|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-07-09 | | MaxxLange: I think <Once> is probably pretty much right on about White's thought process. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | Hevelius: Even I, a really mediocre player yet avid chess fancier, have been able to solve this puzzle in a few seconds. Besides... this site is pure gold, really. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | muralman: These chess puzzles have really sharpened my chess strategy sense. Now, instead of going with first impression, I will calmly look at all pieces on the board and ascertain their relationship to each other. This time, the trapped king was obviously vulnerable. It was easy to see the knight being moved to G3, with the free rook sealing the deal. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | kurtrichards: Why did Rott move 21.Rg1? Is he kind of crazy or something? |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | YouRang: For a moment I got hung up on trying to deflect the queen so that ...Nf2# would work, but I finally woke up and saw that ...Ng3+ did the job thanks to ...Rh6+ ~#. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | kevin86: Mate in three! 21...♘g3+ 22 hxg3 ♖h6+ 23 ♗h5 ♖xh5#. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | YouRang: <chrisowen: Rott's play in the end is garbage.> I suppose we could come up with a pun for this game, but where is the challenge? |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | VincentL: This Monday puzzle is very similar to two others during the last few weeks. The solution is:
21.... Ng3+ 22. hxg3 Rh6+ 23. Bh5 Rxh5 mate |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | GreenFacedPatzer: Ah, Mondays...
Actually, the first thing I considered was that 21 ... Nf2+ was almost a smothered mate, if only white's Queen wasn't guarding that square. So, was there any way to block the queen's defense of f2? Oh, yes, we could play 21 ... Nbd6, then white either has to give up his queen or get checkmated. So I was pretty pleased with myself, (for about 10 seconds) until I saw that white could just respond 22 Bxe4, neutering any attack and probably winning a piece. At that point I was reminded of a line from the Big Lebowski: "No, that f*'s up our plan. They can't do that, dude." "Oh really? Well, why don't you call them up and explain that to them?" In light of that, I figured the mate in 3 starting with 21 ... Ng3+ was really the better plan. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | Patriot: <<kurtrichards>: Why did Rott move 21.Rg1? Is he kind of crazy or something?> I agree--that's a strange move, stalemating his own king. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | CHESSTTCAMPS: <Patriot: <<kurtrichards>: Why did Rott move 21.Rg1? Is he kind of crazy or something?>
I agree--that's a strange move, stalemating his own king.> He was probably intending g4, to get some play on a semi-open g-file. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | lost in space: I took me one moment...two moments...three moments...a decade.... to detect that there is no way to make Nf2# work. Shortly before giving up I saw Ng3+ and so I still love Mondays. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | triangulation: Solving this puzzle reminded me today of how difficult it can be to solve the same thing over the table. Initially I started looking for the solution thinking it was Sunday and insane level. Couldn't find anything for 15 minutes. However, then I saw today was the easy level and almost immediately within seconds got the solution as Ng3+ followed by hxg3 and Rh6# Just shows that if you know there exists a solution you are much more likely to find it, especially so if you know it is well within your capabilities. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | ruzon: <YetAnotherAmateur: As far as white's play is concerned, I can't say I like 13. f4 or the whole sequence from 19-21 which puts white in such a bad position in the first place.> No, I think the problem was 15.♗f3?, which takes away the Knight's only safe retreat square. Maybe at that point the exchange is better? Here's an interesting line: 15...f6 16.♗xe4 dxe4 17.♕xe4 fxe5!? 18.♕xa8 ♗b7 19.♕xa7 ♖a8 20.♕xa8+ ♗xa8 21.fxe5 
click for larger view |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | WhiteRook48: 21...Ng3+ how easy can you get?? |
|
Dec-07-09
 | | Domdaniel: <Maczynskipratten> - <the look of a 2200 gradually positionally crushing an 1800>
