|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1068 OF 1069 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jul-31-11
 | | AylerKupp: <<LIFE Master AJ>: Did anyone ever find a forced win ... at ANY point ... for the "World Team" here?> I certainly never did, not even close. The closest I got was lines involving 58.Ng2 rather than the 58.g4 that we actually played. The attractiveness of 58.Ng2 from my perspective was that starting the analysis several moves earlier most of the engines, including Rybka, evaluated the position as advantageous for Black with the lines involving 58...Qh1+ 59.Kh3 Rg1, even though they really weren't if one went deeper. So my hope was that she would enter this line due her (presumed) limited computer capabilities compared to ours. But by sliding forward or even just following the game it would become obvious to everyone, Natalia included, that these were not advantageous lines for Black. And, of course, she probably didn't even need the computer to see that. Then again, I was probably justifiably considered a ranking member of the Flat Earth Society. |
|
| Oct-22-11 | | master of defence: its great |
|
Oct-22-11
 | | OhioChessFan: <CIO: I'm still waiting for the in depth article by her husband> I am a bit disappointed he didn't want any of my song parodies for an accompanying soundtrack. |
|
| Jul-31-12 | | The Last Straw: the first move was d4??!!! |
|
| Sep-01-13 | | cro777: "This is one of my most memorable and demanding games" (Natalia Pogonina). In an interview at http://www.kingpinchess.net/2013/08... , answering the question "What is your most memorable game?", WGM Natalia Pogonina said: "Two chess games against the World. The first one took place at Chess.com in 2009. I had White and won. <The second was played at ChessGames.com and I drew with the Black pieces>. A few thousand players from over 100 countries participated in those two matches, making the games by far my most memorable and demanding." |
|
| Sep-16-16 | | YouRang: Time to revisit this game and add some new analysis with the aid of much better engines than we had in 2010. IMO, this game was <The World>'s poorest effort. Somehow, the cooperative analysis and reasoning that worked so well in our other games was often supplanted by blustering and bickering (or so it seemed to me). We settled for a draw -- and there's no shame in that -- but I felt that we failed to give GM Pogonina a good challenge. Anyway, I'll start with our 17th move, which was very close:
click for larger view
We played <17.Qb3> here, narrowly beating 17.e5. This was the final vote:
17.Qb3 119 votes (41.0%)
17.e4 112 votes (38.6%)
17.c5 50 votes (17.2%)
17.Qb2 2 votes (0.7%)
And here's some new analysis:
Stockfish_16090806_x64_modern @ 41 ply:
+0.34 17.e4 Re8 18.Qb2 Ba8 19.c5 Be7 20.Bf1
+0.31 17.Qb3 Be7 18.Ne1 Rc7 19.e3 Qb8 20.Nd3
+0.29 17.Qb1 Qe7 18.e4 g5 19.e5 Bg7 20.Rc3
+0.16 17.c5 a5 18.a3 Ra8 19.e4 Ba6 20.h4
So, I should say that there's nothing conclusive here about Qb3 vs e4. |
|
| Sep-16-16 | | izimbra: <YouRang: Time to revisit this game and add some new analysis with the aid of much better engines than we had in 2010. IMO, this game was <The World>'s poorest effort. Somehow, the cooperative analysis and reasoning that worked so well in our other games was often supplanted by blustering and bickering (or so it seemed to me). We settled for a draw -- and there's no shame in that -- but I felt that we failed to give GM Pogonina a good challenge. Anyway, I'll start with our 17th move, which was very close: > That does look like a key position. Strategically, white has more space & the continuations could go either way - either black gets some exchanges in & frees pieces or white is able to push pawns & trap black with a long term space advantage that is likely to be fatal in ICCF style play. Are there any continuations which force a long term space advantage? If not, are there any with that property that black is likely to fall into? My vague recollection is that only the latter was true, but the team didn't see fit to prioritize tempting black to that type of mistake. |
|
| Sep-16-16 | | Boomie: <YouRang: Where did we go wrong?> The Opening Explorer doesn't like 11. Nbd2. Opening Explorer White has had few winning chances after that compared to the obviously good b3 or the flamboyant Ne5. With only 17 games in the DB, we played ourselves out of the OE with Nbd2. That left us with engine play, which is notoriously deceiving in the openings. |
