|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 16 OF 16 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-03-06 | | Victor G.: Game 5: Kramnik ignores 17. Bxf6 (the winning move) giving fritz a stuck pawn and an open king to attack, instead he plays 17. h4. If he played 17. Bxf6 then castling was optional since fritz without its horse did not stand many chances of attacking. Two moves after, he plays 19. Rd3, instead he should have played 19. Rc1(another winning move) since then he can get rid of black's horse at e4 with 20. Bf3 and then allow him to castle safely and go for the win, instead he played 19. Rd3. This move gave fritz the opportunity to get rid of kramnik's castling and with it the winning possibilities of the match(with good play of course), so fritz played 19...b5 followed by a forced 20. cxb5 Bxb5 21.Rd1 Bxe2 22.Kxe2 (now kramnik's castling was gone, and with it his king is open for attack and without good places to occupy, also white does not have his white square bishop anymore to get rid of black's horse at e4 which further attacks white's king.
Now black's attack will be against an exposed king while white's attack will not be so. Also white cannot make progress without ignoring the horse at e4 which can be moved out for multiple attacks and it is also attacking the f2 square and can be aided doing so by a rook(as it happened on the game). This reduces kramnik's winning chances to 0%(with good play), fritz winning chances to 0%(with good play) and setting the drawing chances at 100%(of course with good play). |
|
| Dec-03-06 | | notyetagm: <Ulhumbrus: ... Had Fritz not taken the draw it would have lost, so it also came within an ace of losing.> If you have one move that forces a win, does it matter that all of your other moves lose? Of course not.
|
|
| Dec-03-06 | | Victor G.: To Ulhumbrus and noyetagm: It's not a forced win its a forced draw(with good play), kramnik couldnt make any progress without letting fritz make its own attack and fritz couldnt make any progress without kramnik making his own attack. So Kramnik went for the attack and it resulted in a forced draw. As I pointed 17. Bxf6, instead of 17. h4 or 19. Rc1 instead of 19. Rd3 would have given the win for Kramnik (with good play of course). And about fritz being close to lose, yes it was close to lose, if Kramnik had done any of these two moves(preferably the first one) and followed with really good play he would have won. |
|
| Dec-03-06 | | Hesam7: Some have suggested that Kramnik had some winning chances in the the ending arising after: 27. Re5 Rxe5 28. Bxe5 Ra2+ 29. Rb2 Rxb2 30. Bxb2. Black is NOT forced to play this line however it is interesting to see what happens. The game might continue: 30... Kf7 [30... Nf6? 31. h6!  ] 31. f3! [31. g4?! c4! 32. f3 Nd6 =] Ng3+ 32. Kd3 Nxh5 33. Ba3: 
click for larger viewSooner or later White will get the a-pawn and the c-pawn but I dont think that he can win the ending. |
|
| Dec-03-06 | | blackburne: COMPUTER AND CHESS
Kasparov-Deep Blue, games of computers and programs, human vs computers. This article is in spanish. The link is: http://www.ajedrezdeataque.com/04%2... ------------------ |
|
