|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1731 OF 1784 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-28-08 | | kb2ct: <pferd: <kb2ct:> I was pretending not to have 6-piece tablebases to build evaluations rather than play for mate or tablebase entry. Black can not avoid a tablebase win after Rxa5. He can with Rxh5 :0) |
|
| Jul-28-08 | | pferd: A nice variation if we start with Rxa5:
... 60.Rb5+ Kd4 61.Rxa5 c3 62.Ke2 Nf2 63.Rxh5 Nd3 64.Rd5+
click for larger view |
|
| Jul-28-08 | | chesstoplay: To all CG Premium Members and players at large,
Our thanks to chessgames.com for allowing us to set up a quarterly scholarship award for a paid one year Premium Membership. Please tell us who you think the top 3 contributors - who are currently not premium members - to the Gert Jan Timmerman game have been. Quarterly winners for 2007 were: January 1 won by < Dionyseus >, April 1 won by < Hodja Nasruddin >, July 1 won by < Themofro > and October 1 won by < imag >. At the end of 2007, a new once a year leadership/merit scholarship was awarded to < Thorsson >. Quarterly winners for 2008 so far were: February 1 won by < rinus > and May 1 won by < firebrandx >. My wife and I will choose the winner with the help of the CG staff and Randomvisitor. The ultimate idea here is to do something nice for someone with a love of chess. Our purpose is to say thank you for someone's chess effort and to create more chess. Hopefully, they will pass it forward and help others become chess players and create even more chess! We feel that CG and the Premium Members are critical to a proper decision. If RandomVisitor or Artar1, for example, and several other highly respected players - as well as a score of others all agree on a specific player/World Team member, this would directly influence the decision making process. Again, we are asking Premium Members, as leading members of this very special chess community, to participate and cast a vote. Other World Team members are welcome to voice their opinions as well. < Only 3 days left. << Please direct your votes to my forum. >>> Voting will close on Thursday July 31st at 10 PM CST USA. The winner will be announced at Noon on Friday August 1st. To everyone... Thanks for your efforts and interest in chess! Peter / chesstoplay
|
|
| Jul-28-08 | | kb2ct: <pferd: A nice variation if we start with Rxa5: ... 60.Rb5+ Kd4 61.Rxa5 c3 62.Ke2 Nf2 63.Rxh5 Nd3 64.Rd5+> Or
61. Rxa5 c3
62. Ke2 Nf6 63. Rf5 Nd5 64. Rxd5+ KxR mate in 21
Rxa5 is best.
:0)
|
|
| Jul-28-08 | | pferd: Yeah - but my treatment of 62...Nf2 really works no matter which pawn we take first. I think I'll vote for 61.Rxh5 because it seems a little more forcing, on both us and him: 61.Rxh5 c3 (or Ne3) 62.Ke2 Ne3 (or c3) 63.Rg5 c2 64.Kd2 Ke4 65.Kc1 (not forced, but elegant!)
click for larger view
What better moves does Black have? |
|
| Jul-28-08 | | kb2ct: <pferd: Yeah - but my treatment of 62...Nf2 really works no matter which pawn we take first. I think I'll vote for 61.Rxh5 because it seems a little more forcing, on both us and him:
61.Rxh5 c3 (or Ne3) 62.Ke2 Ne3 (or c3) 63.Rg5> 63....Nf1 !! + +7.27/22
No tablebase win for quite some time.
:0)
|
|
| Jul-28-08 | | kb2ct: Looks like we can get a famous game with Rxa5 first.