I've been on the losing side of a few of those recently, as I returned to competitive chess after a 15-year absence and promptly dropped 300 ELO points from my old rating. But few of the 1800s I've met played this badly: I'd say a 2000 polishing off a 1200. 21.Rg1 qualifies as a helpmate or selfmate, as in puzzles where you have to find a way to lose. It's an astonishingly bad move - far worse than a mere blunder. And worth about five question marks - to think he had the option of Bxe4 and rejected it. I suppose a young player might not be familiar with the various mating patterns set up by the Kh1/Rg1/Pg2/Ph2 configuration -- the basic smothered mate ...Nf2#; the pinned smother, ...Ng3# with R or Q on the h-file; and its logical extension, as here -- Ng3+ followed by a 'back rank' style mate on the file. These should be immediately obvious to anyone with some experience and a rating of, say 15-1600. White's inexperience, btw, also shows in the opening, playing Qc2 and a3 but then recapturing on c3 with the pawn. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | MathMage: 13.f4? doesn't do anything but make a big fat hole on e4. As we saw in the game. 13.a4 gives the dark-squared Bishop play, particularly after Black's inevitable ...c5-c4. <ruzon> Why not immediately 17. ...Bb7 with ...fxe5 to follow? I cannot see White's passed pawns being much of an asset compared to his dismal piece placement. |
|
Dec-07-09
| | Domdaniel: I'm being too harsh. White's reasoning may have gone like this. He sees the danger of ...Nf2, and intends to play Bxe4 to get rid of the knight. But he also wants to develop the Bc1, maybe with Bc1-d2-e1, and on to an active post on the e1/h4 diagonal, with the annoying Ne4 gone. But he worries that Bd2 would weaken g2, currently protected by R, Q, B & K. So he overprotects a 5th time with Rg1, maybe with the idea of hitting white's pawns with g4 a little later. There are fragments of a logical plan there; all he missed was a forced mate in 3. |
|
Dec-07-09
 | | chrisowen: <YouRang>Yes, white lurches the rook across trotting it out with little care, black called his bluff. I take your angle as seeing the front of the Rott endeavour Rg1?...what a rotten spring time he must have had. |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | MaxxLange: <DomDaniel>:
...<I'm being too harsh.>...yeah, I was coming here to say just that. In the first place, I've seen plenty of games where 1800 players played as badly, or even worse. weak players, and 1800 is a pretty weak rating in the scheme of things, are often capable of playing very well in some kinds of positions. But, they have problems being consistent and objective , and seeing all the opponents threats. The difference between playing like an 1800 player and playing like a 1400 player is mostly in being careful and deliberate, no matter what your emotional situation. So, it's not possible to estimate the poor guy's rating from one game....maybe he was drunk or something...if he often just makes a move without, you know, checking for the opponent's mating knight sac , and fails to learn from that....no one can help him! |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | MaxxLange: the guy blundered in a bad position, it happens all the time |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | MaczynskiPratten: In fact, according to the website found be <SufferingBruin>, Rott was rated 1874 at the time of this game. He doesn't make any glaring tactical errors until the final blunder, he just makes positional and strategic oversights that get exploited. The game reminded me of H Hage vs Nimzowitsch, 1926, where White is reduced to even more abject and hilarious helplessness with a similar but even more cramped pawn structure and an even worse Bishop! My impression is that players up to about 1600-1800 strength concentrate largely on tactics or basic strategy (let's throw some pawns forward and attack the King) and only beyond that level do they appreciate structural considerations and strategic planning. Any thoughts? |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | YouRang: <Domdaniel><There are fragments of a logical plan there; all he missed was a forced mate in 3.> Yes, there could be some logic there behind 22.Rg1.
But perhaps if he had just taken a moment to ask himself, "what is the WORST possible move I could make?". Then he might have discovered 22.Rg1. <Lesson for the day>: Always look for the worst possible move, and make sure that it's not the one you're about to make. ;-) |
|
| Dec-07-09 | | MaxxLange: <MaczynskiPratten> a lot of "class" or "club" players (under 2000 rating) go wrong by OVER estimating the importance of pawn structure and strategic planning, and using that as an excuse for tactical laziness. "Oh, I have a more 'positional' style", they say. Two different IMs have told me that this kind of thought process is typical BS from weak players, that will keep them trapped where they are. Below at least 2200 level, they said, your "style" preference for "positional play" or "tactics" is almost always just making excuses for weak aspects of your chess. |
|
| Dec-08-09 | | Once: Another common failing - over-estimating the strength of your move and under-estimating the strength of your opponent's reply. Sure, 22. Rg1 aims to get counterplay with g4 (over-estimating your own move), but it also stalemates white's king. And when a king is stalemated you need to look for checks. I think weaker players spend so long deciding on their own move (often analysing weak alternatives) that they don't put aside enough time to assess what the other guy will play in response. They just hope that there isn't a crushing reply - what Dan Heissman calls hope chess. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
