|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-16-14 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: Black can just play 25 ... Rxc5 to be up a pawn, with White not able to continue actively due to the e-file pin. So our job is to beat that alternative. I'm sure most of us saw the idea of Bxf3 and Qxh3+, but getting the move order right is tricky. I have a try that I think works: 25 ... Bxf3
25 gxf3 Qxh3+
26 Kg1 Re6
If the White knight moves, Black captures the e1 rook with check, for a compelling material advantage. (For the same reason, White can't refuse the bishop.) And I don't see any other reasonable try to prevent Rg6+/Rg2+/Qh1# |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: OK. I think I got that one rather right. :) |
|
Jan-16-14
 | | FSR: Surely 25...Bxf3, and if 26.gxf3, 26...Qxh3+ 27.Kg1 R8e6, rolls White. |
|
Jan-16-14
| | FSR: Maybe Doctor Who can use the TARDIS to set up a tournament among Johannes Hendrik Otto van den Bosch, Jana Malypetrova Hartston Miles Bellin, and Lionel Adalbert Bagration Felix Kieseritsky. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | gofer: Pretty easy!
<25 ... Bxf3>
26 gxf3 Qxh3+
27 Kg1 R8e6 mating
26 Kg1/Kh2 Bxe2 
26 Ng3?/Nd4 Qxh3+
27 Kg1 Rxe1+
28 Qxe1 Rxe1+ (Kf2 Qxg3#/Qg3#)
29 Kf2 Qxg3#/Qg3#
<26 Nf4 Rxe1+>
<27 Kh2 Re2!>
<28 Nxe6 Rxe6>
<29 Qc1/Qc3 Rxb2>
<30 Qxc2 Re2!>
<31 Q anywhere Rxg2+> <32 Kh1 R to any square where it can 'see' the queen +> At any point white can trade off into a losing end game a bishop
down, but the continuation is "valid" otherwise...
~~~
Yep. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | morfishine: <25...Bxf3> wrecking White's position threatening 26...Qxh3+ <26.gxf3> Obviously, the Knight can't move due to 26...Rxe1+; but it is holding the White position together controlling g3 <26...Qxh3+ 27.Kg1 R8e6> White has no good defense to 28...Rg6+ *****
PM: I didn't see the only try for White 28.Rb4; the sharp, conclusive point here is after 28...Qxf3, Black has two threats: 29...Rg6+ and a triple-attack on the Knight; In other words, after 28...Qxf3, 29.Re4 is forced (the amusing reality is White must block the e-file now instead of the g-file, but this allows 29...Rg6+) *****
<FSR> Very funny! I can just see the tournament director handing out the awards at the end of the tournament but unable to read the winner's name: "And winner of the champions division, from the Czech Republic, Jana...Jana...Jana...Oh, hell, this guy standing to my right...." ***** |
|
Jan-16-14
| | FSR: <morfishine> Jana is a gal. She got all those surnames by marrying half of the leading male players in England. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | Doniez: <FSR> too funny!!! Lol!!! Anyway good day for me today, I got the right moves. |
|
Jan-16-14
| | FSR: Her spouses were the 1973 and 1975 (Hartston), 1979 (Bellin), and 1982 British Champions. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | morfishine: <FSR> Jana's a gal? That makes it even worse! |
|
Jan-16-14
 | | offramp: <FSR: Her spouses were the 1973 and 1975 (Hartston), 1979 (Bellin), and 1982 British Champions.> What was 2nd prize? |
|
Jan-16-14
 | | Willem Wallekers: They omitted his title: Johannes Hendrik Otto <graaf (count)> van den Bosch |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | zb2cr: I missed this one, got lost is trying to work out the variations, especially if White declines with 26. Kg1. |
|
Jan-16-14
 | | Stonehenge: Played only four days before Olland died of a heart attack. |
|
Jan-16-14
 | | scormus: <zb2cr: .... if White declines with 26. Kg1> always a good idea to check what goes down if the piece is declined, as I've learnt to my cost playing OTB. Here B has an easily winning reply. In fact the whole game is rather 1-sided. I always knew there was a good reason not to play exd5 against the French. Or the Bosch for that matter ;) |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | DIO: Back in 2009 at the Nashville Superfinals, I watched a lecture from IM Larry Evans who said: "If in a given position I can sacrifice a light piece and get 3 pawns back PLUS an attack, I always go for it." I guess his advice perfectly applies here :-) |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | lost in space: Saw the solution directly and quickly |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | kevin86: I saw this one,too. Black sacs a piece to kill white pawn structure and expose the king to black's heavy piece attack. White is soon crushed. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | WoodPushkin: Greetings
25...Bxf3! is the beginning of the end of a poorly played game by White. 27...<Qxf3> is the better move then the e6♖ lift. It eliminates Whites Rook lift and should signal instant resignation. However one can fight on in a lost RR +6 pawns v RN + 2 pawns with <28.Qf5!> Also white could fight on w/...
<Analysis
28.Rf1 Rg6+ 29.Kf2 Qh2+ 30.Ke1 Rg1 31.Qc3>
Black to move 31..?
click for larger viewAnalysis, Calculation, Execution: Study!!! |
|
Jan-16-14
 | | Penguincw: I got the bishop sac, but the rook lift I did not. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | Whitehat1963: Got the first two moves for black, but not the third. And yet, I could see that the black queen would inevitably take the pawn on f3 and that a rook would have to come into play (obviously). I wonder if I would have seen it over the board. Probably not. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | Patriot: Material is even. Black must have a powerful edge here, with control over the e-file and the bishop aiming thru to h1. The bar for black should be set to a minimum of "winning". 25...Bxf3
26.gxf3 Qxh3+ 27.Kg1 Qxf3  White is pretty well tied down, and the threat of 28...h3 looks to be too much. 26.Nd4 Qxh3+ 27.Kg1 Rxe1+ 28.Qxe1 Rxe1+ 29.Kf2 Qg3#
26.Nf4 Rxe1+ 27.Kh2 I'm not sure what's next here but black should easily win this. 26.Kg1 Bxe2 No contest. |
|
Jan-16-14
| | FSR: Houdini 3 says that the game continuation <27...R8e6> is only Black's third best move! Best play for both sides is then 28.Rf1 Rg6+ 29.Kf2 Qh2+ 30.Ke1 Rg1 31.Qc3 h3 32.Qd4 Rxf1+ 33.Kxf1 Qg2+ 34.Ke1 h2 35.Qxe5 h1(Q)+ 36.Kd2 Qf2 (-5.28). Looking at the position after move 27, Houdini at first gives <27...Qxf3> as best (yes, you naysayers were right!). White's best response is the abject 28.Qf4 Qxf4 29.Nxf4 Rxe1+ with a a dead-won ending for Black (-8.01). Houdini at first gives the surprising <27...R5e6> as Black's second-best move. But if you follow the lines a few moves deeper, it gives as best play 28.Qg5 (giving up the queen to slow down Black's attack) Rg6 29.Qxg6 fxg6 30.Rf1 Re3. Houdini assesses that as -8.76, a hair better than 27...Qxf3, thus making 27...R5e6! Black's best move. But the difference between -8.76 and -8.01 isn't a meaningful one. And the ending that arises after 27...Qxf3 28.Qf4 is really hard for Black to screw up, so I'd go with that line myself. If White instead tries to respond to 27...R5e6 as in the 27...R8e6 line with 28.Rf1, Black deviates with 28...Rg6+ 29.Kf2 Qg2+! (instead of 29...Qh2+) 30.Ke1 h3 and White is toast, e.g. 31.Rf2 Qh1+ 32.Rf1 Rg1 33.Rxg1 Qxg1#. But wait, you say. Why can't Black play the same way after 27...R85e6? That is, after 27...R85e6 28.Rf1, Black can still play 28...Rg6+ 29.Kf2 Qg2+ (rather than 29...Qh2+). But this line doesn't work as well because, with Black's rook loose on e5, White can play 30.Ke1 h3 31.f4 attacking the rook. Got all that? Very confusing, I realize. But the bottom line is that 27...R5e6! and 27...Qxf3! are about equally murderous, and both are better than 27...R8e6. All three moves give Black an easily decisive advantage, but van den Bosch's move is the least crushing of the three. |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | grelf: Thanks for posting Houdini's thoughts <FSR>. Now I don't feel so bad about missing <27...R8e6> with the Houdini analysis vindicating my brutish pawn-gobbling solution <27...Qxf3>... |
|
| Jan-16-14 | | MountainMatt: Heh, I didn't even think about 27...R8e6, just saw that 27...Qxf3 was surely about to win a piece, and to my limited mind, that was good enough. And Houdini agrees?!? Miraculous! |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 25...Bxf3