I hope everyone followed the conversation that just happened. :0) |
|
Jul-29-08
 | | chancho: So we should vote for 61.Rxa5 on our next turn. Something tells me that Timmerman will resign when he sees that the a and h pawns will be picked off, and that his passed pawn will not make it to promotion. |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | whatthefat: <Artar1>'s profile recommends 61.Rxh5. Egads, are we going to have a debate about the move we make?! Maybe this is what GMT was waiting for... :) |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | MostlyAverageJoe: <kb2ct: Black can not avoid a tablebase win after Rxa5. He can with Rxh5> No, with Rxh5 he cannot. See the last portion of this post: The World vs G Timmerman, 2007. |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | kb2ct: <MostlyAverageJoe: <kb2ct: Black can not avoid a tablebase win after Rxa5. He can with Rxh5>
No, with Rxh5 he cannot. See the last portion of this post: The World vs G Timmerman, 2007.> Wrong, Rxa5 is better. It is just that computers can't see it without 6-man tablebases installed. :0)
|
|
| Jul-29-08 | | kb2ct: 63...Ne4 and 63...Nd5 lose to the exchange sac and any other move allow the a-pawn to queen 61. Rxa5 c3
62. Ke2 Nf6 63. Rf5 Ng4 64. a5 Ke4 65. a6 Kxf5 66. a7 
click for larger view |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | amadeus: Here a little tree for further reference
<60.Rb5+ Kd4 61.Rxh5> 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Ne3> 63.Rg5 <Nf1> 64.Rg1 +M26 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Ne3> 63.Rg5 <c2> 64.Kd2 +M24 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Ne3> 63.Rg5 <Nc2> 64.h5 +M22 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Ne3> 63.Rg5 <Ke4> 64.Re5 +M22 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Nf6> 63.Rf5 (+M26 63... Ng8 64.h5 Kc4 65.Rxa5 Nh6 66.Ra6) 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Nf6> 63.Rf5 (+M24 63...Ne8 64.h5 Ng7 65.Rxa5 Ne6 66.h6 ) 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Nf6> 63.Rxa5 (+M34 63...Ne4 64.Ra7 Ng3+ 65.Kd1) 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Nf2> 63.Rf5 (+M30 63... Nh3 64.h5 Ke4 65.Rxa5 Nf4+ 66.Kd1) 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Nh2> 63.Rf5 (+M29 63...Ke4 64.Rxa5 c2) 61...<c3> 62.Ke2 <Kc4> 63.Rxa5 (+M29 63... Nh6 64.h5 Kd4 65.Ra6) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <c3> 63. Ke2 Nf1 64. Rg1 (+M26 64...Ne3 65. h5 Nf5 66.Rg4 Ke5 67.Rg5 c2) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <c3> 63. Ke2 c2 64. Kd2 (+M24 64...Nc4+ 65. Kxc2 Nd6 66.Rg6 Nf5 67.h5 Kc4) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <Nf1> 63. Ke2 (+M27 63...c3 64.Rg1 Ne3 65.h5) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <Kd3> 63. Rc5 Kd4 64. h5 (+M23 64...Nc2 65.Rg5 Kd3 66.Rd5) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <Kd3> 63. Rc5 Nf1 64. h5 (+M23 64...Nd2 65.Kf4 Nb3 6.Rxc4 // +M22 64...c3 Rxc3) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <Kd3> 63. Rc5 Nc2 64. h5 (+M23 64...Nd4+ 65. Kg4 Nb3 66.Rc8 Nd2 67.h6) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <Kd3> 63. Rc5 Nd1 64. h5 (+M20 64...Ne3 65.h6 Nf1 66.h7) 61...<Ne3> 62. Rg5 <Nc2> 63. h5 (+M23 63...Ne1 64.Ke2 Nd3 65.h6) |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | ajile: <Artar1>
Sadly he uses video editing and stooges.