| Dec-03-06 | | adalav: I WAS THERE! |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | Victor G.: Game 5: I tested my points 17. Bxf6 and 19. Rc1 on a chess engine (beowulf: 2300+ elo). 19. Rc1 was not right as it actually gave black the win with really good play. But 17. Bxf6 as I knew since the first time i saw it while watching game 5, resulted in the win for white, of course they are not neccessarily the best moves but just to show how it gives the win for white): 17. Bxf6 gxf6
18. Rd6 Kg7
19. O-O Ba4
20. Bd1 Bxd1
21. Rfxd1 b6
22. Rd7 Rae8
23. Rxe7 Rxe7
24. Rd3 a6
25. Rc3 Re5
26. g3 Kg6
27. Kg2 Kf5
28. a4 Re6
29. h4 Ke4
30. Ra3 Rc6
31. f3+ Ke5
32. Kh3 f5
33. Rb3 Kf6
34. a5 bxa5
35. Ra3 Kg6
36. Rxa5 f6
37. Kg2 h5
38. Kf2 Kf7
39. Ke1 Ke6
40. Ke2 Kd7
41. Kd3 Ke6
42. Ra3 Rd6+
43. Kc3 Kf7
44. Kc2 Kg6
45. Rb3 Re6
46. Kd2 Rd6+
47. Ke2 Re6
48. Rb8 Rc6
49. Rh8 Rc7
50. Rg8+ Kh6
51. Rb8 Rc6
52. Rh8+ Kg6
53. Rg8+ Kf7
54. Rd8 Kg6
55. Kd3 Kf7
56. e4 fxe4+
57. Kxe4 Re6+
58. Kf4 Re8
59. Rd5 Re5
60. Rxe5 fxe5+
61. Kxe5 a5
62. Ke4 a4
63. Kd3 Ke6
64. Kc3 Kf7
65. Kb2
really a nice game for white and black resigned 1-0 |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | alicefujimori: <Ulhumbrus><If Kramnik had not neglected to develop his KR he might have won the ending.>This is like saying if DF had not chose this rather inferior line he might have won the game. Sorry to offend but this is how ridiculous and superficial your statement looks. |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | notyetagm: <alicefujimori: <Ulhumbrus><If Kramnik had not neglected to develop his KR he might have won the ending.>This is like saying if DF had not chose this rather inferior line he might have won the game. Sorry to offend but this is how ridiculous and superficial your statement looks.> Yeah, and if Topalov had seen 32 ♖xg4+ he would have won Game 2. And if dragon flies had 45s, birds wouldn't mess with them. And if ...
Pointless.
|
|
| Dec-04-06 | | square dance: <Yeah, and if Topalov had seen 32 xg4+ he would have won Game 2. And if dragon flies had 45s, birds wouldn't mess with them. And if ...
Pointless.> wow. thats interesting considering how often you've gone on about topalov's blunders. |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | DocNZ: Hello. Some questions for the strong players here. Is the move 11..e5 still in Fritz's book? Personally I hate the move as after the exchanges and getting to 16 c4 the white bishops are activated How about trying to lock the qside pawns to restrict mobility of the white bishobs by 11...Na5 12Be2 c4 (with the aim of locking the pawns) 130-0 b5 14a4 a6 15ab ab 16Ne5 Bb7 seems to restrict the white bishops and active Blacks QB. Just some thoughts. |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | Ulhumbrus: <alicefujimori: <Ulhumbrus><If Kramnik had not neglected to develop his KR he might have won the ending.>This is like saying if DF had not chose this rather inferior line he might have won the game. Sorry to offend but this is how ridiculous and superficial your statement looks.> One meaning of my statement,if true, is that if an opponent of Kramnik repeats this game and if Kramnik doesn't beglect to get his KR out, he may win. One purpose of such an 'if' is to extract a lesson from the game which can be applied to a future game. In the alternative hypothetocal example which you give, a lsson cannot be extracted so easily. I think that this particular value of my remark has not occurred to you. |
|
Dec-04-06
 | | Mateo: A very nice game full of tactical subtleties.
