Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 11 Oct '08 16:50
    I posted an analysis from one of my games in this thread: http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=101638&page=1#post_1902152 .

    It made sense to post it in that thread because it illustrates my point in the original post: I can't figure out how to beat these 1700-1800s!! I wanted to post it here as well, though because I worked hard on that, and it may get more of a response here.

  2. 11 Oct '08 16:50
    I intended to give up my b, c, and d pawns for development of my two bishops. I've been successful with this in the past in blitz.

    1. e4 e5
    2. d4 exd4
    3. c4

    This was a mistake. I intended to play c3, but it wored out anyway.

    3 ... dxc4.

    4. Bc4 cxb2
    5. Bxb2

    I give up two pawns for a large advatage in development. This is probably very unsound, but the advantage in development has proved useful to me in blitz games before.

    5 ... Nf6
    6. e5

    With the large advantage in development, I wanted to press as much as possible. With 6. e5 my intention was to press black's position while forcing his knight back. If 6 ... Ne4 then 7. Qf3 appears to get me a knight.

    6 ... Ng8

    7. Nf3 h6

    h6 was one I hadn't anticipated for some reason, and hindered my plans.

    8. Nb1d2 d5

    8 ...d5 may possibly have been a mistake as he may not have seen the en passant. He may also have wanted to get his queen out, so I'm not sure, as it allowed him to do that.

    9. exd5 ep Qxd6
    10. O-O Be6
    11. Re1

    I expected the pin to be temporary with a 11 ...Ne7 or Be7. That was okay, though because I intended to follow with BxB and then Rb1 or Rc1. I would have had all my pieces in a position to bring them in to an attack then.

    11 ... Nf6
    12. Nd4

    With the triple attack on Black's bishop from the knight, bishop and rook I figured I was going to win at least a pawn, plus get my rook in a very strong position. Also on my mind was The possible fork between black's king and queen from the rook if black didn't block it.

    12 ... Be7

    Blocks the fork, but still allows my rook into a pressing position.

    13. Nxe6

    This may have been a mistake. Perhaps I should have played Bxe6, but I can't see why. This is a very open game at this point, and I thought that the two bishops would serve me better than a bishop-knight combination.

    13 ...fxe6
    14. Rxe6

    I chose to capture with the rook rather than the bishop to keet the black bishop pinned, and gain tempo by causing black to move the queen. My plan was to attack Black's remaining bishop, hoping to win it. I had forseen that the bishop could be saved, but his knight would have to move back to g8 to do this, and this seemed to lead to good things for me as I was far more developed than him.

    14 ... Qd7
    15. Ba3 Nc6
    16. Qe2 Ng8
    17. Qh5+

    Forcing the King to move to d8. This takes away the castling possibility. I now have a stationary target to attack. If 17 ...Kf8 then 18. Rf6+ gxf6 (or Nxf6). Black can't play Bxf6 bringing his queen in because his bishop is pinned. After 18 ... gxf6 or Nxf6 then 19. Qf7++.

    17 ... Kd8.
    18. Bxe7+ ??

    I was rushed on time but in retrospect this seems to be a bad move. I lose an attacking piece and allow him to bring in a piece to defend, and allowed his rook on h8 freedom to move down his back row. The idea behind this move was to take the Bishop out so 1.) it couldn't take out mine first, and 2.) it could not move to d6. I intended to bring my rook in the back row to d1 and attack his queen, and perhaps in the rish of blitz pin his queen. Definitely a miscalculation on my part.

    18 ... Nxe7
    19. Rd1 Kc8
    20. Ne4

    Here, while I still had an advantage in development, I had lost the attack. I could perhaps force him to shuffle his pieces around, but I don't see any way to press him anymore.

    20 ... Qe8
    21. Qh3 Kb8
    22. Nc5

    I seem to have an attack again with Na6 if I could only see it!!!

    22 ... a6
    23. Nd7+ ?

    I was in a real rush on time here. I didn't even consider Nxa6+. That said, in retrospect after analyzing the position for a while, I don't know if it would have done me much good. For instance:



    If black recaptures with his pawn then I seem to have the win. 24. Rb1+.

