|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 417 OF 707 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-02-14 | | DPLeo: I'm all for keeping the bishop pair but what is our winning move in this line instead of 24.Bxc6 <d=51 Shootout> Stockfish 5 modern x64 Starting Position: < 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 O-O 6.O-O d6 7.Nbd2 Ne7 8.d4 exd4 9.cxd4 Bb6 10.Re1 Bg4 11.h3 Bh5 12.a3 Bg6 13.Ba4 d5 14.e5 Ne4 15.Nxe4 dxe4 16.Nh4 Qxd4 17.Qxd4 Bxd4 18.Bg5 Nc6 19.Nxg6 fxg6 20.Rxe4 Bxf2+ 21.Kh2 Rf5 22.Bd2 >
click for larger view
The following line was played after a full d=51 per half-move: 22... Bb6 23.Bc3 Rd8 24.Bxc6 bxc6 25.e6
click for larger viewAnalysis:
d=49 <-0.09> 25... Bc5 26.Bb4 Bd6+ 27.Bxd6 cxd6 28.Rc1 c5 |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | cro777: One of Black's motifs in a 2RBOC (opposite-colored bishops with two pairs of rooks) endgame is to trade a pair of rooks to reduce the <attacking power of two rooks>. <hoodrobin: Di quella pira l'orrendo foco...> "The flames of that terrible pyre..."
With <hoodrobin>'s use of operatic paradigms our analyses become more colorful. |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | g.mueller: Hi
< if 22.Bd2 Rd8 >
[Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2014.09.02"]
[Round "?"]
[White "team 32.e6"]
[Black "GMARK"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C65"]
[PlyCount "135"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. O-O d6 6. c3 O-O 7. Nbd2 Ne7 8. d4
exd4 9. cxd4 Bb6 10. Re1 Bg4 11. h3 Bh5 12. a3 Bg6 13. Ba4 d5 14. e5 Ne4 15.
Nxe4 dxe4 16. Nh4 Qxd4 17. Qxd4 Bxd4 18. Bg5 Nc6 19. Nxg6 fxg6 20. Rxe4 Bxf2+
21. Kh2 Rf5 22. Bd2 Rd8 23. Bb4 Nxb4 24. axb4 Rd4 25. Re2 Bh4 26. g3 Bg5 27.
Bc2 Rf8 28. h4 Be7 29. Bb3+ Kh8 30. b5 g5 31. h5 Bc5 32. e6 Be7 33. Rxa7 Rb8
34. Ra4 Rxa4 35. Bxa4 b6 36. Kh3 h6 37. Rc2 Bd6 38. Kg4 Ra8 39. Bb3 Ra1 40. Rf2
Rg1 41. Rf3 Rg2 42. Kf5 g4 (42... Kh7 43. Bc4 Rxb2 44. Ke4 Rc2 45. Kd5 g4 46.
