chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Yaroslav Zherebukh vs Fabiano Caruana
US Championship (2017), St Louis, MO USA, rd 7, Apr-05
Spanish Game: Morphy Defense. Breyer Defense Zaitsev Hybrid (C95)  ·  1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 1 more Zherebukh/Caruana game
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: Premium members can suggest a game for Guess-the-Move with the Guess-the-Move Suggestion Queue.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Gilmoy: As I recall, Caruana likes this <16..c4> push and <18..Nc5> outpost. But <17..h6> seems like a sharp commitment after he already played the Breyer <14..g6>, leaving Black's K-side airy.

This game might illustrate the deep drawback of not blowing up the d5-center with c6 (or of not having c6 in reserve): Black never gets vertical space for his Rs, nor for the Bb7. Even Nc5 has no targets: White just ignores it, and dogs the DSB in its hidey-hole. That's too many Black pieces failing at being pieces.

<26.f4> was nicely timed: White has the space, and Black has no oomph anywhere.

Apr-06-17  PhilFeeley: I know black is strangled, but what would the continuation be?
Apr-06-17  paavoh: < That's too many Black pieces failing at being pieces> A very apt description.
Apr-06-17  studentt: h4 wins. This is one the best games played by Zherebukh.
Apr-06-17  Dave12: 19..h5 is questionable, it's an unusual mistake from Caruana. Now white has a very comfortable game. Better would have be Kh7.
Apr-06-17  Betterthan99: Strangulation....ĉough cough ...choked like a Loser and ýoū huckleberrŷs think she could even give MC a deçent matĉh??? Lollolololo'
Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: 19. ... h5 was o.k. it was easily still equal then. Nothing wrong with that move. The mistake was 30. ... Bxh6?

Ironically White played the wrong strategy. He should have exhanged the N on c5 gaining a passed pawn in stead of veering over to the King side. Also f4 was not the best.

But I think the psychological effect of his move to the King side led to a psychological wariness for Caruana leading to his error, 30. ... Bxh6 which is probably the losing move. He shouldn't have exchanged that B and allow the Q into h6.

It was a good game by White once things started heating up.

Apr-06-17  Nerwal: 19... h5 has been played many, many times before, but almost all players then went for 20... ♗e7. The plan with ♖f1 and f4 isn't exactly new either : Tal vs Spassky, 1980
Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: Maybe I'm wrong on all that. The trouble is that while initially I also thought that h5 was wrong using a computer seems to just confuse things. It might be the computer is programmed to eval. that Bxc5 is a good idea as he has a passed pawn and the Bs are restricted. Yet a quicker deeper computer than mine might realise that by getting f4 in the h pawn and will be a problem for Black esp. if the Bs can be swapped on that side. But taking on h6 while it might not be the decisive error was certainly not good. It may be that in the long run the pawn on h5 is quite problematic. It is hard trying to work out why games are won and lost for sure. Often neither GM analysis nor computers are much help in some positions. Caruana looked puzzled himself. It just seemed to slowly slip away. Of course the idea of pressure on the f file is human and good.

It all shows that the old main line closed Ruy Lopez is still full of complexity and mystery despite years of study of it.

Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: <Nerwal: 19... h5 has been played many, many times before, but almost all players then went for 20... ♗e7. The plan with ♖f1 and f4 isn't exactly new either : Tal vs Spassky, 1980> That's interesting. I'm trying to find the "truth" of this game with the free Komodo which is good in some positions. What were the errors or the error that led to Caruana's demise? And why. It is difficult to just say "dark square dominance" as that wasn't forced. Of course the end was beautiful. Maurice Ashley is very enthusiastic and showed when Black was lost but not how it transformed to there. It is one of those games talked about in the old books where it is hard to see how the loser went wrong except maybe the exchange of Bs on h6 as I said...
Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Nor is that attacking idea by Tal original, but it is necessary if White is to make progress, antipositional in appearance though it is.
Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: Well Tal showed that the f4 idea worked for him in any case. The h5 pawn was taken with a sac in that game against Spassky so possibly it is an error which is difficult for an "engine" to define but which we can "see" immediately. I won a game the other night making what I knew (or thought I knew) was a wrong move, indeed it was h5 in a different position, but it was not quite possible to punish and I wanted to keep attacking chances with dropping a N on g4 as I did (the position was very different and I didn't castle. But I suppose a computer if it was deep enough and quick enough could demonstrate. Of course it meant that it gave me practical chances.

