chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
 
Chessgames.com User Profile Chessforum

agb2002
Member since Jun-28-08 · Last seen Aug-02-21
I'm an applied mathematician who lives in the south east of Spain.

My approach to the puzzles is similar to that of David Zechiel (User: dzechiel ) : I first write the variations I find in a reasonable amount of time (using the puzzle diagram only) and post them before watching the game or other's comments. Then I have a look at them and try to be critical with my work. I apply the touch-move rule to my posts (see Unzicker vs Fischer, 1960). I hope to improve my tactical vision this way.

Often I cannot even spend a couple of minutes looking at the diagram (work, family, other interests, etc.) so I try to blind solve it along several breaks. My first attempt was R Vera vs S Garcia Martinez, 2001 and although the variations I found were not very deep I felt quite satisfied with the experience.

>> Click here to see agb2002's game collections.

Chessgames.com Full Member
   Current net-worth: 2,010 chessbucks
[what is this?]

   agb2002 has kibitzed 6056 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Aug-02-21 Robatsch vs A Kostjoerin, 1960 (replies)
 
agb2002: White is one bishop and one pawn down. White has Rxd8+, Bxh8 and Rg3. 28.Rxd8+ seems to be quickest: A) 28... Rxd8 29.Qf6 A.1) 29... Rd7 30.Qxh8+ Kf7 31.Qf6+ Kg8 (31... Ke8 32.Rxe6+) 23.Rxe6 wins. A.2) 29... Rh7+ 30.Qxd8+ Kf7 31.Qxc7+ Kg8 23.Qxc6 wins decisive material. B) 28...
 
   Aug-01-21 E Rompteau vs K E Engel, 1965 (replies)
 
agb2002: Black has a bishop for a knight and a pawn. White threatens cxd6. This threat suggests 21... Bf4 (21... Rg4 22.cxd6 Nf4+ 23.Kh1) but White is not forced to take the bishop: 22.gxf4 Nxf4+ 23.Kh1 (else mate in three at most) 23... Rxe2 looks winning. For example, 24.Ng1 Qd5+ 25.f3 ...
 
   Jul-31-21 Keene vs Miles, 1976 (replies)
 
agb2002: Level 3.5: 25.? Lilienthal vs S Landau, 1934 [DIAGRAM]
 
   Jul-30-21 Harikrishna vs Svidler, 2008 (replies)
 
agb2002: According to DroidFish, White wins with 28.Qh3+ Kg7 29.Qh6+ Kf6 30.Bf5 (the move that escaped me). If 30... Rg8 then 31.Qg5+ and mate soon.
 
   Jul-29-21 H Rossetto vs Najdorf, 1955 (replies)
 
agb2002: <TheaN:... However, always consider the regular acceptance of a sac: 29....f4 30.hxg5 fxg3 and we're in a very complicated position. SF remains cold however and evaluates +2 as all White pieces are close enough to defend.> I saw this but got stuck after 31.Nf3 when the ...
 
   Jul-28-21 I Lysyj vs Sutovsky, 2008 (replies)
 
agb2002: White is one pawn down. Black threatens Rxf5+. The first idea that comes to mind is 41.Kf5: A) 41... Rxc4 42.Kg6 and mate in two. B) 41... Kg7 42.Bb5 B.1) 42... Rb4 43.Rb7 (43.Rxe7+ Bxe7 44.a7 Rf4+ 45.Ke6 Rf8) B.1.a) 43... Kf7 (threatens Rf4#) 44.Be8+ Kxe8 45.Rxb4 cxb4 46.a7 b3
 
   Jul-27-21 Bellon Lopez vs Borges Mateos, 2000 (replies)
 
agb2002: White has a bishop for a rook and two pawns. Black threatens Qe2+ with perpetual or a won ending. White can win with a mating attack: 38.Bg8+ Kg6 (38... Kh8 39.Bf7+ Kh7 40.Qg8#) 39.Qf7+ Kg5 40.h4+ Kg4 41.Qg6+ Qg5 42.Be6#.
 