Re3 Rd2+ 47. Kc6 Be7 48. Re4 g5 49. hxg6+ Kg7 50. Kxc7 h5 51. Kxb6 h4 52. gxh4
g3 53. Rg4 Bf6 54. Rxg3 Rd8 55. Rg4 Rc8) 43. Kxg4 Kh7 (43... Rxb2 44. Kf5 Kh7
45. Ke4 Re2+ 46. Kd5 Re5+ 47. Kc6 Rxh5 48. Rd3) 44. Re3 Rxb2 (44... Be7 45. Kf3
Rxb2 46. Rc3 Kg8 47. Ke4 g6 48. Kd5 gxh5) 45. Kf3 Be7 (45... Kh8 46. Ke4 Rh2 (
46... Rd2 47. Rf3 Bc5 (47... Rh2 48. g4 g6 49. hxg6 Kg7 50. Kd5 Kxg6 51. Kc6)
48. Kf5 Kh7 49. Ke5 Bd6+ 50. Ke4 Re2+ 51. Kd5) 47. g4 Rd2 (47... g6 48. hxg6
Rd2 49. Rf3 Kg7 50. Rf7+ Kxg6) 48. Rf3 g6 49. hxg6 Kg7 50. Rf7+ Kxg6 51. Ke3
Rh2 52. Bd5 Rb2) 46. Rc3 Kg8 47. Ke4 Kf8 48. Rxc7 g6 49. Bc4 gxh5 50. Rb7 Bc5
51. Bd5 Rd2 52. Ke5 Rf2 53. Be4 Re2 (53... Ke8 54. Bg6+) 54. Kf5 Re1 55. Rh7
Be7 56. Kg6 Ke8 57. Rh8+ Bf8 58. Bf5 Ke7 59. Rh7+ Kd6 60. Kf6 Ra1 61. Rf7 Ra8
62. Bg6 Kc5 63. Rxf8 Rxf8+ 64. Bf7 h4 65. gxh4 Rh8 66. e7 Kxb5 67. e8=Q+ Rxe8
68. Bxe8+ 1-0
click for larger view |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | RandomVisitor: <g.mueller>23...a5 perhaps |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | yskid: <Sep-02-14
premium
member cro777: One of Black's motifs in a 2RBOC (opposite-colored bishops with two pairs of rooks) endgame is to trade a pair of rooks to reduce the <attacking power of two rooks>.<hoodrobin: Di quella pira l'orrendo foco...> "The flames of that terrible pyre..."
With <hoodrobin>'s use of operatic paradigms our analyses become more colorful.> I find hoodrobin's quote quite adequate for DaringSpeculator's "hocus pocus". I have to add something non-english too:
Tinjaju šahovska drvca, dok se lomača ne rasplamsa (approx.: chess woods smouldering till pyre inflames). In this case GMARK has to add some accelerant (22...Rd8). |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | DPLeo: No move today.
Trying to decide between 16... Qxd4 or Bxd4 ... |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | cro777: <yskid: I find hoodrobin's quote quite adequate for DaringSpeculator's "hocus pocus". In this case GMARK has to add some accelerant...> ... or suffer from thermophobia. |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | YouRang: Hummph. I was sort of expecting a move today.
I still think we'll see ...Qxd4. |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | DPLeo: <YouRang: ... I still think we'll see ...Qxd4.> Stockfish agrees with you.
After 16... Bxd4
click for larger view
1) d=33 <+0.24> 17.Bg5 c5 18.Nxg6 fxg6 19.Rxe4 h6 20.Be3 2) d=33 <-0.10> 17.Nxg6 Nxg6 18.Rxe4 Bxe5 19.Qe2 Qd6 20.Be3 3) d=33 <-0.44> 17.Bc2 Re8 18.Bg5 e3 19.fxe3 Bxc2 20.Qxd4 |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | yskid: <Sep-02-14
premium
member cro777: <yskid: I find hoodrobin's quote quite adequate for DaringSpeculator's "hocus pocus". In this case GMARK has to add some accelerant...> ... or suffer from thermophobia.> With dew point (rosište) at 18 deg.C here today I'm somewhat thermophobic myself. Nevertheless, BOC+rooks may be good chance to "overcome" "conventional wisdom" with engine assistance. Perhaps some deep "triangualation" or equivalent exists in the position. If anyone, this Team has chances to find it. The principal presented by zssoyd for the correspondence players these days applies to the single players and probably is good for the time being. Yet analytical potential of the Team is IMHO considerably greater. GMARK is probably somewhat surprised with our "pawn sac" and suddenly aiming towards queenless ending. |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 Pro w32:d 34 done
