Blown Endgame

Originally posted by no1marauder
Black hardly "cruised to victory"; in fact as SG and Korch have pointed out, 24 f5! probably wins.

But as "always" in such games, the winning move was not played by the outrated player, because it was somehow hidden enough, or there was another reasonable option that was distracting enough... or if that move had been played, it would not have been played out to a win because the higher-rated player can somehow play strong enough to make it very difficult to convert the position into a full point. That White did not play the f4-f5 move already sort of proves that the move was not that obvious. Look, hypothetically if you had played a similar game as Black against a 1400-rated player you would have won it as well. That is the sort of thing I was trying to point out.

I do not know why you always appear to employ arguments on a personal level; you asked for feedback on the game, and I gave some; you already stated in the initial post you expected to be "ridiculed"; why? - nothing to worry about when losing against a much stronger player. Take it as an opportunity to "learn" instead of an opportunity to feel "insulted" because you lost. I hope I did not appear somehow "insulting" towards you, I was just commenting on the game. Of course there are always some could-have-beens when reviewing lost games, but where does that get one if during the game these possible maneuvers elude the player.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Off the top of my head without running it through any engine:
21 Rg1+ Ng6 22 Bg5 Q moves say 23 Qh5 or 23 h4 seems to give White a promising attack.

Maybe there's not a forced win, but Black seems to be under heavy pressure as well as being down material.

After 21 Rg1+ Ng6 22 Bg5 Black has 22...Qe5 when after 23.Qxe5 Nxe5 from possible checks (moving bishop away from g5) no one is dangerous. And endgame seems to be at least no worse for Black.

Maybe also playable is 22....Qf7 when 23.Qh5 fails to 23...Bxf2 but I`m not sure about Black position after 23.h4.

Btw. Probably both of us did not count material - only now I`ve noticed that Black has 2 pawns for exchange which usually is not considered as "being down material".

P.S. Also after 21.Rg1+ maybe black can afford to play 21...Ng4!? - at least I don`t see refutation

Originally posted by heinzkat
But as "always" in such games, the winning move was not played by the outrated player, because it was somehow hidden enough, or there was another reasonable option that was distracting enough... or if that move had been played, it would not have been played out to a win because the higher-rated player can somehow play strong enough to make it very difficult ...[text shortened]... where does that get one if during the game these possible maneuvers elude the player.

Your worthless opinion is noted; in heinzkat's world a lower rated player never beats a higher rated one. I asked for "constructive criticism", not ignorant comments regarding the impossibility of higher rated players losing. I note you ignored my real example of a player 600 points lower beating a GM. In OTB, I also drew against a player with a similar rating advantage; in fact, I did so after being a piece down!

Originally posted by no1marauder
In heinzkat's world a lower rated player never beats a higher rated one.

It is good that you are reading with such scrutinity and you will always find something not completely correct in what I write, but this time I already covered myself in by putting emphasis on the inverted commas around the word "always". 🙂

I will repeat and explain more thoroughly what I was trying to say, thoughts that came up after replaying the game you placed here...

The higher rated player will win in the majority of cases. That is just how the rating system works. If the much higher rated player would not win the great majority of games against weaker opposition, he would not be rated any higher than them either... 😉

On the point of a GM losing against a 1900, such games happen, yet they are exceptions on the normal expectations. (I skipped this point, excuse me but is it required that I respond to every single point 🙂)

However, such a game as you give in this thread is what happens quite a lot; the weaker player may "stumble his way" into a advantageous position at some point, but will not be able to convert it to a win against a stronger player. Just like you would probably win a game where somewhere you have a disadvantageous position against much weaker opposition too.

I have not said that you played a bad game - you did fine. But playing OK chess is not always enough when being this outmatched (I do not know what playing strength 2189 on ICC corresponds to, but I find Black's play on the whole quite OK), you need a bit of luck too and your opponent to help a hand somewhere, which he did not except for allowing Bxf5.

I have also thought about the initial "You don't know anything about chess, do you" comment (a point which I "passed" on too) and I believe you are completely right there; I am gullible and clueless when it comes to knowing anything about chess. But I would not know anyone who would use that to be condescending about it against me, we are having a good laugh about it. I have a feeling that we would communicate a lot differently if it would not be through these Internet forums.

