|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-17-07 | | scholes: A true gem , Kamsky shows his positional understanding . Its just not a matter of bad bishops in this game .Its more than that ,though i don't know what . Time and again in this wcc he has shown a brand of positional understanding that is so much different than Anand ,Kramnik . Anyone can tell what Kamsky was going to do if Kiril had not played Be7 after 49 Bd6 .Kirl DSB was defending both the pawns alright there at e8 and white rook was not going to invade them any way any time . Well i see the answer . Was he going to bring his g pawn forward after winning the h pawn .Does it seems right? |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | Eyal: <xrt999: it appears that 47...Rc7+ first is slightly better than immediately playing 47...Rf7. It kicks the white king off of c6, and prevents the retreat of the white bishop on move 49.Bd6 after the same exact move order. The game is drawish for black, which is better than losing. for example: 47.Rc7+ Kd6 48.Rf7 Rh6+ 49.Kg8 Rxh5 50.Rxf8 Kd7 51.Kg7 Rh3> White should play 48.Kd5 rather than Kd6, so that after Rh6+ he can place the bishop on d6, as in the game (48...Rd7+ wouldn't help here after 49.Ke6). Then there's a rather straightforward winning plan which was mentioned by <scholes> - picking up Black's h pawn, marching forward the g pawn (combined with placing the king at c6 or e6 if it went earlier to d5), and Black's position completely disintegrates. So the game isn't drawish at all if Black plays 47...Rc7+; by this stage it's totally lost for him, whatever he does. |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | JG27Pyth: They way Kamsky creates the good vs bad bishop is brilliant strategic chess and the way he converts his good vs bad bishop advantage into a win from move 35 on, is brilliant technique. |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | TrueBlue: 39 .. d5 was a the blunder? |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | arnaud1959: <TrueBlue: 39 .. d5 was a the blunder?> Anything else allows 40.♔e4 followed by ♔d5 |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | Comandente: What is the point to move bishop first and then take knight two moves later? |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | cotdt: it's a typical kamsky finish, actually. nothing special! |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | Ezzy: G Kamsky (2714) - Ki Georgiev (2649) [C85]
World Chess Cup Khanty-Mansiysk RUS (3.1), 30.11.20071.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0–0 Be7 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.d3 Qd6 8.b3 Be6 9.Bb2 Nd7 10.Nbd2 c5 11.a4 a5 12.Re1<New move. 12 Qe2 has been played before.> 12...0–0 13.Nf1< One would think 13 Nc4 seems natural, but Kamsky juggles with his knights and it is the f3 knight which is heading for c4.> 13...f6 14.Ne3 g6 15.Nd2 Nb8< After 13...f6 the black knight has to relocate to get in on the action.> 16.Qf3 Nc6 17.Qg3 Nd4 18.h4 Kh8 19.Ndc4 Qd7 20.Rac1 b6 21.f3 <They say Kamsky is a solid player. 21 f3 is as solid as it gets.> 21...Rae8 22.Qh2 Bd8< I thought the reason for this move was to protect the b6 pawn so he could play 23...c6 24...b5 with counter play on the queenside. Strangely enough, Georgiev doesn't have this plan in mind. >23.Rcd1 Bxc4 <Now even the computers like the 24...c6 25...b5 plan.>24.dxc4 <Threatening 25 c3 winning the knight. >24...Qf7 25.h5 gxh5 26.c3 Ne6< [26...Nxb3 And his knight will probably be out of play for a long time. BUT objectively it could be correct to take the b3 pawn as it stops whites bishop from getting into the game via Bc1] >27.Nf5 Ng7 28.Qh3 Nxf5 29.Qxf5 <Blacks bishop is of no more value than a pawn.> 29...Re6?! <Played to stop 30 Rd7, but this restricts blacks queen moves as it is tied to the defence of the e3 rook. 29...Qg6 trying to simplify with exchanges is probably better, but white has a definate strategic advantage.> 30.Kf2 Rd6? <This is an even worse move with the rook, creating a backward pawn on an open file. But what can black do anyway. Perhaps ...Be7 before the ...Rd6 move >31.Rxd6 cxd6 32.Rh1<All the future strategy books on chess will use this game as an example of 'good bishop' v 'bad bishop.'> 32...Qg6 33.Rxh5 Qxf5 34.exf5 Rg8 35.Bc1 Rg7 36.Bh6 Rd7 37.Ke2 Be7? <I think this might of been the time for the 37...d5 break as to stop whites infiltration to the queenside with his king. [37...d5 38.cxd5 Rxd5]> 38.Rh4 <Threatening 39 Rg4 40 Bg7+ 41 Bxf6 etc >38...Rd8 39.Kd3 d5 40.cxd5 Rxd5+ 41.Kc4 Rd7 42.Rg4 Bd8 43.Kb5 Rf7 44.Kc6 <Kamsky threatens 45 Re4 46 f4>44...Ra7 45.Bf8 < also good >45...h5 46.Rg6 Kh7 47.c4 Rf7 48.Rh6+ Kg8 49.Bd6 Be7 50.Bc7 Rg7 51.Rg6 Rxg6 52.fxg6 Kg7 53.Kd7 Bf8 54.Bxb6 Kxg6 1–0 A magnificent strategic game from Kamsky the world cup winner! He’s in peak form at the moment. Let’s hope it continues so we can see a great Topalov v Kamsky match. |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | mrbasso: Ridiculous game. This GM never heard about the concept of good and bad bishops. |
|
Dec-17-07
 | | keypusher: <mrbasso: Ridiculous game. This GM never heard about the concept of good and bad bishops.> Are you really that stupid? |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | Jim Bartle: "He's Gata Game?" |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | Eyal: <Comandente: What is the point to move bishop first and then take knight two moves later?> I was thinking about it myself... One idea is that by waiting for Black to play Nf6 before taking the other knight, White avoids certain important lines of the "normal" exchange variation, where Black plays an early f6 and develops the knight through e7 to g6 or c6 (after c5). |
|
Dec-17-07
| | keypusher: Games showing that Kiril Georgiev has, in fact, heard about the concept of good and bad bishops. Amazingly, sometimes he even wins with the bad bishop. Kiril Georgiev vs Dgebuadze, 2006
Kiril Georgiev vs Bologan, 2006
Kiril Georgiev vs U Atakisi, 2001 |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | patzer2: <Ezzy> Thanks for the game analysis. Looks to me as if Georgiev might have started to lose it with 23...Bxc4?! Instead, your recommendation 23...c6! 24. h5 b5  leaves Black in good shape. With all the holes created after 23...Bxc4?! on the Queenside, Black practically invites Kamsky's King to take a stroll over there to help mop up. Even stronger than 45. Bf8 was 45. Re4!  , with the threat of 46. f4 and 47. fxe5 allowing the Rook to join in the final battle even quicker than in the game continuation. |
|
| Dec-17-07 | | mrbasso: <keypusher: Are you really that stupid?> You are asking the wrong guy. Ask Mr. Georgiev the same question when you meet him in person! |
|
Dec-17-07
| | keypusher: <mrbasso: <keypusher: Are you really that stupid?> You are asking the wrong guy. Ask Mr. Georgiev the same question when you meet him in person!>> You just answered it. |
|
Dec-17-07
 | | Jimfromprovidence: Can black do better by keeping the queens on the board and playing 33… Rg8 (threatening Qxg2)? Then after 39 Qh3 39...Rg7 could follow. |
|
Dec-17-07
| | Jimfromprovidence: <jimfromprovidence> <Can black do better by keeping the queens on the board and playing 33… Rg8 (threatening Qxg2)?
Then after 39 Qh3 39...Rg7 could follow.>
Sorry. I meant 34 Qh3 34...Rg7 could follow.
|
|
Dec-18-07
 | | HeMateMe: I love the games they select, but the puns are killin me..... Maybe Kamsky should be playing the match against Vlady. Strong as Kamsky is, he lost a match against Karpov. Is anyone wondering if Kamsky is stronger now than when Karpov beat him in the FIDE final ten years ago? If not, it just reinsures Karpov's place as a player for the ages. |
|
| Dec-18-07 | | Eyal: <Jimfromprovidence: Can black do better by keeping the queens on the board and playing 33… Rg8 (threatening Qxg2)? Then after 34 Qh3 34...Rg7 could follow.> In this case, White should probably initiate the queen exchange himself by 34.Qxg6 Rxg6. It's true that by not allowing White to play exf5 and vacate the e4 square for penetration of the king Black can prolong resistance, but on the long run his position seems hopeless - his pieces are too passive and his pawns are too weak. A winning plan for White might consist of breaking into Black's position by advancing the g and f pawns, supported by placing the bishop on the c1-h6 diagonal and bringing the king to h4. |
|
Dec-18-07
| | Jimfromprovidence: <Eyal>. <In this case, White should probably initiate the queen exchange himself by 34.Qxg6 Rxg6. It's true that by not allowing White to play exf5 and vacate the e4 square for penetration of the king Black can prolong resistance, but on the long run his position seems hopeless - his pieces are too passive and his pawns are too weak. A winning plan for White might consist of breaking into Black's position by advancing the g and f pawns, supported by placing the bishop on the c1-h6 diagonal and bringing the king to h4.> This is the position if white initiates the exchange (after 34 Qxg6 Rxg6.)
click for larger viewI tried, but frankly I can not find a win for white. I'd really like to know if there is one. |
|
| Dec-18-07 | | patzer2: <JimFromProvidence> Interesting post. It appears your suggestion 33...Rg8! 34. Qxg6 Rxg6 just might give Black a fortress that White can't penetrate. My Fritz 8 program gives it a winning evaluation below 17 depth, but can't penetrate. At least OTB, IMO it would have been extremely difficult to avoid the draw. |
|
Dec-18-07
| | Jimfromprovidence: <patzer2> <Interesting post. It appears your suggestion 33...Rg8! 34. Qxg6 Rxg6 just might give Black a fortress that White can't penetrate. My Fritz 8 program gives it a winning evaluation below 17 depth, but can't penetrate. At least OTB, IMO it would have been extremely difficult to avoid the draw.> I can't find a win for 33… Rg8 34 Qh3 as well.
click for larger view |
|
| Dec-18-07 | | Eyal: <patzer2><JimFromProvidence> I agree, I've tried and I can't find a clear win for White in this line either - it's much harder than I thought at first... So it would appear that 33...Qxf5, allowing White to clear the e4 square for the route of the king's invasion with 34.exf5, was a careless move by Georgiev - making Kamsky's task much easier. |
|
| Oct-16-10 | | timothee3331: Maybe on that line we can play some kind of a plan
:
1) we let the rook stay on h5 and we put a pawn on g4 to prevent actions on the kingside
2) the bishop will maybe be transfered to c1 to avoid all the changes on the kingside. for instance a rook exchange on g5 and maybe way further on h4 so it can put pressure on the f6 weakness
3)then we play our queen to d5 and try to penetrate the Black's camp. If it's exchanged then we have a way for our king, which with the bad bishop and the pawn weaknesses should be enough
4)since Black doesn't exchange we try to combine threats of queen invasion, shifting of the rooks from h5 to h1 to d1 etc..., threats of b4
I don't know if it wins but surely it's not an easy draw |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