So chess has an element of luck and psychology, in fact it is, even at the level of Caruana etc, still a big factor in chess. Tal won against Spassky in that game by skill and ingenuity but he also had some luck and the pressure or reality on his side...I was reading today that he got into one position where epopl thought he was calculating all the moves but there were too many as he wrote later, and all he could think of was a hippoptamus. He spent 15 minutes thinking about a hippotamus and what would happen if one was trapped in mud as he seemed to be. He wasn't sure if he should sacrifice, he could see pros and cons, so he sat there "dreaming" and the something said, you would just have to get with it and get ropes and bulldozers and get the hippo out to save it. Then he kind of "woke up" and made his sacrifice...it was something like that! Then after his victory it was reported, wrongly, that he had worked all the moves out for a brilliant victory. He had worked some of the moves out and thought about saving a hippopotamus!!

Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: <perfidious> Yes, the other "correct" way might have just fizzled to a draw.
Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Richard,

'Tal and the hippopotamus' Tal vs Vasiukov, 1964

Writers seeing or finding things the players never saw or even considered was I think fairly common in the pre-computer days.

I won a brilliancy prize in 1978 and happened to eavesdrop on the judge explaining to another player why it won.

He showed a wonderful variation that I had not seen nor had any intention of playing. If the judge, it was this lad Alastair F White had not been such a good and imaginative player himself I would not have won it.

Apr-06-17  Dave12: <Richard Taylor: 19. ... h5 was o.k. it was easily still equal then. Nothing wrong with that move. The mistake was 30. ... Bxh6? Ironically White played the wrong strategy. He should have exhanged the N on c5 gaining a passed pawn in stead of veering over to the King side. Also f4 was not the best.

But I think the psychological effect of his move to the King side led to a psychological wariness for Caruana leading to his error, 30. ... Bxh6 which is probably the losing move. He shouldn't have exchanged that B and allow the Q into h6.

It was a good game by White once things started heating up.> i meant, to my human eye after white breaks with f4, his position looks very good (although there may be a tactical way to equalize somehow). The Tal-Spasski game metioned by <Nerwal> only proves me right.

Apr-06-17  Ulhumbrus: After 22 Bh6 Black's worst placed piece is his queen's bishop as it is obstructed by White's d5-e4 pawn chain. This suggests 22..Bc8
Apr-06-17  protonchess: To my human CM eye, 20. Bxc5 (trading off his best minor piece) cannot be right. In fact it looks like a case of ... you guessed! ... Contemptus Bishopus. Yes, it is the kind of move engines will suggest, and often play. But engine eval means nothing until there's a forced win, up to that point it is just personal preference of the programmer. It is sad that those are accepted as some kind of higher truth.
Apr-06-17  Imran Iskandar: What a beat down.
Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: <protonchess> I agree I am not sure. In a practical game the f4 move would certainly be what I would play. I think. I always try to attack the King but that isn't always the way.

Engine evaluations don't mean nothing. But sometimes in complex positions the engine is too slow so I need a faster computer as well as a better engine. I have the free Komodo. But I always look at alternatives. In fact though after teh f4 move Komodo does revert. There is a fuzzy point in this game where it isn't clear why White lost. Spassky may have had a defense. Some players are brilliant in defense and attack and maybe in that game Spassky missed a defense.

Sometimes you have to go for it, risk opening up the opponent and take it to the opponent. The Ruy Lopez has some very complex and subtle variations though so it helps to use a good computer as well as human "intuition".

Perhaps they need a new program that uses human and computer methods...that somehow actually sees the board and eliminates calculating irrelevant moves....Or that focuses on the more human moves. Something like that. Susan Polgar I think it was also said they (the computers) need to explain why they play what they do play.

Good as they are the machines are still, in computer terms and possibly human brain terms in some ways (except for tactical procedures etc); they are relatively primitive. Well when I was young there was no television in NZ let alone computers, they were something in science fiction books!