|
| Sep-16-16 | | cro777: <YouRang: I'll start with our 17th move, which was very close>
click for larger view(We played 17.Qb3 here, narrowly beating 17.e4)
At the 27th World Championship Final (2011) in correspondence chess White opted for 17.e4. https://www.iccf.com/game?id=328656 |
|
| Sep-17-16 | | YouRang: <izimbra> <Boomie> <cro777> I think that many of us came away from this game feeling that we had botched the opening. It will probably be a long time before a World Team opts for the Catalan again. But perhaps we just didn't play it well (I'm certainly no opening expert). I think we probably botched some moves later on also, which is why I thought I'd do a review. I do recall that 11.Nbd2 was an earlier controversial move. I didn't start there only because I suspected that engine analysis would be less meaningful at such an early stage in the game. Thanks for the link to the ICCF game featuring 17.e4. Perhaps it's a small consolation to the 17.Qb3 voters that 17.e4 didn't fare any better. :-) ~~~~
As for this game, I'm currently looking at our next move that also had some controversy, although the vote wasn't as close:
click for larger view
We chose <18.c5> over 18.e4. My recollection is that I was among the e4 voters. |
|
| Sep-17-16 | | cro777: The fact that the game played between two correspondence grandmasters at the highest level followed the same path until move 17 proves that we didn't play as badly as we use to think. Besides, Pogonina played very well. |
|
| Sep-17-16 | | YouRang: BTW, I earlier mentioned the disharmony on the team during this game. The pre-game drama certainly didn't help. Our opponent's husband (Peter Zdhanov) joined the team (!) and couldn't be convinced that the team would see that as a serious conflict of interests. For a long time, he refused to leave and even resorted to insulting the team for their attitude! Some of our players simply left the game, and ultimately we voted to resign on the first move, until Zdhanov finally departed. I often wondered what our opponent was thinking. If he had remained, then surely any notably good moves on her part would (rightly or wrongly) fall under suspicion, and any result other than a loss would be badly tainted. Frankly, I don't know how she couldn't be professionally embarrassed by Zdhanov's behavior. Maybe she was. Perhaps tensions were also raised because the time control was just 24 hours for each side to move. All other games gave at least 48 hours. Given that World team members are scattered around the globe, and that some of them like to sleep, 24 hours is hardly sufficient time for coordination. |
|
| Sep-17-16 | | YouRang: <cro777> I see that game was played in October of 2011 (a few months after this game finished). I wonder if either player came across our game during their deliberations? :-D |
|
| Sep-17-16 | | Marmot PFL: The World play seems too tentative in this game, waiting for a mistake that never happened. When the pawn advance finally occurs black has no problems meeting it. In later games (Akobian, Williams, Naiditsch) the World played more critical lines, taking advantage of it's extra time and computing power. It's practically impossible for one player, even a very strong one, to look at every line in detail for weeks on end. |
|
Sep-17-16
| | OhioChessFan: I still can't believe the team played 4. g3. Absolutely unbelievable. |
|
| Sep-17-16 | | cro777: <YouRang> The game Acevedo - Badolati started on June 10, 2011. In the opening they could have consulted the game Zhao Jun - Wang Hao from the first Danzhu tournament in China in 2010. Zhao Jun - Wang Hao. Position after 13...Bxf6
click for larger viewThe same position arose in our game after 15...Bxf6. We continued with 16.b4. In the diagram position Zhao Jun opted for 14.e4. Zhao Jun vs Wang Hao, 2010 |
|
| Sep-17-16 | | cro777: In the position we've been discussing
click for larger view a grandmaster would play 16.e4. They usually follow the "be a center forward" strategy (center forward play). We were loyal to our "bayonet" strategy. As far as the opening is concerned, 11.Nbd2 was not the best choice.
click for larger viewAn immediate 11.Ne5 is more common, although after 11…Rc8 Black has a rather solid position.
