chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Alexandru Manea vs Tamir Nabaty
Golden Sands (2012), Golden Sands BUL, rd 2, Jun-05
Reti Opening: Reti Gambit (A09)  ·  0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 388 more games of T Nabaty
sac: 22...Rxc4 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: The tournament is found above the game. For the newest chess events, this information may be a link which takes you to the tournament page which includes other games, a crosstable, discussion, etc.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
Mar-28-13  Conrad93: Hard to believe a 2300+ rated opponent played the opening this badly...
Mar-29-13  Abdel Irada: It seems to me that White began to go astray with 10. Nb3. Worth considering was some such continuation as 10. e4, c5 11. e5, Nd5 12. dxc5, Bxc5 13. Ne4, Be7 14. Rd1, Qc7 15. Bg5, with complications.

In the text, I wonder if he thought he could trap the queen. (Ironically, he *did* win the queen, but got a lost position out of the deal.) Otherwise, 14. Bb5? is awfully hard to explain except as a blunder.

Mar-29-13  Conrad93: 6. Qe2 was a dumb move. 6. d4 is far stronger, though getting rid of that b4 pawn looks very difficult.
Mar-29-13  Abdel Irada: While 6. Qe2 wasn't the move I'd have chosen, I hesitate to call it "dumb" because I see its purpose: to deter ...Ba6.

Up to 10. Nb3, White's play has been a bit passive, but not fatally so; it is that move that began the meander into futility. Getting rid of the b4 pawn is not an immediate imperative, and had White logically seized the center with 10. e4, I think his game was still playable.

Mar-30-13  Conrad93: It may not be immediate imperative, but it is certainly a thorn in white's position.

6. Qe2's purpose is pointless. Seizing the center was without a doubt better.

Mar-30-13  Abdel Irada: <Conrad93>: Please explain why the pawn on b4 is a "thorn" in White's position, and why you feel White stands worse after the series of moves I suggested in my first post.

Feel free to use an engine if you like. If you can show me something wrong with the idea, or offer proof that White is worse, I will be most interested to see it, because my own preliminary conclusion is that as of move 10, White retains his customary very slight edge, and best play will converge on equality.

Apr-02-13  Conrad93: < Please explain why the pawn on b4 is a "thorn" in White's position, and why you feel White stands worse after the series of moves I suggested in my first post>

You seem to have trouble understanding positions then.

Without the b4 pawn in the way the white knight could develop much more swiftly. To argue that it causes no strain in white's position is not something worth arguing about. The fact is too obvious.

The knight really has no place to go.

<White retains his customary very slight edge, and best play will converge on equality.>

The same can be said for even the worst position.

Apr-02-13  Abdel Irada: <Conrad93: Without the b4 pawn in the way the white knight could develop much more swiftly.>

Did you even bother to play through the line I suggested? As you will see, the pawn on b4 has no inhibiting effect on the knight, which after being developed on d2 (as in the game) moves to e4, a strong and active centralization.

<The same can be said for even the worst position.>

I see. We can put that to the test, then. You open with 1. f3 and 2. g4, and we'll see how soon that converges on equality.

<You seem to have trouble understanding positions then.>

Could remarks like that explain your reputation on this site?

Apr-03-13  Conrad93: <Did you even bother to play through the line I suggested? As you will see, the pawn on b4 has no inhibiting effect on the knight, which after being developed on d2 (as in the game) moves to e4, a strong and active centralization.>

The knight is on a weak square.

Apr-03-13  Abdel Irada: No, the knight moves *to* a weak square on b3.

If White had followed the plan I suggested in my first post on this page, its destination would be the active and central e4.

Apr-06-13  Conrad93: I'm starting to consider you a patzer if you think that the b4 pawn adds no difficulty. With the right moves black could make that pawn a passer.
Apr-06-13  Cyphelium: <Abdel Irada> After 10. e4 I think that the most natural try for black is 10. -c5. Then 11. e5 is almost forced. 11. -♘d5 12. ♘e4 ♘d7 looks good for black, I doubt that white can claim an edge here.

Obviously, the real blunder was losing a piece with 14. ♗b5. 13. ♗d2 looks uninspired as well. Instead, 13. f3 and 14. e4 looks like a way of developing the ♗c1. I don't think this looks like a worse option than 10. e4 (not better either, necessarily).

<Conrad93> It is easy to say things like that a piece is on a "weak square" or that a pawn might become a passer given "the right moves", but more difficult to explain what a weak square means in this particular case or show which those "right" moves actually are. You could do with showing some variations illustrating what you mean.

Apr-06-13  Conrad93: Showing a continuation is pointless. You can glance at the position and realize that knight on b1 is limited.
Apr-07-13  Cyphelium: <Conrad93> Of course it is limited, the question is whether it matters or not. I don't really believe in white's opening, but the position might still be playable. Variations have been suggested to support such a statement, be they right or wrong. You think that showing such continuations is pointless. I think that chess analysis using vague statements and no variations is what really deserves to be called pointless.
Apr-07-13  Conrad93: No, what's pointless is arguing that Nd2-Nb3-Nc5 (or Nd5) is possible. It's just a waste of tempo. After 6. Qe2? white gives away any advantage he possibly had.
Apr-07-13  Conrad93: 3. Na3 might actually be better than the popular 3. e3 variation, at least that's what Reti played.
Apr-08-13  Abdel Irada: <Conrad93>: I sense that someone has still not read my first post, and has perhaps also overlooked my subsequent ones.

Read over what I wrote and tell me where I suggested that White maneuver his knight to b3 and c5 or d4.

<Cyphelium>: As you'll find in my first post, 10. e4, c5 was precisely the sequence I anticipated, and although I think White's opening has been too passive for any real chance at an advantage, I would certainly not say the line I cited leaves him standing worse.

<All>: In case it's not clear, the way White played this opening is not as I would do it. But even lackadaisical openings need not lead to disadvantage, and I am not convinced that White cannot maintain at least equality with the line I offered.

However, I'm not proud. If I'm wrong, and anyone can show me a concrete continuation to prove it, I am perfectly willing to change my opinion.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Notable Games Young Talents !
by FLAWLESSWIN64
Reti Gambit 3.e3 (A09) 0-1 Failed Q trap
from RGIII Stumbled, Fumbled, Recovered? by fredthebear
Reti Gambit 3.e3 (A09) 0-1 Failed Q trap
from yFredthebear Tripped on Diagonalz III by fredthebear
A09 Reti: Gambit [Black]
by chess.master
Reti Gambit 3.e3 (A09) 0-1 Failed Q trap
from RGIII Stumbled, Fumbled, Recovered? by trh6upsz
Special Coffee Collection B2 [Black]
by chess.master
100 partidas de Elite
by stacpoole
Reti gambit
by kafkafan
* its different !
from IR 15 games by FLAWLESSWIN64

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC