< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Feb-05-05|| ||EXIDE: Another example of a fine ending. |
|Feb-05-05|| ||MoonlitKnight: 40.Qxf8 would also have been pleasing to the eye. 40...Nf2+ 41.Kh2 Ng4+ 42.Kh1 Qh3+ 43.gxh3 44.Rh2# |
|Feb-05-05|| ||WillC21: <Gypsy> You think it's not very difficult at all to visualize 34 ply ahead? Are you insane? I don't think you know what a ply is. A ply is a color's complete move set and all the other color's possible reactions to that move set. Maybe the world's strongest computers under "normal" time controls see this far ahead, but certainly no human! Grandmasters only calculate variations stemming from 3-5 candidate moves, on average! In fact, calculating ply just is not the way any human approaches chess, my friend! |
|Feb-05-05|| ||Gypsy: <A ply is a color's complete move set and all the other color's possible reactions to that move set> Your definition is different than my. I took ply as just a half a move in a sequence. |
|Feb-05-05|| ||Gypsy: Now it may be a matter of semantics < WillC21>, but this game, for instance, claims to have <PlyCount "96">. From that I extrapolated that ply=1/2 move -- and believe that I also read that at some book I was browsing through. Could you check the definition? It would be great to know for sure.|
(Btw, I certainly can visualize the entire game like this one and I believe anyone can.)
|Feb-05-05|| ||tamar: <gypsy> Your description of the conditions necessary to calculate far ahead reminded me of the final 19 moves of Capablanca vs K Treybal, 1929
where by fixing the pawn structure with 39 b6 and having possession of the only file, any player, not just Capablanca could calculate out to move 58.
Alekhine mentions a similar instance in his book. |
|Feb-06-05|| ||Gypsy: <tamar> Jup, the Capablanca-Treybal game is a good example.|
I believe that good tactical ability has two aspects: concentration and alertness. Concentration lets us remember the positions of pieces and visualize the position down, say, 5 or 7 moves later. Alertness lets us discover interesting and important moves.
Note that these two naturally work against each other. Most people can stay alert, but have problems of concentrating and submerging into the position, so their vision is often "warped" and inacurate. But, conversely, people with extensive technical training are often too good at concetrating. (I am one of those.) They see fairly easily down those 5-7 moves, but at the same time easily miss that a bishop is free for taking on the move one.
Books do not make distinction and always run the mantra of concentration, concentration, concentration. I propose that we are better served when we realize which type of thinking we naturally fall into and then work on improving the complementary skil. (Using myself as an example again, as long as I manage to stay alert, I "see everithing". But habits are hard to break and it is so easy to let yourself be sucked into the game....)
|Feb-06-05|| ||WillC21: <Gypsy> Ok, a ply is a half-move, as I found by doing some research on my chess program. I stated this wrong, but still 34 ply(17 moves) is not common for a human. Of course a person can setup an extremely simple chess position, due to some unique geometry, where the position can be calculated ahead very far by a fairly strong human chess player. I was more talking on average; like if you take a snapshot from the average middlegame position of grandmaster game they are never exhausting 34 ply worth of possibilites. The method of such exhaustion is a way a computer can play strong chess, but a way in which the human mind would be wasting time and efficiency, since so much of our efforts come by way of intuition. Once again, a very simply geometric position can be setup where massive calculations can be made by a human, but that is not the scenario most humans encounter during their average tournament chess game. |
|Feb-06-05|| ||Gypsy: In that case we are on the same page <WillC21>. |
|Feb-06-05|| ||patzer2: <aw1988><How did Qe2 and Qxe4 end up in the "Defensive Combinations" catagory?> When I first looked at the position and saw all those enprise pieces, I though to myself how is Black going to get herself out of this mess? Then it came to me that it has to be some kind of defense by counter attack (e.g. desperado move perhaps?). Of course I could have put it under "weakened castled position" or "pursuit (king hunt)," but that doesn't do justice to the astounding defensive role that 41...Qe2!! plays in rescuing this position (that at my first glance appeared lost). Kind of reminds me of those old Western movies where the hero figures out at the last second how to overcome an apparently fatal situation and then make everything right. The wonderful thing about this move is that it not only gets Black out of her predicament, but it also has the nice added bonus of winning. |
|Feb-06-05|| ||aw1988: <patzer2> I recognize that now, my apologies for not spotting it earlier. Topalov-Leko has the same idea; h6!! and Kh7!! *somehow* find a way to win. :P |
|Feb-22-05|| ||artemis: <willc21> have you ever played blind-fold chess? There you have to play the entire game without looking at the board and remember all of the pieces. I have played blind fold games and while they are difficult they are not impossible. I have looked 19 moves ahead in a game before (only to find that my intended move didnt work!!) and I am far from master level. While these variations were in an endgame, it was a rook and bishop (with five or six pawns a side). So while it is easier than a middle game position, it is still 19 moves. In middle games (sicilian middle games at that) I have looked up to 10 moves ahead, although from time to time I miss a line or wrongfully dismiss a move. |
The point is that even for non-master players, the ability to see far ahead is not a natural ability, but it is an attribute that can be improved over time.