W So vs Karjakin, 2016 11.b3, which transposes into the Queen's Indian Defense, is another good option. |
|
| Sep-18-16 | | YouRang: Okay, my engine has been working on white's 18th move all day:
click for larger view
The team voted <18.c5> (I had voted for 18.e4, but I can't say I was "passionate" about it). 18.c5 159 votes (55.8%)
18.e4 105 votes (36.8%)
18.a4 7 votes (2.5%)
18.cxd5 6 votes (2.1%)
18.0-1 2 votes (0.7%)
Today's new analysis:
Stockfish_16090917_x64_modern @ 48 ply:
+0.35 18.e4 Be7 19.c5 a5 20.a3 axb4 21.axb4
+0.29 18.c5 a5 19.a3 Rb8 20.Qc3 Bb7 21.e4
+0.11 18.Qd3 c5 19.cxd5 exd5 20.dxc5 bxc5 21.bxc5 A slight nod to 18.e5, although not terribly conclusive. However, just structurally I didn't and still don't like 18.c5. ~~~~~
The game proceeded as the engine suggested for a few moves: <18.c5 a5 19.a3 Rb8>
click for larger view
Here, white deviated by shuffling the queen back to c2: <20.Qc2>, whereas the analysis above preferred 20.Qc3. I'll let the engine sit on our 20th move for a while... |
|
| Sep-18-16 | | YouRang: Here are my results for move 20:
click for larger view The vote:
20.Qc2 147 votes (62.3%)
20.Qd3 65 votes (27.5%)
20.e4 6 votes (2.5%)
20.Qc3 5 votes (2.1%)
20.Qa4 3 votes (1.3%)
20.e3 3 votes (1.3%)
The new analysis:
Stockfish_16090917_x64_modern @ 45 ply:
+0.27 20.Qc2 Bb7 21.e4 Ba6 22.Ra1 Be7 23.e5
+0.26 20.Qc3 Bb7 21.e4 Ba6 22.e5 Bg5 23.Ra1
+0.26 20.Qd3 Bb7 21.e4 Ra8 22.Bf1 axb4 23.axb4
So hardly any notable difference to be found.
~~~~
The game continued: <20...Bb7 21.e4> (we *finally* played e4, but I think it was better earlier) <21...Qc7>. Here we came to another debatable move <22.Nf1>. I recall voting for 22.Bf1. I'll let the engine simmer on this today... |
|
Sep-18-16
| | AylerKupp: <<YouRang> I felt that we failed to give GM pogonina a good challenge> (part 1 of 2) It seems to me, as <cro777> indicated in The World vs N Pogonina, 2010 (kibitz #27563), that Pogonina does not agree with you, or at least she didn't then, considering this and the other game she played against the Chess.com team in 2009, to be "by far most memorable and demanding". I think that this game can be divided into two phases, the opening and the middlegame (there really wasn't an endgame). I agree with you in that I don't think that the team played its best in the opening and did not seem to come out of it with much, if any, advantage. Possibly the Zdhanov distraction had something to do with it but I wouldn't know, I had not joined the team at that time. But I think that starting with 21.e4 and the slight opening of both the center and the q-side that the game became more interesting. Our 41.Nc4 really made the game double edged, as did our exchange sac with 44.Nd6 Qxd1 45.Ne8+ Kf8 46.Nxf6+, particularly since Black develops mating threats of her own.
click for larger viewAt this point Stockfish 7 is of no help to determining our winning chances, evaluating the game's best continuation to be 46...Kg7 47.Ne8+ Kf8 48.Nf6+ and a draw by repetition. A pretty finish (from our perspective) would have been 46...Ke7 47.Qe8+ Kxf6 48.Qe5# but that obviously would not have happened with a grandmaster, not even in blitz under time pressure. If you haven't see it, this might be a good time to check out <kingscrusher>'s video of the game, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=477.... So our 50.Nc7+ might have been considered "gutsy", except that Stockfish also evaluates it at [0.00], d=38 after 50...Kg7 51.h5 Ra1 52.h6+ Kf6 53.Qh8+ Ke7 54.Qe8+ Kd6 55.Qd8+ Nd7 56.Ne8+ Kc5 57.Qe7+ Kb6 58.g4 f5(1) 59.gxf5 gxf5 60.h7 Qf1+ 61.Kg3 Ra4 62.Qd8+ Kc5 63.Qg5 Rg4+ 64.Qxg4 fxg4 65.h8Q(2) gxf3 66.Qc3+ Kb5 67.Nd6+ Kb6 68.Nc4+(3) Kb7 69.Na5+ Kb6 70.Qxc6+ Kxa5 71.Qxd7 Qg1+ 72.Kxf3
click for larger viewAnd this is a tablebase draw after 72...Qh1+ 73.Kg4 Qg2+ 74. Kh5 Qf3+. The White king cannot escape the Black queen's checks on an open board. (1) Up to here Stockfish followed our game (most of the moves are forced) but Pogonina chose 58...Ra4 instead of 58...f5. Sliding forward and restarting the analysis after 58.g4, lets see what Stockfish suggests at d=36. 