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Bb4 5.e3 O-O 6.a3 Bxc3+ 7.bxc3 c5 8.Bb2 Nc6 9.Rc1 Re8 10.Bd3 dxc4 11.Bxc4 e5 12.dxe5 Qxd1+ 13.Rxd1 Nxe5 14.Nxe5 Rxe5 15.Be2 Bd7 16.c4 Re7 17.h4 <A novelty. 17.Bxf6 was played in Geller-Spassky, 1965, Candidates, draw in 32 moves.> Ne4 18.h5 Ba4 19.Rd3 b5 20.cxb5 Bxb5 21.Rd1 Bxe2 <21...Rb8? 22.Bxb5 Rxb5 23.Rd8+ Re8 24.Rxe8 mate.> 22.Kxe2 Rb8 23.Ba1 f5 <Preparing Rb3. 23...Rb3? 24.Rd8+ Re8 25.Rxe8 mate.> 24.Rd5 Rb3 <24...g6? 25.hxg6 hxg6 26.Rh8+, White wins.> 25.Rxf5 <25.Rd3? Rxd3 26.Kxd3 Nxf2+, Black wins.> Rxa3 <Threatening 26...Ra2+ winning the f pawn.> 26.Rb1 <Now, after 26...Ra2 White can reply 27.Ke1 (or even 27.Rb2 Rxa1? 28.Rb8+ wins) as the Rook on the first rank defends the Bishop. At the same time Kramnik threatens 27.Rb8+.> Re8 <Impeding the White Rook to invade Black’s back rank. 26...h6? 27.Rb8+ Kh7 28.Rff8, White wins.> 27.Rf4 Ra2+ 28.Ke1 h6 29.Rg4 g5 <Only move. 29...Re7? 30.Rb8+ Kh7 31.Bxg7! Rxg7 32.Rxe4, White wins. 29...Rxf2? 30.Rxg7+ Kf8 31.Rbb7 a5 32.Rh7, the threat 33.Rh8 wins. 29...Nxf2? 30.Rxg7+ Kf8 31.Rh7! Nd3+ (31...Rxe3+ 32.Kf1 Ng4 33.Rb8+, White wins) 32.Kf1 Nb4 33.Bg7+!, White wins a pawn as 33...Kg8? 34.Rh8+! wins the exchange.> 30.hxg6 <30.f3? Nf2, Black wins the e pawn.> Nxf2 <30...Rxf2? 31.Rxe4! wins for White.> 31.Rh4 Rf8 <31...Rxe3+? 32.Kf1 (with the threat Rb8+) Re8 33.Rxh6, the threat 34.Rh8+ wins the exchange for White.> 32.Kf1 <32.Rxh6? Nd3+ 33.Kd1 Rf1 mate.> Nh3+ 33.Ke1 Nf2 34.Kf1 Nh3+ 35.Ke1 1/2-1/2 |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | Ulhumbrus: <alicefujimori: <Ulhumbrus><If Kramnik had not neglected to develop his KR he might have won the ending.>This is like saying if DF had not chose this rather inferior line he might have won the game. Sorry to offend but this is how ridiculous and superficial your statement looks.> One meaning of my statement,if true, is that if an opponent of Kramnik repeats this game and if Kramnik doesn't neglect to get his KR out, he may win. One purpose of such an 'if' is to extract a lesson from the game which can be applied to a future game. In the alternative hypothetical example which you give, a lsson cannot be extracted so easily. I think that this particular value of my remark has not occurred to you. |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | acirce: Wow, I never knew that analysing a game and pointing out possible improvements is now "ridiculous" and "superficial". Only on chessgames.com... |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | acirce: <Mathias says DF for the first time thought it was worse off coming out of the opening.
Kramnik disagrees: "What, was I better off? I don't understand why people say this. I never saw White as having an advantage today." Q: Compared to the human matches, is this more difficult?
A: It takes greater concentration. That's obvious. Takes much more energy than when you play people, but that's ok, remember, I am a professional. But I feel fine. And I think I am playiing well. Except for the event in the second game. Did you lose your best opportunitiy today?
A: Why no. I didn't see myself as having an advantage at all. It was sharp, approximately equal play and counterplay. I think it turned out to be a clean and quite good game. Q: Even showing your best game, you can't beat the computer. Is it impossible?
A: Well, no... It's very hard to beat the computer, but it is possible. Maybe I will be able to do this in the last game. I will tell you a little secret. I have played with this program many games (60 or so) in rapid time control, 10 minute each. That's much harder for a man than longer time control. And I played with black every time. Well, I managed to win only twice out of the 60 games. Lots of draws. So I wouldn't be surprised if there are many draws here in this match. I knew that if I played well there would be many draws. If I play badly there will be few draws. *laughs* Says that the most you can win against a computer with such a short match is one game. "Maximum." And he says he still has this chance. Q: Is the time of anti-computer chess gone?
