I played 24. Rhf1 and resigned shortly after. I was playing against the chessok rybka computer on the hard difficulty. Very difficult for me to win against.
I looked at the position after 23...f5 and decided 24. Rhe1 could've helped but then a closer look tells me I'd still be down 2 pawns after 24. Rhe1 Re4+ 25. Kf2 Rdxd4 26. Rxe4 Rxe4
Hmm maybe the d-pawn is too weak after 18. a3. Maybe I could've tried 18. 0-0-0?
I believe 23... f5 is meant to support 24...Re4+ so the isolate d-pawn can be taken giving Black a 2 pawn advantage in the ending. That seems too much for White to overcome to get a draw. Therefore, my answer is, NO!
Like you said, you would need to do something earlier that is better, such as the 18. O-O-O you suggested. Or even earlier to prevent the loss of a pawn. That would put us back to 11.c5?? as the move to be replaced with something rational, like moving the attacked knight away. However on second look that can not be done without losing the c5 pawn, so the mistake must be before 11.c5. Let me have a look. No, I think 11.Nf5 would work. However, defending the c pawn with 10.b3 instead of 10.Qc2 may be even better. Then if 10.h4 the knight can more to e2 without fear of losing the pawn by blocking the line of the defending bishop. On the next move the Knight can move to a better square at f4 or c3 and unblock the bishop and every thing is protected and the bishop can be developed.
Originally posted by hamworld Hmm. I think c4 would've worked much better had I just played Nxf6 but I'm still going with 5. Ng3.
Perhaps 7. Bd3 would've worked much better and then I could've played 8.c3 had Black played 7...Bg4?
What was your purpose for playing 7.c4 at this time instead of making a developing move? Was it to prevent the Black queen from coming to d5 after Black plays the 7...Bg4 move? 7.c4 may not be such a bad move if that is the case. It is your defense of it that is where you went wrong.
Originally posted by RJHinds What was your purpose for playing 7.c4 at this time instead of making a developing move? Was it to prevent the Black queen from coming to d5 after Black plays the 7...Bg4 move? 7.c4 may not be such a bad move if that is the case. It is your defense of it that is where you went wrong.
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHinds What was your purpose for playing 7.c4 at this time instead of making a developing move? Was it to prevent the Black queen from coming to d5 after Black plays the 7...Bg4 move? 7.c4 may not be such a bad move if that is the case. It is your defense of it that is where you went wrong.
The Instructor
It was more to stop 7...Nd5. Anyway, 11. b3 looked like an ugly move to me which is why I did not play it(why bother putting a bishop on d2 only to play b3?
Originally posted by SwissGambit I think 7.Bd3 is the most common book move.
Does "theory" still apply here? I checked in the chessgames database and there are only 4 games.
I figured since Robert Spassky plays Bd3 a lot in openings like these it might be a good idea.
Originally posted by hamworld Originally posted by RJHinds [b]What was your purpose for playing 7.c4 at this time instead of making a developing move? Was it to prevent the Black queen from coming to d5 after Black plays the 7...Bg4 move? 7.c4 may not be such a bad move if that is the case. It is your defense of it that is where you went wrong.
The Instructor
It was I figured since Robert Spassky plays Bd3 a lot in openings like these it might be a good idea.[/b]
Playing 7.c4 to prevent 7...Nd5 is not a good reason. If that was the only reason then it would be better to let him make that move then attack with 8.c4 and gain a tempo. I would not recommend 11.b3 because that would lose a knight. I recommended 10.b3 to defend c4 instead of 10.Qb2. And I don't understand what you mean by your question about putting a bishop on d2.
Some masters play 7.h3 which prevents the bishop from pinning the knight with bg4 and it also waits to see if Black plays 7...Nd5 when 8.c4 gains a tempo as I said before.
Originally posted by RJHinds Playing 7.c4 to prevent 7...Nd5 is not a good reason. If that was the only reason then it would be better to let him make that move then attack with 8.c4 and gain a tempo. I would not recommend 11.b3 because that would lose a knight. I recommended 10.b3 to defend c4 instead of 10.Qb2. And I don't understand what you mean by your question about putting a bishop on d2.
The Instructor
I'm not sure how to say it, my point is b3 is usually leads to the dark bishop fianchetto so if Bb2 isn't played, it just seems like a waste of time. That's just my amateurish viewpoint, though.
Anyway, I decided to no longer play against Rybka on chessok.com because it freezes too much.
Originally posted by hamworld I'm not sure how to say it, my point is b3 is usually leads to the dark bishop fianchetto so if Bb2 isn't played, it just seems like a waste of time. That's just my amateurish viewpoint, though.
Anyway, I decided to no longer play against Rybka on chessok.com because it freezes too much.
The purpose of 10.b3 is to protect and support your earlier c4 that has come under attack and not for the purpose of the fianchetto of the bishop. You are not going to castle queenside anyway so you don't need a bishop there. Black's bishop is doing nothing there now, except blocking his own king pawn. I would be glad to get that position as White.
Originally posted by RJHinds The purpose of 10.b3 is to protect and support your earlier c4 that has come under attack and not for the purpose of the fianchetto of the bishop. You are not going to castle queenside anyway so you don't need a bishop there. Black's bishop is doing nothing there now, except blocking his own king pawn. I would be glad to get that position as White.
The Instructor
Really? Position seems to be a complicated after 10...a5 or cramped after 10...h4.
Originally posted by hamworld Really? Position seems to be a complicated after 10...a5 or cramped after 10...h4.
I wonder what Petrosian would play.
I do not know what Petrosian would play as Blsck, but in response to your two suggested moves, I know what I would play as White.
I think 10...a5 does nothing for Black and is very good for White after 11.Bd3 because not only is the Bishop developed to a good diagonal, but the king is ready to castle and Black still has his king pawn blocked.
I think 10...h4 is better, but as I mentioned earlier that was the reason that 10.b3 is so good, because the knight just drops back to e2 even though it blocks the bishhop at f1 and looks cramped for the moment, the b3 pawn protects the c4 pawn just fine by itself. Then as I said before the knight will reopen the line for the f1 bishop with 12.Nf4 or Nc3 as you choose. Then the f1 bishop is free to develop to allow the king to castle and white is good.
Originally posted by hamworld Originally posted by RJHinds [b]What was your purpose for playing 7.c4 at this time instead of making a developing move? Was it to prevent the Black queen from coming to d5 after Black plays the 7...Bg4 move? 7.c4 may not be such a bad move if that is the case. It is your defense of it that is where you went wrong.
The Instructor
It was ...[text shortened]... I figured since Robert Spassky plays Bd3 a lot in openings like these it might be a good idea.[/b]
Black's ...Nb6 is actually the move that takes it out of GM practice and down to 'mere' master level. But there are still games with the 7.Bd3 line.
Originally posted by SwissGambit Black's ...Nb6 is actually the move that takes it out of GM practice and down to 'mere' master level. But there are still games with the 7.Bd3 line.
My opening book gives 6...e6 7.Bd3 c5 as the main continuation. Is that what you call the GM practice?
03 Jul '13 18:26
Could I have succesfully defended this losing endgame?
Back to Top