but not the end-In the text,it is cut and dry: 32 ♖f1 ♗xf2+ 33 ♖xf2 ♖xf2 34 ♔xf2 black's extra pawn wins easily. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | Stonewaller2: One reason for resigning a tournament game might be to avoid the strain of trying to draw a lost position in order to regroup for later rounds. This was a first-round game in a Swiss system tournament; White most likely expected to lose. I've been two pawns up and only drawn (the position was 8/6N1/p7/Pb5p/5kpP/8/3K4/8, Black to move). Needless to say when I'm playing for the 20 grand at the end of the HB Global Challenge rainbow this May I ain't planning to resign a lot. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | Fulkrum: So whites 14th move should have been f3, correct? The blunder was moving the bishop to g5 instead of reenfocing the e4 pawn. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | SouCapi: <patzer2> Same as you, I`m coming back after 27 years and trying to get in shape before retirement comes a couple of years down the road. The white queen also caught my attention so my first try was also 25...h6 and follows your line up to 32...Rxb2 position that I thought was good enough for black. After 25..h6 the reply 26.Rxf5 appears strong. However after 26...Qxf5! 27.Bxh6 Qf3 white is quite lost. Following Lasker's advice (if you find a good move try to find a better one), I tried the rook sac as in the game. <sanferrera> your idea seems interesting so later the puzzles could be classified based on that. |
|
| Jan-13-05 | | Stonewaller2: Oops, make that 8/6N1/p7/Pbp4p/5kpP/8/3K4/8, Black to move. |
|
Jan-13-05
| | patzer2: <SouCapi> Welcome to Chessgames.com. For someone away from Chess for a while, you have a good eye for tactics. Appreciate your observation about the winning double attack after 25...h6 26.Rxf5? 26...Qxf5! 27.Bxh6 Qf3! |
|
| Feb-23-05 | | RookFile: Why resign? I'll tell you why.
Because maybe if you don't tick
the grandmaster off, he'll spend
some time with you after the game,
and maybe you'll learn something. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 25...Rxg5