    [FEN]rk2q2r/2p1n1p1/p1n1R2p/8/2B5/7Q/P4PPP/1R4K1[/FEN] (posted in following post)

    If 24 ... Ka7 25. Qe3+ Nd4 26. Qxd4+ c5 27. Qxc5++. The other option is 24 ... Kc8 25. Rxe7+.

    [FEN]r1k1q2r/2p1R1p1/p1n4p/8/2B5/7Q/P4PPP/1R4K1[/FEN] (posted 2 posts down)

    From here it can proceed one of two ways.

    25 ... Kd8 26. Rxe8.

    [FEN]r2kR2r/2p3p1/p1n4p/8/2B5/7Q/P4PPP/1R4K1[/FEN] (posted 3 posts down)

    Black can't play 26 ... Rxe8 because 27. Rd8 leads to mate.

    So after white plays 26. Rxe8 Black must follow

    26 ... Kxe8
    27. Qe6+ Ne7
    28. Qf7+ Kd8
    29. Qe6+ Kb8 (or Kb7)
    30. Rb1+ Ka7
    31. Qe3+ c5
    32. Qxc5++.

    If instead of 25 ... Kd8 black decided to play 25 ... Qd7 then 26. Qxd7++.

    If, however, instead of 23 ...bxa6 Black decided to play 23 ... Rxa6 then things would have looked different. I can not find a winning line from here, and things look fairly even.

    Since, even after analyzing I can't seem to find anything except perhaps being able to force a draw after 23. Nxa6+ I don't feel too bad playing 23. Nd7+. After this black proceeds:

    23 ... Ka7
    24. Qe3+ b6
    25. Qa3 Na5

    Here I'm very short on time. I completely miss the threat on my bishop from black's knight.

    26. Rxe7 Nxc4
    27. Qg3 Qd8
    28. h3

    Things have totally fallen apart for me. I have no attack left. h3 was just a rushed move because I was going to really have to rush just to keep the game going and I wanted to avoid the back-row mate.

    28 ...g5

    and black wins on time.

    I realize I made a couple of mistakes, however I felt I played this game reasonably well. I didn't see any outright blunders, and I had the initiative the whole time, but I don't see how I could have gotten trhough my opponents seemingly impenetrable defense. This is the sort of game I'm referring to, and I can't seem to figure out what I should have done to win this one.

    To answer your question, I can't honestly figure out exactly how my opponent got out of that except by tactically blocking every threat I saw.

    Sorry for the long post, and there's my analysis. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
  3. 11 Oct '08 16:50
  4. 11 Oct '08 16:50
  5. 11 Oct '08 16:51
  6. 11 Oct '08 17:35
    I promise I will take a look at it and give some annotations soon.
  7. 11 Oct '08 17:44
    Thanks!
  8. 11 Oct '08 18:20 / 2 edits
    I like the opening you chose. I have played it from time to time. I generally get a good game when black plays dxc3. The problem for me has been 1.e4 e5 2.d4 exd4 3.c3 d5 ! . It doesn't necessarily refute the gambit. It just brings about a totally different position (with an isolated queen pawn for white). After 5.Bxb2, we have the Danish Gamit Accepted. Frank James Marshall had some nice wins with this variation for white. One of the "refutations" for black is to head to an even endgame. I will present the line here.



    See Next Post
  9. 11 Oct '08 18:29
    First, I would like to explain this variation. It is one of the most tactical opening lines you will ever study.
    5. ... d5 ! is a nice thematic pawn sacrifice. Black returns material to catch up in development.
    6.Bxd5 white answers with a threat to win the queen
    6. ... Nf6 black ingnores the "threat" and resumes development
    7.Bxf7+ winning a pawn and trying to lure the king away from the defense of the queen
    7. ... Kxf7 !! grabbing the material and ignoring the threat
    8. Qxd8 grabbing the queen
    8. ... Bb4+ attacking the king and creating a discovered attack from the rook on h8 to the queen
    9.Qd2 retreating to get the b4 bishop for the queen
    9. ... Bxd2 + 10. Nxd2 material is even
    10. ... Re8 attacking e4
    11.Ngf3 !! ( On 11. ... Nxe4 12.Ne5+ ! cuts off the e4 knight's protection or wins the exchange after Rxe5 13.Bxe5)
    11. ... Nc6 (stopping Ne5 and attacking e4 again)
    12.0-0 ! ( On 12. ... Nxe4 13. Nxe4 Rxe4 14. Ng5+ wins the rook)