   Jul-26-21 T Bree vs V Krutti, 1999 (replies)
 
agb2002: White has four pawns for a knight. The knight prevents Qd7+ and mate next. Hence, 38.Rd8+: A) 38... Nxd8 39.Qd7+ Kf8 40.Qxd8#. B) 38... Ke7 39.R3d7#.
 
   Jul-25-21 L Hazai vs S Osmanbegovic, 1994 (replies)
 
agb2002: Black has a rook, a knight and a pawn for a bishop. White threatens Qh8(g7)#. Black's only moves are f6, Kf8 and Re5. In the case of 19... Re5 20.Qxe5 followed by Re1 looks winning for White. In the case of 19... Kf8: A) 20.Bb4+ Kg8 (20... Re7 21.Qh8#) 21.Bb4 may repeat moves. B)
 
   Jul-24-21 A Poluljahov vs D Lopushnoy, 2000 (replies)
 
agb2002: White has a bishop and a knight for the bishop pair. The pawn on f7 protects g6. This suggests 23.e6: A) 23... Be8 24.exf7 Bxf7 25.Rxe7 wins a pawn with the better position. B) 23... Bxe6 24.Rxe6 fxe6 25.Qd3 B.1) 25... Bf6 26.Qxg6+ Kh8 27.Qxh6+ Kg8 28.Qg6+ Kh8 (28... Kf8 29.Bh6+ ...
 
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Calculo, luego existo

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Oct-01-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <OhioChessFan: Where in the world is agb2002?>

LOL. Tonight in Buffalo. Tomorrow in New York, London and back to Spain.

Business this time. Tourism next. Perhaps.

Oct-01-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: Shuffle Off to Buffalo- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_h0...

New York, New York- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btF...

London Calling- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfK...

Never Been to Spain- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKS...

Dec-25-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  wordfunph: <agb2002> Merry Christmas!
Jan-01-15  CHESSTTCAMPS: <agb2002 from 12/26 POTD <Nice to see you again Phil!>>

Thanks. It's always nice to see you and your analysis, also!

Happy New Year!

Jan-02-15
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: Happy New Year to you and your family, Phil!
Jul-06-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  Fusilli: Hola amigo! Como van los posibles planes de mudarse a la tierra del tio Sam?
Aug-19-16  Patriot: Hi <agb2002>! Just thought I would answer here...

<That's very true. Still the problem is how to differentiate between the essential and the superfluous?> I think this depends on the time remaining on the clock. Clock time remaining determines if you should be using "blitz logic" or "slow logic". In blitz, I would only focus on "scary" moves where someone could lose a piece. Moves that are purely defensive don't really count as worth considering because that takes too much time. But in a slow game, a defensive move could minimize an edge and therefore perhaps it was better to play a simple developing move. For example, if white had a 0.4 pawn advantage and started an attack which is easily defended then the advantage could go down to 0.1 whereas developing a knight would maintain the 0.4 evaluation. Therefore purely defensive moves could be considered a refutation.

Aug-20-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: Hi <agb2002>! Just thought I would answer here...>

Why not? You're more than welcome.

<<That's very true. Still the problem is how to differentiate between the essential and the superfluous?> I think this depends on the time remaining on the clock. Clock time remaining determines if you should be using "blitz logic" or "slow logic".>

I'm far more interested in the "slow logic" than in "blitz logic". The basic rationale is that one should learn to walk before trying to run (I mean any time control, not only blitz). However, just 'walking' proves to be incredibly difficult.

Another serious problem I have is that I tend to proceed in iterative ways (test and error) and this is not adequate in chess because one cannot take moves back.

Aug-20-16  Patriot: <agb2002> <I'm far more interested in the "slow logic" than in "blitz logic". The basic rationale is that one should learn to walk before trying to run (I mean any time control, not only blitz).> Absolutely! It's easier to adjust down--once you know how to analyze very well, you can trim that process in fast time controls.

<Another serious problem I have is that I tend to proceed in iterative ways (test and error) and this is not adequate in chess because one cannot take moves back.> I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you mentioned taking moves back. By iterative I assume you mean methodical as in an algorithm, testing each try. But the moves you consider are not random moves--they are usually critical and those are the ones you want to look at.