: /
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxiO... |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | MostlyAverageJoe: <kb2ct: <MostlyAverageJoe: <kb2ct: Black can not avoid a tablebase win after Rxa5. He can with Rxh5> No, with Rxh5 he cannot. See the last portion of this post: The World vs G Timmerman, 2007.>
Wrong, Rxa5 is better. It is just that computers can't see it without 6-man tablebases installed.> I did not comment on the relative quality of Rxa5, so I am not sure what you consider to be <wrong>. Rxa5 wins, too. As a matter of fact, I am about done running an analysis tree for that move. All I said is that <<black cannot avoid getting tablebase-mated with Rxh5>>. Claiming otherwise is wrong. It is quite possible that Rxa5 is better (it may reach TBs faster, or mate faster), but please present your argument without incorrect statements about Rxh5. |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | kb2ct: <MostlyAverageJoe:> Rxh5 wins too. My only comment about Rxh5 was that it was adequate and preferred by Rybka. Rxa5 first is more human and my choice,
:0) |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | MostlyAverageJoe: < kb2ct: Rxa5 first is more human and my choice> You won't get a disagreement from me here. When I look at the position and employ my patzer-level endgame skills, my impression is that Rxa5 frees our a-pawn which is more threatened by the proximity of the black king. The h-pawn is not in that big of a hurry to get going. Could you summarize your argument as to why <Rxa5> would get us a <famous> game, as opposed to Rxh5? Departing from Rybka's recommendation might be a part of the reason, but what else? The idea of an exchange return with many pawns remaining and a TB win, as shown in<pferd>'s and your variations is indeed very cool, but what is the chance of GMT playing into one of them? |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | MostlyAverageJoe: Here's my analysis tree after <60.Rb5+ Kd4 61.Rxa5>, including cute lines from <pferd> and <kb2ct>. The forced win is fairly easy to show (it took me maybe an hour, while at the same time doing some real work). I used Deep Shredder 11 with 5-men TBs; with 6-men TBs, perhaps there would be less of the stuff below. The results can be verified by following the longest line, letting the engine run for a couple minutes, then backsliding and exploring side branches. All of the variants below ended up with Shredder claiming a forced mate. Alas, Shredder does not report the numbers of moves until mate, so additional verification (perhaps something like what <amadeus> has shown) would be useful. Improvements, particularly resulting in neat positions when TBs are entered, are, of course, welcome. 61. ... Ne5+ 62.Ke2 Nd3 63.Rg5 Nf4+ 64.Kd1 Nd3 65.a5 Nc5 66.Rxh5 Na6 67.Rh6 64. ... Nd5 65.a5 Nc3+ 66.Ke1 64. ... c3 65.a5 Kd3 66.Rc5 64. ... Nh3 65.a5 64. ... Ne6 65.Rxh5 63. ... Kc3 64.a5 Nc1+ 65.Kd1 63. ... Nb4 64.a5 c3 65.Rxh5 Kc4 66.Kd1 64. ... Kc3 65.Rxh5 64. ... Ke4 65.Rxh5 Na6 66.Rh6 64. ... Na6 65.Rxh5 63. ... Nc5 64.a5 Nb7 65.a6 63. ... Nc1+ 64.Kd1
62. ... Nc6 63.Rxh5 Kc3 64.a5 Kb4 65.a6 62. ... Ke4 63.Rb5 Nf3 64.Rxh5 c3 65.Kd1 63. ... Nc6 64.Rxh5 c3 65.a5 63. ... Ng4 64.a5
62. ... Ng6 63.Rg5 Nxh4 64.a5
61. ... Kc3 62.Rxh5 Nf6 63.Rf5
61. ... Nh6 62.Rxh5
61. ... Ne3 62.Rxh5 c3 63.Ke2
62. ... Nc2 63.a5
62. ... Nf1
61. ... Nf6 62.Rf5 Nd5 63.a5 Nb4 64.Ke2 c3 65.Rxh5
63. ... Ne3 64.Rf4+ Kd3 65.a6 63. ... c3 64.Ke2 Ne3 65.Rf4+ 64. ... Ke4 65.Rg5 Nb4 66.Rxh5 62. ... Ng4 63.a5
62. ... Nd7
62. ... Ne8 63.Ke2 Nd6 64.Rxh5
63. ... Ke4 64.Rxh5 Ng7 65.Rc5 63. ... Kc3 64.a5 Nc7 65.Rxh5 63. ... c3 64.a5 Nd6 65.Rxh5 64. ... Kc4 65.a6 63. ... Ng7 64.Rg5 Ne6 65.a5 c3 66.a6 65. ... Nc5 66.Rxh5 65. ... Nc7 66.Rxh5 64. ... Ne8 65.a5 61. ... c3 62.Ke2 Nf6 63.Rf5 Ne4 64.Kd1 Ng3 65.Rf3
65.Rg5 Ne4 66.Rxh5 65. ... Nf1 66.a5 64. ... Kd3 65.a5 64. ... Kc4 65.Rxh5 64. ... Nc5 65.Rxh5 63. ... Nd5 64.Rxd5+ <kb2ct>'s line, ending in: 
click for larger view 63. ... Ng8 64.a5
62. ... Nf2 63.Rxh5 Nd3 64.Rd5+ <pferd>'s line, ending in:
click for larger view 62. ... Ne3 63.Rxh5
62. ... Nh2 63.Rxh5
|
|
| Jul-29-08 | | sentriclecub: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kK5T... What is a better hybrid sport?
