Oct-03-03
 | | patzer2: Nielson wins this theoretical battle in the king's Gambit Accepted(Kieseritzky Gambit, Green Vatiation), demonstrating a good plan for black with 5. ..d6. Nielson also demonstrates excellent middle game and end game technique in decisively exploiting a slight white king-side pawn weakeness. |
|
| Oct-03-03 | | drukenknight: are you sure this is a theoretically won game? I am trying to visualize where the black K will be when the pawns go off the board. Obviously if he is able to secure a pawn he will win. What b4 cxb3 Kxb3? if there is a white K on b3 and white pawns on a3 and c3 and black pawns are along the fifth rank then...? |
|
| Oct-03-03 | | Cyphelium: drukenk> It is very easily won. The kings are in opposition and white will run out of moves first, letting the black king in. See: 47.b4 a6 and now any king move will allow black to pick up the pawn on c3. For example: 48. Kc1 Kd3 49. Kb2 Kd2 and now the desperate 50. a4 certainly won't help, 50. -bxa4 51. Ka3 Kxc3 52. Kxa4 Kd2 and the c-pawn will queen. Actually, black wins in your variation too, 47. b4 cxb3 48. Kxb3 c5 49. a4 a6 50. axb5 axb5 51. c4 b4 or instead 49. c4 a6 50. cxb5 axb5 51. a4 bxa4+ 52. Kxa4 Kd3 53. Kb3 c4+ 54. Kb2 Kd2 and c3-c2-c1Q. |
|
| Oct-03-03 | | drukenknight: you keep playing white pawns to the 4th rank, keep them on the 3rd rank and see if that helps. It is too late for me (5 AM) to look at this now, it's just a thought I had on the fly, maybe it's insane. |
|
| Oct-03-03 | | Cyphelium: If you keep the pawns on the third, you'll have to move the king, right? So after 47. b4 cxb3+ 48. Kxb3 c5 you have two moves: If 49. Kb2, then 49.- Kd3 and there is now way to hold on to the c-pawn. If 49. Kc2, black just plays 49.- c4 and then the c3-pawn will fall in the same way as in the variations in my last post. |
|
| Oct-03-03 | | drukenknight: Cyph. you are right, I will have to call you on my endgame questions. Okay so where is the big mistake? It seems to me that white has potential passed pawn on the k side and black on the q side. If the rooks stay on the board then the Kings need to blockade. Blacks K is ideally placed to blockade but white gets his lost on the k side. on or about move 20. what do you think? |
|
| Oct-05-03 | | Cyphelium: drukenk> Yeah, around move 20 it's apparent that black has an advantage due to more active rooks. I don't now the theory of this line, but I have my doubts about white's opening play. Already after 9. d4 I think I prefer black, maybe even before that. |
|
| Oct-07-03 | | drukenknight: Hello Cyph, I'm back: I doubt the game is lost on move 9. At move 20 the game looks quite balanced and actually looks simple, but it's deceptive w/ just R and pawns. I am looking at blacks K and thinking how can blacks K just sit in the middle but white feels he has to move his K around? Can white gain an advantage this way? if "yes" okay, then but if the answer is "no" then it seems that white has lost tempo. The black R is going to go Rd8 in order to divide the board in half. White has more pawns on K side and black has more pawns on q side. Blacks K is ideally positioned in order to stop passed pawn. If two Rooks come off the board, then the black K will have to blockade, hes in good position, if all 4 rooks come off, then he would have to be able to grab the passer before white can come cover. Well hard to fully analyze all that but whatever, black's K is in the best place to stop a passed pawn. When white's K wanders over, he cannot come back to stop a passed pawn on the q side. This will be a problem, I think the only way to offset that problem would be for white to get his passed pawn first and then create counterplay, because in the long run blacks passed pawn on the q side will be quite a problem. So I was thinking 20 c4 Rd8+ 21 Kc2 in order to bring the K over to where it can defend. Black may get connected Rs on the 6th rank, but white can double his on an open file, so maybe... |
|
| Oct-11-03 | | Cyphelium: I don't understand your last post. After 20. c4, Rd8 isn't check. I guess you mean 21. c4 etc? In that case your plan won't work because of 21. c4 Rd8+ 22. Kc2 Re4 losing a pawn. |
|
| Oct-11-03 | | drukenknight: 21 c4 yes correct.
SO he loses a pawn? So what? didja notice the whole rest of the game he's down a pawn? |
|
| Oct-14-03 | | Cyphelium: >SO he loses a pawn? So what?