Aug-21-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <<Another serious problem I have is that I tend to proceed in iterative ways (test and error) and this is not adequate in chess because one cannot take moves back.> I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you mentioned taking moves back.>

If I try to improve some details or features in the design of a machine, algorithm, data structure, etc. and the modification turns out to be a mistake I can undo it. However, we cannot take back a move in a real game.

You don't need to be a doctor to suffer some kind of "professional deformation".

<By iterative I assume you mean methodical as in an algorithm, testing each try.>

Yep. And error control is usually an essential part of many iterative algorithms. As long as one can reduce it below the prescribed tolerance in the long or preferably not so long run everything is ok.

In chess one should be accurate always and this makes an essential difference.

Aug-21-16  Patriot: <agb2002> How are you taking moves back? If you are thinking ahead you have to sometimes reverse course.

<In chess one should be accurate always and this makes an essential difference.> I think accuracy is needed whenever you have competing main candidates. But if a line is simply winning you don't have to be totally accurate.

Aug-22-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: <agb2002> How are you taking moves back? If you are thinking ahead you have to sometimes reverse course.>

I meant that when in a real game and in doubt if the chosen move eventually fails then it is not possible to go back and try any of the alternatives.

<<In chess one should be accurate always and this makes an essential difference.> I think accuracy is needed whenever you have competing main candidates. But if a line is simply winning you don't have to be totally accurate.>

Accuracy is important in every position, no matter whether one is about to start a combination, an attacking or defensive maneuver or a simplification to enter the endgame. For example, there can be some hidden details in that endgame which ruin the victory or even the draw.

However, an essential factor is energy. I normally prefer the (apparently) easiest, simplest and less energy demanding path than the shorter, more complex but more accurate alternatives, tipically chosen by engines.

Aug-23-16  Patriot: <agb2002> <I meant that when in a real game and in doubt if the chosen move eventually fails then it is not possible to go back and try any of the alternatives.> Ok, so you are saying you try a move to see what happens. Since I am usually playing no more than G/15, if I see an interesting try I spend a moment looking it over and if it looks interesting I play it.

<Accuracy is important in every position, no matter whether one is about to start a combination, an attacking or defensive maneuver or a simplification to enter the endgame. For example, there can be some hidden details in that endgame which ruin the victory or even the draw.> I disagree--accuracy is not important in every position. My Chess instructor (a master) teaches that all you need to do is prove a move is best (or even adequate) in a reasonable time. If a move is clearly best, it's a waste of time further proving it.

<However, an essential factor is energy. I normally prefer the (apparently) easiest, simplest and less energy demanding path than the shorter, more complex but more accurate alternatives, tipically chosen by engines.> I agree 100%! Computers won't miss a detail and get mated but human players can, no matter how good they are. Play for the easy and obvious win and your opponent will probably resign.

Aug-24-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: ... Ok, so you are saying you try a move to see what happens.>

I meant that competition chess game is kind of a sequence of one shot situations while in many other activities it is possible to redo something and to improve it someway to avoid trouble.

<Since I am usually playing no more than G/15, if I see an interesting try I spend a moment looking it over and if it looks interesting I play it.>

One of the useful aspects of shorter time controls is to experiment opening plans (so you try a move to see what happens) to gain some experience, perhaps very superficial but better than plain ignorance, a most familiar feeling to me.

<<Accuracy is important in every position, no matter whether one is about to start a combination, an attacking or defensive maneuver or a simplification to enter the endgame. For example, there can be some hidden details in that endgame which ruin the victory or even the draw.> I disagree--accuracy is not important in every position. My Chess instructor (a master) teaches that all you need to do is prove a move is best (or even adequate) in a reasonable time. If a move is clearly best, it's a waste of time further proving it.>

If a move is better or even adequate then it is more accurate than a number of others and therefore accuracy matters. Perhaps my concept of accuracy in this context is a bit loose.

<Play for the easy and obvious win and your opponent will probably resign.>

Not my little son, aka the phaser hitman. He will resist and strive and stand and struggle and try and try over again and will take advantage of even the tiniest chance, typically when I'm distracted serving myself another bunch of salad at dinner, to deliver a back rank mate or a crushing knight fork or the like, carefully prepared by me to reward his effort (but please don't ever tell him!).