click for larger view1. [0.00]: 58...f5 59.gxf5 gxf5 60.h7 Qf1+ 61.Kg3 Ra4 62.Qg7 Rg4+ 63.Qxg4 fxg4 64.h8Q gxf3 65.Qd4+ Nc5 66.Nd6 Qd3 67.Qb4+ Kc7 68.Qxc5 Qxd6+ 69.Qxd6+ Kxd6
click for larger viewThis line is similar to Stockfish's original Principal Variation but still results in a tablebase draw. |
|
Sep-18-16
| | AylerKupp: <<YouRang> I felt that we failed to give GM pogonina a good challenge> (part 2 of 2) 2. [0.00]: 58...Ra4 59.Qe3+ Kb7 60.Nh2 Qd5+ 61.f3 Qa2+ 62.Kh3 Qb2 63.Qe7 Qd2 64.Nd6+ Ka6 65.Nxf7 Ra2 66.Nf1 Qg2+ 67.Kh4 Ra5 68.Qxd7 Qf2+ 69.Kh3 Qxf1+ 70.Kg3 Qe1+ 71.Kh3 Qh1+ 72.Kg3 Qe1+
click for larger viewAfter Pogonina's 58...Ra4 Stockfish immediately deviates from our 59.Qd8+ to choose 59.Qe3+. I remember we looked at that move also but decided on 59.Qd8+, not that it helped us all that much. But this version of Pogonina's line also peters out to a draw by repetition, although perhaps with some anxious moments for White. 3. [0.00]: 58...Qf1+ 59.Kg3 Qd3 60.Qb4+ Ka6 61.Nd6 Ne5 62.Qb7+ Ka5 63.Nc4+ Qxc4 (in spite of the resulting material balance, 63...Nxc4 apparently loses, Stockfish evaluating the resulting position at [+3.42], d=28 after 64.Qa8+ Kb5 65.Qxa1) 64.Qc7+ Kb4 65.Nxe5 Qd5 66.Qb6+ Kc3 67.Qe3+ Kc2 68.Qe2+ Kb3 69.Qe3+ Kc2
click for larger viewAnd another draw by repetition. So there does not seem to be much to choose from between Stockfish's original recommendation 58...f5, Pogonina's 58...Ra4, and 58...Qf1+, and possibly other moves. (2) Had we followed this line at least we might have had the satisfaction of queening our h-pawn, but the game would still have been a draw. (3) If instead 68.Qb4+, both reasonable legal moves lead to an equal position at d=40: 
click for larger view1. [0.00]: 68...Kc7 69.Nf7 Qg2+ 70.Kf4 Qg6 (70...Qxf2 does not provide winning chances, Stockfish evaluates the resulting positions at [0.00], d=37 after either 71.Qd6+, 71.Qa5+, or 71.Qe7) 71.Qa5+ Kb7 72.Qb4+ Kc8 73.Qe7 Qd3 74.Qe4 Qxe4+ 75.Kxe4 (and this position is a tablebase draw after 75...c5, but Lomonosov tablebases were not available in 2010) 75...Kc7 76.Kxf3 c5 77.Ke4 c4 78.Kd4 c3 79.Kxc3
click for larger viewStill a draw, although I'm not sure why Stockfish decided to sacrifice Black's c-pawn. 2. [0.00]: 68...Ka6 69.Qb7+ Ka5 70.Qxd7 Qg2+ 71.Kf4 Qxf2 (a possible winning attempt by Black although the position is a tablebase draw) after, strangely, 72.Nc8) 72.Qd8+ Kb4 73.Ne4 Qc2 74.Qd6+ c5 75.Kxf3 (and this is obviously a draw, although 75.Qxc5+ Qxc5 76.Nxc5 Kxc5 77.Kxf3 would have made it even clearer, specially for players like me) 75...Qc4 76.Qe5 Qd3+ 77.Kf4 Qd4 78.Qb8+ Ka3 79.Qb6 Qb4 80.Qa6+ Kb3 81.Qd3+ Kb2 82.Qe2+ Ka1 83.Qf1+ Kb2 84.Qf2+ Kb1 85.Qf3 c4 86.Qd1+ Ka2 87.Qc2+ Ka1 88.Qc1+ Qb1 89.Qc3+ Qb2 90.Qa5+ Kb1 91.Nc3+ Kc2 92.Nb5 c3 93.Ke4 Kd1 94.Nxc3+
click for larger viewEnough said. Our "attack" did not have any chance to succeed, something that was pointed out much earlier by, among others, <imag>, <OhioChessFan>, <Tabanus>, and Pogonina herself. If we want to look at possible winning approaches for White, we need to look for moves between 21.e4 and 41.Nc4 when the position began to open up. |
