|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 33 OF 33 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
May-18-13
 | | FSR: <Shams> Not really. I was visiting my aunt, who was a law professor out there at the time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France... |
 |
May-18-13
 | | perfidious: <FSR>: Goddard offers a pleasant setting in which to go to school; I imagine your aunt enjoyed rural Vermont in the late sixties-quite a contrast from Chicago. |
|
May-18-13
| | FSR: <perfidious> She was a hippie back in the day. |
|
May-21-13
| | FSR: <perfidious: <FSR> Amusing fact: my first game with 1.f4 became my first King's Gambit, too, via 1....e5 2.e4 d5 3.exd5 c6> An amusing sequence: 1...e5 <I'm playing a gambit!> 2.e4 <No, I am!> d5 <No, I am!> Ideally, the players should keep it up with 3.d4!? f5!? Winkel vs Alkmaar, 1856 (which, alas, started with 1.e4). |
|
May-23-13
| | FSR: In the following game, I rejected what Houdini now tells me would have been a promising exchange sac on move 11, inexplicably failed to take a free pawn on move 12, and instead gave White close to a winning position by move 18. White didn't exploit it, allowing me to escape to a dead-drawn ending. Then, to my amazement, White played extremely passively and I managed to eke out a win. I'm now 87-0-0 on GameKnot, although I'm sure my winning streak will finally come to an end very soon. [Event "Let's play chess"]
[Site "http://gameknot.com/chess.pl?bd=193..."]
[Date "2013.05.20"]
[Round "-"]
[White "22246031"]
[Black "krakatoa1"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1562"]
[BlackElo "1577"]
[TimeControl "1/259200"]
[Mode "ICS"]
[Termination "normal"]
1. Nc3 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. e4 g6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Bg7 6. Nxc6 bxc6 7. Bd3 Nf6 8. e5 Nd5 9. Nxd5 cxd5 10. Qf3 Qc7 11. Bf4 O-O 12. O-O Bb7 13. Qg3 Qb6
14. a4 f6 15. a5 Qe6 16. a6 Bc6 17. Rae1 fxe5 18. Bxe5 Bxe5 19. Rxe5 Qf6
20. Qe3 e6 21. f4 Rfb8 22. b3 Bb5 23. Bxb5 Rxb5 24. Qd4 Qd8 25. c4 Rxb3
26. cxd5 Qb6 27. Qxb6 Rxb6 28. Ra1 Rc8 29. dxe6 dxe6 30. Re2 Rcc6 31. Rd2 Rxa6 32. Rd8+ Kg7 33. Rd7+ Kf6 34. Rxa7 Rxa7 35. Rxa7 h6 36. Ra1 Kf5 37. g3 Kg4 38. Rb1 Kh3 39. Re1 h5 40. Re2 Ra6 41. Re1 h4 42. Re3 Kg4 43. gxh4 Kxf4 44. Re2 e5 45. Rc2 Kf3 46. Rc3+ Ke2 47. Rc4 Kd3 48. Rb4 e4 49. Rb3+ Ke2 50. Rb7 Rd6 51. Rb3 Rd3 52. Rb6 Rh3 53. Rxg6 Rxh4 54. Rg2+ Ke1 55. Rg3 Rf4 56. Re3+ Kd2 57. Ra3 e3 58. Ra2+ Ke1 59. Ra1+ Ke2 60. Ra2+ Kf3 61. Kf1 Rb4 62. Ra1 Rb2 63. Kg1 Rg2+ 64. Kh1 e2 65. h3 Kf2 66. Ra2 Rg8 67. Kh2 Kf1 68. Ra1+ e1=Q 69. Rxe1+ Kxe1 0-1 Here's the position after my opponent played 35.Rxa7: 
click for larger viewI've annotated the game at http://chicagochess.blogspot.com/20... |
|
May-24-13
 | | Patriot: Hi <FSR>! <I daresay Csom thought that that was what he was doing, defending against mate and simultaneously threatening 50...Nxd7.> You may be right. The problem I have with 49...Nf8, besides the fact it loses to 50.Nf5, is it doesn't really propel black's cause. It defends and attacks, but usually one move attacks can be defended. It seems black got scared and retracted into a shell. 49...Ng5 looks like a very reasonable move and more aggressive to white's king. What did black fear about this move? Unless he was low on time, he had to consider it. |
|
May-24-13