Aug-24-16  Patriot: <agb2002> It sounds like your son is going to be one mean player! :-)
Aug-25-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: <agb2002> It sounds like your son is going to be one mean player! :-) >

He started playing blitz tournaments for children last year and got a trophy in almost all of them. Not too bad.

However, I'd prefer he doesn't pursue anything serious about chess, even if I knew he would become eligible for a sports scholarship in a top notch university.

I suspect you would have a similar opinion.

Aug-25-16  Patriot: <agb2002> Wow, congrats to your son (and proud father)! That is great to hear! This is all a testament to his teacher...you! :-)

It's tough to get far in Chess but if he makes expert or master, he could win real money in tournaments! I would encourage him to reach for his dream.

Aug-26-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <Patriot: <agb2002> Wow, congrats to your son (and proud father)! That is great to hear!>

Thanks a lot!

<This is all a testament to his teacher...you! :-) >

The first time he won a tournament is particularly memorable to me: he managed to beat out the favorites (two children whose families emigrated from ex-soviet republics, another from China and a couple of nationals, all of them very aggressive players) with a perfect score.

A curious anecdote happened in the fourth round. He was already playing at board #1 and his next opponent was a girl. I noticed that her granny sat down very close to their table but didn't give much importance and continued reading a newspaper. I noticed that the tournament arbiter announced the beginning of the round but read a few lines more and then had a look at my son.

To my surprise both players were standing since the game was already over. I thought "well, it doesn't matter, this girl is probably a very good player because she reached board #1 and surely caught him in an opening trap".

Then he came to me as if everything was ok and told me that he mated her in less than a dozen moves. I was perplexed. He then told me that the girl didn't even know the very basics and her granny was pointing out the moves but missed a relatively simple mate threat!

<It's tough to get far in Chess but if he makes expert or master, he could win real money in tournaments!>

In Spain you can get about 200€ if you win a local rapid tournament, not too bad for eight hours of work, but you need at least IM strength to have realistic chances.

<I would encourage him to reach for his dream.>

That's the point. He's too young to really know what his dream is. At the moment he just wants to play with other children. It is typical to see them fighting mercilessly on the board and seconds later after the game rushing to play soccer, hide-and-seek, etc. before the next round.

Aug-28-16  Patriot: <agb2002> <In Spain you can get about 200€ if you win a local rapid tournament, not too bad for eight hours of work, but you need at least IM strength to have realistic chances.> Not sure how that compares with U.S. dollars but here you can win in the thousands at tourneys across America.

<That's the point. He's too young to really know what his dream is.> Yes, but I would go along with whatever current dream he has and let him have fun with it.

Aug-29-16
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: <you can win in the thousands at tourneys across America.>

You had to take part in the bigger open tournaments to find such prizes here but then you must be a quite strong GM to have chances.

<I would go along with whatever current dream he has and let him have fun with it.>

I'm trying to introduce my children to as many activities as reasonable, including chess, airplane model construction, maths, robotics, soccer, gym workout, etc. Hope they eventually find the occupations and hobbies which really satisfy them so that they can enjoy a happy and productive life. That's probably best at the moment.

Aug-02-18  CHESSTTCAMPS: Great to see you again! Still working actively in applied mathematics, I presume?
Jan-09-19  jith1207: Hi, do you know what happened to the long term user

User: dzechiel

His page says there's no such user on record now. Perhaps he has asked the account to be removed?

Jan-09-19  jith1207: Sorry, it looks like the link in your bio is no longer working. He seems to be available, thankfully has just commented after a long time.
Sep-24-19  EIDorado: I see you posts in each puzzle. No wonder you see no significant improvement.
Dec-05-19  EIDorado: @jith1207 More likely than not he got embarrassed with his "method". It makes anyone look like an idiot.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 8)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·  Later Kibitzing>

A free online guide presented by Chessgames.com

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 user 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.

You are not logged in to chessgames.com.
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:
   
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 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC