Can someone analyze this game?

It's not enirely Black's fault. 5.Nxc6 was often a an overture to a quick draw offer.
'A drap move offering White nothing' I recall one opening books comment.

When good players meet it takes two too tango.

It appears the players just let this one go to concentrate on their other game.

Game 8830858

Ths game was much more intereresting, no comments.
IT IS STILL IN PROGRESS.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
It's not enirely Black's fault. 5.Nxc6 was often a an overture to a quick draw offer.
'A drap move offering White nothing' I recall one opening books comment.

When good players meet it takes two too tango.

It appears the players just let this one go to concentrate on their other game.

Game 8830858

Ths game was much more intereresting, no comments.
[b]IT IS STILL IN PROGRESS.[/b]

I played both of these guys. I lost both of my games against cohanas.
But King and Pawn gave me a draw on one of the games against him,
when I made the draw offer, even though he was a pawn ahead. He
apparently cares more about not losing than winning.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I played both of these guys. I lost both of my games against cohanas.
But King and Pawn gave me a draw on one of the games against him,
when I made the draw offer, even though he was a pawn ahead. He
apparently cares more about not losing than winning.

Since you think there is a win in the endgame against Kings and Pawns in this game: Game 8695484 perhaps you could describe the winning endgame technique you would have used in his place. I'm sure we could all use the instruction.

Thanks in advance.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Since you think there is a win in the endgame against Kings and Pawns in this game: Game 8695484 perhaps you could describe the winning endgame technique you would have used in his place. I'm sure we could all use the instruction.

Thanks in advance.

I would be interested in knowing the winning solution to this game too. I don't accept draws in winning positions. 'Cares more about not losing than winning'? If you thought it was a win, then why did you offer me a draw?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Since you think there is a win in the endgame against Kings and Pawns in this game: Game 8695484 perhaps you could describe the winning endgame technique you would have used in his place. I'm sure we could all use the instruction.

Thanks in advance.

I do not know if there is a win or not. But if I had been in his position
and really wanted to win, I would have played some more to see what
would happen. I am not an expert in the endings so I could have
blundered and lost, so I offered a draw because I was not sure that I
could keep the rook pawn from queening even though it looked that way.
At the time I played him he had not lost a game but had some draws.
So since he was rated higher than me I thought maybe he was just
being nice in giving me the draw.

Kings and Pawns has informed me that he is sure that game was a draw
and that he plays to win. So we should take his word for it. I believe
him now.

Originally posted by no1marauder
....perhaps you could describe the winning endgame technique you would have
used in his place. I'm sure we could all use the instruction.

Endgames.
It's OK boys I've got this one.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Endgames.
It's OK boys I've got this one.

[pgn]
[FEN "8/4R1k1/2p4p/4K3/6rP/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
{This was the final postion with Black in check. I have therefore figured out it is Black to play.}1... Kg6 2. Rc7 Rg1 {This is the Lucena back-peddle.} 3. Kf4 Rf1+ 4. Kg4 Rf6 {Notice the cunning way Black defends his c-pawn.} 5. h5 {Mate! White missd this. My conclussion....White was sandbagging.}[/pgn]

Instead of 2...Rg1, I am sure Kings and Pawns would have played 2...Rxh4

P.S. On more study it looks like 2...Rc4 is even better, if Kings and Pawns
is playing for a win.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Endgames.
It's OK boys I've got this one.

[pgn]
[FEN "8/4R1k1/2p4p/4K3/6rP/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
{This was the final postion with Black in check. I have therefore figured out it is Black to play.}1... Kg6 2. Rc7 Rg1 {This is the Lucena back-peddle.} 3. Kf4 Rf1+ 4. Kg4 Rf6 {Notice the cunning way Black defends his c-pawn.} 5. h5 {Mate! White missd this. My conclussion....White was sandbagging.}[/pgn]

I think thats the best and sneakiest try.
Good work Mr. Pawn.

Don't care what the box says, thats good form!

Q

Originally posted by PhySiQ
I think thats the best and sneakiest try.
Good work Mr. Pawn.

Don't care what the box says, thats good form!

Q

The more I look at it, I think White should try for the draw with 2.Re6+
to insure he can get the c6 pawn. However, after Kings and Pawns
takes the h4 pawn, I am not sure White can stop the Black Pawn from
queening without losing his Rook. I am not an expert on these endings.

P.S. Kings and Pawns has already said this ending is a draw and he is
rated over 2400 on this site so I am sure he knows better than the rest
of us because he even taught chess for 16 years, I think is what he has
written on his profile page.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I am not an expert on these endings.

Put the box away and grab a wooden set. Study study study.


Q

Originally posted by PhySiQ
Put the box away and grab a wooden set. Study study study.


Q

But not at Harvard.

Originally posted by PhySiQ
Put the box away and grab a wooden set. Study study study.


Q

I asked Kings and Pawns why he violated opening theory by moving
his knight 3 times in the first 5 moves of the opening, but he has not
responded. There must be some exception in this particular opening,
but I do not know what it is. Does anyone have an idea?

Originally posted by RJHinds]In my opinion 3.d4 is played for quick opening development.
I think Black should take the d4 pawn and white should continue his
development of his pieces by playing 4.Bc4 (Scotch Gambit). White
however, plays 4. Nxd4 in order to maintain a material balance, but
it seems to violate opening principle by moving the knight twice. The
result of White's last two moves is to allow Black to gain a tempo by
attacking with 4...Nf6.

I was a little caught off guard about the comment about Nxd4 violating opening principles by moving a piece twice in the opening.

I suppose it is literally true, but I don't think the opening principle applies in the case of recaptures-otherwise we would have to categorically state that the Open Sicilian violates opening principles.

Larsen remarked one time that he thought that the Open Sicilian was strategically suspect because white trades a center pawn for a wing pawn, but that's as far as he went.

😕

There I was just having a wee piece of fun with DJ. Talking out of the
back of head. Having a wee joke.

But as Paul said, some of the comments have got me too a wee bit worried.

A few I suspect are playing along. Q in the ending joke.

But....

I'm waiting for someone to tell me that 5.Nxc6 is not dull....
And it is certainly NOT a violation of an opening principle.
Unless you want to argue with a World Champion.

Kasparov (v Karpov in 1991) played 5.Nxc6 in that postion.
It is main line theory, has been since Mieses played it in the year dot.

The sharpest follow up is then 6.e5.
Perhaps I should have pulled my 'off to bed' gag a few moves later.

Korch warned me on numerous occassions not to go to far.
"People will believe everything you say."

I hope not. Else we are all in trouble. 🙂

So to make it up to DJ I will now seriously take a look at the game in the question.