|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 61 OF 129 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Mar-14-07
 | | jessicafischerqueen: Prove me wrong, gentlemen, prove me wrong... I'll await <Marco's> analysis and give it a good going over when it's posted. Put me down for <b4> still, however, unless I change my mind... |
|
Mar-14-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: I have to agree with <Marco> about not posting our move early... Analysis may prove <Qa5> preferable, and we have the time, so let's use it. I'll also begin investigating <Qa5>... GOOOOO TEAM!!! |
|
| Mar-14-07 | | dakgootje: Currently in favour of Qa5, but might change my vote |
|
| Mar-14-07 | | Marco65: <hitman84> 16...Qa5 wants to prevent Na4 but is only effective in preventing our ...b4 for a long time: 16...Qa5 17.Kb1 b4? 18.h6! e5 
click for larger view Is White losing a piece? Not really: 19.Nd5!! exd4 20.Nxe7+ Kh8 21.hxg7+ Kxg7 22.Bxd4+ 
click for larger viewa) 22...f6 23.Bc4 Re8 [23...Bb7 24.gxf6+ Rxf6 (24...Nxf6 25.Rdg1+ Kh8 26.Rg8+! Rxg8 27.Bxf6+ Rg7 28.Ng6#) 25.Rdg1+ Kh8 26.Ng6+ Kg7 27.Nf8+! Kxf8 28.Rg8+ Ke7 29.Rxh7+ Rf7 30.Rxf7#] 24.Rdg1 Kf8 [24...Rxe7 25.gxf6+ Kh8(f8) 26.Rg8#] 25.gxf6 Nxf6 26.Bxf6 and at the end Black can't avoid Rg8# b) 22...Ne5 23.fxe5 dxe5 24.Nc6 Qa4 25.Bxe5+ f6 26.gxf6+ Rxf6 27.Nxb8  (and 27.Rd6 might be even better) No "mighty brain" here, I just analysed Moreno - Pinho 1998 http://www.letsplaychess.com//chess... Has anybody looked at the games posted by <TTLump> at page 58? |
|
Mar-14-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Marco> Your analysis of this game is an endoresement of us playing <b4> now, while we have a chance? <b4> does not delay <Qa5>, but the reverse seems to be true. Hence, I'm more than ever in favor of <b4> for our next move. |
|
| Mar-14-07 | | Marco65: <jessica> I don't see good alternatives to ...b4. I also tried to prevent Na4 by 16...Nc5 but it seems that 17.e5 is a strong reply. Anyway we don't have to be so scared by the variation 16...b4 17.Na4 Qa5 18.b3 Nc5 19.Nxc5 dxc5 20.Qb2 Rd8 should we? My vote is still for ...b4. Good night |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | hitman84: <Marco>White loses a pawn in your variation. 16. h5 Qa5
17. Kb1 b4
18. h6 gxh6
19. Ne2 hxg5
20. fxg5 Bb7
21. Bg2 Qe5
click for larger viewI still like <Qa5> |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | Marco65: <hitman84> Thanks, maybe I trusted too much master games. But things would get really complex and risky after this sac: 16.h5 Qa5 17.Kb1 b4 18.h6 gxh6 19.Bc4!?, just scracthing the surface: 19...bxc3 20.g6 (there are alternatives here) Rxb2+ 21.Kc1 maybe Black wins, but I wouldn't trust this variation if not deeply analysed |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | Marco65: <hitman84> Thinking it over that sac seems unsound. Anyway I found an improvement for 16...b4 17.Na4: a) Create a dark square weakness: 17...Qa5 18.b3
b) Develop with tempo: 18...Bb7 19.Kb1 (otherwise ...Bc6 wins a pawn) c) Push back the queen when e4 is under pressure and Qb2 is not possible: 19...e5 20.Qd3 d) Only now push back the knight: 20...Bc6 21.Nb2 (21.Qxa6 Qxa6 22.Bxa6 Bxd5 is  at least) e) Gain the bishop pair: 21...Nc5 22.Bxc5 Qxc5
This position is only great for us:
click for larger viewI do hope they play Na4 at this point |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | hitman84: <Marco>Yes <Qa5> line is like a labyrinth/chakravyuha we need to double check all possible variations before playing it. On the other hand <b4> line is simpler, the only thing I was worried about was Na4->c4, e5 is a critical move in the line and black looks good. I vote <b4>
|
|
| Mar-15-07 | | EmperorAtahualpa: Wow, <hitman84> nice job on analyzing ...Qa5! I was assuming we would simply move ...b4 and not even consider any other moves. You mention ...Qa5 opens up a "labyrinth" but that doesn't mean it has been refuted. Are you sure you're voting ...b4? And what about White's option to move Na4->c4.. has that been refuted already? I don't see any refutation over here.. For now my vote stays on <...b4> but ...Qa5 looks very attractive to me too! So I'm still open for suggestions. Sorry, I don't have time to do any analysis now, am busy...perhaps tonight! |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | Marco65: <Qa5 line is like a labyrinth/chakravyuha> Not to mention 16...Qa5 17.Kb1 b4 18.h6 gxh6 19.Bd2!? f6 20.Qg1 (or 19...e5 20.Qd5) <EmperorAtauhalpa> 16...Qa5 hasn't been refuted. It is just too risky in some variations (read it: nobody would ever have the time to fully analyse it and take responsibility to claim it safe!) On the other hand, yes I think the manouever Na4-b2-c4 has been "refuted" not in the sense that has been prevented, but if you look at the latest diagram, even if White will get Nc4 in, Black is better due to the bishop pair and complete domination of dark squares, and more concretely f4 is en-prise, fxe5 dxe5 seems almost forced after which g5 is en-prise and Black is ready to activate a rook on the d-file... |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | hitman84: Hi <EA>! I don't know but b4 looks simpler and we get an edge in the middlegame with a double ♗ advantage.
