|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 963 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: It's still more than 6 hours before GMAN responds to 16.f5 - but I have a general feeling that we haven't used our 'extra' 24 hours very well. The main page has had some off-topic bickering and some arguments about earlier moves. And not a lot of actual analysis. OK, it's a weekend, we have a new world champion, taking a day off is tempting after so many instant replies from AN. But if the 48-hr patterns becomes the norm now, we need to adapt - and learn to use that downtime. <Thorsson> posted this on the main page: Thorsson: What should we be analysing now? IMO the capture exf5 is pretty forced, and the capture gxf5 has no more than 2 serious replies.
Of the quieter alternatives, Nd7 is an error, and I can't help but feel that Re8 is too. Black voluntarily weakens the f-file? It can't be right. Rc8 has been analysed a lot, but 17.Nd4 still seems our best (and more than adequate). That leaves us with 16...Qd7, which has received very little attention. I'd like to suggest people give this a few hours thought before GMAN makes his move. |
|
| Oct-14-06 | | twinlark: <Dom> I was a bit worried too as there's been bugger all analysis the last two days...but then again there's two days to go at it hell for leather. BTW. Nicely expressed on the main thread. I hope <brankat> keeps contributing. |
|
| Oct-14-06 | | classF: Vigi Varkey (computer programmer previously unknown to chess) beat GM Nickel in the March 2006 freestyle chess tournament by using Rybka 1.1. So, sadly, computer generated lines probably do have high value these days. |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: <classF> - I agree, and I'm not condemning all of them out of hand. Of those available to us, RandomVisitor's deep Rybka analyses, to 24- or 26-ply, are the most important. But it's essentially a blundercheck device, and even there it has limitations. The horizon effect always kicks in. But, even after all the warnings, I still have the impression that some voters doodle around with Fritz and regard its 3-minute findings as significant. I'm trying to counter this tendency. Hence the silly gamelet I quoted above. btw, do you have a link to (or the score of) that Varkey-Nickel game? I haven't seen it. Thanks. |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: The latest Rybka analysis from RandomVisitor now predicts 16...Rc8 as Black's most likely response. This is the main line: (26-ply, 1 of 52 examined)
1. = (0.09): 17.Bb6 Qd7 18.Nd4 exf5 19.exf5 d5 20.Rae1 Rce8 21.fxg6 hxg6 22.Qd2 Nh5 23.Qh6 Bh4 |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: Two more lines from Rybka, courtesy of User: RandomVisitor 2. = (0.14): 17.Rf2 exf5 18.exf5 Nd5 19.Bd4 Bh4 20.g3 Nxc3 21.bxc3 Re8 22.Qg4 Bg5 23.Nd2 h5 3. = (0.13): 17.Rae1 e5 18.Rf2 Nh5 19.d4 Bg5 20.dxe5 Bxe3 21.Qxe3 dxe5 22.Rd2 Qf6 23.g3 Rfe8 |
|
| Oct-14-06 | | classF: <Domdaniel>
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...
Vigi Varkey scored an amazing 7.5/8 using Rybka 1.1 32-bit without human interventon, compare to 6/8 for Nickel (who played under the name "Ciron"), in the main event. Then, in the final, Varkey upgraded to 64-bit, and again scored better than Nickel. I don't know that Nickel lost any particular game to Varkey, but those links include pgn downloads of games where Nickel lost to other Rybka users. Of course the time control was much more rapid than for our game. |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: <classF> Thanks, I'll check these out. Now that you mention it, I vaguely remember reading something about this at the time, but didn't pay much attention. |
|
| Oct-14-06 | | monad: <Or maybe a one day fly is like a one man dog? > As long as we're not going to One man <and his> dog :-) |
|
| Oct-14-06 | | monad: Dom, may I park this here or will it be out of place? After 16...exf5 17.exf5
No contest. I hope. Sigh. I'm sure there will be "no-pawn-grabbing" theories, or a half-hearted vote for a premature Bb6, but I am ignoring those for the minute. The chap who said "Cricket is the only game where you are playing against eleven of the other side and ten of your own," obviously never played chess as a team. Little point in second guessing Black. I chose Re8 because that is what I would play, without reasoning too deeply. That is neither here nor there. I can't see us planning ahead for every eventuality. 1. 17...Nd7
2. 17...Qd7
3. 17...Re8
4. 17...d5
5. 17...Qc8
6. 17...Nd5
7. 17...Rc8