|
Sep-18-16
| | AylerKupp: BTW, for those who remember The World vs Naiditsch, 2014, while I was looking at back posts I noticed <WinKing>'s reference to "hocus pocus" in this game: The World vs N Pogonina, 2010 (kibitz #23136). |
|
| Sep-18-16 | | YouRang: <AylerKupp: <<YouRang> I felt that we failed to give GM pogonina a good challenge> (part 1 of 2) It seems to me, as <cro777> indicated in The World vs N Pogonina, 2010 (kibitz #27563), that Pogonina does not agree with you, or at least she didn't then, considering this and the other game she played against the Chess.com team in 2009, to be "by far most memorable and demanding".> Well, maybe she was being polite. I think she could have drawn this game by following 20-ply Rybka. We never created any situations where she had to find some precise, yet non-obvious move to hold the draw. (In contrast, our "hocus pocus" game with GM Naiditsch was laced with such situations -- and of course he did finally slip-up.) Anyway, it's not really a matter of "disagreement" between Pogonina and myself. Even if she genuinely felt challenged, that wouldn't require *me* to feel that we adequately challenged her. <If we want to look at possible winning approaches for White, we need to look for moves between 21.e4 and 41.Nc4 when the position began to open up.> IMO, white needed improvements in the range of moves 11-25. Afterwards, the game had lost all of its steam. It may have had some drama in an OTB game, but in an engine-assisted game, the draw was secure. |
|
| Sep-18-16 | | YouRang: Our 22nd move:
click for larger view The vote:
22.Nf1 113 votes (43.0%)
22.e5 91 votes (34.6%)
22.Bf1 37 votes (14.1%)
22.cxb6 9 votes (3.4%)
22.Re1 5 votes (1.9%)
22.exd5 3 votes (1.1%)
22.Nb3 2 votes (0.8%)
The new analysis:
Stockfish_16090917_x64_modern @ 45 ply:
+0.31 22.Bf1 Ra8 23.Nb3 axb4 24.axb4 Ra3 25.e5
+0.25 22.Ra1 Be7 23.e5 Ba6 24.Nb3 axb4 25.axb4
+0.25 22.h4 Ra8 23.Bf1 axb4 24.axb4 Ra3 25.e5
So, it shows a slight preference for 22.Bf1 (which was the move I voted for, but it finished a distant 3rd in the voting). Our <22.Nf1> move didn't make the top three moves. For a while, I ran this with PV=7, but 22.Nf1 wasn't even in the top seven. I started feeling that the team lost its way with this move... ~~~~
The game continued: <22...dxe4 23.Qxe4 Rfd8 24.Ne3 Ba6 25.Ng4 Bb5>, which led to an even more disputed move. I'll let the engine work on that next. |
|
Sep-18-16
| | OhioChessFan: <YouRang> I agree that Pogo almost surely isn't serious about this being a real challenge, and I likewise attribute it to graciousness. As for where we went wrong, when Black can play 17...Ba8, without knowing anything else about the game, you have to know she's not struggling. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1068 OF 1069 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