We can also push a5->a4 and take control of the a-file. <Qa5 looks very attractive to me too! So I'm still open for suggestions. Sorry, I don't have time to do any analysis now, am busy...perhaps tonight!>Ok then we shall have one final go at it, I'll login around 9 pm IST ie. 4:30 pm Amsterdam time. |
|
Mar-15-07
 | | TheAlchemist: Just to be sure, what's the time I'm supposed to post the move? Is it still GMT -5 or GMT -4? Right now, it's 4 PM GMT so there's plenty of time left in any case, but I'm still a little confused by this whole thing, so forgive me. |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | hitman84: <TheAlchemist>I'm not analysing further unless <EA> decides to drop in. I vote <b4> EDT is GMT -4.
We have just less than 3 hours. |
|
Mar-15-07
| | TheAlchemist: I posted 16...b4 |
|
Mar-15-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Lads>
Please don't forget how crucial our <e5> break is after they retreat their Knight... And we know where the Knight will go so good to see all the analysis has already gone ahead several moves... GOOD SHOW GENTLEMEN!!! |
|
Mar-15-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: Hmmm...
Everyone resting?
We've got work to do!! |
|
| Mar-16-07 | | brankat: <Ronteltapzilla> Please, try to take better care of Your forum, if You can! |
|
| Mar-16-07 | | Marco65: <Please don't forget how crucial our <e5> break is after they retreat their Knight...> I'm still hoping they'll play Na4 (are they going to make some imprecision sometimes or not?) but realistically I bet on Ne2. I remember your analysis, and since ...exf4 was not good after ...e5, also ...e5 is just a wasted tempo imho and we shoul keep it until forced by h6. |
|
Mar-16-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Marco> Agreed- it would be GREAT if they played <Na4>, this is close to a blunder IMO.... They won't though, but we could pray? Viz- <e5>, we have time to analyze our best continuation for sure. I'm going to work on the assumption that they will play <Ne2>, and proceed from there. Will post some analysis today based on that assumption. <Hitman> has posted a lot of material that is relevant to our position at present-- I think we should all look through his analysis carefully-- |
|
| Mar-17-07 | | chessmoron: <Agreed- it would be GREAT if they played <Na4>, this is close to a blunder IMO.... They won't though, but we could pray?> Your prayer is ANSWERED! |
|
Mar-17-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Na4> played? That's a mistake, surely.... To the analysis room Batman!!! |
|
Mar-17-07
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Team (especially Marco)> <e5> is not a wasted tempo, by any means. It is in fact ESSENTIAL to our position.
I believe we have two strong Candidate Moves now...
<17.Qa5> and <17.e5> <e5> is better for us Main reason I think this is
A)Queen is useful on <d1> for the moment so that we can capture <Bxg5> after we move <e5> and they try to pass-- <f5> B)An immediate <Qa5> opens us up to a dangerous line in which White can sac their <a4> knight after <17...Qa5 18.h6>. If <17...Qa5 18.h6>, <18...e5> is virtually a forced move for us- only way to prevent immediate checkmate or totally wreck our King pawn structure... <18...g6>, for example, is TERRIBLE for us- clearly. So we have to play <e5> now or on the next move. I say now. Check this out:
<17...e5 18.h6 fxe5 dxe5> and, say, <19.Qd3 Qa5!> and we are in VERY GOOD SHAPE-- 
click for larger viewIf <17...Qa5>, however, then <18.h6 e5 (forced now) 19.fxe5 dxe5 20. Qd5! Qxa4 (going for the bait) 21.hxg7! Kxg7 22.g6 hxg6 23.Bh6+!> and wins our rook-- <23...Kg8 Bxf8> Notice that all these moves are FORCED after <20...Qxa4>... producing this:
click for larger viewAfter this, of course, we probably play <...Bg5+ Kb1> and then <Kxf1>, but then our King is hopelessly exposed and our Queen is still sitting on <a4> right out to lunch.. This is why I will strenuously argue for <e5> rather than <Qa4> for our next move. With <e5> now, we still get to play <Qa4> without our kingside getting busted open, and our Queen on <a4> is not hung out to dry- it is useful.. |
|
| Mar-17-07 | | Marco65: It might be a mistake, or they see more than us.
I tried to improve from some variations by hitman84 with 17...Qa5 18.b3 Bb7 19.Kb1 (otherwise ...Bc6 wins a pawn) e5 20.Qd3 Bc6 21.Nb2 (21.Qxa6 Qxa6 22.Bxa6 Bxd5 at least imo) 21...Nc5 22.Bxc5 Qxc5 and I claimed this position is good for us:
click for larger viewIt seems a straightforward plan, but probably I missed alternatives for them, or simply MFO has a different opinion on the resulting position. What do you think? Is there any flaw? Anything better? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 61 OF 129 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