| | Patriot: <FSR> The more I look at the position, and I think it's what you are trying to tell me, he simply missed 50.Nf5! 49...Nf8 is sort of a double-attack. One piece is attacked but he also threatens to remain a whole piece up! I think he expected Karpov to resign there. That had to be terribly frustrating for him! |
|
May-25-13
| | FSR: <Patriot> Yes, exactly. I think Csom assumed the rook had to move, and analyzed 49...Nd7 to a win based on that assumption, so 50.Nf5!! never entered his head. (It wasn't a ridiculous assumption, either. You don't see a move like that every day. Humans aren't computers, and can't consider every possible response by the opponent. Also, 50.Nf5!! didn't threaten mate in one, but rather two longer mates. A very hard move to see in a game.) He probably thought that 49...Ng5 won too, but thought 49...Nd7 was more forcing, compelling White to save his rook. Who could imagine that Karpov would respond by leaving the rook hanging and hang a knight too? And yes, it had to be a nightmare for Csom to go from winning to losing in one move, and against the world champion no less. |
|
May-27-13
| | FSR: I just submitted this game to CG.com:
[Event "ESP-chT"]
[Site "Spain"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[EventDate "1993.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Garcia Padron, Jose"]
[Black "Teran Alvarez, Ismael"]
[ECO "B26"]
[WhiteElo "2465"]
[BlackElo "2260"]
[PlyCount "76"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nc3 Nc6 3. g3 g6 4. Bg2 Bg7 5. d3 d6 6. Be3 Rb8 7. Qd2 b5 8. Nd1 b4 9. Ne2 h5 10. h3 h4 11. g4 e5 12. O-O Bxg4 13. hxg4 h3 14. Bh1 h2+ 15. Kg2 Qh4 16. f3 f5 17. exf5 gxf5 18. Ng3 Qh3+ 19. Kf2 f4 20. Nf5 fxe3+ 21. Ndxe3 Bf6 22. Bg2 Qh7 23. Nxd6+ Kd7 24. Ne4 Qh4+ 25. Ng3 Qxg3+ 26. Kxg3 Bh4+ 27. Kxh2 Be1+ 28. Bh3 Bxd2 29. Nf5 Nd4 30. Nxd4 cxd4 31. Rad1 Bf4+ 32. Kg2 Kd6 33. g5 Ne7 34. Rh1 Bxg5 35. Bg4 Nd5 36. Rdg1 Ne3+ 37. Kf2 Nxg4+ 38. fxg4 Be3+ 0-1 Comment: This is a great game! I would appreciate it if you would add it to your database. |
|
May-28-13
| | FSR: Just submitted this game:
[Event "Leningrad-ch"]
[Site "Leningrad"]
[Date "1987.??.??"]
[EventDate "1987.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Taimanov, Mark E"]
[Black "Kamsky, Gata"]
[ECO "D94"]
[WhiteElo "2480"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "77"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. e3 Bg7 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Bd2 c5 7. dxc5 Na6
8. cxd5 Nxc5 9. Bc4 a6 10. O-O b5 11. Be2 Bb7 12. Rc1 Rc8 13. h3 Qd6 14. Rc2 b4 15. Na4 Nce4 16. Bd3 Bxd5 17. b3 Rxc2 18. Bxc2 Rd8 19. Bc1 Rc8 20. Qe2 Bb7 21. Rd1 Qc6 22. Nd4 Qc7 23. Bd3 Qa5 24. a3 Nc3 25. Nxc3 bxc3 26. b4 Qd5 27. f3 e5 28. Nc2 e4 29. Bxa6 Bxa6 30. Rxd5 Bxe2 31. Ra5 exf3 32. Nd4 f2+ 33. Kxf2 Bd3 34. b5 Ne4+ 35. Kg1 Bxd4 36. exd4 Rb8 37. a4 Nd2 38. Ra6 Nb3 39. Bf4 0-1 Comment: This is a historically important game that is mentioned in the site's biography of Kamsky, but is not in the database. |
|
May-28-13
| | FSR: And this:
[Event "TUR-chT"]
[Site "Marmaris"]
[Date "2006.04.20"]
[EventDate "2006.04.18"]
[Round "17"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Atalik, Suat"]
[Black "Ozen, Ali"]
[ECO "D06"]
[WhiteElo "2632"]
[BlackElo "1697"]
[PlyCount "39"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 Nf6 3. cxd5 Nxd5 4. Nf3 e6 5. e4 Nf6 6. Nc3 c6 7. Bd3 Be7 8. Qe2 O-O 9. h4 h6 10. e5 Ne8 11. Bxh6 gxh6 12. Qe4 f5 13. exf6 Nxf6 14. Qg6+ Kh8 15. Qxh6+ Kg8 16. Rh3 Bd6 17. Ne5 Bxe5 18. dxe5 Nbd7 19. Rg3+ Ng4 20. Qh7# 1-0 |