That's why white loses this game. He loses a pawn and goes down in the endgame, as you very often do when you are down a pawn for no compensation. >didja notice the whole rest of the game he's down a pawn? I did notice this and that's actually my point. If we can't find a defence around move 20 that enables him to hold on to the pawn, then improvements have to be found earlier. |
|
| Oct-14-03 | | drukenknight: No, nothing I have ever seen compells me to believe that if you drop a pawn you will lose. If the position is well balanced and you lose material, then making attacks on the K should save the game. Not every position is balanced, of course, sometimes a serious mistake was made many moves before. but most of these games we see here are well played and much of the time, the position is quite well balanced. So no I dont agree that we need to find a way to hold the pawn on move 20. In the last year or so I have had to change my theories, a lot of my thinking now revolves around end games and positions that are won and positions that are drawn. Look at this game on about move 38 or 39. 3 pawns can hold off 4 if the K acts as a blockader. THis is why the blockading strategy is so important you can save a game, even down a pawn. Again having given more thoughts on endgames, the blockading K works when there are still Rooks on the board. THre are many positions you can create with K/R/pawn vs K/R that are saved. Okay now look at board on move 41 after Rooks are gone, its probably lost. The K cannot effectively blockade when the Rooks are gone, unless it is a rook pawn, the loss of pawn is crucial. Okay so black was smart to trade off Rooks he knows the endgame. So what I am contending is that if white can get the K to the q-side to act as blockader he can save the game. As I said above, whites mistake was strategic, his K is on the wrong side of the board. I think it is that simple, but again maybe I am wrong, so.... You have to first admit that there are plenty of games with unequal pawns that are still draw. Agreed? |
|
| Oct-15-03 | | Cyphelium: > You have to first admit that there are plenty of games with unequal pawns that are still draw. Of course I agree (how could I not?), but in my humble opinion that's beside the point. See below. >No, nothing I have ever seen compells me to believe that if you drop a pawn you will lose. I didn't say that. I said, as you can read above, that VERY OFTEN you lose games when you are down a pawn for NO COMPENSATION. From the general to the particular. I was actually primarily discussing this game. After move 20, white is down a pawn and fails to find sufficient compensation for it. So he loses the game. This game. That was my point. Of course I don't believe that you are bond to lose any game just because you are pawn down. >So no I dont agree that we need to find a way to hold the pawn on move 20. Maybe not. I depends on why we are doing this analysis. If I understand you correctly, you don't think we need find earlier improvements because maybe white can save the draw after move 20 in spite of being a pawn down. But if white faces this uphill struggle, maybe saving the game and fighting for a draw etc, then surely something must be wrong with white's play? And to now what, we must go back earlier? Also, I note that my definition of "blockade" must be very different from yours, but I'll let it rest... =) |
|
| Oct-17-03 | | drukenknight: you can still save the game even w/o compensation as long as the K can blockade, in a k/R/p vs K/R endgame. Agreed? Does he really need compensation to do that? If the K can blockade then that is all the compensation he need.s all I'm saying is that if whites K remains on the q side he should be able to draw. I'm not saying he can save it after move 20, but on move 20. by getting the K to the q side after c4. I've already started a line in the 10/7 post. |
|
| Oct-19-03 | | Cyphelium: If you refer to 21. c4 Rd8+ 22. Kc2 then I still want to play 22.- Rd4, as I said in an earlir post. After, say, 23. b3 Rxe4 white is down a pawn and I don't see any blockade. This looks losing for white. But perhaps you can convince me otherwise? >Agreed? Does he really need compensation to do that? If the K can blockade then that is all the compensation he need.s You have already answered your own question. |
|
| Oct-19-03 | | drukenknight: Umm, you havent clarified my question, you've made it more muddled! if I can blockade successfully is that compensation? Is that enuf? Serious question... Okay, now we are back to our game and it is my move, yes? WHy are you confusing me with fantasy white moves? I can make my own mistakes,thank you. |
|
| Oct-19-03 | | Cyphelium: druken> if I can blockade successfully is that compensation? Is that enuf? Serious question It is enough, but you have to show me how it looks before I'm convinced. >Okay, now we are back to our game and it is my move, yes? WHy are you confusing me with fantasy white moves? If I haven't understood your intention correctly, I'm sorry. Then you have to give me a variation to show me what you mean. >I can make my own mistakes,thank you.
I'm sure you can. ;-)
OK, I'm off to a league match now, so this will have to continue later. |
|
| Apr-04-08 | | PolishPentium: 28 Kg2 seems helpful for White...
|
|
| Jun-29-08 | | castelao2: Great game of Nielsen who induced a better ending with Bc3 and Nc5, the natural 21.Ke2 could be a mistake, I prefer 21.Kc1, and then Re1, deffending e4. The last chance could be 31.Kg3 lefting the rook in f2 to protect the second line, so black has clear adventage |
|
|
|
|
Kibitzing