A: Yes, I try to play like I usually play against people. And the computer, btw, also plays like a regular strong GM. The time of all these special "anti-computer" tricks is gone. Q: Do you regret being unable to fully prepare for this match?
A: Well, what is one to do when things are as they are. Of course I hope we will have another match like this and I will have a couple of months to prepare...But, since I only had two weeks, whether I regret this or not, it doesn't matter. I prepared in physical, psychological and chess terms as best I could, considering how much time I had. Asked if he thinks computer progressed strongly since the Bahrain match.
Says he thinks is progressed considerably and this can be shown mathematically, but the play has been equal right now. Says he had chances to win in the first and second game, and you can't say that he had no chances. "I can't speak for others but I personally can battle a computer. It's too early to speak about the far future." Asked about Topalov rematch, says he hasn't heard anything official from FIDE, so it's just talk for now.> http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt...
http://www.chesspro.ru/_events/2006... |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | acirce: And from http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... <Experts were stunned when Kramnik played 17.h4 against the computer, instead of exchanging on f6 as Geller had done, disrupting Black's pawn structure and playing with this small advantage. In the press conference after the match Kramnik said that he was convinced that Deep Fritz would have held the position quite easily ("It is very hard to beat this computer"). He also said that he was always fond of the pair of bishops, so he decided to take a risk and play a dangerous game.> ...
<Fritz was expecting 27.Re5 Ra2+ 28.Rb2 Nc3+ 29.Kd3 (now all black pieces are hanging) 29...Rxe5 30.Rxa2 Rxe3+ 31.fxe3 Nxa2 32.Kc4 Nb4 33.Kxc5. In the press conference Kramnik said that this line was probably a draw, but only Black can play for a win.> While everybody wanted 27.Re5, it was <Mateo> who first pointed out that this was unclear. |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | square dance: <Fritz was expecting 27.Re5 Ra2+ 28.Rb2 Nc3+ 29.Kd3 (now all black pieces are hanging) 29...Rxe5 30.Rxa2 Rxe3+ 31.fxe3 Nxa2 32.Kc4 Nb4 33.Kxc5. In the press conference Kramnik said that this line was probably a draw, but only Black can play for a win.> whats the deal with all of this ridiculous and superficial analysis? |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | alicefujimori: Oh, so giving only 17.0-0 (without giving any further possible variations) is enough to claim that "<If Kramnik had not neglected to develop his KR he might have won the ending.>" and "<Had Kramnik developed this Rook, it might have been difficult or impossible for Fritz to hold the ending.>"? What's the difference between this and saying "If DF had not entered into this rather dubious variation, it might had won or it might had been difficult or impossible for Kramnik to hold"? Wow, I don't blame a person that have never played in any standard time control tournaments before nor have an official rating to have enough knowledge about chess to realize that such statements were ridiculous and superficial, but you should know better <acirce>. :) |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | square dance: <What's the difference between this and saying "If DF had not entered into this rather dubious variation, it might had won or it might had been difficult or impossible for Kramnik to hold"?> nothing. and whats wrong with making such a statement?!? |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | alicefujimori: <square dance>Because it was ridiculous and superficial. I just pointed it out to <Ulhumbrus>, that's all. I wouldn't had posted anymore on this subject had not some people decided to post "crappy little" comments on this. |
|
| Dec-04-06 | | square dance: <alice> i like how you decide what is ridiculous, superficial and crappy. i think you're the president of your own "crappy little" fan club. |
|
| Dec-05-06 | | Calli: Thousands of photos from the match:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/schwar... |
|
| Dec-11-06 | | alicefujimori: <sqaure dance><i like how you decide what is ridiculous, superficial and crappy. i think you're the president of your own "crappy little" fan club.>You mean you're the president of the "troublemaking" fan club, right? Don't worry, we all know that. :) |
|
| May-06-07 | | blackburne: COMPUTER AND CHESS
Kasparov-Deep Blue, games of computers and programs, human vs computers. This article is in spanish. The link is: http://www.ajedrezdeataque.com/04%2... ------------------
|
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 16 OF 16 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
