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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 24 May '13 15:34 / 1 edit
    Hi SG.

    Pulled this into another thread, that other lad is still having fun
    saccing Knights on f7. Don't want to hijack it.

    You said:

    "... But it is apparent I need practice defending the position after the sac on f7."

    Of course you do, we all do.
    Defending such positions is very very hard, it is much easier to play
    them as the attacker.

    Take speculative sacrifices. (and that Knight x f7 is pure specualtion.)

    I think I'd seriously struggle to find 10 sound middle game mating
    combinations in the -1400 DB. Where the initial spec/sac was sound.

    I could post 10 of 1,000's where the attack should have been beaten off
    but the defender blundered.

    (Also it quite easy to set up a search to find mates and go backwards
    on them to see the blunder. Harder to search for a sound defence
    as the game does end in mate from the unsound attack.
    I need an unsound attack button!)

    It's how we are brought up, all these White to play and win diagrams/puzzles.
    Not many Black to play and defend diagrams/puzzle knocking about.

    The solution in some cases of these 'Black to play and defend puzzles'
    would take pages.
    (... and would probably be some of the most important pages of chess we
    have ever studied.)

    Chess writers are to blame (very much me included.)
    We go way overboard on a good sac and (as I do) praise the spec-sac
    to the highest heavens. What a about speculative defensive that turns
    out to be sound...To be very honest I don't think I could spot one.

    And how many times have I written:

    "The first to attack wins because players cannot defend themselves."

    Usually adding.

    "Have complete faith in your opponent, the defender, blundering."

    SO we open a book and see: Black to play and defend puzzle:

    Diagram.

    "Black is under a heavy attack, find the move that quells the attack
    and leaves the position level."

    Well yours truly will skipping straight past that one.

    What is the next diagram. Ho Ho. Within secondsI can see it's
    A Classical Bishop sacrifice.
    Sac check, Knight check, Queen mate threat, Rook lift, mate.
    Solved it without even setting up the bits 'OH Boy am I good'.

    Closes book. Opens same book 10 years later, solves same
    Classic Bishop Sacrifice. "Yes I'm still good."

    Why did I just give the word diagram and no actual diagram?
    I don't have an example in mind. (that is pretty awaful when you think about it.)

    I'm not talking about a tactical defensive move like here.


    Black to play and win, when it appears he can do nothing to stop Qh5 and mate.

    The answer is 1...Nxe6 answering 2.Qh5 with 2...Qxg2+ and the Knight fork.
    But even then (and this explains why writers tend to shy away from this stuff.)
    There are still tries that the enquiry mind might want to look at.

    1... Nxe6 2. Qg4 Ng5 3. f4 Nf7.


    Black holds out.
    There are other defensive moves for Black but you can see if I wanted
    to cover them all even from this very simple made up position would go on and
    on we go and every writer knows the longer the analysis the more chance
    of an error creeping in. "If it's long it's wrong." Russain proverb.

    Use a computer!
    The positions needing study are those that stave off an attack and get you
    back into the game. Computers will not show all the sacs (if any)
    that lead to a position with say a 4 or 5 only defensive moves being required
    if it's unsound.
    It may be unsound to a computer but it's 100% blunderland to a human.
    The writer will have to recognise these blunderland positions hiding in
    there, the type of postions I strongly advocate to drop your opponent into
    and thread the reader through the maze.

    Nah!
    Far much easier to ditch this Black to defend nonsense, too many variations.
    Too much like hard work......very hard work.

    Much easier (and every writer is lazy) to show clockwork, sac bang mates
    combo's with little need for variations. (guilty as charged!)

    Also it's every chess book buyers fault.
    Would you spend ages following every variation in how to defend a position.
    Not necessarily win it, but to defend it.

    Of course not, it's much easier to memorise opening moves.
    Hence the ratio: 1000 Opening Books for every book on studying defensive techniques.
  2. 24 May '13 18:41
    While I'm not particulary good at either, I am way better at attacking than defending.

    For some reason its much easier to see my own attacking lines than my opponent's. I've often thought about why that is the case.
  3. 24 May '13 19:01
    I lose about 50% of my games because I ignore most of the attacks from my opponents. If interested in a game, I find that Flip Board is the only way to force me to actually pay attention. There is a sense of subtlety to a good defense so that you don't even realize that it has happened.
  4. 24 May '13 20:08
    I never use the "flip board" feature. Maybe I should.
  5. 24 May '13 20:37 / 3 edits
    As a general rule of thumb with speculative sacrifices, i think black should try to exchange queens - almost nothing else matters because once whites queens of the board the attack will evaporate. Black needn't develop and can loose 1-2 pawns just for a queen swap. just my thoughts. infact the tactic almost spoils them - white has to be careful to avoid it.
  6. Standard member Exuma
    Anansi
    26 May '13 03:17
    I like GP's d5, which I didnt see, was playing with c6 instead of g6, to answer Bc4 with d5

  7. 26 May '13 04:48 / 1 edit
    Not only solve the classical Bishop sac - I play them as well

    I'm white - Gameknot 3 min game played about 45 mins ago.

    I've added an unplayed possible finish, I really would not post yet another
    bog standard Greek Gift without there being something else in there.

  8. 26 May '13 08:11
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Not only solve the classical Bishop sac - I play them as well

    I'm white - Gameknot 3 min game played about 45 mins ago.

    I've added an unplayed possible finish, I really would not post yet another
    bog standard Greek Gift without there being something else in there.

