| May-24-11 | | Chris00nj: Great game. Tons of tactics |
|
Dec-08-16
 | | plang: This hybrid line is not included in my book on the Bb5 Sicilian though it has been played quite a few times. After 8..Qc7 the game resembles a Taimanov Sicilian setup with Black having the two bishops; not clear who benefits from that. 9..Nxd4!? and 10..f6!? was an unusual setup; Plaskett's computer suggested 11 Qd1 with the idea of an annoying check on h5. Had Black played 11..fxe Plaskett was considering 12 Nd5. In Christiansen-Bischoff Essen 1999 White had played 13 Qh4 and the game had been drawn; 13 Rad1 was new. 14 Rd3? was an error; more consistent would have been 14 Qh4 and if 14..b4 then 15 Ne2..Qxc2 16 Nd4..Qxb2 17 Re2..Qa3 18 Nxf5..exf 19 e6 with a powerful attack. Bischoff did not play 18..h6 due to 19 Ng6!..Bxg2 20 Be3!. Bischoff's 21..Ba7? removed the bishop from defense of the kingside. Plaskett had only 4 minutes left when he played 25 Nf5! but he had no trouble finishing off the attack. According to both the Informant and British Chess Magazine the final move was 30 Kf1 not 30 Bxf2. Very entertaining game. |
|
Apr-19-19
 | | ChessHigherCat: After diddling around for a while trying to make the rook lift into something other than a "rook gift", I hit upon Nf5, threatening a triple fork (trident?) on d6 and a very strong mating attack if taken: 25. Nf5 exf5 26. Qxf5+ Ke8 27. Qg6+ Kf8 28. e6 |
|
Apr-19-19
| | ChessHigherCat: Akh hakh, it's the 25... Bc5 defense that makes this a Friday (or Saturday) puzzle. |
|
Apr-19-19
| | ChessHigherCat: It would have been a big mistake trying to hang onto the c-pawn: 16. Rd2 Bc5 17. Qc4 Bxf2+ 18. Kxf2 Qxc4 |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | Walter Glattke: 30.-Rf8 31.Qh5+ Kd8 32.Rxd7+ Kc8 33.Rxb7 Rxf2 White wins. 30.-f2 31.Qf7+ Kd8 32.Qxg8+ Kc7 33.Rxd7+ Kc6 34.Rxb7 exf2+ 35.Kxf2 Rxc2+ White wins. / 25.-g6 26.Nxh6+ Kg7 27.Nxg8 Rxf2 28.Bxf2 Kxg8
29.Qxg6+ Kf8 White wins. 25.-Bxf2+ 26.Bxf2 exf5 27.Qxf5+ Ke8 28.Qg6+ Kf8 29.e6 d6 30.Rxd6 Rxc2 31.Qf7+ Kxd8 32.Qxb7 Rc1+ 33.Be1 Rxe1+ 33.Kf2 Rd1 34.Qb8+ White wins. |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | Walter Glattke: 30.-e3 not f2 |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | goodevans: I got most of this fairly quickly but one possibility that only occurred to me after I'd checked the answer was black luring the B away from h4 before taking the N: <25.Nf5 Bxf2+ 26.Bxf2> (not 26.Kxf2? e3+ winning for black) <26...exf5> 
click for larger viewNow with <27.Qxf5+ Ke8 28.Qg6+ Kd8 29.Qe6> white wins by forking the two black Rs. |
|
Apr-19-19
 | | agb2002: White has a knight for a rook.
Black threatens Bxf2+ (Kxf2 e3+) and Rcx2.
White has Qh5+ and Nf5.
In the case of 25.Nf5, threatening Nd6+:
A) 25... exf5 26.Qxf5+ Ke8 27.Qg6+ Kf8 28.e6
A.1) 28... dxe6 29.Rd8#.
