chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Manuel Rivas Pastor vs Lev Psakhis
Minsk (1982), Minsk URS, May-??
Indian Game: Anti-Nimzo-Indian (E10)  ·  1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 2 more Rivas Pastor/Psakhis games
sac: 16.Rxc6 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You should register a free account to activate some of Chessgames.com's coolest and most powerful features.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
Oct-02-08  ToTheDeath: Well played, congrats to Sr. Rivas-Pastor- the first player to stand up to FIDE's ridiculous doping tests.
Oct-02-08  pacorrum: Good game!
Oct-02-08  Shams: there's no way a clean player could maneuver his knights like that. this guy must be on EPO or HGH.
Jul-06-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  patzer2: Because (31. ?) was a difficult Saturday puzzle, I figured the first move had to involve a combination (a.k.a. sham) sacrifice.

So my pick was 31. Rxc6! Qxc6 32. Ne5 Qc8 33. Qa4+ +- (+2.76 @ 18 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 18...?).

Don't know if my 33. Qa4+ +- is as strong as the game move 33. Bb5+ +- (+2.90 @ 19 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 18...?), but I'm content I was on the right track.

The winning idea is obviously to use the exchange sacrifice to attack and weaken the King position before Black has a chance to castle.

P.S.: So where did things start to go wrong for Black?

Black's game took a turn for the worse with 13...N5f6? 14. Rc1 ± (+0.80 @ 21 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 14...?).

Instead, 13...Bxg5 = (+0.10 @ 19 ply, Stockfish 9 analysis of move 13...?) would've kept it level.

Jul-06-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  al wazir: I got the obvious first two moves, but from there on I was clueless. I should have realized that black would play 17...Qc8 (Qb7 isn't safe because of Bb5+ and Bc6), but I didn't.
Jul-06-19  mel gibson: I saw that Rook sac but it looked too risky.

Stockfish 10 agrees with the text move:

16. Rxc6

(16. Rxc6 (♖c1xc6 ♕b7xc6 ♘f3-e5 ♕c6-d5
♕d1-a4+ ♔e8-f8 ♘e4-g5 ♖a8-c8 ♘g5xf7 ♘f6-g4 ♘f7xh8 ♘g4xe5 ♗d3xh7 ♖c8-c4 ♕a4xa7 ♘e5-d7 ♕a7-a6 ♗e7-f6 ♘h8-g6+ ♔f8-f7 b2-b3 ♖c4-c7 ♕a6-e2 ♘d7-f8 ♘g6-f4 ♕d5xd4 ♕e2-h5+ ♔f7-e7 ♗h7-g8 ♕d4-c5 ♕h5-f7+ ♔e7-d8 ♘f4xe6+ ♘f8xe6 ♕f7xe6 ♗f6-d4 ♕e6-g4 ♕c5-e5 g2-g3 g7-g5 ♗g8-e6 ♖c7-c6 ♗e6-f5 ♖c6-f6 ♖f1-d1 ♔d8-c7 ♖d1xd4 ♕e5xf5 ♕g4-e2 ♖f6-f8 a3-a4 ♕f5-f3 ♕e2-d2 ♕f3xb3 ♖d4-d3 ♕b3-e6) +4.01/41 395)

Score for White +4.01 depth 41.

When Black resigns Stockfish 10 says that:

29... Ra7

(♖a8-a7 ♘f4xg6 ♗e7-d8 ♕f3-d3
♔h7-g8 d4-d5 ♖a7-g7 d5-d6 ♕c8-c5 ♘g6-f4 ♕c5-b5 ♕d3xb5 a6xb5 ♘f4-e6 ♘f6-e8 d6-d7 ♘e8-f6 ♘e6xg7 ♔g8xg7 ♘e5-c6 ♗d8-c7 d7-d8♗ ♗c7xd8 ♘c6xd8 b5-b4 ♖e1-e7+ ♔g7-g8 a3xb4 h6-h5 ♘d8-c6 h5-h4 ♖e7-e6 ♔g8-g7 ♖e6-d6 ♘f6-e8 ♖d6-d4 ♔g7-g6 ♘c6-e5+ ♔g6-g5 ♘e5-d7 ♘e8-g7 ♖d4-d6 b6-b5 ♖d6-d5+ ♔g5-g6 ♖d5xb5 ♔g6-f7) -10.62/34 85

score for Black -10.62 depth 34

Jul-06-19  clement41: Exemplary display of light-square play!
From move 15 on, every white move attacks light squares, which is logical, white being stronger than Black on that complex. An instructive example to use as a reference game for such attacks.
Jul-06-19  saturn2: I saw the first 3 moves. At the cost of an exchange white spoils the castling. But it seemed a rather speculative sacrifice to me without a concrete win.
Jul-06-19  Diana Fernanda: Is better 21. Knight x h7, after of changer of horse knight d7 And knight b6 win the Queen black.
Jul-06-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  patzer2: <ToTheDeath: Well played, congrats to Sr. Rivas-Pastor- the first player to stand up to FIDE's ridiculous doping tests.>

I was vaguely aware FIDE was using anti-doping tests for top players (primarily men over 2700 and women over 2500 in select FIDE events), but until I read your post I wasn't aware FIDE had actually penalizing any players for refusing to take an anti-doping test.

So I did a little internet search to locate the FIDE anti-doping rules to educate myself a bit on the subject.

