| Feb-21-15 | | Papagambit: What an exquisite retreating tactical shot featuring our old friend Zug! |
|
| Feb-21-15 | | Gilmoy: <6..c5> might already be wrong: a weekender playing the <what> without understanding the <why>. <8.e5 11.Be4> exacerbates congestion. <14..f5> becomes a <right-of-refusal> offer gone bad. White simply sees deeper, and the capture-chain produces an unshakable bind on open d. |
|
| Feb-23-15 | | raviarun: Why is the retreat a zugzwang? The threat is 29.Nd6+. If 28...Kg8, then 29.Nd6 Rd8 30.Ne7+, winning the bishop. |
|
| Feb-23-15 | | Tomlinsky: A smell similar to that when opening a packet of dry roasted peanuts must have engulfed the players after 14...f5. |
|
Feb-23-15
 | | OhioChessFan: Don't Zwet It. |
|
| Feb-24-15 | | roni.chessman: <raviarun: Why is the retreat a zugzwang? The threat is 29.Nd6+. If 28...Kg8, then 29.Nd6 Rd8 30.Ne7+, winning the bishop.> It would seem that <OhioChessFan> has a point. Zugzwang: A situation in a chess game in which a player is forced to make an undesirable or disadvantageous move. All of black's moves are bunk. |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | goodevans: Today is a rest day at Wijk aan Zee so I was hoping the GOTD would give us something to feast on. Alas, rather too one-sided to provide much sustenance. Wait though! Zugzwang is mentioned. My ears prick but I cannot find it. More disappointment. Roll on tomorrow when Wijk aan Zee is back. As for the pun, it too failed to raise a smile. |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | stone free or die: I know, it was bitter zet. |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | Twilight of the Idol: A compelling game. Is black already lost by move 14? 14. ... f5 and he winds up in a debilitating bind, but how else was it possible to cope with the direct attack? 14. ... Ba6 15. Ng5 g6 16. h5! and black looks totally busted. 16. ... hxg5 17. hxg6+ Kg8 18. Rh7 and you just resign: 18. ... f5 19. exf6 Qxf4 20. f7+ Rxf7 21. gxf7+ Kf8 22. Rh8+, for instance. 14. ... h5 is an option, and 15. Ng5 g6 16. Nxe6!? fxe6 17. Qxg6 Rxf4! gives black some hope after 18. Qh6+ (18. Qxh5+ Kg7) 18. ... Kg8 19. Qxf4 (19. Qxe6+ Rf7) 19. ... Qxe5 and the attack ends with black having two bishops against the rook and pawn. White is still for choice after that mess since black has permanent pawn weaknesses and a problem LSB. Nevertheless, 15. Ng5 g6 16. Nf3 and white can gradually build that attack, which should break through pretty easily since black has accumulated even more k-side weaknesses. |
|
Jan-23-25
 | | Teyss: Agree with above: the game is not very special and the final position is not zugzwang since if it were White to move, he would also win. I really like zugzwang in general, there's something paradoxical and rare about it. The pun: Bart with the black pieces = Bart of Darkness, wow. Zwet is close to "zwart" meaning black in Dutch but not enough to be relevant. The opponent is not named Joseph or Charles or Kurtz or whatever. This game would have been a better fit although even less interesting: A White vs B van der Zwet, 2013 |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | Arlekhino: <Teyss: Agree with above: the game is not very special and the final position is not zugzwang since if it were White to move, he would also win.> Allow me to politely disagree. I would argue that Black, in the final position, is in Zugzwang. Though it´s not a reciprocal Zugzwang, since, of course, if it were White to move, they would not be lost as well. I figure that this question of the concept of Zugzwang has already been exhaustively dicussed around here, but I couldn't help from exposing my view on this specific case. And I also think that the game is interesting enough to be a GOTD, and the pun has clicked for me. |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | goodevans: <Arlekhino> You say that you ‘would argue that Black, in the final position, is in Zugzwang’ without actually providing any argument. The term ‘zugzwang’, from the German ‘compulsion to move’, specifically describes a situation where a player is forced to make his position <worse> because he must make a move. Could you please explain why you think that applies here