|
May-29-13
| | FSR: And this:
[Event "United Insurance 7th"]
[Site "Dhaka"]
[Date "2004.05.13"]
[EventDate "2004.05.07"]
[Round "9"]
[White "Suvrajit, Saha"]
[Black "Singh, Gurpreetpal"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A40"]
[WhiteElo "2301"]
[BlackElo "2352"]
[PlyCount "120"]
1. d4 g6 2. c4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 4. d5 Bxc3+ 5. bxc3 f5 6. e3 d6 7. Be2 Nf6 8. h4 Qa5 9. Qb3 Nbd7 10. Nh3 Nb6 11. Nf4 Rg8 12. f3 Bd7 13. Bd2 O-O-O 14. Kf2 Qa4 15. Rab1 Rde8 16. Rb2 e5 17. dxe6 Bxe6 18. Nxe6 Rxe6 19. Qb5 Rge8 20. Bd3 Nfd7 21. f4 Nf6 22. Re1 Ne4+ 23. Kf3 h5 24. Bf1 Kc7 25. Bd3 Qxb5 26. cxb5 c4 27. Bf1 d5 28. Rc2 Na4 29. Bc1 Naxc3 30. Bb2 Nxb5 31. a4 Nbd6 32. Bd4 Nc8 33. Rb1 b6 34. a5 Nc5 35. Rc3 Rc6 36. Be2 Nd6 37. axb6+ axb6 38. Ra3 Kb7 39. Kf2 Nb3 40. Rbxb3 cxb3 41. Rxb3 Ra8 42. Rb2 Ne4+ 43. Kf3 Nd6 44. Bd3 Ra3 45. Ke2 Nc4 46. Rc2 Rc8 47. g3 b5 48. g4 hxg4 49. h5 gxh5 50. Bxf5 Rca8 51. Kf2 Ra2 52. Kg3 Rxc2 53. Bxc2 Ra3 54. Bg6 Nxe3 55. Kh4 g3 56. Kh3 g2 57. Kh2 h4 58. f5 h3 59. f6 Ng4+ 60. Kg1 Rg3 0-1 Comment: Black could have won more quickly with 22...Ng4+! winning the pawn on e3 because 23.Kf3?? would be met by 23...Qd1+!! 24.Rxd1 (or 24.Kg3 Qxe1! 25.Bxe1 Rxe3#) Rxe3+ 25.Bxe3 Rxe3#. |
|
May-30-13
| | perfidious: <FSR>: Was just searching for something else and came across a reference, by you, to Noelle Bush. Had never heard of this member of the Bush clan, but she seems to have got herself quite a start in life, very early on: http://www.nndb.com/people/995/0000... |
|
May-31-13
| | FSR: <perfidious> She comes from one of America's most prominent crime families. |
|
Jun-04-13
 | | Shams: By the way, if you ever get your hands on Roth's "The Breast" you absolutely must read it. It's like 110 pages and the funniest thing he ever wrote. |
|
Jun-04-13
| | FSR: <Shams> In my youth I spent a lot of time trying to get my hands on "The Breast." Oh, you're referring to the Philip Roth novel. Ahem, excuse me. I'm pretty sure that I did read that, many moons ago. I know the premise is that the protagonist, a man, is surprised upon waking up one morning to discover that he has somehow become a female breast. And it was pretty damned funny, as I (vaguely) recall. |
|
Jun-04-13
| | Shams: <FSR> Ok, so I have a question. You wrote: <You create two or more folders in which to put games; mine are "White Repertoire" and "Black Repertoire." (Wildly imaginative names, no?) There are perhaps 40 variations you need to know as White and 40 as Black. For each variation, you select one or more model games.> I get that the 40 is a rough estimate, but it's a rough estimate of lines you need to know per opening, not per color repertoire, right? And the idea is to learn these lines cold such that you'll be able to use them as hooks upon which to hang other games you study, that you may or may not have memorized so well? |
|
Jun-04-13
| | FSR: <Shams: ... I get that the 40 is a rough estimate, but it's a rough estimate of lines you need to know per opening, not per color repertoire, right?> I was thinking per color repertoire. In my case, I play the Classical Sicilian and the Gruenfeld. So I need to learn lines against the following, for example: Sicilian 2.f4
Sicilian 2.c3
Sicilian 2.b3
Sicilian 2.b4
Sicilian 2.c4
Smith-Morra
Sicilian 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+
