|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 91 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-18-07 | | shr0pshire: Welcome to chessgames! |
|
| Jan-18-07 | | AugustAle: Welcome to the world! Enjoyed your collection. The Rossolimo is like cold aftershave, no? |
|
| Jan-31-07 | | Artar1: <kutztown46: What I do have is an ordinary PC at home running Fritz 9. I am more than willing to set up a position and let it run overnight. I can be a foot-soldier if someone takes charge and assigns me a position to analyze. Maybe those who have the super-fast computers should analyze the lines of greatest interest and side lines or lines of possible future interest could be assigned to people like me. I also have a forum available - I am a premium member, but I would not have the time to dig through pages of posts looking for things to copy into my forum. What I could do is post my own results but how would people know to come to my forum to see them?> kutztown46,
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post. I really appreciate it! You were the only one to respond. I think for us to succeed in this game we will need to be organized. This organization cannot be forced; it must be voluntary. You are the first to volunteer, and I am thankful for that. I was hoping for group members to organize into subgroups to discuss the various options that Black now faces. The group as a whole doesn't seem too interested in doing that right now, but I will continue trying. Unfortunately at this stage of the game, "brute-force" analysis using the computer is not completely reliable. I certainly don't trust my setup to deliver the best move or course of action. The best guiding light, I think, is to use grandmaster play in which trial and error, over time, has provided reasonable courses of action. However, these games in themselves cannot, like our computer programs, be the sole determining factor in our choice of moves in the opening. Even grandmasters make mistakes, and do so on a regular basis. The kind of work that needs to be done now would be to use the Opening Explorer and a host of grandmaster games to chart a course of action for our team, and then to blunder-check this course using our computers. Unfortunately, this course of action is time-consuming and requires extensive interaction with the computer. If you have any time to devote to the game at this phase, perhaps the best investment would be to look at a game or two in which Black lost after having played 5...Ba4+, and to determine where and why this loss occurred. It's my guess that most defeats resulting in this line of play resulted from mistakes that occurred in the middle- and endgame rather than in the opening, as some have expressed. I, like Honza, who I both like and respect, feels similarly. He possesses, what I believe to be, master-playing strength. If you have any time to look at a game or two, as I mentioned previously, I would be greatly indebted. I will try to finish my full analysis of the recent Topalov-Anand, 2007 game this weekend, and then publish my results. I plan to be as extensive as possible in my game critique. Thanks again for your help.
Take care.
|
|
Jan-31-07
 | | cu8sfan: Are you a fan of Chigorin's? I like his defence against the Queen pawn openings. I've just bought Alexander Morozevich 's book about the Chigorin Defence. |
|
Feb-01-07
| | cu8sfan: <Why did you ask me about Chigorin specifically?> If I'm not mistaken your avatar is a picture of Mikhail Chigorin. |
|
| Feb-01-07 | | Artar1: Thank you for your commitment! |
|
| Feb-02-07 | | Boomie: <kutztown46: FEN> I use 3 ways to create FENs. If the position is reachable from the OE, the FEN is located in the lower right corner. If the position is close to a posted diagram, I right click on it and copy shortcut. Then I trim the extra characters after pasting. I enter new positions by hand. If the FEN is wrong, the kibbitz window will show "Bad FEN" or the character string. Just edit it and hit "Preview Kibbutz" until it's right. |
|
| Feb-02-07 | | Boomie: <Using chess engines> The World has used chess engines to its advantage in two ways: line production and line verification. Line production is done by someone with a monster machine and the lastest software. A position is run out to about 25 ply and the top 5 or 6 lines are posted with ratings. These ratings are from the first move and so are not very deep at the last move. Line verification involves starting at the last move of a line and "sliding" back to search for improvements for either side. Searching to a depth of 13-16 ply is sufficient. Improvements are posted to the monster machine users to be verified at greater depth. Verification can be time consuming as side lines are explored and hunches about the position are pursued. However it also is the most educational use of the engine. After the process is done the user knows everything about that line. |
|
| Feb-07-07 | | Rainbolt: <Artar1:Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post. I really appreciate it! You were the only one to respond. I think for us to succeed in this game we will need to be organized. This organization cannot be forced; it must be voluntary. You are the first to volunteer, and I am thankful for that.> Hello! i have a machine at home with Fritz8 and would like to volunteer to put it to use. My computer is not very fast compared to some others, but i would like to use it to help the world team anyways. <I can be a foot-soldier if someone takes charge and assigns me a position to analyze>
This would work well for me too, as i do not have as much time to read through the forums and figure out which line would be best to analyze. |
|
| Mar-02-07 | | Artar1: <kutztown46: <Elixir of Life: Although User: kutztown46 's forum had helped us tremendously in the past, once we are completely out of theory, it should be rendered obsolete.>> I would not use that word.