|Feb-22-05|| ||WillC21: <artemis> I actually have never played blindfold chess. I should though. I agree with you, 10 moves in certain middle games is very possible, even for non-master players. The point I was trying to make was that humans don't tend to evaluate in terms of "ply." In other words, we can see certain lines fairly deep, but we don't examine as many possiblities the way a computer does. This is because we have intuition. It may seem obvious now, but that was my only point. |
|Mar-15-19|| ||SpamIAm: Well, all the complaints about the Fischer-Schweber game being "too familiar" must've been taken to heart! New position!|
|Mar-15-19|| ||Walter Glattke: A) 43.g4? Nh2++ 44.Kg2 Qxg4+ 45.Kh2 Qh3+ 46.Kg1 Qh1# B) 43.gxh3 Qxh3+ 44.Kg1 Qh2#
c) 43.Qxg7+ Kxg7 44.R1xf7+ Qxf7 45.Rxf7+ Kxf7 46.gxh3 b3 black wins, so D) 47.Kh2 as in the match, E) 42.Qg3 Ng5 black advantage.|
|Mar-15-19|| ||thegoodanarchist: 14 years between kibitzes. I wonder if that is a chessgames record?|
Or an artifact of my ignore list?
|Mar-15-19|| ||ChessHigherCat: I'm glad white insisted on playing on when he should have resigned so we could see all the variations :-)|
|Mar-15-19|| ||wood n tempo: I thought 41...♕xe4, nabbing a pawn and indirectly protecting the knight via pin, was a relatively strong move. White then might follow up with 42.♕d3, (forcing a trade of queens), or 42.♖xf7.|
|Mar-15-19|| ||wood n tempo: Whoops, I didn't even see that the f8 rook was en prise. Better look harder next time.|
|Mar-15-19|| ||BOSTER: <Gypsy> <it is actually not that difficult to visualise 17 moves>.
Reti claimed that he see only one move ahead.
Lombardy claimed that 2 and half moves ahead would be nice.
You are lucky man if you see 17 moves ahead.|
|Mar-15-19|| ||pittpanther: I see my post that 42 Qg3 puts up more resistance from 14 years ago - still seems true.|
|Mar-15-19|| ||Jimfromprovidence: <wood n tempo> In your line 41...Qxe4 42 Qxf8 black still wins.|
click for larger view
There is 42...Nf2+ 43 Kg1 (not Kh2??) Qxe3.
click for larger view
Now, if 44 Rxf7,then one way black wins is after 44...Ng4+ 45 Kh1 Qe5, below, which threatens 46 Qh2#
click for larger view
White has to give up his rook to stop the mate so after 46 Rxg7+ Qxg7 black is ahead a piece and a pawn.
|Mar-15-19|| ||devere: It seems that 41...Qxe4 42.Qxf8 Nf2+ 43.Kg1 Qxe3 44.Rxf7 Ng4+ 45.Kh1 Qe5 is good enough to win. And if 43.Rxf2 Qh4+ 44.Kg1 Qxf2+ 45.Kh1 Qxe3 46.Rxf7 Qg3 wins|
|Mar-15-19|| ||agb2002: Black has two extra pawns.