Sicilian 3.d4 cxd4 4.Qxd4
Classical Sicilian 6.Be3
Classical Sicilian 6.f4
Classical Sicilian 6.Be2 (probably Boleslavsky)
Sozin
Richter-Rauzer
Gruenfeld Classical Exchange (Bc4/Ne2)
Gruenfeld Modern Exchange (Nf3/Rb1)
Gruenfeld Exchange with Be3
Gruenfeld 4.Bg5
Gruenfeld 4.Bf4
Gruenfeld 4.e3
Gruenfeld 4.Nf3 Bg7 5.Bg5
Gruenfeld Russian System
Gruenfeld g3 lines
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.f3
Trompowsky
London System
1.c4
1.f4
1.Nf3
1.Nc3
1.g3
1.b3
1.b4
<And the idea is to learn these lines cold such that you'll be able to use them as hooks upon which to hang other games you study, that you may or may not have memorized so well?> You want to learn them cold, yes, but beyond that I'm not sure what you mean. I'll certainly have occasion to look at games that don't fit into my repertoire. |
|
Jun-05-13
| | Shams: Great Ramones tune! |
|
Jun-05-13
 | | brankat: Hmmm, name <Ramone> sounds familiar :-) |
|
Jun-05-13
| | Shams: <FSR> I thought you said once that you stopped playing the Classical Sicilian because you didn't like defending the doubled f-pawns when White plays the Rauzer. I'm thinking about taking up the Grunfeld myself. I like the Benko Gambit a lot, but not necessarily as an everyday defense. |
|
Jun-05-13
 | | Tomlinsky: <FSR> Given your liking of the Grunfeld have you ever thought of using the structure for both sides a la ZOOM 001 by Bent Larsen/Steffen Zeuthen? I have an original hardback copy but have seen Japanese reprints on eBay if you don't already own it in your, I believe, expansive collection. It inspired me to think structurally with my repertoire as Black which centre's on French/Slav (Chebanenko) but never made the fully leap to corresponding d4 setups for White having a great love for the English and prefering the transpositional possibilities of choosing which, and when, to move-order into specific d4 lines. My plan, for years now, was to make the Catalan my 'second string' to the English, which often arises in any case when I choose and then take up the full ZOOM 001 idea for both sides by adding the Grunfeld which I have played, badly, on occasion. This hasn't happened so far but I will make the effort in the next couple of years. The Grunfeld is quite a wild leap in logic for a French/Slav player. Well, to me at least. Maybe next year! |
|
Jun-06-13
| | FSR: <Shams> I still don't like getting doubled f-pawns. But Black must play something, and the Classical Sicilian may literally be <the> best-scoring major opening line for Black. And most opponents won't in fact play the Richter-Rauzer. Moreover, I realized, probably after my earlier comment that you mentioned, that 6...Qb6! scores well for Black. CG.com's Opening Explorer actually shows a plus score for Black - 50.7% over 289 games! ChessBase's Mega Database 2013 shows Black scoring 48.8% over 1101 games - better, I believe, than he does with <any> major defense to 1.e4 or 1.d4. And Mega shows White getting a <minus> score after most responses to the Classical. Here, in order, are White's most common responses to it (note that all of the below statistics are from <White's> perspective): As mentioned, 6.Bg5 Qb6! (51.2%)
6.Bc4 Qb6! (45.8%)
6.Be2 and now, in order of popularity, 6...e5! (42.3%), 6...g6 (45.8%), and 6...e6 (50.1%). Much rarer is 6...Nxd4!? 7.Qxd4 g6!, played only 149 times - but 36.8%! 6.Be3 Ng4! (36.6%!)
6.f3 e5! (47.6%) So much for the English Attack!