Yes, we can handle the responsibility of coordinating the forums between the two of us. There will be times in which I will be unable to do that task. There's something else that both you and maybe Elixir could do, and that would be to look at competing lines of play and put words to them. There seems to be a lack of objective summary analysis being done, which, in essence is a form of game analysis, but of a more limited scope. All too often we are presented with machine evaluations without an adequate explanation to go alone with it, and in many cases, no explanation. I'm certainly guilty of this, but after working hours on a variation using a centaur-style of analysis, I am usually too tired to provide a verbal summary. That may also apply to others. Also, I need someone who will try to motivate people to open forums and to do analysis. You could offer your own forum for move analysis without having to do any yourself, if you like. If any of these ideas seems appealing, please let me know. |
|
Mar-15-07
 | | kutztown46: ,./,./,./,./,./,./,./,./,./,./
Beginning of discussion on 18...Ng4
,./,./,./,./,./,./,./,./,./,./ |
|
Mar-15-07
 | | Tabanus: <kutztown46> Reposted from Artar1's forum as a starter (and many moves are not covered, e. g. 19.Qd2, 19.h3, 20...fxg3, ...h5 lines, etc.): 18...Ng4 19.Ne5 (21-ply):
1. = (0.00): 19...Bxe5 20.dxe5 dxc4 21.bxc4 fxg3 22.hxg3 Qc5 23.e3 Nxe5 24.Bd4 Qd6 25.f4 Ng4 26.Bf3 2. = (0.19): 19...Qg5 20.gxf4 Qh5 21.h3 Nxe5 22.fxe5 Be7 23.Qd2 Bh4 24.f4 Qg6 25.a4 Be7 26.Rcc1 Sliding forward: 19...Bxe5 20.dxe5 dxc4 21.bxc4 fxg3 22.hxg3 Qc5 23.e3 Nxe5 24.Bd4 Qd6 (more or less forced sequence) (20-ply): A. (0.04) 25.c5 Qc7 26.Bxe5 Qxe5 27.Rd1 Qf5 28.Rd4 bxc5 B. (0.00) 25.f4 Nf7 26.Rd2 e5 27.Bxe5 Qe7 28.Bb2 Nd6 C. (0.00) 25.Rd1 Rcd8 26.f4 c5 27.fxe5 Qd7 28.Rcd2 cxd4 D. (-0.01) 25.Ba1 Nf3+ 26.Bxf3 Rxf3 27.Rd1 Qe7 28.Rcd2 Rf7 Sliding forward on A.: 25.c5 Qc7 26.Bxe5 Qxe5 27.Rd1 (20-ply): (0.08) 27...Qf5 28.Rd4 bxc5 29.Rf4 Qd3 30.Be4 Qb3 31.Rxf8+ (0.09) 27...Qf6 28.Rdd2 bxc5 29.Rxc5 Bb7 30.Qc2 Qe7 31.Ra5 Trying 23...Rcd8, but 24.Bd4 Qe7 25.Bxc6
Trying 22...Rcd8 (based on 23.Bxc6? Rxf2!) (20-ply): (0.00) by four different moves: 23.c5, 23.Bf3, 23.a4 and 23.Bh3 |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | Nasruddin Hodja: Let me repost my earlier thoughts on the main forum: Hmmm. Not being (and not planning to be) a full member, I can't set up a forum of my own, but I think we need to look more carefully at 18. Nf3 Ng4. At g4, the knight does double duty of disputing the e5 square, uncovering backup for the f4 pawn, and possibly provoking white to weaken his kingside pawns, though GMYS probably won't fall for it. The long (28-ply) analysis of the move in <RV's> forum is: 18...Ng4 19.Ne5 Bxe5 20.dxe5 (the weakening of the dark squares is offset by the "dead point" of white's pawn at e5) dxc4 21.bxc4 fxg3 22.hxg3 Rcd8 (the c6 pawn is poisoned-- 23. Bxc6?? Nxf2 24. Rxf2 Rxf2 25. Kxf2 Qc5+ 26. Kf1 Qxc6) 23.a4 c5 24.Bh3 h5 25.f3 (0.00) Play might continue 25. ... Nh6 26. Qe3 Nf5 27. Qf2 Bb7 28. Bc1 Nd4 29. Rc3 Qe8 and black is at least equal, imo given white's weak queenside pawns and the hampering nature of the strongpoint d4 knigh, given that white cannot yet play e3. I assume other lines would avoid the immediate 19. Ne5 reaction. One possibility is <MarkThornton's>: 19. h3 Nh6 20. g4?!
