|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-18-05 | | yoozum: Easy problem - even I got it. |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | patzer2: <JohnBoy> After 25...Qg5 26.Qxf4 Qxf4 27.Rh1+ Kg8 (I think that's the move you meant) 28.Bh6 Qe5+! 29.Kf1 Qxb2 30.Re1 Qxa2 –+ White can resign. |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | Rogon: I don't understand why this isn't a forced mate after 27. Ke1, i.e. 27... Qg1+ 28. Ke2 Qg2+ 29. Ke1 Bg3+ 30. Qf2 Qxf2# |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | patzer2: <JohnBoy> I see 25...Bxf3! more as a deflection move continuation of the winning attack on the "weakened castled position" that started with 18...Nxe5, and was well underway after 22...Nf4!, than I do as a "demolition of pawn structure." Since 25...Bxf3! is not the actual start of the winning combination, and it does force the King to move or the pawn to capture, I decided to call it a deflection. However, if anyone else wishes to classify it as a demolition, I have no problem with it. |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | JohnBoy: <patzer2> "After 25...Qg5 26.Qxf4 Qxf4 27.Rh1+ Kg8 (I think that's the move you meant)" - right - but now not your 28.Bh6, rather 28.Ba3 as I wrote. It's is less of a free meal than your Bh6. |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | patzer2: <Rogon> Well it's not an immediate mate, but Black should be happy with 27...Qg1+! 28.Bf1 Bxd2+ 29.Rxd2 Rxf8  |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | Rogon: <patzer2> Ah, I didn't see Bf1. Thanks! |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | patzer2: <JohnBoy> I think 25...Qg5! 26.Qxf4 Qxf4 27.Rh1+ Kg8 28.Ba3 g5! 29.Rac1 Rd8 30.Be7 Rd7 31.Bf6 g4 32.Rhf1 Rxd3 33.Kxd3 Ba6+ 34.Kc2 Bxf1 35.Rxf1 Qc4+ 36.Kd2 Qxf1 is clearly decisive for Black. |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | JohnBoy: <patzer2> - Sorry, maybe I was not sufficiently clear. I don't think that 25..Qg5 is a bad move. I chose it when doing the puzzle because I saw how it wins. Your 28...g5 gets to the point. I just happen to now think that Street chose correctly with 25...Bf3+ - it's more to the point. By the way, in your line, after 28...g5, white should probably avoid giving up both rooks. A bit more resilience is offered with 29.Rh6 g4 30.Rxe6 - I think that white, while clearly getting thrashed, can survive for a few more moves without devastating material loss or mate. As per deflection vs. demolition, I suppose my difficulty is what exactly you mean by deflection. Can you help me out here? |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | patzer2: <JohnBoy>I think we're in agreement. We both agree 25...Bf3+! and 25...Qg5! win, but 25...Bf3+! gets to the point quicker and faster. You asked about my definition of deflection. If you go to my game collection, you'll find my definition. However, my concept of deflection can probably best be understood by going through some of the examples there. |
|
| Feb-18-05 | | JohnTal: JohnBoy - you refuted my line. Well done, the bishop check on g2 is key. Mate comes with the B# on f3, supported by the Q on h1. I had hopes of Qe7+ with mate at g7.
The h1-a8 diagonal is too strong for Black and his other bishop is well placed. After 23 moves, White is in dire straits - his king devoid of protection, and Black's 2 strong bishops and Queen running amok. Great compensation for a rook. Well done Frank! Nice to see lots of comments 30 years later. To Misguided Aggression - from your line, how would you reply to 26 Bf1? |
|
| Feb-19-05 | | SouCapi: <patzer2> <JohnBoy> after 25...♕g5 26.♕xf4 ♕xf4 I think white should play 27.♗a3 directly (instead of 27.♖h1+ ♔g8 28.♗a3). The idea is keep the black ♔ in the seven row and in the same white bishop diagonal. Now 27...g5 is answered by 28.♗d6 and the bishop cannot be captured because of ♗xf5+. It seems that black has only two moves 28...e5 or 28...♕a4 which allows white to control the c column. |
|
| Feb-20-05 | | patzer2: <SouCapi> After 25...Qg5 26. Qxf4 Qxf4 27.Ba3 Rd8 28.Rh1+ (28.Kf2 Qh4+ 29.Ke2 Qg3 30.Kf1 Bxf3 31.gxf3 Qxf3+ 32.Ke1 Rxd3 33.Rxd3 Qxd3–+) 28...Kg7 29.Rad1 Qe5+ 30.Kf2 Qd4+ 31.Ke2 Rd5 32.Rd2 f4 33.Rh7+ Kxh7 34.Bxg6+ Kxg6 35.Rxd4 Rxd4 –+, I think Black has everything well under control. |
|
| Nov-26-06 | | gauer: Who is the strategically more inferior after the 8th move by black? The two set-ups I aim to avoid the most are: (i) the Isolated Queen-pawn positions, (ii) the Grunfeld Exchange / Open Catalan (colour-reversed var. of the Grunfeld) line, since both either surrender the centre or the attack of the lack of a centre. Alternatively, one can look at this as an IQP vs Fianchetto set-up, with a piece-based, rather than pawn-based, centre. I recall some other theoretical lines (in some mid-1950's book) that were also more fitted to piece (ie primary idea is play for initiative, development, not pawn structure - Belgrade Gambit lines, etc come to mind) rather than pawn play (ie primary idea is to establish a pawn structure, and then decide to open or close or lock the game - Italian Game comes to mind) in the centre. Of course, there was also separate discussion in that book of the concept of the fluid centre, such as the creeping counter-attack nature of the Sicilian. |
|
| Nov-27-06 | | Interbond: West Indian Defence? That's a new one for me! |
|
Nov-21-11
 | | FSR: <Interbond> It's really a Gruenfeld Defense by transposition. See Opening Explorer |
|
Nov-21-11
 | | NM JRousselle: Did White forget to resign with honor? |
|
| Nov-21-11 | | whiteshark: Game over! |
|
| Nov-21-11 | | kevinatcausa: We are the 93.75%.
We are getting kicked off of our board. We are being forced to sacrifice ourselves, so that the kingly 6.25% might grow fat off of the riches of the board. Our controllers pit pawn against pawn, throwing our lives away in battle while those kings remain safely castled in the corner of the board. Our safety is worth nothing while theirs is worth everything. We are the 93.75% |
|
| Nov-21-11 | | nolanryan: i dont understand the pun. maybe if his name was Wall Street the pun would make more sense?? |
|
| Nov-21-11 | | knighterrant999: LOL at/with <kevinatcausa> |
|
| Nov-21-11 | | kevin86: A funny time to resign-about five moves before would have made more sense. |
|
| Nov-21-11 | | xthred: Occupy Frank Street! LOL |
|
Nov-21-11
| | ajk68: White's opening play appears aimless and clumsy. 15. Ne5? Maybe 15. Rc1 would have been better. |
|
| Nov-22-11 | | ColeTrane: Occupy Austin Texas |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 20...Qh4