The thing to bear in mind is that Black will need to make most of the above moves at one time or another. It will be a very personal thing for him to choose the sequence. a) He's got to get his King's Rook out of the way if/in case the white Bishop shoots kingside to =h6= by playing Re8 (my choice) b) He's got to contemplate if his Knight would be of greater use on the Queenside, via Nd7 or go to the center as soon as it is safe. c) He's got to plan for connecting the Rooks by shifting the Queen. I reckon it's too early for him to push the d-pawn or occupy the c-file with Qc7/Qc8 or Rc8 So far we have very wisely, kept our options open as regards <our precious DSB>. Black has been waiting to see which way the Bishop jumps and he has held his strategy in abeyance. In fact he has masterly played a lot of "Pass" moves, holding off with the real plan until we show our hand. By stealth, design or good fortune, we have managed to hold off playing out our precious, (yes, it needs saying again) DSB. It will be <our Bishop move that decides the rest of the game>, and possibly its outcome. Black will try his hardest NOT to commit himself until we do. Lets hang on until we absolutely have to or until Black gives the sign. Now the move <17...Re8 is a give away>: By shifting his King's Rook <off the =f8= square>, Black is making room for his DSB, to counter ours going to Bh6 and stirring up trouble in the King's defences. This is the time that Black has to pay up for his move 7...g6. He can't have his apfelstrudel and eat it. No. We already have a good line-up to get at the black King. Even though =f7= is still intact, our Queen, Rook and =f=pawn are all poised for a kingside attack. Just imagine our precious DSB added to that arsenal! <17...Re8 will mean that for us it is make-your-mind-up time>. We are fortunate or maybe not, in that we can go either kingside or queenside with good prospects. Playing Bb6 will give us a good safe game, as in the line on my webpage. ( still at http://www.nickel.nohyphen.com ) But I have to admit that I would love to see what would happen if we DID threaten Black on the kingside. |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: Hi, Monad. Your logic is impeccable - but since he hasn't actually played ...Re8 yet there's no sense in putting all our analytic eggs in one basket. The other moves you mention should also be looked at, somewhere. |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: MARKER DIAGRAM
He has played 16...exf5 to reach this position (White to play):
 click for larger viewOur most likely response is 17.exf5 when this position arises:
 click for larger view |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | Domdaniel: STRATEGY FORUM
Some general pointers:
Right, then. Since our next move will be 17.exf5, this gives us a few days to set up the long-awaited strategic forum. Part of the discussion will be about what the forum is actually for. Do we make a positional assessment of the current board position? Or should we follow the lines of analysis that are posted elsewhere and try to assess the situation 8 or 10 moves down the line? Or both, perhaps? My take on this is fairly uncomplicated. In an OTB game one spends a lot of time calculating, out of necessity. Positional thinking tends to either hum quietly in the distance like background radiation, or to push itself forward for consideration at 3 or 4 critical points in the game. CC is different. We have the luxury of tactical calculation and strategic thinking on every single move, and we should make the best of it. Since the pawn structure has just been altered, much of the earlier positional assessment is now irrelevant. But we can still pose specific questions: how can we optimize our knights? Where should our Rooks go? Is a kingside attack an option or should we concentrate on the centre? Lines of analysis are welcome here as well, but ideally they should come with ideas and explanations attached. |
|
| Oct-14-06 | | Thorsson: Our Rooks:
I can see 3 possibilities:
1. We play Rf3 and Raf1. This is particularly good if he plays Rfe8. Objectives f6 & f7. 2. We play Rae1. Objectives are e-file and attack on e7. 3. We play Ra4 and then switch it. Could go to anywhere from e4 to h4. Flexible and could go for all the above. Harder to play however. |
|
| Oct-14-06 | | Elixir of Life: I think for the moment we should just quietly build up the "base" of an attack, e.g. Piece coordination, etc. To me, the pieces just don't look too harmonious. A bit rough on the edges. On the long term, I can only envision a (surprise!) Queenside attack. The only option is a Queenside attack. The b6 square, covered by the a5 pawn, covered by the knight, is very important as an attacking "base". Somehow, whenever I look at the board, I see a piece, playing a key role in the b6 sqare. |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | kwgurge: It may be worth sending the c3 knight to a4 at some point. I and most others were against this earlier. However, with the pawn structure now changed, and as <Thorsson> points out here, Ra4 being a potential option, black would certainly have to think carefully about whether to allow the N to go to b6 (freeing our DSB for kingside action and covering c8 and d7) or give up his LSB for the N (easing any pressure on our k-side, lifting the a-Rook without loss of tempo and removing black's endgame advantage of the two bishops).