6.g3 g6! (again 47.6%)
6.f4 e5! (47.2%). I believe you've already seen the trap I played in NN vs F Rhine, 2013. In sum, of White's seven most popular sixth moves, only 6.Bg5! ekes out a tiny plus score. After all of the alternatives, and Black's best response thereto, White scores <less than 48%>! Most Anti-Sicilians are even worse. White's second most popular second move, 2.Nc3, already leaves him statistically worse after (in order of popularity) 2...Nc6 (49.3%), 2...e6 (49.1%), 2...a6 (46.4%), or 2...g6 (48.9%). But not 2...d6?!, Black's third most popular move (50.2%), which forfeits the option of a quick ...e6 and ...d5 against the Grand Prix Attack. See the important game T Wedberg vs Kharlov, 1992. (I have my own fond memories of this line - K Thompson vs F Rhine, 1992 - but Kharlov's 11...c4! is better than 11...Bxc3!? as I played.) I play 2...Nc6! because it fits in with the rest of my repertoire if White switches back to an Open Sicilian with 3.Nf3 or 3.Nge2. White's third most popular move is 2.c3. White plays 2.Nf3, 2.Nc3, or 2.c3 about 92% of the time. After 2.c3 Nf6!, the game almost always continues 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4, and now <all> of White's principal moves give him a minus score: 5.Nf3 (48.7%), 5.cxd4 (43.6%), 5.Qxd4 (44.5%), and 5.Bc4 (42.0%, and only 35.4% after 5...Qc7!). White's fourth most popular move is 2.d4. Accepting the gambit scores very well for Black, particularly after 2...cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6! 7.0-0 Nf6 8.Qe2 Bg4! 9.Rd1 e6 (26.8%). But Marc Esserman's brilliant <Mayhem in the Morra!> (2012) has gone a long way toward rehabilitating the gambit. If Black is afraid, he can decline with 3...Nf6, transposing into the 2.c3 lines that give White less than nothing. White's fifth most popular move is 2.f4. The Tal Gambit, 2...d5!, gives White a wretched 42.0% score. There are important move-order subtleties. After 2.Nc3 or 2.Ne2, I play 2...Nc6!, not 2...d6?!, both because of the aforementioned line against the Grand Prix and also in order to meet 2.Ne2 Nc6 3.g3 with 3...d5! Note that with White's knight on c3, Black doesn't fear 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4. But I avoid 2.Nf3 Nc6, because 3.Bb5! scores 53.7% against 3...e6, and considerably higher against everything else (over 57% against both 3...g6 and 3...d6, and 55% after 3...Nf6). After 2...d6, 3.Bb5+ is less fearsome. White scores 53.5% against 3...Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Qxd7, 53.1% after the rarer 3...Bd7 4.Bxd7+ Nxd7 (Fedorowicz's preference), and only 47.0% after 3...Nd7!? - although I suspect those numbers are skewed because 3...Nd7 is usually played by higher-rated players trying to win against weaker players. Note that if Black doesn't mind a draw, the equalizing line seen in Delchev vs Ivanchuk, 2003 and related games, http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches..., is very important. (Weird statistical anomaly: after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nc6!?, White scores only 48.6% in 4573 games, but after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 d6!?, he scores 57.2% in 5959 games. My theory is that 3.Bb5+ players are more likely than 3.Bb5 players to be lower-rated players who are content with a draw after 3.Bb5+ Bd7, but it's still surprising.) |
|
Jun-07-13
| | Shams: <FSR> <And most opponents won't in fact play the Richter-Rauzer.> I'm calling <6.Bg5> the Rauzer already; am I wrong to do so? 6.Bg5 is by far the most common response to the Classical Sicilian, roughly three times as popular as the Velimirovic. |
|
Jun-07-13
| | FSR: <Shams> There does not seem to be even one game in the database where Vsevolod Rauzer played 6.Bg5. At least Kurt Paul Otto Joseph Richter has a few: K Richter vs L Roedl, 1932; K Richter vs H Wagner, 1932; K Richter vs Pelikan, 1936; K Richter vs Bogoljubov, 1937. 6.Bc4 is usually called the "Sozin," not the "Velimirovic" - the latter is reserved for Sozin lines where White castles queenside (Bc4, Qe2, 0-0-0). I don't have access to Mega Database 2013 at the moment. According to CG.com's database, 6.Bg5 has been played almost 2.5 times as often as 6.Bc4, and 6.Bg5 has been played slightly more than all other moves put together. Opening Explorer I definitely do <not> have the impression that that is true today. The English Attack is very popular, so many people play 6.Be3 or 6.f3 - neither of which works very well against the Classical. In my recent tournament games, I've played against 6.Bc4 twice and 6.f3 twice, never against 6.Bg5. It is also important to note that often one will not even reach the position after 5...Nc6. Roughly half the time White will play some sort of anti-Sicilian (2.c3; 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.g3; 2.Nc3 Nc6 3.f4 followed by 4.Nf3 and either 5.Bc4 or 5.Bb5; 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3; 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+; etc.). Just look at my games on GameKnot. I always play the Sicilian against 1.e4 and with one exception have always headed for the Classical. But there are very few Richter-Rauzers. See http://gameknot.com/list-games.pl?m... and http://gameknot.com/list-games.pl?m.... Out of over 150 games (half of those as Black), I can only think of two Richter-Rauzers offhand. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 33 OF 33 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
 |
A free online guide presented by Chessgames.com
|
|
|