    [pgn]
    1. e4 e6 2. Nf3 c6 3. d4 a6 4. Bd3 d5 5. Nc3 {Just developing my bits and ...[text shortened]... 20. Nxe6 Qxg8 21. Bc5+ b6 22. Bxb6+ Kb7 23. Bc5 {That would have been a good checkmate.}[/pgn]
    Nice! what you consider bog standard others might find rather good! according to the ratings your stonger then that computer of mine!
  9. 27 May '13 10:18 / 4 edits
    I must admit my thread on nxf7 was not very helpful - its a line i'm trying right now so am not going to post the answers to it! thats why i didn't put up many finnished games. Its a fun line though even if not sound...

    I'm playing another knight sac game now and my opponent has successfully made a mockery of my posistion just by giving the knight back but staying a pawn up, I've lost but probably would of had a winning attack if they didn't.
  10. 27 May '13 12:02 / 2 edits
    Hi E4

    "I must admit my thread on nxf7 was not very helpful ..."

    Chess threads don't have to be helpful. They can be anything.
    show a cute game, show an ending with a nice twist, show an awful blunder,
    mention a player, tournament, event, book, piece of kit, chess set,
    insult JR, anything on chess..anything at at all...except chess poems.
    (I bet now we get flooded with chess poems.)

    What you are doing is what a lot of chess players did when first introduced
    and fell in love with the game. I know I did.
    Looking for and making sacrifical gambits against every known opening.

    Trust me e4. I have dozens of books showing every kind of gambit.
    'Gambits Accepted','The Gambit', etc...etc..
    Some are totally unsound and so old the only theory on them is in Latin.

    What you ever you are looking at will have been tried before or looked
    at in past by 100's of different enquiring eyes.
    You, and no doubt others out there, are using a computer to help you.
    I don't know if this is any good, never tried it.
    I'd say the computer may give a false indication of how practical
    a move is in play v a human.

    Say you try out a piece sac and the computer 'thinks' then pops up
    with an evaluation of -2.38. No good then.
    However it's -2.38 may come from looking at 15 very difficult to see moves
    ahead with the Black King marching from e8 to a2.

    Your job will be to look at what it says and decide and look at what
    you consider a human would play.

    It is how Openng Traps work.
    People claim computers are greedy. No, humans are greedy.
    They will snatch a pawn/piece often with no consideration at all of the consequences.
    A computer will consider what happens next, if it likes it and can no mate
    are end up losing material then it will take it and hang on onto come hell
    or high water. Computers are stubborn.

    So post away, keep seeking and have fun.
    Without seekers we would have no Captain Evans who played 4.b4 1820's.

    try looking at some known Black Gambits in reverse with White.

    1.Nf3 d5
    2.e3 c4
    3.e4!


    That is a Budapest in reverse. You know this but does your confused opponent?
    Also a box out of it's book may give a different slant.
    (would it not be great if the box actually gave 3.e4 top billing!)

    I wonder if a good box will recognise what has just happened and
    slip into it's book? Something to experiment with.

    Also I spent hours years ago, no days years looking at this.

    1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6.

    Now instead of 4.Ba4 or 4. Bxc6 how's about 4.Bc4.

    And if 4...Nf6 can I swing them towards a variation of the Two Knights
    where in some mainlines (those with d4) Black plays 0-0-0.
    Can I use a6 as a weakness, a lever to open the King with a b4-b5 push?

    If 4...Bc5 can I play a normal Guicio Piano as White.
    Is a6 in this position good, bad or so-so.

    Are there not lines where Black sacs his a8 Rook to a Nc7+ using
    the time to win material in the centre of the board and then pick up a8 Knight.
    This time the Knight hops out at b6!

    So just have fun. Post away.
  11. 28 May '13 23:53 / 1 edit
    This is a line I'm trying in the evans gambit - sacs 2 pieces, but gets one back, I'm not sure what to play next, black looses if he doesn't play 8 kf8 needs very sharp defense.



    I think there might be a win for white there.....(?)
  12. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    29 May '13 06:26
    Originally posted by e4chris
    This is a line I'm trying in the evans gambit - sacs 2 pieces, but gets one back, I'm not sure what to play next, black looses if he doesn't play 8 kf8 needs very sharp defense.

    [pgn]1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Bc5 3.Bc4 Nc6 4.b4 Bxb4 5.c3 Be7 6.d4 Na5 7.Bxf7+ Kxf7 8.Nxe5+ Kf8 9.Qf3+ Nf6 10.g4 d6 11.g5 dxe5 12.gxf6[/pgn]

    I think there might be a win for white there.....(?)
    Interestingly enough, Black (a 2100 player) did not lose even with 8...Ke8 in the one game I found.

  13. Standard member hunterknox
    Hopeless romantic
    29 May '13 20:54
    I've always wanted a big book of defensive saves. I love to grind out a win through tenacious defence - almost as satisfying as an unsound combo.
  14. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    29 May '13 23:20
    Originally posted by hunterknox
    I've always wanted a big book of defensive saves. I love to grind out a win through tenacious defence - almost as satisfying as an unsound combo.
    You'll find a slew in the games of Wilhelm Steinitz.
  15. 30 May '13 02:48 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Interestingly enough, Black (a 2100 player) did not lose even with 8...Ke8 in the one game I found.

    [pgn][Event "Game from non-PGN file"]
    [Date "2013.05.29"]
    [Round "-"]
    [White "?"]
    [Black "?"]
    [Result "*"]
    1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3 Be7 6. d4 Na5 7. Bxf7+ Kxf7 8. Nxe5+ Ke8 9. Qh5+ g6 10. Nxg6 Nf6 11. Qh4 Rg8 12. Nxe7 Qxe7 1 ...[text shortened]... d6 15. e5 dxe5 16. Ba3 Qf7 17. dxe5 Nd5 18. Qd3 Rxg2+ 19. Kh1 Nf4 20. e6 Rxh2+[/pgn]
    the computer does not like ke8 for some reason both play kf8... maybe 11 Qh6 causes trouble? Also 12 ne5 looks better for white? keeps a threat on f7