after which a plausible line might be:
19. ... Nf7 20. Rd1 h5 21. Ne5 hxg4 22. hxg4 Bxe5 23. dxe5 Ng5 and the almost forced f3 leaves black with the better position, imo. Another line avoiding 19. Ne5 might be:
19. Re1 fxg3 20. hxg3 Bb7 21. e4 dxc4 22. Rxc4 c5 23. d5 exd5 24. exd5 Qf7 and the pressure down the f-file gives black good counterchances. Of course, these are all engine-less lines, so they have to be blunder-checked by Rybka and company in order to make sure I didn't "lose the thread" somewhere. Still, I would like to see some serious checking of 18. Nf3 Ng4, as it seems to me too many people favor 18. Nf3 Ne4, in which the Ne4 can be driven back and doesn't exert force over the e5 and e3 squares which are highly important in this position. |
|
Mar-15-07
| | kutztown46: <truefriends 3/15:> Ne4 is the most logical move. But Ng4 scores better in the Monte Carlo Randomizer on RV's forum. We need to analyse this position very carefull. This might be a key move in this game. |
|
Mar-15-07
| | kutztown46: <Boomie 3/15:> The 18...Ng4 lines with h5 are showing promise. Once again our old friend, dxc4 bxc4 c5 is played with good effect. My initial try is 18.Nf3 Ng4 19.Bh3 h5 20.Bg2 dxc4 21.bxc4 c5 22.e3 fxe3 23.fxe3 Rf7 -0.50/13 This is a better result than any Ne4 line. Notice how dxc4 bxc4 c5 frustrates white's battery. h5 is not an offensive move. It prevents h3-g4. |
|
Mar-15-07
| | kutztown46: <Boomie 3/15:> My second bite at the Ng4 apple was almost as sweet. We get to sac some material in this one which is always fun.