A.2) 28... d5 29.e7+ Qxe7 30.Bxe7+ Kxe7 31.Rxd5 + - [Q+P vs r+b]. A.3) 28... Bxf2+ 29.Kf1 d5 (29... Bxh4 30.Qf7#) 30.e7+ Qxe7 31.Bxe7+ Kxe7 32.Kxf2 wins decisive material. B) 25... Bc5 26.Qh5+
B.1) 26... g6 27.Nxh6+
B.1.a) 27... Ke8 28.Qg5 Qc8 (28... Rg7(f8) 29.Qd8#; 28... Kf6 29.Qf6+ Ke8 30.Qd8#) 29.Nxg8 recovers the material while the attack makes progress. B.1.b) 27... Kf8 28.Qg5 Qc8 29.Qf6+ Ke8 30.Qf7#. B.1.c) 27... Kg7 28.Qg5 followed by Ng4 keeps the attack. For example, 28... Rf8 29.Ng4 Rxc2 30.Qh6+ Kf7 31.Qh7+ Ke8 32.Qxg6+ Rf7 33.Nf6+ Ke7 (33... Kd8 34.Qxf7 wins; 33... Kf8 34.Qg8+ Ke7 35.Qe8#) 34.Nxd7+ wins. B.2) 26... Kf8 27.Qg6
B.2.a) 27... exf5 28.Qxf5+ Ke8 29.Qg6+ Kf8 30.e6 as above. B.2.b) 27... Rxc2 28.Nd6 Bxd6 29.exd6 Rh8 30.Be7+ Kg8 31.Bf6 wins (31... Rh7 32.Qe8#). C) 25... Bb8 looks worse than Bc5 because the former doesn't control e7. D) 25... Bxf2+ 26.Kf1 exf5 (26... Bxh4 27.Nd6+ wins) 27.Qxf5+ Ke8 28.e6 transposes to A.3. |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | malt: Got 25.Nf5 Bc5 (Bb8)
(25...ef5 26.Q:f5+ Ke8 27.e6 )
26.Qh5+ g6 27.N:h6+ Kg7 28.Bf6+ Kf8
29.Qg4 Δ 30.Q:e6 |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | goodevans: <agb2002> Your line <D) 25... Bxf2+ 26.Kf1> doesn't work because of <26...Bc5>. Compare this with your line <B.1.c) 25... Bc5 26.Qh5+ g6 27.Nxh6+ Kg7 28.Qg5>
click for larger viewAfter <25...Bxf2+ 26.Kf1 Bc5 27.Qh5+ g6 28.Nxh6+ Kg7 29.Qg5> the K is now standing on the open f-file allowing black to win with <29...Rf8+>. 
click for larger viewInstead white would have to settle for something like <29.Bf6+ Kf8> and his attack peters out. See my previous post for how white can win after 25...Bxf2+. |
|
Apr-19-19
 | | Plaskett: I am humbly appreciative of your interest in my manky efforts, gentlemen. |
|
Apr-19-19
| | ChessHigherCat: <Plaskett: I am humbly appreciative of your interest in my manky efforts, gentlemen.> Great game, thanks for providing us with a weekend puzzle! |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | 5hrsolver: Missed the 25.. Bc5 defense. Also missed the great rook lift 27. Rd6 the threat of course is 28.Be7# After 29.. Bxf2+ I think 30. Kh1 would have worked too
as in 29... Bxf2+ 30. Kh1 Bxh4 31. Qf7+ Kd8 32. Rxd7+ Kc8 33. Qxg8+ Bd8 34. Qxd8# There are other side variations that all looked winning as some of you have pointed out. |
|
Apr-19-19
 | | Breunor: Plaskett, always great to see a player of your strength on the forum! |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | whiteshark: <plang: This hybrid line is not included in my book on the Bb5 Sicilian> I only have Shirov's comments on the Bb5 Sicilian, but you're probably not Alexei, and besides, it's a CD and not a book. So, who are you, <plang>? Inquisitive minds would like to know more. ;) |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | whiteshark: <Plaskett: I am humbly appreciative of your interest in my manky efforts, gentlemen.> Hello, Mr. Plaskett,
would you describe this game as your best? (manky doesn't really fit well as a description, or does it?) If not, which then? Thank you in advance for your answer. :) |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | Everett: <Mr. Plaskett> thank you so much for your chess and your appearance here at chess games.com! Only if you are up for the telling, could you share your thoughts on this game? Bronstein vs Plaskett, 1993 No worries if not. Pleasure nonetheless and best of luck. |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | TheBish: Not really a closed Sicilian at all. Other than being a delayed Rossolimo (Bb5), it would be an open Sicilian, as White played d2-d4 and not d2-d3. |
|
| Apr-19-19 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 26 dpa done
1. = (0.00): 21...Bf8 22.h3 Rc5 23.Bh4 Rxc2 24.Qg4 e3 25.fxe3 Qc6 26.Qg5 Rc1 27.Qd8+ Kf7 28.Rxc1 Qxc1+ 29.Kh2 Qd2 30.Nf6 gxf6 31.Qxf6+ Ke8 32.Qd8+ Kf7 33.Qf6+ Ke8 2. = (0.00): 21...Qc6 22.Qg4 Kf7 23.Ng3 Rgf8 24.Nxe4 Kg8 25.Nf6+ gxf6 26.Bxf6+ Kf7 27.Qh5+ Kg8 28.Rd4 Rxf6 29.exf6 Kh8 30.Rh4 Bxf2+ 31.Kxf2 Qxc2+ 32.Kg3 b3 33.axb3 Qd3+ 34.Qf3 Rg8+ 35.Kh3 Qxf3+ 36.gxf3 Rg6 37.f7 Rf6 38.Kg3 Kg7 39.Ra4 Kxf7 40.Rxa6 Rg6+ 41.Kf2 Rh6 42.Kg3 Rg6+ 43.Kf2 |
|
Apr-20-19
| | agb2002: <goodevans> Thank you! I did notice the possibility of forking the rooks but for some reason I thought Kf1 was better. |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 20.Rxe4