    Here the books usually close with =. The positional is equal, but not a draw. White has a kingside pawn majority, black has a queenside pawn majority. It usually become a race to see who can launch their pawns forward the fastest.

    There you have it. One of the most booked up lines, still leaves plenty of play at the end of the evaluation.

    Next Post I return to the actual game.
  10. 11 Oct '08 18:52
    Your 6.e5 was a nice move. 6. ... Ng8 was a mistake. ( 6. ... Bb4+ 7.Kf1 (7.Nc3 Qe7/7.Nd2 Qe7) d5 is interesting.
    For move 7, f7 attacks generally come to mind. 7.Qd5 doesn't look so great, I guess. 7.Qb3 (with an idea of a rapid queenside castling may cause black's lag in development to show) Qe7 8. Nd2 or 8.Nc3 but not 8.Ne2 Qb4+
    7.Nf3 looks fine too and may in fact be best. I am only giving my own analysis this time.
    I think 7. ... h6 begs for 8.Qb3 (since he eliminated Nh6 as a defense) black will have a hard time developing his pieces.
    The problem with 8.Nd2 is d5 !! ( He really got a lot more space than he had, and his pieces became much more active.)
    From here on, you exploited your lead in development and more active pieces quite well. Well Done.
    I don't think Bxe7 wasn't all that bad. He really is in bad shape.
    This is a really hard game to analyze. There really aren't that many strategic themes or anything to explain. This tactical game is more about cold hard calculation. You just have to study the position and try to go through as many variations as you can. Being blitz, makes it ten times harder. On the whole, you played great attacking moves and never let the initiative go. That was a great !
    I'm sorry I could not be of more help.
    Someone else please analyze this with a computer and show some more of the variations. I don't have the time right now. Sorry
    All The Best
    Handshake
  11. 11 Oct '08 19:01 / 1 edit
    Thanks. I never looked at 7. Qb3 or 8. Qb3 in the sense of a development stopper...

    I've never studied this by book or anything, so that was extremely helpful as well. I'll have to check out some of the master games using that variation.
  12. 11 Oct '08 23:21
    Now that I'm home I can run this through Fritz:

    Analysis by Fritz 11:

    10.Qb3 Nd7 11.Bxf7+ Kd8 12.Rd1 Ngf6 13.0-0 Qb4 14.Qc2 c6 15.Nc4 Kc7 16.Bc3 Qe7 17.Qg6 b6 18.Rfe1 Qc5
    +- (2.85) Depth: 17/21 00:00:01 1733kN

    It also evaluates 15 Qb3 as +4.86 whereas Ba3 is +1.06.

    The winning move seems to be 23. Nxb7, which I didn't even consider in post-game analysis!

    Another one I missed:

    26.Qxa5 Qxd7 27.Rxd7 bxa5 28.Rxc7+ Kb8 29.Rexe7 h5 30.Be6 Ra7 31.Rxa7
    +- (#11) Depth: 10/15 00:00:00 13kN

    Fritz is good at breaking your spirit
  13. 11 Oct '08 23:28
    just a little patience and you will be able to win against 1700-1800s from time to time...you are on the right track(playing nice games and analysing losses)...I bet than in less than a year you will be there...
  14. Standard member black beetle
    Black Beastie
    12 Oct '08 06:07
    Originally posted by vipiu
    just a little patience and you will be able to win against 1700-1800s from time to time...you are on the right track(playing nice games and analysing losses)...I bet than in less than a year you will be there...
    I would pick a standard opening and I would stick to its theory exploiting every posible line of its main variation.