18.Nf3 Ng4 19.Bh3 h5 20.Bg2 dxc4 21.bxc4 c5 22.<Ne5> Qc7 23.Ng6 fxg3 24. hxg3 Bxg3 25.Nxf8 Bh2+ 26.Kh1 Rxf8 -0.35/13 |
|
Mar-15-07
| | kutztown46: <Hugin 3/14:> I am still working on this lines involving 18 Nf3 Ne4 but have started to look at 18 -Ng4 also.. 19 Qd2 Rcd8 20 Bh3 h5 21 Qd3 Qf6 22 Bg2 e5 seems like a safer not so commited attempt.. and avoid a bit risk for losing a pawn endgame as kwgurge warned against.. |
|
Mar-15-07
| | kutztown46: <jmrulez2004 3/14:> f4 was the right move...somewhere...along the line in the next few moves...if situation is favourable....blakck should play Ng4...whther white eats the pawn or f4 or not... the game i liquidfying..getting th knight to g4 can damage white a lot with Ne3 a possibility to folllets play some tactics:)! |
|
Mar-15-07
| | kutztown46: <think 3/15:> <Nasruddin Hodja> <Benjinathan> I am voting for Ng4 as well, for the same reasons as Nasruddin. One thing you are never supposed to do when being attacked is move the pawns in front of your king, so h3 isn't a likely reply. At g4 the knight is well-placed for a k-side attack and perhaps harder to kick out. |
|
Mar-15-07
| | kutztown46: <Hugin 3/15:> Analysis by Zap!Chess Zanzibar: If 18 -Ng4
1. = (-0.17): 19.Bh3 h5 20.c5 Bc7 21.Qd2 bxc5 22.Rxc5 Bd6 23.Rc2 fxg3 2. = (-0.17): 19.c5 Bc7 20.Bh3 h5 21.Qd2 bxc5 22.Rxc5 Bd6 23.Rc2 fxg3 |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | izimbra: Discussion of 18...Ng4 19. Ne5 seems conspicuously absent. 29.Ne5 is Rybka's predicted white response. After 19...Bxe5 20. dxe5 fxg3 21.hxg3 dxc4 22.bxc4 black can temporarily win a pawn with 22...Qc5 23.e3 Nxe5 but after 24. Bd4 Qd6 25. Bxe5 Qxe5 26. Rd1 it seems that black cannot hold the pawn forever and probably loses the endgame. But after 22...Rc8 23. Bf3 it's not clear that black has any advantage and may even be a little worse. |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | Boomie: Hopefully Ng4 will rate better than Ne4. Here's a dump of my lines with Ng4. I just started looking at Ng4 yesterday so not all these lines have been rated or completed. At first sight, Ng4 is doing better than Ne4. 18...Ng4 19. Bh3
(19. h3 Nh6 20. g4 dxc4 21. bxc4 c5 22. d5 e5 -0.33/16) 19...h5 20. Bg2
(20. Nh4 fxg3 21. hxg3 Rxf2 22. Rxf2 Bxg3)
20...dxc4
(20...fxg3 21. hxg3 dxc4 22. bxc4 c5 23. Ne5 Bxe5 24. dxe5 Rcd8) 21. bxc4 c5 22. Ne5
(22. d5 exd5 23. cxd5
(23. Nh4 d4 24. Ng6 Qf6 25. Bd5+ Kh7))
(22. e3 fxe3 23. fxe3 Rf7 -0.50/13)
22...Qc7 23. Ng6 fxg3 24. hxg3 Bxg3 25. Nxf8 Bh2+ 26. Kh1 Rxf8 |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | TefthePersian: We've got nothing after 18...Ng4 19. Ne5 Bxe5. Except for perpetual check. I'm confident 19. h3 sucks, though. |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | Boomie: <izimbra: Discussion of 18...Ng4 19. Ne5 seems conspicuously absent.> Indeed. I'm having a hard time finding a killer line for black. However that doesn't mean it's all bad. The line you give with 25. Bxe5 is not best for white. After 25...Qxe5 26. Rd1 -0.75/15. Better for white is 18...Ng4 19.Ne5 Bxe5 20.dxe5 dxc4 21.bxc4 fxg3 22.hxg3 25.<c5> Qb8 26.cxb6 axb6 27.f4 Nf7 28.Rd1 c5 29.Ba1 -0.11/14, producing an interesting endgame position.
click for larger viewOne possible improvement is 22...c5.
18...Ng4 19.Ne5 Bxe5 20.dxe5 dxc4 21.bxc4 fxg3 22.hxg3 <c5> 23.e4 Rcd8 24.Bh3 Nh6 25.Qe3 Qe8 -0.14/14. Not spectacular but on par with the best 18...Ne4 lines.
click for larger view |
|
| Mar-15-07 | | izimbra: <Boomie: <izimbra: Discussion of 18...Ng4 19. Ne5 seems conspicuously absent.> Indeed. I'm having a hard time finding a killer line for black. However that doesn't mean it's all bad. The line you give with 25. Bxe5 is not best for white. After 25...Qxe5 26. Rd1 -0.75/15. > The machine eval of this is wrong due to a horizon effect. It is based on the fact that black wins a pawn and can keep it for a little while, but if you play it out, you'll see that white gets the pawn back with interest. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 91 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
A majority vote for 1-0 means we resign. 