White threatens Nxc4, Qxf8 and gxh3.
Black can meet two threats with 41... Qxe4:
A) 42.Qxf8 Nf2+ (42... Qh4? 43.Qxg7+ Kxg7 44.Nf5+ wins for White)
A.1) 43.Kh2 Qh4+ 44.Kg1 Qh1#.
A.2) 43.Kg1 Qxe3 looks lost for White. For example, 44.Rxf7 Ne4+ 45.Kh1 (45.Kh2 Qg3+ 46.Kg(h)1 Qxg2#; 45.R7f2 Rxf2 results in a won pawn ending) 45... Ng3+ 46.Kh2 Nxf1+ 47.Rxf1 Qe4 48.Qf5+ (48.Rf2 Qh4+ 49.Kg1 Qxf2+ with a won pawn ending) 48... Qxf5 49.Rxf5 Rc2 50.Ra5 Rc6 followed by Rb6 with a won ending.
A.3) 43.Rxf2 Qh4+ 44.Kg1 Qxf2+ 45.Kh1(2) Qh4+ 46.Kg1 Rb1+ 47.Nf1 Qf4 and mate soon.
B) 42.Qe7 Qxe7 43.Rxe7 Ng5 54.Ra7 Re2 - + [3p]. For example, 55.Nd5 Rd8 56.Nxb4 Rdd2 57.Rg1 Nh3 wins.
C) 42.Qd3 Qxd3 43.Rxd3 Ng5 looks similar to B.
D) 42.Rf3 Ng5
D.1) 43.Qxf8 Qh4+ 44.Rh3 (44.Kg1 Nxf3+ and mate in two) 44... Nxh3 is similar to A.
D.2) 43.Rg3 Qh4+ 44.Kg1 (44.Rh3 Nxh3 as above) 44... Ne4 45.Qd3 (45.Qd4 Qxg3 46.Qxb2 Qxe3+ wins) 45... Qxg3 46.Qxe4+ Kg8 wins decisive material.
E) 42.Qg3 Ng5 - + [3p].
F) 42.Qh2 Nf2+ wins decisive material.
|Mar-15-19|| ||cormier: |
click for larger view
Analysis by Houdini 4 d 24 dpa done
1. + / = (0.33): 10...Nc6> 11.Bd2 Bd6 12.Rac1 Qb6 13.g4 h6 14.h4 Qb7 15.Ne2 Ne7 16.Ng3 Ng6 17.Qh1 b4 18.Qh3 Ne7 19.f3 b3 20.axb3 Qb8 21.Ne2 Qxb3 22.Bc3
2. + / = (0.59): 10...Nbd7 11.e4 b4 12.exd5 bxc3 13.dxe6 fxe6 14.bxc3 Bd6 15.Re1 Kf7 16.Rb1 Rb8 17.Rxb8 Qxb8 18.Bxa6 Qc7 19.Bb5 e5 20.Ba4 Re8 21.Bb3+ Kf8 22.Bd2 Qb6 23.Qd3 Qc6 24.g3 exd4 25.Rxe8+ Kxe8 26.cxd4 Ne4 27.Be1 Ndf6 28.a4 Kd7 29.a5 Kc7
3. + / = (0.63): 10...b4 11.Na4 Bd6 12.Bd2 a5 13.Rfc1 0-0 14.Qd1 Nbd7 15.Rc6 Nb8 16.Rb6 Qe7 17.Rc1 Nbd7 18.Rb7 Rfb8 19.Rxb8+ Rxb8 20.Rc6 e5 21.Ra6 Bc7 22.Qc1 Rc8 23.Rc6 e4 24.Be2 Nb8
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·