Originally posted by heinzkat
It is good that you are reading with such scrutinity and you will always find something not completely correct in what I write, but this time I already covered myself in by putting emphasis on the inverted commas around the word "always". 🙂

I will repeat and explain more thoroughly what I was trying to say, thoughts that came up after replaying the game ...[text shortened]... would communicate a lot differently if it would not be through these Internet forums.

Your comment that "the stronger player cruised to victory" is ridiculous to anyone who actually looked at the game with some level of chess knowledge as the comments of other players here show. I suggest you refrain from posting in the Chess Forum until you are actually able to analyze the moves of a game with some small level of understanding.

Originally posted by Korch
After 21 Rg1+ Ng6 22 Bg5 Black has 22...Qe5 when after 23.Qxe5 Nxe5 from possible checks (moving bishop away from g5) no one is dangerous. And endgame seems to be at least no worse for Black.

Maybe also playable is 22....Qf7 when 23.Qh5 fails to 23...Bxf2 but I`m not sure about Black position after 23.h4.

Btw. Probably both of us did not count material - ...[text shortened]... Also after 21.Rg1+ maybe black can afford to play 21...Ng4!? - at least I don`t see refutation

Well, Black is not technically down material but I think that under normal circumstances a Rook with y pawns is generally stronger than a Knight with y + 2 pawns. Of course, that's a general observation with certainly a lot of exceptions.

23 ...... Qe5 seems to force the exchange of Queens; that certainly lessens both sides' winning chances. Maybe Black is better off with something like 22 Be3 getting rid of the pesky attack on f2. Looking at it with Rybka, White's attacking chances don't look as promising as I thought against best play though I still think Black's King position is a bit vulnerable and the g-file is still potentially useful.

21 ...... Ng4 looks crazy but I'll have to look it over. Good points.

So far, nobody mentioned the line 34.Kg1 Rf8 35.Re1 (instead on Rf1). I didn't look at all possibilities, just at the most obvious one:

35. ... dxc3 36.bxc3 Bxc3 37.Rxe6! giving back the exchange for play Bxe6 38.Bxe6+ Kb8 39.Bxc4 with good chances for white: bishops pair, freepawn ..

35. ... d3 doesn't seem much better for black after 36.Re4
Perhaps 35. ... b5 36.Bd2 d3 would be black's best option, but I still like white.

Just my 2 cts.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Well, Black is not technically down material but I think that under normal circumstances a Rook with y pawns is generally stronger than a Knight with y + 2 pawns. Of course, that's a general observation with certainly a lot of exceptions.

23 ...... Qe5 seems to force the exchange of Queens; that certainly lessens both sides' winning chances ...[text shortened]... ul.

21 ...... Ng4 looks crazy but I'll have to look it over. Good points.

About Rook vs knight+2 pawns - it really depends on position. In open positions rook may be stronger, but in semi-open (like this one) or closed positions where rook don`t have so much space I usually prefer to have knight + 2 pawns.

About 22.Be3 (instead of 22.Bg5) - can`t find real problems for Black after they will start to move their central pawns with 22...e5 (with possible Be6 and d4 to follow). It seems that White will need to start defending against black pawn advance in center.

I still stand by that assessment; I believe White never managed to really make a fist, despite having had somewhat of an advantage/initiative for some time. But as I explained, this is the sort of game that is normal with large differences in strength... perhaps take a look at some of your wins against players that had over 400 rating points less than you.

Originally posted by Mephisto2
So far, nobody mentioned the line 34.Kg1 Rf8 35.Re1 (instead on Rf1). I didn't look at all possibilities, just at the most obvious one:

35. ... dxc3 36.bxc3 Bxc3 37.Rxe6! giving back the exchange for play Bxe6 38.Bxe6+ Kb8 39.Bxc4 with good chances for white: bishops pair, freepawn ..

35. ... d3 doesn't seem much better for black after 36.Re4
Perh ...[text shortened]... 35. ... b5 36.Bd2 d3 would be black's best option, but I still like white.

Just my 2 cts.