1. = (0.07): 16...Qxd4 17.Qxd4 Bxd4 18.Bg5 Nc6 19.Nxg6 fxg6 20.Rxe4 Bxf2+ 21.Kh2 Rf5 22.Bxc6 bxc6 23.Be3 Bxe3 24.Rxe3 Rb8 25.Rd1 h6 26.Rd2 Re8 27.Rc3 Re6 28.Rdc2 Rfxe5 29.Rxc6 Rxc6 30.Rxc6 Rb5 31.Rxc7 a5 32.Ra7 g5 33.a4 Rxb2 34.Rxa5 Rb3 35.Ra7 2.  (0.26): 16...Nf5 17.Nxg6 hxg6 18.Rxe4 Nxd4 19.Qg4 Ne6 20.Bb5 Qe7 21.Bc4 Rad8 22.b4 c6 23.Rb1 Rfe8 24.a4 a6 25.a5 Ba7 26.g3 Rd4 27.Kg2 Rxe4 28.Qxe4 Rd8 29.h4 Rd7 30.Rb2 Rd4 31.Qe2 Rd8 32.Rb1 Qd7 33.Qe4 Qe7 3. (0.43): 16...Bxd4 17.Bg5 c5 18.Nxg6 fxg6 19.Rxe4 h6 20.Be3 Nf5 21.Bxd4 Nxd4 22.b4 b6 23.e6 Qe7 24.Bd7 Kh7 25.Rb1 Rad8 26.Qe1 Nc2 27.Qe2 Nd4 28.Qg4 Rf5 29.bxc5 Rg5 30.Qf4 bxc5 31.Rb2 Rf8 32.Qc1 Rgf5 33.Qb1 Rg5 34.Kh1 Rgf5 35.Qe1 R8f6 |
|
Sep-02-14
 | | naresb: <kwid: <YetAnotherAmateur:><but there is also the distinct possibility that our opponent <flubs a move> that tilts the balance in our favor>
That's the spirit! Unfortunately for us such wishful thinking has been made part of our game strategy which at this level and especially with engine assistance has an almost impossible likelihood to be realized.> I think everyone would completely agree that 'wishful thinking' is 'human nature', but in the competitive world it has zero place. Coming to our game, in any correspondence chess game with engine assistance with three days of time, a game with a definite result to occur is a 'Wishful thinking'. I am relatively new to this game of chess, I haven't seen statistics of other cc games played so far. But in order to create winning possibilities against a superior opponent backed with engine assistance, efforts (in the form of complexities) need to be given to create such possibilities. |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | DPLeo: <naresb: ... Coming to our game, in any correspondence chess game with engine assistance with three days of time, a game with a definite result to occur is a 'Wishful thinking'. ...> Our last 2 games had a definite result.
Chessgames Challenge: S Williams vs The World, 2013
Chessgames Challenge: The World vs Akobian, 2012
Enjoy! |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | Tiggler: <DPLeo>: <Our last 2 games had a definite result.> In both games our opponent played weak moves, more than one in the last game. And we had the thrill of knowing they were weak as soon as they were played. All GMs play weak moves, but 2700+ GMs probably do so less frequently, and our present opponent has yet to play one. But he may. If he does, we will probably know it before he does. Engine assistance is a factor, but a GM is more likely to think he knows better than the engines than we are. Ideas are their Achilles' heel. |
|
Sep-02-14
| | naresb: <DPLeo: <naresb: ... Coming to our game, in any correspondence chess game with engine assistance with three days of time, a game with a definite result to occur is a 'Wishful thinking'. ...>
Our last 2 games had a definite result.
