|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 24 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jun-02-07
 | | Honza Cervenka: <THE pawn> It was the final move of the game and it took me a while to grasp why white had resigned. I don't remember names (or rather nicknames) of both players but I will try to find the game again. |
|
| Jun-14-07 | | MostlyAverageJoe: Honza, thanks for taking the time to reply to my question on the Hort vs V Zheliandinov, 1967 discussion. I hate to bother you again, but I was already familiar with the basic principles you mentioned, and was looking more for the ideas specific to the position obtained in this particular game, e.g., which pieces appear to be easiest traded? Which to trade first and which to keep? Which side to concentrate on, etc. I was a bit surprised, for example, that in your line, the rooks persevere to the end instead of being traded ASAP. |
|
| Jul-11-07 | | Eyal: <Honza> Congrats on the new avatar... whose picture is it? |
|
| Jul-11-07 | | Open Defence: what happened to the thinker ? i thought it was great!! |
|
| Jul-11-07 | | Benzol: <Eyal> It's Simon Winawer <Honza> What was wrong with the thinker? |
|
Jul-11-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <MostlyAverageJoe> It is difficult to say that in general even in this particular game. General principles of play with material advantage are useful directory and base for operational planning in concrete game and concrete position but they must be always implemented by tactical means available in concrete situation on the board. And it can be quite often very long run, especially if the material advantage is not huge (like in this case where black got two Pawns for lost piece) and there are no significant weaknesses in opponent's position. It is usually necessary to activate pieces and create pressure by various threats (piece intrusions, pawn break-throughs, winning of additional material, mating attack etc.) to force advantageous simplification in the process. And the simplification must not be the only or fixed goal of play. If you go for trades in case of your material advantage, you must be pretty careful to beware of any situation where the opponent can create an effective fortress or transfer the game into any theoretically drawn ending (this is a problem especially in positions with very few Pawns on board or Pawns on one side of board only). |
|
Jul-11-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <Open Defence><Benzol> <what happened to the thinker ?> My premium membership expired some time ago and so my old avatar was free for a while. It had happened already once before but then it remained free when my account was re-activated and I was able to pick this avatar up again. This time the avatar was taken by some other user and so I had to choose another one. Never mind, Simon Winawer is quite worthy alternate of "the thinker".:-D |
|
| Jul-27-07 | | Artar1: <Honza>:
If you like, I can spend a few hours looking over the game that you submitted to <RV>. |
|
Jul-31-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <Artar1> You are welcomed.:-) |
|
| Aug-02-07 | | Artar1: Fritz found a different move for White on move 12 that leads to very lively play that is in White's favor. I will send you my results soon. |
|
| Aug-03-07 | | Artar1: <Honza Cervenka: <Artar1> You are welcomed.:-)> Like a dunce, I entered the wrong move on your behalf so I had to throw out all my work! I guess I wanted you to win that I lost all objectivity! I will repost my work soon. |
|
| Aug-22-07 | | zanshin: <Honza> I know that RV has already analyzed your game much better than I can, but just as an exercise for me to learn using Fritz, I analyzed it too and have decided to post the results to your forum in case you are interested. [Event "chessworld.net"]
[Site "chessworld.net"]
[Date "2007.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "HC"]
[Black "priit2"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C42"]
[Annotator "Fritz 10 (300s)"]
[PlyCount "82"]
[EventDate "2007.??.??"]
C42: Petroff Defence: 3 Nxe5 and unusual White 3rd moves 1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nf6
3. Nxe5 d6
4. Nf3 Nxe4
5. d4 Bg4
6. Bd3 f5 last book move
7. O-O Be7
8. c3 Nc6
9. Qb3 Qd7
10. Nfd2 Nf6
11. Re1 O-O-O
12. Bb5 d5
13. Bxc6 bxc6
14. Qa4 Bd6
15. Nb3 (15. f3 Rhe8 16. Rf1  ) 15... Rde8
16. Bd2 Rxe1+
17. Bxe1 Re8
18. N1d2 Be2
19. Qxa7 Qe6
20. Nc5 (20. h3 Nh5 21. Nc5 Bxc5 22. dxc5 Nf4 23. Qa8+ Kd7  ) 20... Bxc5 21. dxc5 [Opposite coloured bishops appeared] (21. Qxc5 Nh5
22. c4 =)
21... Ng4
22. h3 [White threatens to win material: h3xg4] Ne5
23. c4 d4 (23... dxc4 24. Nf1 [Combination]) (23... Bc4 24. Nxc4 [Combination]) (23... Nc4 24. Nxc4 [Combination]) 24. Nf1 Kd7
25. Ba5 [White has a mate threat] Rc8
26. Bd2 (26. Ng3 Nd3 27. a4 f4 28. Nxe2 Qxe2 ) 26... Nd3 27. b4 (27. Qb7 f4 28. b4 ) 27... Bxf1 
28. Rxf1 Qe2
29. b5 Qxd2
30. Qb7 Qe2
31. Qxc6+ Ke7
32. b6 Qe5
33. b7 ? (better 33. Rb1 Nf4 34. g3 ) 33... Rb8 34. Rb1 Nf4
35. a4 Ne2+
36. Kh1 Nc3
37. Rb2 d3
38. f4 (38. a5 Ne2 39. Rb1 ) 38...Qxf4
39. Rf2 Qg3
40. a5 Ne2 (40... Qxf2 ?! [is not possible] 41. Qxc7+ Kf6 42. Qxb8 ) 41. Rf1 (41. Rxf5 ?? [mating in 3] Qe1+ 42. Rf1 Qxf1+ 43. Kh2 Qg1#) 41... Rd8 (41... Rd8 42. Qd5 Rxd5 43. cxd5 Qe5 ) 0-1 |
|
Aug-23-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <zanshin> Thanks.