Just something to consider in some lines.
|
|
| Oct-14-06 | | Nightranger: <kwgurge> I was looking at this also. But the jury is still out for me. |
|
Oct-14-06
 | | kwgurge: Of course, 17...Qd7 prevents Na4 and preserves his bishop pair after 18.Nd4 Rfe8 unless white snaps the LSB immediately. This is a line I am looking at tonight. |
|
Oct-15-06
 | | kwgurge: Another possibility which I am putting on Fritz 9 overnight is 17...Qd7 18.Bd4 gxf5 19.Bxf6 Bxf6 20.Qh5.
This gives up the two bishops and appears to be very double-edged. After Rxf5 and Raf1, the pressure on f6 and f7 along with the open g-file gives white serious attacking chances. I think, however, that I would have to find something very strong and forcing to make this worthwhile. Otherwise, black's counterattack and endgame edge would probably be too much to overcome. It is also quite possible that black may not play 18...gxf5. |
|
Oct-15-06
 | | Domdaniel: Some more thoughts on possible Rook developments.
Doubling on the f-file is tempting - especially as a timely Bh6 will drive away the Rf8 - but it could be a little tricky to carry out. At least we don't have to worry about ...e5 and ...d5 anymore, and black's newly-isolated d6-pawn makes a much less convincing 'break' candidate. If he does play ...d5 we'll need to blockade it with Nd4 or Bd4. Of course we can't play Rf3 with the Bc6 dominating the long diagonal. Is this sufficient argument for Nd4 and perhaps Nxc6? Previously I've regarded this exchange as an error, but things change. There's also Rf2, with a similar idea. But f2 is a good square for our queen in some lines - as long as Black can't reply ...Ng4, hitting the Qf2 and Be3. For this reason, I like the look of h3 at some point - it has other uses as well. I'm not sure about the Ra4 idea. It would also require elimination of the Bc6. While the rook lift idea is tempting with the pawn on a5, it's hard to see exactly where the Rook is going. |
|
Oct-15-06
 | | Domdaniel: I also find it utterly unlikely that AN would play ...gxf5, wrecking his kingside pawn structure. The only reason to do this would be an imminent and strong attack on our king, using the open g-file and the long diagonal - something like Kasimdzhanov-Lutz. One problem with this, now, is that since ...exf5 he no longer has ...e5 available. Which means ...Kh8 walks into a very nasty pin with ...Bd4. We might even be able to follow up with Qh5 (!) - it looks much better for white. So I think the f5 pawn will probably stay where it is for the time being; he may try to prod us into playing fxg6, although this too opens lines for white. |
|
| Oct-16-06 | | twinlark: Dom
Things are cooking along quite nicely. I'm thinking of having a break for a while as the game doesn't seem to need that feverish organising and jollying along that got things started. The spirit of cooperation seems to have caught and been made easier by the game taking a definite shape, especially as the analytical structures being constructed by our top gun analysts seem to be crystallising nicely. I'll watch what happens for a few more moves, but I don't see my interventions are necessary anymore. Besides, my kids are champing at the bit and really want me to take 'em to the beach for a week or two now the weather's heating up (is it what!), 'specially as it's been a couple of years since we've been on holidays. |
|
Oct-16-06
 | | Domdaniel: MARKER DIAGRAM****
We have just played 17.exf5 to reach this position (Black to play):
 click for larger viewNow we just carry on with strategic or positional ideas/assessments. |
|
Oct-16-06
 | | Domdaniel: Here's something pertinent which <kwgurge> posted on the main page: I am a bit worried about the number of superficially viable 18th moves for white if black plays something more waiting than forcing at 17.
There have been so many potential 18th moves presented recently (including h3, g4, Bb6, Bg5, Bd4, Nd4, Nd2, Na3 Re1 and Qd2 among others) that the next vote could be very close. I would hate to see our recent better cooperation and communication revert to advocacy and herd voting in these circumstances. Each move is critical now. Let's give the analysis time to appear and be digested before we launch into anything in response to black's 17th which could come in 22 hours since he's pretty much known what our move was going to be for days now. |
|
Oct-16-06
 | | Domdaniel: As <kwgurge> says, any non-forcing move by AN - like a rook move - will leave us with a wide choice of replies. Maybe we can come up with some ideas here that will help us to decide which moves to play in what order. Alternatively, we can look at the concrete lines being cooked up elsewhere and see how they measure up positionally. |
|
 |
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 963 ·
Later Kibitzing> |