or, alternatively, provide a different definition of ‘zugzwang’ that you think we should adopt. I would be interested to know |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | Allderdice83: Van der Zwet is already worse by move 3 with 3 ... d6?! (3 ... d5 is the top engine choice); 4. e5 d4 5. exf6 dxc3 6. bxc3 Qxf6, or 4. cxd5 exd5 5. e5 Ne4 (6. Nxe4? dxe4 7. Qa4+ Nc6 8. Qxe4 Be6 and Black's development more than makes up for the pawn). It just gets worse for him from there as White doesn't let up. |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | Arlekhino: Right, <Goodevans>, thank you for the chance to explain. What I see is that the player with the black pieces found himself in a position where any move he could make would be useless to avoid defeat. And, of course, he had the obligation to move. Now I don´t sugest anyone should adopt this as the concept of Zugzwang. I´d rather say that this is very similar to what one can name Zugzwang, and that is argument enough for me to refer to it as a Zugzwang. I agree that I´m bending the concept, since even if Black could "pass", he would loose. But reading the comments above, I see that I´m not alone in considering this, if not "the perfect example of Zugzwang", at the very least an analogous situation. I know: if we stretch the concept of Zugzwang like I´m sugesting, any position in which a player decides to resign because "resistance is futile" could be called Zugzwang. Therefore my argument is insufficient, to say the least. But could you "cut me some slack" there, on the grounds that this conversation may have helped to clarify the concept, or at least may have served for our colleagues here to reflect about it? Thanks again, anyway! |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | goodevans: <Arlekhino> An interesting way of looking at it. Thanks for explaining. |
|
| Jan-23-25 | | Muttley101: It's not zugzwang- that's when there is a compulsion to move when any move worsens one side's position or loses, whilst the opponent having the move means they cannot make progress. The classic example is K+P vs K, for example- picture white Kf6, Pe7, black Ke8. Black's in zugzwang- black can only play .. Kd7 when Kf7 controls the queening square and promotes. This is also a case of reciprocal zugzwang- white to move is in zugzwang as well, because white can only move the king- playing Ke6, the only move to support the pawn, is stalemate, and any other move by the king allows black to capture the pawn. Black's simply busted here- white has a winning move at his disposal, and black cannot defend against the threat which white could execute immediately and win. Sorry to be so long-winded, but it's an importanct concept worth clarifying. |
|
Jan-24-25
| | Teyss: Hi Arlekhino,
Don't know if you'll pick up this post, sorry to be late but wasn't available yesterday evening. You are allowed to disagree of course especially so politely, hence don't hesitate to raise a contradiction because it leads to interesting comments. <goodevans> and <Muttley101> made good points so I have nothing to add except a few example in order to illustrate. If it doesn't benefit you, hope it will other potential readers. Example of mutual zugzwang: the player to move loses. That's a simple one. 
click for larger viewWhilst there are many cases of zugzwang with a few pieces (notably K+Ps vs K+Ps), it's very rare to have the situation with more pieces on the board as in the present GOTD. Notably it has been debated if the famous Saemisch vs A Nimzowitsch, 1923 is actually zugzwang: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immor... To give just one example with more pieces than a simple endgame: M Podgaets vs M Dvoretzky, 1974. The game could have continued 31.b4 cxb4 32.c5 bxc5 after which White has to make a losing move. 
click for larger view If 33.Qxf3, Qh2#. If 33.R~, Rxf2 wins immediately. If White could pass, there wouldn't be an immediate winning move for Black; if White could pass indefinitely, Black would just push a Qside Pawn to promotion. Zugzwang is sometimes called out even though it doesn't qualify because it's a cool concept and we want it to apply, yet its rarity is precisely what makes it special. |
|
|
|
|
Kibitzing