Chessgames Challenge: S Williams vs The World, 2013
Chessgames Challenge: The World vs Akobian, 2012
Enjoy!>
Whether any statistical data of cc games played is maintained?, if yes what are the results for the C65 line played in this game? |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | Albums Dummyflap: extreme likelihood of ...Qxd4 methinks... should Black round up e5 pawn it should draw easily |
|
Sep-02-14
| | naresb: If GMARK opts for 16... Qxd4 and responds 18. Bg5 (some of us might disagree with the engine move, What's the rational behind exchange of our Bishop with opponent's Knight?) with 18... Nc6, I would opt for a draw. |
|
| Sep-02-14 | | Tiggler: < naresb: If GMARK opts for 16... Qxd4 and responds 18. Bg5 (some of us might disagree with the engine move, What's the rational behind exchange of our Bishop with opponent's Knight?) with 18... Nc6, I would opt for a draw> Do us all a favor and read the analysis and the AT, if you don't mind, before you dare to vote or offer draw. |
|
Sep-03-14
 | | AylerKupp: <<naresb> If GMARK opts for 16... Qxd4 and responds 18. Bg5 (some of us might disagree with the engine move, What's the rational behind exchange of our Bishop with opponent's Knight?) with 18... Nc6> Well, after 16...Qxd4 17.Qxd4 Bxd4 18.Bg5 Nc6 we are not <obligated> to play 19.Bxc6, either immediately or at any time afterwards. The motivation to do so is to saddle our opponent with doubled isolated c-pawns on a semi-open file, with the likelihood that we would be able to win one of them and so restore material equality. And, unlike the lines with 19.Nxg6 fxg6 20.Rxe4 Bxf2+ 21.Kh2 Rf5 22.Bd2 Rd8 23.Bb4 Nxb4 24.axb4, we don't have a BOC situation which would increase our winning chances if we retain the initiative and can work up an attack against his king or increase his drawing chances if we are not able to do so. Neither avoiding the exchange of our LSB for his knight by Bxc6 nor encouraging the exchange of our DSB for his knight by Bd2-b4, ...Nxb4 ensures a decisive result but I think that they increase our winning chances. |
|
Sep-03-14
| | naresb: <Tiggler><AylerKupp> Noted, will go through in detail. |
|
| Sep-03-14 | | optimal play: <16...Qxd4> 17.Qxd4 Bxd4 18.Bg5 Nc6 19.Nxg6 fxg6 20.Rxe4 Bxf2+ 21.Kh2 Rf5 22.Bxc6 bxc6 23.Be3 Bxe3 24.Rxe3 Rb8 25.b3 Kf7 26.Rc1 Rb6 27.Rec3 Rxe5 28.Rxc6 Rxc6 29.Rxc6 Re7 30.b4 =
click for larger view |
|
| Sep-03-14 | | kb2ct: Don't be surprised if he declines the pawn sac by playing Nf5. Why would he play into a long prepared variation??
:0) |
|
| Sep-03-14 | | YetAnotherAmateur: To clarify my point: The reason we have to hope for our opponent to flub (and do our best to make that as likely as possible) is that right now all our analysis work is saying very strongly that this will be a draw if he plays correctly. Yes, it's wishful thinking, but it's the only chance for a win we have. |
|
| Sep-03-14 | | ChemMac: <AylerKupp: JustWoodShifting> <But DPLeo's line includes 22.Bxc6 (your Houdini 3 line does not – yet) which throws away our advantage of having the 2 bishops in return for giving Black doubled isolated c-pawns in the semi-open c-file. It is likely that we would be able to win one of them, and possibly both of them, but all the dynamism will have gone out of our position and with it our likely winning chances.>
I do apologise for giving my own analysis without benefit of machine imprimatur. However, on principle I have to agree. After 16. Nh4 Qxd4 17. Qxd4 Bxd4 18. Bg5 Nc6 19. Nxg6 fxg6 20. Rxe4 Bxf2+ 21. Kh2 Rf5 22. Bd2 Rd8 23.Bc3 Bb6 then 24.e6 and not BXc6. Black's moves 22 and 23 are of course not forced in either order, but seem likely. Unfortunately g4 isn't (yet) possible. 
click for larger view
One Black reply is 24……Bc5. Then 26.Rae8, to prevent B->d6-e5 and threatening e7 followed by Bb3, Be6, and Bd7. So 26...Be7 .....? Unclear to me now. Should White play 23 b4 to stop Bc5, and then e6? |
|
| Sep-03-14 | | morfishine: <kb2ct> Thats what I was thinking and wondering if 16...Nf5 17.Nxg6 followed by 18.d5 is playable? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 417 OF 707 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