Some games though are almost inexplicable.

Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: <Sally Simpson: Hi Richard, 'Tal and the hippopotamus' Tal vs Vasiukov, 1964

Writers seeing or finding things the players never saw or even considered was I think fairly common in the pre-computer days.

I won a brilliancy prize in 1978 and happened to eavesdrop on the judge explaining to another player why it won.

He showed a wonderful variation that I had not seen nor had any intention of playing. If the judge, it was this lad Alastair F White had not been such a good and imaginative player himself I would not have won it.>

You should show your game on here!

I might have got the story a bit garbled I am doing a project where I go through the dewey decimal system taking books at random and taking more of those I would normally not like. I am up to the 500s and without looking yesterday I picked up 1) a book about elephants 2) a book about a park in Scotland where fungi are studies 3) a book about the stars etc in the Southern Hemisphere 4) a book about mathematics and there is a chapter on chess in it!

I had no idea. This sent me to another part of the library where I found Chess and Philosophy.

But the book about mathematics had the story of Tal in it.

My reason for this is an ongoing complex lit. art project (it is actually hard to categorize what I am doing: but I am sampling all kinds of writing in a more or less random way. Here I am doing my random sampling in a more systematic way and when I say get to rugby or Mills and Boon I will force myself to use more of the texts of such books but starting from 000 (computers! which paradoxically dont interest me much so I quoted more, the point being sometimes to make it look quite different from something say that is "poetic" and has strange codes and so on so I often break off mid sentence and quotes are chosen semi-randomly) and so I procede!

But chess is there, and I borrowed the book on maths and the one about philosophy (endorsed on the back by Jennifer Sharade). I allow myself to get out books that are more interesting to me and they are poetry, art poetics, literature some books about maths and science,some history etc and chess from time to time. But it is stimulating when I get books in areas I have never "been" so to speak...There was a scary book about a terrible jail in Australia and there was one a bout a rape at Yale...strange things...a few about oil production and the environment in Canada and so on....self-help, a book about how to breathe well,a bout vitamin D (I took part in a scientific study of vitamin D here myself)....all interesting.

But the chess books are there also. A complete of Fischer's games a book by Davies...who is apparently a GM...

Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: <sallysimpson> Was this your game?

G Chandler vs A White, 1980

You should have more of these. Did they confuse you with Murray Chandler? You're not related are you? I'll check he says...

Apr-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Richard,

No that was played about 2 years later. Alastair was the Best Judge of another tournament. I'll see if I can dig out my 78 game. I have submitted games in the past but only a few sneaked through. Most really are cheapo's.

Only once I know of me and Murray have been confused and that was here with the above game. I've been told one of my games is also under his name in a book. If it is the chances are I lost it! (can have that one).

Someone (it was not me) said I was Murrays dad and the subject of his 'How to Beat Your Dad at Chess'. (If so I fathered him when I was 9.)

That stuck for a while and I was fed up denying it and made the mistake of once calling him my son in a game note. That was a big mistake. There are still people in Scotland who still think I'm Murray's Dad...I'm not.

Apr-07-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: Wonderful game. Zherby really brought it, here. This opening is not played out.
Apr-07-17  protonchess: @Richard_Taylor: I don't want a fight, but maybe you can explain what engines' numbers mean, if not nothing. :-)

If it's not a forced win for either side (and that's the overwhelming majority of positions that occur in games), there isn't an objective sense in which it is anything other than a draw.

Apr-07-17  protonchess: See also Anand vs Carlsen, 2015 - although there Black preferred to trade his dark Bishop for a Knight.
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Some Greater Hits
by Pawn N Hand
Zherby's Best of 2017 Love the Majors At the End
from OhioChessFan's favorite games of 2017 by OhioChessFan
B: Morphy Defense. Breyer Defense Zaitsev Hybrid
from Ruy Lopez: Closed, Main Line, 9 h3 by imsighked2
protonchess' favorite games
by protonchess
The Ruy Lopez + The Italian Game
by frogmanjones
2017 U.S. Chess Championships
by AchieverofChess

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC