|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 49 OF 129 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Feb-26-07
 | | jessicafischerqueen: Example: say we have castled, and they move h5. Then, we move, and they play h6- then we play g6, and their own h pawn protects OUR king. If they play g6, we play h6- and again, their h pawn is forced to protect our king. I think castling now refutes the pawn storm. Our f pawn is then available to advance with rook behind it, or capture on g6 and open f file for our rook. I've looked at this for hours now-- i think we are in serious trouble if we do not castle immediately. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Elixir of Life: <everyone> Why is no one typing this: "filler" ? |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Marco65: <Elixir Of Life> No idea what you're talking about <JessicaFischerQueen> So you changed your avatar already! Nice one. As for castling, it is possible but don't underestimate the risks. After h5 g6 we reply ...h6,then they play gxf7 opening the g-file against our king. I think it' safer to keep it in the middle for a while. I have even found a game where Black castled queenside, sorry I didn't write it down, but it wasn't exactly our position because for a mistake I searched in Fritz with White to move. And guess it, I got dozens of top level games! Alternatives to ...Qc7 are welcomed, maybe it'a good idea to still prevent h5 for a while, but I don't feel like castling. Since you spent so much time in analysing maybe you could write down some analysis to show why keeping the king in the middle is more dangerous and try to convince me. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Marco65: Without looking too far, one example of Black castling queenside is Pelikan-Vidal |
|
Feb-26-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Marco> gxf7 would not open the g-file against our king, it would create a half-open file. I spent a lot of time fooling around over the board with this, and without our King on g8 it's much, much easier for them to shred our kingside pawn structure. My main point here is that our King on G8 actually aids in the defense of our h and g pawns, kind of ironically, since these pawns are supposed to protect our King. After gxf7, we take back Rxf7 freeing our rook on the f-file, giving it a luft to aid in defence, or counter attack. Remember, if they shred our kingside pawns (especially if they create a full open file on h or g), there'll be no castling kingside- ever-- Worried,
Jess |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Zebra: I have not yet decided what to support (I spent most of my time looking at f4 or Bc4 for white), but I think there is a lot in what <Jess> says - that if we are going to play 0-0, there is some merit in doing it early. On the other hand postponing castling and going for an eventual 0-0-0 are also options, and Qc7 is almost always going to be a useful move. I am undecided so far between 0-0 and Qc7. |
|
Feb-26-07
 | | TheAlchemist: <Elixir of Life> Because we have no one to fear. :-) |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | EmperorAtahualpa: <Have a look at the games posted by chessmoron and that now are in TheAlchemist's profile. This position is typically reached via a different move order. Maybe that helps find it in MCO.> <Marco65> Yes I did that already, but without much success. This is because Be3 and g4-g5 are still quite specific moves and MCO-14 doesn't cover them very widely. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | EmperorAtahualpa: I think we're here at quite a critical move actually. We need to decide whether to castle kingside or not, and if we do, we should do it NOW and not later! White's kingside pawns are quite advanced already, which I don't find a pleasant thought at all. Personally right now I would be against castling and would go for the stable developing move 12...Qc7. I also think <Zebra>'s idea of castling queenside is not very feasible, because it would require advancing our bishop which in turn would require our queen's knight to move to an unsuitable square. Also our king would end up on the half-open c-file and we would have to moev it to safety with Kb8 followed by ...Rc8, which costs time. Better would be just to leave the king in the middle and move the rook to the half open file immediately! |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | EmperorAtahualpa: <jessicafischerqueen> Who is the girl in your avatar? |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Zebra: <I also think <Zebra>'s idea of castling queenside is not very feasible> Not my idea, I just recognize that it sometimes happens, as already observed by <Marco>. I would need a bit of persuading to go that way myself. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | hitman84: <EA>Its Jessica Alba :) |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | hitman84: Looks like I gotta lot of catching up to do.. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | EmperorAtahualpa: I'm looking for a way to bring our knight on d7 and our bishop on c8 into play. Would it be a good idea at some point to do a pawn advance e6-e5 and bring the knight to a better position via Nf8-Ne6? This way you could bring the bishop to d7 and the rook from a8 to c8 to pressure the half-open file. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Swapmeet: Here are 2 more games with 12...0-0
[Event "Chigorin mem 13th"]
[Site "St Petersburg"]
[Date "2005.10.20"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Andreikin, Dmitry"]
[Black "Lugovoi, Aleksei"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B56"]
[WhiteElo "2458"]
[BlackElo "2547"
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. h3 e6 7. Be3 Be7 8. g4
O-O 9. g5 Nd7 10. h4 a6 11. f4 Nxd4 12. Qxd4 b5 13. O-O-O Bb7 14. h5 e5 15. Qd2
exf4 16. Bxf4 Ne5 17. Be2 Rc8 18. Kb1 Re8 19. Nd5 Bxd5 20. exd5 Nc4 21. Qc1 Bf8
22. Bg4 Rc7 23. g6 Re4 24. gxf7+ Kh8 25. Bg5 Qb8 26. Bf5 Re5 27. Be6 b4 28. Rh3
h6 29. Bf4 Re4 30. Bxh6 a5 31. Rg1 a4 32. Bxg7+ Bxg7 33. Qh6+ 1-0 [Event "Bad Ragaz op"]
[Site "Bad Ragaz"]
[Date "1994.??.??"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Haist, Wolfgang"]
[Black "Joachim, Sven"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B81"]
[WhiteElo "2275"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. h3 e6 7. g4 Nc6 8. g5
Nd7 9. Be3 Be7 10. h4 O-O 11. Qd2 Nxd4 12. Bxd4 b5 13. O-O-O b4 14. Ne2 Bb7 15.