Btw, I had very few time to go through RV's Rybka and your Fritz analyses and compare them with my own findings and notes made during and after the game. But it seems to be that all engines tend to underestimate black's counter-chances on the Kingside and in the centre. For example, Rybka's second line to alternative move 20 <20.Na5 Kd7 21.Qb7 Bb5 22.c4 dxc4 23.g3 Qe2 24.a4 Bxa4 25.Ndxc4 Bb5 26.Rc1 Ng4 = (0.00) Depth: 22]> seems to be in fact utterly lost for white though RV's later suggestion <20.Na5 Kd7 21.Qb7 Bb5 22.g3 Qg8 23.a4 Bxa4 24.Rxa4 Rxe1+ 25.Kg2 Qe6 26.Nxc6 Qe2 => looks like a signifficant improvement (I did not find any convincing refutation of it at least). But before that point Rybka evaluated white's position as somewhat better (Fritz was even much more optimistic) while I felt that I am in serious troubles as white there and I was able to find myself quite effective continuations for black against my old Fritz 8's suggestions. |
|
| Aug-28-07 | | laskereshevsky: Hello Honza.
(Maybe someone had already asked you...)
Your Avatar could be SIMON WINAWER?.. |
|
Aug-28-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <laskereshevsky> <Your Avatar could be SIMON WINAWER?..> Yes, that is Simon Winawer. |
|
| Aug-28-07 | | Benzol: <Honza> Just wondering would this game
Razuvaev vs Bagirov, 1972 be a good candidate for your Impressive & Entertaining Draws collection? |
|
Aug-29-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <Benzol> Interesting battle and very human in its highlights as well as flaws. But maybe my Game Collection: Missed chances would be more proper place for it as white let escape black from utterly lost game there (for example, 24.Bg5 Be5 25.Qh6 or 24...Bg7 25.Rxg7 and Bagirov could have just resigned) and in the end he had to be himself quite happy with draw. |
|
| Aug-29-07 | | Benzol: Thanks for your comments <Honza>. I can remember being completely stunned when I first played the game when I was about 14 back in the 70's. |
|
| Sep-15-07 | | dabearsrock1010: where have you been for the world championship games i miss your commentary |
|
| Sep-27-07 | | whatthefat: <Honza>
I've been having a look at your suggestion of 9...h6 10.d5 in the Timmerman game. I'd appreciate it if you could give some input on my analysis; I've linked the posts to here: Chessgames Challenge: The World vs G Timmerman, 2007 Chessgames Challenge: The World vs G Timmerman, 2007 And I'm currently investigating 10...Nc5 but it's tough going, as both 11.Qa3 and 11.Qc2 lead to a lot of complexity. |
|
Nov-06-07
 | | Richard Taylor: <Honza> - I notice (in your short profile) you make a mistake common to many non English speakers - you say: "My rating in practical chess (Czech national ELO) oscillate somewhere between 2010 and 2060,..." The correct term is "oscillates"
In English there is a (probably stupid) exception in the conjugation of verbs e.g.: I walk . ... ..... ....... ...we walk
you (sing) walk............you (pl) walk
He, she, it walks..........they walk
Now for you to make this "error" is not relevant except that it is one detail that - say you were a spy (!) in a war or something (lol - like if you were a secret agent like James Bond!) - would help to mark you out. That said, some English people say (one example):
"I was sat there."
meaning
"I was sitting there." (Referring to some fairly recent past event) In point of fact all of these dialectical variations are all equally correct! The key is to be understood - which you are - which means that what I'm saying here is redundant! But I pick up on these (mostly trivial) details. It might be a problem in spoken English - in some - difficult for me to find an example - situations. But I have long wondered and pondered how or why the convention of "he says" rather than "he say" or "he walk" etc has become common usage. It is one of the rare cases of inflexion in English that I know. Herr Comrade E von Schiller might be able to enlighten us further on the mysteries of this vital and pressing matter!! |
|
Nov-06-07
| | Richard Taylor: Of course "oscillate" may have been a "typo"... |
|
Nov-06-07
| | Richard Taylor: Here is (real) example of someone confusing the word "oscillate" (it may have been a verbal slip or "ignorance" but I picked up on it regardless - it is quote from a book (mostly poetry) ("Conversation with a Stone") I wrote & was published this year - the sequence is called 'Hospital' as I started it when I broke my leg in 2004... > 25 / 01 / 04
Hospital 15 (27/01/04)
Check up at the Superclinic – a huge structure in Manukau, suburb where I once lived, and which has changed so much. About to cut off my first cast (plaster), the nurse told me that “this is an “osciating saw”...she meant oscillating. “osciating” makes one think of bone eating! But I had no fear of the saw, having a fair idea of how it works, knowing that it would be relatively blunt, not particularly hard, and respond to some sort of magnetic fluctuations, crumbling the plaster by its movement rather than any tensile pressure or direct force: hence the “tickling feeling’ on contact with my leg. The nurse found my foot to be swollen. Was I thus Oedipus – swollen foot? Born to kill my father?.... " < And it goes on, in similarly slightly ironic tone, but not 'ad infinitum'! |
|
Nov-13-07
| | Honza Cervenka: <Richard Taylor> Thanks. It was a mere slip from my part (that remained unnoticed for years). |
|
Nov-13-07
| | Richard Taylor: Aha - fair enough. But I have often wondered how that rule of the third person came to be. That is 'I think' etc and 'she thinks'. Otherwise a lot of English would be very easy. Latin varies in each case and so on as does French if I recall rightly... Anyway it is basically trivia! |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 24 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
