Robert Gardner vs David Yu Peng (2004)

Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players ·

Kibitzing

Robert Gardner vs David Yu Peng
Canadian Championship (2004), Toronto CAN, rd 2, Aug-21
Modern Defense: Standard Defense (B06) · 0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	165 more games of R Gardner
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can change the color of the light and dark squares by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page. Or, you can change it with the "SETTINGS" link in the lower right.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Jun-04-06		LluviaSean: I thought this would be totally winning for White...

Jun-05-06		borisbadenoff: Well this is a pretty confuse game. There where chances at sometime for both sides. The opening is pretty equal with chances for both sides. First black gets in trouble by playing b5 instead of for example Qb6. And even worse black answers with dxe5 instead of Nd5. Even worse is 12. .. fxe6 where Nf6 was needed. Then white loses the simple 19. Re1 to keep up the pressure and instead goes for 19. Ba5 this is only good for black as it allows the the exchange of queens. But white doesn't want to and loses a tempo. The move that in my opinion loses for white is 22. Rxd4. That move was playable one move before. Exchanging the queens and the black dark colored for the white light colored bishop. The games go on and black keeps the small advantage until 26. h5 which looks to me like it would allow a draw better may have been Nxg4. But 30. Rf1+ is the last nail for the coffin of white's burial. And after 35. .. Qh6+ black should be finally able to bring home the advantage of one piece and maybe soon the h-pawn

Jun-05-06		Cyphelium: <borisbadenoff> The problem with 12.- ♘f6 is that after 13. exf7+ ♔xf7 14. ♘f3 the g6 pawn is likely to be lost anyway in view of 15. ♘e5+. 14.- ♘d7 15. 0-0 is certainly bad for black. 14.- g5 15. ♘e5+ ♔g8 16. ♘g6 ♖h7 does keep the pawn, but is also pretty awful for black. 19. ♖e1 is interesting. One alternative is 19.- ♘e5, which forces white to sacrifice the exchange with 20. ♖xe5 ♗xe5. White seems to have compensation after 21. ♗d3 (idea ♘h5 and ♖f1) 21.- ♗f6 22. ♘h5+ ♔f7, but if it's enough to win I don't know. I don't see why 21. ♖xd4 is more playable than 22. ♖xd4. After 21.- ♕xd4 it's the same position, the bishop is just on a5 instead of b4. Then if 22. ♘e2, a transposition to the game continuation is likely. The last fatal error might have been 27. ♕g5+. White could have tried 27. g5 instead. Then after, for example, 27.- ♘g4 28. ♕g7+ ♔f5 29. ♕f7+ ♔e4 30. ♕g6+ ♔f3 31. ♗xh8, white is still a piece down and may be objectively losing, but as a practical chance it seems better than the game continuation.

Jun-06-06		borisbadenoff: Cyphelium: <borisbadenoff> The problem with 12.- Nf6 is that after 13. exf7+ Kxf7 14. Nf3 the g6 pawn is likely to be lost anyway in view of 15. Ne5+.> Well I see no problem which could lead to losing the g-pawn quickly. 14. .. Ne4. And Ne5+ fails to Bxe5 <19. e1 is interesting. One alternative is 19.- e5, which forces white to sacrifice the exchange with 20. xe5 xe5. White seems to have compensation after 21. d3 (idea h5 and f1) 21.- f6 22. h5+ f7, but if it's enough to win I don't know.> Well 19. .. Ne5 isn't so a good idea. You overlooked the idea of 19. Re1 Ne5 20. Rxe5 Bxe5 21. Nxd5!! (21. .. exd5 is not possible because of Qf7#) so 21. .. Rf8 22. Qxf8+! Kxg8 23. Nxb6 (axb6 not possible because of Bxh6+ Kg8 Rd8#) 23. .. Kg7 24. Nxa8 Kxg6 and white is a rook up. Even more I like the line which my engine pointed out to me. 21. Nxd5 Rf8 22. Qxf8+ Kxf8 23. Bxh6 Bg7 24. Rf1+ Kg8 25. Nxe7+ Kh8 26. Bxg7+ Kxg7 27. g5 Qe3+ 28. Kb1 Qg1 29. Rxg1 Black has to sacrifies the queen by itself to stop white from Rf7+ Kh8 Rh7# <I don't see why 21. Rxd4 is more playable than 22. Rxd4. After 21.- Qxd4 it's the same position, the bishop is just on a5 instead of b4. Then if 22. Ne2, a transposition to the game continuation is likely.> Well after 21. Rxd4 Qxd4 its the same position with the bishop on a5 and a mate in 3!! 22. Qxe7+ Kg8 23. Qe8+ Kg7 24. Nh5# So 21. .. Qxa3 22. bxa3 Nxg6 23. Re1 Nxf4 24. Rxf4 And black is pawn up while in the other variation black keeps his one rook up advantage. <The last fatal error might have been 27. Qg5+. White could have tried 27. g5 instead.> Well but black would never play Ng4. But instead something like Qe3+ or Qf3 with the idea Rf8

Jun-07-06		Cyphelium: <borisbadenoff> I like your variations. Apparently I've got some problem to see knight moves. (Of course I overlooked 21. ♘xd5 as you say, but also 24. ♘h5 mate in the variation after 21. ♖xd4). The g6-pawn might be held after 12.- ♘f6 13. exf7+ ♔xf7 14. ♘f3 ♘e4 (another knight move!), but doesn't white at least have an edge after 15. 0-0?

Jun-07-06		borisbadenoff: <<Cyphelium> but doesn't white at least have an edge after 15. 0-0?> Of course white already has an advantage since 8. .. b5 or more clearly after 9. .. dxe5. Instead of 8. .. b5 for example 8. Qb6 would have been good. 9. Rb1 0-0 And suddenly the whole idea of e5 is useless at the moment. Because of 10. e5?? dxe5 11. fxe5??? Nxe5 and white has an extra pawn. Here once again we see why move order some times matters

Jun-07-06		Cyphelium: <borisbadenoff> Well, it's obvious that 10. e5 is out of question in that variation of yours. Anyway, after 8. -♕b6, I guess white could try to make things more unclear with something like 9. ♕d2 ♕xb2 10. ♖b1 ♕a3 11. e5 ♘d5 12. ♘xd5 cxd5 13. e6. But this does look a bit desperate on white's part. I don't believe in white's opening play and have no wish to defend it!

Jun-07-06		borisbadenoff: <Cyphelium: <borisbadenoff> Well, it's obvious that 10. e5 is out of question in that variation of yours. Anyway, after 8. -Qb6, I guess white could try to make things more unclear with something like 9. Qd2 Qxb2 10. Rb1 Qa3 11. e5 Nd5 12. Nxd5 cxd5 13. e6. But this does look a bit desperate on white's part. I don't believe in white's opening play and have no wish to defend it!> Well the 13. e6 clearly overdoes the whole idea maybe try supporting it with Nf3 instead. But otherwise a interesting idea. Offering the pawn and get blacks queen outta play for some moves

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:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
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.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

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

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.