If my search was accurate, FIDE's latest version of their anti-doping rules (2018 update) are at https://www.fide.com/fide/fide-anti...

Here are a few select quotes from the FIDE anti-doping rules:

<The following constitute anti-doping rule violations:

2.1 Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Player’s Sample

2.1.1 It is each Player’s personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters his or her body.?>

<ARTICLE 22 ADDITIONAL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PLAYERS AND OTHER PERSONS

22.1 Roles and Responsibilities of Players

22.1.1 To be knowledgeable of and comply with these Anti-Doping Rules.

22.1.2 To be available for Sample collection at all times.>

The 2018 FIDE rules do not contain the list of prohibited substances, but they do have a link to the 2018 list of banned substances. The current 2019 list of prohibited substances, maintained by the world anti-doping agency (WADA), can be found at: https://www.wada-ama.org/sites/defa...

The substances FIDE is most concerned with according to their guidelines:

<The most relevant banned substances for chess are:

• Amphetamines – e.g. Adderall, Ritalin

• Ephedrine and Methylephedrine – Prohibited by WADA when its concentration in urine is greater than 10 micrograms per milliliter

• Pseudoephedrine is prohibited when its concentration in urine is greater than

150 micrograms per milliliter
• Modafinil>

Although caffene is not on the "prohibited substance" list, the FIDE rules are concerned with the amount of it in player urine samples. The specific quote about caffene from the FIDE rules states:

<Substances not present on the Prohibited List but represented in the Monitoring Program:

• Caffeine – Included in WADA Monitoring Program and relevant for incompetition testing only. Any urine test reading of less than 12 micrograms per milliliter poses no problem.>

Does this mean FIDE thinks players consuming too much caffene (i.e. above 12 micro grams per milliliter in a urine sample) poses a problem? If so, why?

Jul-06-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  agb2002: White has a bishop and a knight for the bishop pair.

Black threatens B(N)xe4.

The bishop on c6 also protects the diagonal a4-e8. This suggests 16.Rxc6 Qxc6 17.Ne5 followed by 18.Bb5+ (or 18.Qa4+ in the case of 17... Qd5) and 19.Ng5.

That's all I can do today.

Jul-06-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  patzer2: According to https://en.chessbase.com/post/prove..., FIDE initially instituted drug testing for top players in 1999 in the hopes of making Chess an olympic sport.

That obviously hasn't happened. So the initial rationale for anti-doping policies by FIDE seems to have fallen by the wayside.

However, a 2017 study at https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien..., led by Dr. Klaus Lieb, a professor of psychiatry and psychotherapy at the University of Mainz in Germany and cited in this article indicates certain substances, which FIDE is concerned about, do improve chess performance. However, those same substances increased thinking time which increase the potential for losses on time.

When losses on time were thrown out of the results, the study found the substances FIDE is now particularly concerned with regulating do significantly improve Chess performance. As the 2017 ChessBase article states in summarizing the study:

<When adjusting for an unexpected side-effect of the drugs on decision-making behavior – paradoxically, that they made the subjects play slower — the study found modafinil improved the players’ performances by an average of 15 percent, methylphenidate by 13 percent, and caffeine by around 9 percent.>

P.S.: While I understand FIDE's concern with trying to create a fair playing field in reducing the effects of the use of these substances on chess performance, I'm not convinced mandatory anti-doping testing for top chess players is the answer to the problem. Too often bureaucratic rule makers create more problems than they solve. This may be a case in point.

Jul-06-19  cormier:


click for larger view

Analysis by Houdini 4 d 22 dpa done

1. = (0.09): 13...Bxg5 14.Nfxg5 h6 15.Nf3 f5 16.Ned2 Nf4 17.Qc2 Nxd3 18.Qxd3 0-0 19.Rac1 Qb7 20.Nh4 Nf6 21.Ng6 Bxg2 22.Rfe1 Rfc8 23.f3 Rxc1 24.Rxc1 Nd5 25.Qe2 Bh3 26.Qxe6+ Kh7 27.Rc6 Rd8 28.Ne5 Ne7 29.Rd6 Rxd6 30.Qxd6

2. + / = (0.31): 13...h6 14.Bxe7 Nxe7 15.Rc1 0-0 16.Bb5 Rac8 17.Bxc6 Nxc6 18.Qa4 Ndb8 19.Rc3 Qf4 20.Re1 Rfd8 21.g3 Qf5 22.Kg2 Qd5 23.Ned2 Rf8 24.Qc4 Ne7 25.Qxd5 Nxd5 26.Rcc1 Nd7 27.Ne5 Nxe5 28.dxe5

Jul-06-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: I have no clue what was going on most of this line.
Jul-06-19  victory1: 25 n-d7 should win
Jul-06-19  jes47: As patzer2 pointed out, the first two moves are pretty clear and then 33 Qa4 is also a decisive win. Puzzles should have clear and unique winning lines. This one doesn't.
Jul-07-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: There has been a distinct tendency of late to feature POTD with duals, or even more ways to close the show.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
16.? (July 6, 2-10)
from Saturday Puzzles, 2018-2022 by Phony Benoni
Great Positional Sacrifices
by Easy Point
0ZeR0's Favorite Games Volume 14
by 0ZeR0
16.? (Saturday, July 6)
from POTD Indian (Not King's, queen ,Bogo or Nimzo) 3 by takchess
16.? (Saturday, July 6)
from Puzzle of the Day 2019 by Phony Benoni

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC