| Apr-26-09 | | muradov: Good game by Shark. He should strive for consistency in his play.. |
|
| Apr-26-09 | | notyetagm: Very ironic that Svidler missed the winning move ♗e5xg7! yesterday in his game against Leko but that Mamedyarov did not miss it today against him, 36 ♗e5xg7! 1-0. |
|
| Apr-26-09 | | messachess: Well, of course, if black doesn't play 31...Ke7, then white can't play 32.RxB starting the winning combination. Good game by Mamedyarov. |
|
| Apr-26-09 | | parmetd: No black has a draw by 31... Rd7! |
|
| Apr-26-09 | | notyetagm: http://nalchik2009.fide.com/round-1...
SHIPOV:
<Mamedyarov-Svidler
This game contained a number of finesses, and Black’s first and only mistake became fatal.
The players discussed the Shabalov-Shirov Variation of the Slav Defense. The position quickly became original. Black had problems with his king, however, Peter bravely started to fight in the center (16…c5!) and for a long time played very well, but apparently spent too much energy and got very tired. On the 31st move he could force a draw by 31…Rd7! (and White must give the perpetual), but blundered. <<<After 31…Ke7? 32.Rxf2! it turned out that Black cannot take the rook on f2 due to tactical nuances.>>>
Shakhriyar was merciful in his final attack. The 36.Bxg7! blow immediately killed all the resistance.> |
|
| Apr-26-09 | | notyetagm: 32 ?
click for larger viewThis is *exactly* the kind of <TACTICALLY COMPLEX> position that you do *not* want to play against Mamedyarov. 32 ♖f1x♗f2! 
click for larger view |
|
| Apr-26-09 | | notyetagm: Can someone please post the line showing why Black cannot take the White f2-rook after 32 ♖f1x♗f2 ? Thanks |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | Hafen Slawkenbergius: 33.Qc5+ ? |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | notyetagm: <Hafen Slawkenbergius: 33.Qc5+ ?> Yike, I was looking for something *deep* that Svidler overlooked and then I overlooked a 1-ply <QUEEN FORK>. :-) |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | nuwanda:
I wonder why Shak played the strong but complicated 36.Bxg7 and not the even stronger and very simple 36.Qd8+ and 37.Qxg5 !? |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | messachess: <notyetagm: Can someone please post the line showing why Black cannot take the White f2-rook after 32 Rf1xBf2 ?>
33...RxR 34.Qc5+ wins a piece. |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | bane77: <nuwanda>
Because this attack leads to mate after Qe8+ Qh5+ and Rc8++. |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | nuwanda:
Hi <bane77>, obviously, if black plays 36...Rxg7but he is not forced to do so, after for example 36...Qc2 white has probably nothing better than 37.Dd8+ Kxg7 38.Qxg5+ Qg6 winning, of course, but 36.Qd8+ is much simpler... |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | SimonWebbsTiger: yes, his B:g7 is peculiar to say the least. I followed the game on FICS and he didn't appear to be in any serious time trouble at all. Anyone would be happy to just fork and end the battle than spend time analysing B:g7. Maybe he was so concentrated on playing Qe8 and his bishop being attacked, he simply overlooked Qd8? Weirder things have happened in top GM games, although it does sound an unlikely explanation! |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | nuwanda: <SimonWebbsTiger: ...Anyone would be happy to just fork and end the battle than spend time analysing B:g7...> Thats exactly the point i'm interested in. Maybe this is not the case for players of Shak's kind. Maybe his thoughts went "Ok, Qd8+ is winning at once, but i'm more interested in Bxg7, this move is more fun and i can see no defence for black, i want to torture Peter a little bit..." Would be very intersting to hear Shak's view on this theme... |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | ahmadov: <notyetagm: Very ironic that Svidler missed the winning move e5xg7! yesterday in his game against Leko but that Mamedyarov did not miss it today against him, 36 e5xg7! 1-0.> A good post... |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | dehanne: <This is *exactly* the kind of <TACTICALLY COMPLEX> position that you do *not* want to play against Mamedyarov.><notyetam>Except when your name is Kurnosov. |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | SimonWebbsTiger: Another interesting bit of chess psychology is why Svidler didn't whip out ...Qc2 before resigning. |
|
| Apr-27-09 | | notyetagm: <dehanne: <This is *exactly* the kind of <TACTICALLY COMPLEX> position that you do *not* want to play against Mamedyarov.><notyetam>Except when your name is Kurnosov.> Kournosov or the R-word. :-) |
|
Kibitzing
