[FEN "2b1r1k1/1p3pb1/2pp1np1/1Pq5/2P1p1n1/2B1N1P1/2NPPPB1/Q4RK1 w - - 0 21"]
21. Nxg4 {White has won a clean piece. Nxg4 meets Bxg7 and Bxg4 drops a piece to Bxf6.} 21... Nxg4 {Have the g7 Bishop} 22. Bxg7 Qh5 {Mate on Qh2 is threatened. I hope you saw that at home.} 23. Rb1 {To give the King some running room.} 23... Qh2+ 24. Kf1 Ne5 {New threat. Bh3 and Qh1 mate.} 25. g4 {A nice defensive try, which had to be spotted by Black before embarking on this road. Note Bxg4 does not work due to White playing Bxe5 and the attack is beaten off. He may pre-attack analysis have considered Kxg7 here, it wins back the piece. But like all good players he Checks all Checks.} 25... Nf3 {Or indeed I may not be giving the lad full credit and he saw this move coming ages ago. This is a cracking move. A lot of my cracking moves have been found when I reach the critical position fully intending to do something different.} 26. exf3 exf3 27. Bxf3 Bxg4 {The threat of Bh3+ and Qg1 mate can only be stopped by White giving up his Queen starting with Be5. If Bxg4 then of course Qh1 mate. WHite resigned. Great Game. OK you want to see a mate} 28.Ne3 {Blocks the e-file and covers g2.} 28...Bxf3 29. Ke1 Qh1
Greenpawn,
In your analysis on move 9, showing a check mate, is there any positional reason to choose Qh1# for the mate, rather than Qg1#? Is there any stylistic reason or "proper play" reason to use Qh1#, and not Qg1#?
If it doesn't specifically apply here, does it apply in other situations where a Grandmaster has a choice of 2 one move methods of checkmate where one choice is somehow more appropriate than the other?
1. d4 f5 2. e4 fxe4 3. f3 exf3 4. Bd3 fxg2 5. Qh5+ g6 {Now do you prefer 6.Bxg6 and Qxg6 mate or....} 6. Qxg6+ hxg6 7. Bxg6 {I think most would go for the Queen sac (I just did) because it's a Queen sac which is always pleasing, but other will sac the Bishop instead.}
GreenPawn,
Thanks for the reply. I was wondering if Grandmasters use certain principle ideas even when 2 one-move checkmates will work or 2 two-move checkmates will work.
In the previous example of the silly mate, would a grandmaster play the Bxg6+ over the Qxg6+ out of some principle, if for no other reason but to keep reminded of such a principle in general play conditions which are not in an immediate or imminent end game? Or do GMs just do what they want to in such cases?
In the above case if a fellow GM was Black in a similiair position and we are
at the rear end of some brilliant combination then the Queen sac wraps it up nicely.
I don't think the other GM would be too upset or take it as an insult.
I'd play the Queen sac because I am a natural born show-off.
I'd sac the Queen and post the game!......three times a month.
Don't wiegh yourself down with so many questions or hold the GM lads in awe.
The are a bit better at a game than you, nothing more.
They don't think deep and ponder on every move as if the existence of the
universe depends upon it. They usually play what is the best practical move.
The less thinking a position requires then that is way to go.
(they call it technique) Only when the positions demands it do they dive
into the think tank. Knowing when such positions arise comes with
experience, and experience cannot be taught.