|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Aug-06-05 | | danielpi: <acirce> That's interesting. If black declines the return. Hm. Well, I hadn't considered that. I guess in that case the win for white is a bit less than obvious isn't it? Okay. Well, for the first time on chessgames.com, someone admits he's wrong. Me. Be that as it may, I should note in my defence, on general principle, that computers tend to be pretty weak in endgames so I don't trust the Fritz analysis too much. I still BELIEVE that white should win this. However, I confess I am not strong enough to find that win. I wholeheartedly retract my claim that the win is obvious. It is merely my speculative belief, which may very well be dead wrong. |
|
| Aug-06-05 | | acirce: <Okay. Well, for the first time on chessgames.com, someone admits he's wrong. Me.> A historical moment! :-) OK, myself I'm not 100% convinced that White is *not* winning, but someone has yet to give the line. I have to go to bed, it's 3 past midnight here in Sweden. I'll see what comes up on this page tomorrow. PS - Generally appreciate your posts in the threads around here a lot. You seem to be a voice of reason. |
|
| Aug-06-05 | | danielpi: <acirce> Thanks. Same to you. |
|
Aug-06-05
 | | Sneaky: My hunch is that White wins anyhow. Give the Black pieces to Hydra and the White pieces to GM Nickel and we'll see how it turns out. |
|
Aug-06-05
 | | Gypsy: <all> <About 17. ...gxf6 18.exf7 Qxf7 19.Bxf7 Rxg3 20.hxg3 Bg4 21.Bb3 a5 22.Rxf6 a4 23.Bd5 Nxc2 24.Rc1 Nd4 25 Rf2, and after the fork ... > But let's consider also this possibility for Black: 24...Nb4!? 25.Bxb7 Rb8 26.Bf3 Bxf3 27.Rxf3 (27.gxf3 cuts the rook off even more) 27...Nxa2 28.Rc2 Rb2! 29.Rf2 a3 ... with the now decisive threat of 30...Nb4 and Black marshalls his pawns through. Variations like this made me think that steering towards a draw with 22.a4 Nxb3 may realy be the prudent way to go as White. (Sorry for the long gap between my posts, but got stuck on an errand.) |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | Fianchettofemme: What's wrong with 17 gxf6 18 exf7 Qxf7 19 Bxf7 Rxg3 20 hxg3 Bf5!? |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | sharpnova: <Sneaky> a hunch? thats great. sounds like a great fallback position after pages of analysis have destroyed any offence for white. too bad it doesn't work in a game. |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | danielpi: <sharpnova> What I don't understand is why you're so emotional about this. And rude. Quite. <...after pages of analysis have destroyed any offence for white...> Well, from my point of view, there's only a couple sticky lines I can't figure out. It seems, based on the pawn structure and material that white SHOULD win. Just because we haven't been able to find a line doesn't mean that one doesn't exist. Of course it very well may not exist. As I've said, I resign myself to not being smart enough to figure it out. Nonetheless, <Sneaky> has a right to his opinion. |
|
Aug-07-05
 | | offramp: It's gonna be a rook check or pawn kill. |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | Boomie: <Fianchettofemme> 20...♗f5 looks like another good try for black. Here's one possible line. 20...♗f5 21. ♖e7 b5 22. ♖c7 ♖c8 23. ♖xc8+ ♗xc8 24. ♖xf6 ♔g7 25. ♖f2 a5 26. ♔f1 ♗f5= (0.00/15) |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | aginis: <pheonix> thanks for the analysis missed the setup for the rook fork. after 26...Ne3 27.Kf2 Nd1+ 28.Ke1 Rxa2 black holds the c pawn. |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | sharpnova: <danielpi> you seem quite an exciteable fellow. i'll remember to have some fun with you from now on. |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | danielpi: Mmmm. That's me all right. Mr. "Exciteable" (sic). Let that be a lesson to me: don't try to reason with people- reasoning is for computers. Umm- and you shouldn't bother wasting your time "exciteing" me. I know you've wasted enough of my time. You're ignored. Doubt that's the first time that's happened. |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | sharpnova: i always get a kick out of the internet equivelant of a girl giving someone the silent treatment. really i do... i actually think i might have just woken up my roomate from laughing so hard. mixing chess with drama.. danielpi. chess soap superstar. chess and the city. desperate chess wives. haha! |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | Phoenix: Really, a few manners can go a long way, <sharpova>. It might prevent you having to say <i can se i'm being ignored by the posters> over and over. Have a nice day. |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | sharpnova: i never said that. and i enjoy the ignores. everyone who put me on ignore deserved it. :) |
|
Aug-07-05
 | | Benzol: It might be interesting if there was a feature which says "You are on so-and-so's ignore list". |
|
Aug-07-05
 | | tpstar: It might be interesting if there was a feature which says "You are on so-and-so's ignore list." At least that would prevent repeating what somebody else just said. |
|
| Aug-07-05 | | jcmoral: <Benzol> I said something like that on Kibitzer's Cafe and some people didn't like it one bit! |
|
Aug-07-05
| | Benzol: <jcmoral> <tpstar> I missed that one earlier. Must have been when my phoneline was on the blink. :) |
|
| Aug-12-05 | | patzer2: <acirce> Thanks for your analysis evidencing the fact that 17...gxf6! gives Black sufficient compensation, such that the recent daily puzzle solution 17.e6! (though a strong clearance move and a best move for White in the position) cannot be declared a clear win for White. For some reason this "solution" and its discussion thread reminds me of the Hans Christian Anderson fairy tale "The Emperor's New Clothes," which can be read on line at http://www.online-literature.com/ha..., where an innocent child points out that the emperor who was tricked into thinking he was wearing magical clothing (visible only to the innocent and pure of heart) but was actually naked. In the face of the obvious, no amount of wishful thinking could clothe the emperor after one pure of heart and innocent pointed out his folly. In the same sense, after <acirce>'s analysis, 17. e6! remains at best unproven and at worst cooked as a winning solution. |
|
| Aug-14-05 | | wheelchiar bandit: i had a dream a watch this game being played
|
|
| Aug-14-05 | | Phoenix: Comparing <acirce> to an innocent child from a fairy tale had me laughing for awhile (no offense meant). Also, as anyone can see, <acirce> was NOT the one who first said 17...gxf6 gave Black sufficient comp, nor was he the only one to give supporting analysis. |
|
| Aug-14-05 | | patzer2: <Phoenix> No offense taken. <Acirce> displays a lot of expertise, honesty frankness and integrity in his analysis and calls it as he sees it. So a better comparison might have been to his good reputation, honesty and frankness as an accurate observer and kibitzer here. Also, sometimes it takes an expert or master such as <acirce> to find and point out the "obvious" in difficult positions. |
|
Oct-11-22
 | | kingscrusher: Wow brutal use of the Vienna game :) |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