After 35. ... dxc3 36.bxc3 Bxc3 37.Rxe6! Bxe6 38.Bxe6+ Kb8 39.Bxc4 also Black may start to move their pawns with 39...b5! - 40.Bxb5? Nd4! with double threat of Nxb5 and Nf3+. Of course White are not obliged to take that pawn but black gains extra tempo to move their queen side pawns.

Originally posted by Korch
After 35. ... dxc3 36.bxc3 Bxc3 37.Rxe6! Bxe6 38.Bxe6+ Kb8 39.Bxc4 also Black may start to move their pawns with 39...b5! - 40.Bxb5? Nd4! with double threat of Nxb5 and Nf3+. Of course White are not obliged to take that pawn but black gains extra tempo to move their queen side pawns.

True, after 39. ... b5 I would not capture as white but play something like 40.Bh6 followed by 40. ... Rf6 (or first Bd4+ Kh1) and 41.Bd3 with tempo too.

Are you valuing black's chances as good as white's in such a continuation? I don't.

Originally posted by Mephisto2
True, after 39. ... b5 I would not capture as white but play something like 40.Bh6 followed by 40. ... Rf6 (or first Bd4+ Kh1) and 41.Bd3 with tempo too.

Are you valuing black's chances as good as white's in such a continuation? I don't.

I could value White`s chances as better, but definitely nothing decisive.

I found the game to be moderately interesting. I decided to to do some analysis on it with the aid of my engine of choice (Spike). As the title of the thread is "Blown Endgame", I was only concerned with determining what were the last opportunities that White had to (probably) win the game and later, hold the draw.

As several posters have already indicated, 34. Kg1 is a distinct improvement over 34. Rh6, though after 34 ... Rf8, Spike preferred 35. Rd1, evaluating the position at about half a pawn advantage. More importantly though, Spike indicated that 34. h3 was even better (about 3/4 pawn advantage @ 17 ply). Although it cannot be stated with absolute certainty, 3/4 of a pawn advantage is likely to translate into a win.

Though 34. Rh6 does throw away the win, it does not throw away the draw - that occurred on 36. Bxe6. If instead, White plays 36. Rb5, then Spike's analysis concluded with a repetition of position: 36. Rb5 Bxc3 37. Bxe6 Bxe6 38. Rxe6 Ra5 39. Rxa5 Nxa5 40. h4 b5 41.h5 b4 42.Re3 Bd4 43.Re4 Bc3 44.Re3 etc. Clearly, having the
h-pawn still on the board is significant in the evaluation of the position.

Some thoughts at first glance ...open to rational feedback. :-)

9.Qa4 does not look useful; I think white should play for f4-f5 [playing for c4 leaves d4-e5 too weak]. So castle...b3, Bb2 to protect d4...h3, Nh2, f4-f5 is my idea].

9...c4 is absolutely horrible, very-anti positional.

11. exf6 looks stronger and should guarantee white advantage. It leaves e6 backwards, should Black push e5, then d5 is a permanent target.

11...f5 if Black wants to fortress but of course this would destroy his practical chances...

15...Rxf3 simply is Black's best practical chance; it looks fine.

I understand the point but I question 19. f5... the file can be blocked, for instance 20...Ne5 Rg1+ Ng6;

28. Be3 I think... then if Bxp Rf1 and all lines should work out rather favorably for white I think

35...Nd4 looks really appealing! pxN B+ Kg1 Bxd4 and now...? Rd1 Rg2+ for instance

36. Rb5 as AlboMalapropFoozer said... to prevent the Nd4 garbage I think... then h4 ... and Bxe6 ...you need the h-pawn and it's hard to evaluate the position I don't know the status of Black's c-pawn, there might be a game. :-)

Originally posted by Yuga
Some thoughts at first glance ...open to rational feedback. :-)

9.Qa4 does not look useful; I think white should play for f4-f5 [playing for c4 leaves d4-e5 too weak]. So castle...b3, Bb2 to protect d4...h3, Nh2, f4-f5 is my idea].

9...c4 is absolutely horrible, very-anti positional.

11. exf6 looks stronger and should guarantee white advantage. It le ...[text shortened]... evaluate the position I don't know the status of Black's c-pawn, there might be a game. :-)

There's no way to defend the triple attacked d-pawn except 9 Qa4.