Baseball and water skiing merged into a single activity? Or chess and boxing? |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | Artar1: Using a 24-ply analysis for each ply examined, I got a very similar result to what has already been posted: 59. Kf3 Ng4 60. Rb5+ Kd4 61. Rxa5 Ne5+ 62. Ke2 Nd3 63. Rg5 c3 64. Rd5+ Kxd5 65. Kxd3 Tablebase win for White in 20 moves. 
click for larger view<61. Rxa5> does not shorten the game. So what will it be folks? Will we play <61. Rxa5> or <61. Rxh5>? By taking the a-pawn, there does seem to be fewer options for Black, but I don't like the idea of trading our rook for the knight, letting Black achieve even material, despite the fact that Black will most certainly lose regardless of which pawn is captured. |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | kb2ct: Rxa5 or Rxh5 first depends on your criteria. Quickest mate or quickest tablebase entry. If you go by highest evaluation, then highest evaluation at what point?? Rxa5 will likely lead to a faster if not an immediate resignation, but Rxh5 mates on move 83 not move 86. I intend to vote for Rxa5, but I acknowledge that it isn't a simple decision. :0) |
|
Jul-29-08
 | | kutztown46: Before the Rxa5 vs. Rxh5 debate gets into full swing, I would caution that 60...Kd4 is not forced. There are two other moves for black, both plausible. See this post: zanshin chessforum If GMT plays Kd6 or Kc6, our tactics may or may not change. I have not analyzed them myself. But I think it would behoove us to at least generate and explore some lines for the alternatives to Kd4. |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | MostlyAverageJoe: <kutztown46: ... If GMT plays Kd6 or Kc6> These moves evaluate OK-ish without tablebases, but with tablebases they lead very quickly to a forced mate. I cannot image GMT voluntarily cutting off his K from being able to support his passed pawn, when our K can easily stop the knight+pawn duo. |
|
| Jul-29-08 | | zanshin: <MostlyAverageJoe: <kutztown46: ... If GMT plays Kd6 or Kc6>> <kutz> If <MAJ> is right (and he usually is), maybe we should just go with Kd4 since I did not use tablebases. |
|
Jul-29-08
 | | Gypsy: <Artar1: ... So what will it be folks? Will we play <61. Rxa5> or <61. Rxh5>? By taking the a-pawn, there does seem to be fewer options for Black, but I don't like the idea of trading our rook for the knight, letting Black achieve even material, despite the fact that Black will most certainly lose regardless of which pawn is captured. > Even if that means going into a very elemental, won pawn-endgame? I am surprised. Btw, if I look at the two options via my eye towards the pawn endgame, Rxh5 looks 'more winning' than Rxa5. (Relative positions of kings and pawns.) |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1731 OF 1784 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
