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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member RECUVIC
    international loser
    22 Sep '09 15:06
    [pgn]3759097[/pgn Most of us are very familiar with Bishop x h7 but is it always as correct as it might first appear? Decide here,1/was it correct at the time and 2/why did an excellent game opponent resign and 3/was that decision correct? This is not for the faint hearted or ocassional chess player,the correct answers are not as easy as they might seem to be,so I discovered myself! If you know or think you know the answers to any of these questions,share them with me. I will make no further comments for now,my next message on the questions will provide my own personal answers,but they may not be the same as yours!-----------------
  2. 22 Sep '09 16:20
    Game 3759097

  3. 22 Sep '09 18:30 / 2 edits
    1/ Bxh works cause black's knight gets offside. black can't dislodge whites knight. and its good because black's position gets passive.

    24 qe5?? why not 24 d5, idea qd4. now white has to play energetically.

    2/ resigns cause rxg5 fails.

    3/ ...a4! rxa4 bxc ra7 rxg kxg rxr rx kx r+ rf2 or h2 - b2. draw.

    quality game.
  4. 22 Sep '09 18:31
    Originally posted by Booked
    quality game.
    The level is of GM standard I'd say.
  5. 22 Sep '09 18:37
    Originally posted by heinzkat
    The level is of GM standard I'd say.
    don't know. once the queens went off i couldnt evaluate the positions anymore. i'm too weak, and too lazy.
  6. 22 Sep '09 18:41
    Originally posted by heinzkat
    The level is of GM standard I'd say.
    oh 'personal completed games from 24,112 games in printed book'

    what book is that? dunno where'd you get the time to play so many games, i can't count that high.
  7. 26 Sep '09 15:29
    Originally posted by RECUVIC
    [pgn]3759097[/pgn Most of us are very familiar with Bishop x h7 but is it always as correct as it might first appear? Decide here,1/was it correct at the time and 2/why did an excellent game opponent resign and 3/was that decision correct? This is not for the faint hearted or ocassional chess player,the correct answers are not as easy as they might seem to b ...[text shortened]... ons will provide my own personal answers,but they may not be the same as yours!-----------------
    Took a quick look at the game in question, first of all very dubious choice of opening for Black with that 4...b5, although White went on to push c5 in the opening phase.
    On the 17.Bxh7 move, I would at best give it "?", 17...g6 18.Ng5 Nf5 19.h4 Nxh4 20.f4 Nf5 (maybe 20.d5 Nxe3 21.Qb2) 21.Qd3 Qb6 - at this point in the game I would say that White had lost any edge it gained during the poor opening choices of the Black pieces. 22.g4 Ne7 23.Qe4 Qc7! - very nice move for Black, which can now focus on gaining an advantage on the Q-site with its passed pawns, starting with a4!. Centre is defensible is White tries to pressure with d5 exd5 cxd5 Rd6.
    24.Qe5?? - horrible move, gives Black the game on a silver platter. After the Q-exchange Black can push a4-b3 with ease creating immense pressure and blocking one rook on Rab1 after b3, White then has to withdraw Ne4 and Black can manoeuvre his Nc8, Bc6 and start activating both pieces to claim the Q-side. Black effectively plays with an extra piece, since Bh7 is blocked! ... a4 26.Rdb1 Nc6! - process of activating pieces is even quicker for Black.
    But 25...Nc6? is too early, giving White Rf1!, forcing 26...Nd8. Still, I think Black has a small advantage here. 29.Rf2? again is inviting Kg7! followed by Nc6!!, and not Kg7 30.Rh2 Ra7 - which is slow and achieves nothing, since Nxf7 is countered by Rxh7!.
    31.c5 Bd7 32.Kf2 Rb7 - even without Bc6 White is completely lost in this position, Black has only to start pushing those damn pawns.
    35.d5? (exd5 exd5 Nxe5! Kd4 Nxg4!, if Kf4 then Nd3+! is deadly), but Black plays 35...Nxe5 36.c6 Nxg4+?? - very very very weak move, Re7! was the answer to c6, followed by exd5.
    37.Kf4 Rb5 (imagine only 37...Bxc6 38.dx6 Nxh2 39.cxb7 e5+! 40.Kg3 Rb8 41.Kxh2 Rxb7 42.Bxg6 Kxg6 - position after is Black has two passed pawns + Rook versus Knight badly placed + Rook, I would play as Black in this position and win without problems)..
    38.Kxg4 exd5 39.exd5 Rxd5 40.Rc1? inviting b3! 41.Rc4 1-0

    What did you do, bribe him to resign?! White is lost here... after 41.Rc4 Rb5! with b2 in mind, c7 is countered by Bd7 with check if White does not move the King, followed by Rxg5, two passed pawns, one dead Bishop and a generally bad position give Black easy winning chances...
  8. 26 Sep '09 22:33
    Originally posted by Booked
    oh 'personal completed games from 24,112 games in printed book'

    what book is that? dunno where'd you get the time to play so many games, i can't count that high.
    oh haven't you heard? RECUVIC is a grandmaster, he just doesn't know how to notate chess moves.
  9. 26 Sep '09 23:00
    Originally posted by philidor position
    oh haven't you heard? RECUVIC is a grandmaster, he just doesn't know how to notate chess moves.
    He has a big wise book full of games in his own patented notation though
  10. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    27 Sep '09 00:43
    Originally posted by DanVM
    Took a quick look at the game in question, first of all very dubious choice of opening for Black with that 4...b5, although White went on to push c5 in the opening phase.
    On the 17.Bxh7 move, I would at best give it "?", 17...g6 18.Ng5 Nf5 19.h4 Nxh4 20.f4 Nf5 (maybe 20.d5 Nxe3 21.Qb2) 21.Qd3 Qb6 - at this point in the game I would say that White had lost an ...[text shortened]... passed pawns, one dead Bishop and a generally bad position give Black easy winning chances...
    Nice rating. And to think, one year ago, you were a 1700 player.
  11. 27 Sep '09 14:48 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Nice rating. And to think, one year ago, you were a 1700 player.
    We all start somewhere I think.
  12. 27 Sep '09 14:51 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Nice rating. And to think, one year ago, you were a 1700 player.
    Did you at least take a look at the analysis provided? And thank you for your compliment, though thinly veiled.
    A year ago actually I wasn't playing, 02.10.08 my rating was 1035 going for the low point 713, same will happen this year when my MA starts.
  13. 27 Sep '09 14:58 / 1 edit
    So tell us what is your secret to RHP success, can you open a new thread on it?
  14. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    27 Sep '09 17:00
    Originally posted by DanVM
    Did you at least take a look at the analysis provided? And thank you for your compliment, though thinly veiled.
    A year ago actually I wasn't playing, 02.10.08 my rating was 1035 going for the low point 713, same will happen this year when my MA starts.
    I was thinking more in the timeframe Jun '08, when you played this game as a 1768 player:

    Game 4932508

    Indeed, a quick glance at the rating graph indicates that you were averaged out at roughly 1700 over about 200 games.

    Your low point came from a mass-timeout/resignation spree when you apparently left the site.

    Then, when you came back slightly over a year later, you were suddenly a master.
  15. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    27 Sep '09 17:04
    Originally posted by 4al0
    We all start somewhere I think.
    Very well. Let's say someone started at 1700, then played at that level for ~200 games. Then, a year later, they come back 600 points stronger. Wouldn't you want to buy a bottle of whatever chess elixir they were drinking?!