Ng3 d5 16. e5 a5 17. f4 a4 18. Kb1 b3 19. f5 exf5 20. Nxf5 Bc5 21. Bb5 Bxd4 22.
Qxd4 bxc2+ 23. Kxc2 Nc5 24. Nd6 Ne6 25. Qg4 a3 26. Rh3 axb2 27. Kxb2 Qa5 28. a4
Ba6 29. g6 Bxb5 30. gxf7+ Kh8 31. Qxe6 Bxa4 32. Rdd3 Rab8+ 0-1 |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Zebra: I think Nf8 may be a useful deployment for the knight after 0-0, but it is quite flexible where it is. I prefer a development plan Qc7, b5, Bb7/Rac8, with or without castling first. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Marco65: <JessicaFischerQueen> <gxf7 would not open the g-file against our king, it would create a half-open file> of course this is what I meant, and I don't like it. In my opinion by not castling now we save not one but two tempos. If we castle White needs h5 and g6 to continue expanding on the kingside. If we don't, White needs h5, Rg1 and g6. I asked for concrete variations, so I'll give the example: 12...Qc7 13.h5 (most games seen so far feature 13.f4 which should already tell something) 13...b5 14.Rg1 Nc5 (e6 may soon need protection) 15.g6 hxg6 16.hxg6 f6 17.Be2 b5 18.a3 Bb7 now it is us who have the initiative. Of course there can be improvements. I think a better plan for White is the thrust f4-f5. By looking at some of the games, Black is able to push b5-b4 at the same time... but no tempo was wasted by castling. |
|
Feb-26-07
| | TheAlchemist: <EA> e6-e5 gives white the d5-square, so I guess we should first undermine the c3-knight with b5-b4 and only then play e5. Even if we were to stop Nd5 with Nb6, white might even give up the e3 bishop and play Bxb6, so he can play Nd5. I don't know |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Zebra: <and am pretty tired of all the crap at school> they haven't got to the bit where you find the elixir of life yet? |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | hitman84: I completely agree with <Marco> its all about the tempo, the one we gained! <EA>We don't have to worry about the c8 ♗ now. Our main aim is to start the expansion as white has already started his. It also frees the b7 square for ♗. |
|
Feb-26-07
| | TheAlchemist: <they haven't got to the bit where you find the elixir of life yet?> LOL. And he was right here in my forum just a few hours ago, and I missed him by a few seconds. Talk about Murphy |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Marco65: <Swapmeet> I think I might have proven the point that ...Qc7 is not risky for our kingside pawns, while your new games prove <JessicaFischerQueen>'s point that castling is also safe. Black can defer White's attack thanks to keeping g5 attacked twice, and go for b5-b4 in the meanwhile. Maybe it's again a matter of taste. Let's go to vote! |
|
Feb-26-07
| | TheAlchemist: <Marco65> <Let's go to vote!> We still have 1 more day. |
|
| Feb-26-07 | | Marco65: <TheAlchemist> You got in between my two posts, of course my latest post didn't take into account what you wrote. I'll need to examine it later on. |
|
Feb-26-07
| | TheAlchemist: Ah, damn, I'm such an idiot, I missed a very simple defence in the line 17.Bh6 gxh6 18.Qg4 in the first paragraph, i.e. 18...Bg5. I guess there are more such examples later on, so I'm re-examining the whole thing. Ok, back to the drawing board... After 17.Qg4 Bf6 18.Bh6 Kxh7 19.Bxg7 Rg8 in that line, we should be OK, although it seems dangerous at first glance... In that case, taking on h7 with the king right away might be best, again because of the simple Bf6. Also, 16.gxf7 would be best for White, since after 16...Rxf7 17.Nxe6. So, 15...b4 would be therefore wrong to begin with. Now, I think I found the right way...
<12...O-O 13.Rg1 Qc7 14.h5 b5 15.g6 hxg6 16.hxg6 Nde5> (protecting e6 after gxf7 Rxf7), which should hold. Which probably suggests O-O and Qc7 are interchangeable in this line. I think 13.Qd2 would be another way to go for white after either of them, aiming for O-O-O. I will exampine this a little later. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 49 OF 129 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
