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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    07 Oct '08 01:52 / 4 edits
    I just finished a game that I'm proud of - my second highest rated win on RHP.

    Game 5473417



    My question concerns 7. Nf5. It's a little counter to what I've always heard about chess because it allows doubled pawns and removes a pawn from the 2 center squares after 7... Bxf5. I did it because I like to get the 2 bishops early in the game and because it just "felt" like a good move in that it gave me a lot of space in the center.

    Through the game that pawn on f5 turned out better than I could have hoped. It remained a bone in his throat all game and kept his king pawns in check. I guess I'll run it through an engine also, but do you think 7. Nf5 was a good idea?
  2. 07 Oct '08 02:04
    It's definitely not a move I would consider making, as it goes against opening principle. Now the pawn is over extended and it's doubled.
    But by the looks of this game the move was pretty solid since Black didn't even have an ePawn to defend with.
  3. 07 Oct '08 02:21
    Originally posted by Best101
    It's definitely not a move I would consider making, as it goes against opening principle. Now the pawn is over extended and it's doubled.
    But by the looks of this game the move was pretty solid since Black didn't even have an ePawn to defend with.
    Often times the best move breaks many principles and guidelines. Take positional sacrifices for example.
  4. 07 Oct '08 02:47 / 1 edit
    Rybka seems to prefer black at -.26 (which is really just an equal game) at depth=15. On the other hand, it's not a bad move(a blunder) and since you used the move to accomplish your own strategic goals one can hardly blame or fault you for making it.

    Interestingly enough, this move wasn't even in my database, so i'm guessing you just shocked the hell out of your opponent.

    Edit: I haven't analyzed the entire game yet but it seems your opponent gave you the advantage after 9...Nc6-e5. He/She should've gone directly after your weak pawn with Qd8-d7
  5. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    08 Oct '08 13:12
    Thanks for the comments.

    I ran it through Chessmaster and it says 7. Nf5 was more than half a pawn worse than the best move and not even in the top 10 moves.

    If he had moved Qd7 right away, I was planning to move Bd3 to defend the pawn and was quite prepared to push the g pawn to g4 to defend the f5 pawn and eventually castle long and use the doubled f pawns to spearhead a pawn march against the castled black king. With all the space I had in the center, I would have been perfectly happy to try this.

    Can anyone explain why Nf5 is considered such a poor move by the engines? I guess I just am unable to see the game so mechanically yet.
  6. 08 Oct '08 13:38 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sh76
    Thanks for the comments.

    I ran it through Chessmaster and it says 7. Nf5 was more than half a pawn worse than the best move and not even in the top 10 moves.

    If he had moved Qd7 right away, I was planning to move Bd3 to defend the pawn and was quite prepared to push the g pawn to g4 to defend the f5 pawn and eventually castle long and use the doubled f pa ...[text shortened]... d such a poor move by the engines? I guess I just am unable to see the game so mechanically yet.
    I would say that 7 Nf5 was not a very good move because it allowed your opponent to trade off an undeveloped piece for a developed one. You had invested three tempi to get it to f5 while your opponent invested one by taking it. Also, the subsequent trade left your pawn on f5 which is, in effect, isolated since defending it with another pawn would ruin your kingside pawn cover.

    Edit: Your idea to gain the bishop pair is well and fine but then you allowed the exchange with 10 Bd3.

    Edit 2: Just read about your idea to castle queenside and push the g pawn. Preparing for this would require two more tempi and this further loss of time would, I feel, hand the initiative to your opponent.
  7. 08 Oct '08 14:27
    My question concerns 7. Nf5. It's a little counter to what I've always heard about chess because it allows doubled pawns and removes a pawn from the 2 center squares after 7... Bxf5. I did it because I like to get the 2 bishops early in the game and because it just "felt" like a good move in that it gave me a lot of space in the center.

    I think it was a dubious move. Indeed, as you say, it gives you doubled pawns. After the exchange Bxf5 exf5, if you were to take all remaining pieces off the board, the pawn endgame would be lost for you.

    Yes, it does give you the two bishops, but the pawn structure is more important. You have an extra piece (bishop) on the light squares. But Black can, after some moves, play c6 and d5, when you either retreat it to d3 where it stares against the own f5-pawn or to e2, where it isn't doing anything noteworthy.

    It probably felt like a good move because it was forcing. You got the bishop pair and an inferior pawn structure by force.

    Your comment about the move giving you alot of space in the center confuses me. First of all, the sequence (Nf5 Bxf5 exf5) reduces your central control (= space) because your sole remaining center-pawn has been removed. Secondly, you allowed black to exchange a (undeveloped!) piece, which reduces his space deficit impact.


    Having said this, I think there are several moves which give white a slight advantage. For example, Nxc6 isolates black's a-pawn. Or you could just pursue development with O-O.
  8. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    08 Oct '08 14:58 / 2 edits
    Thank you Green Paladin and Schakuhr. I think you've convinced me that I may have gotten away with it this time, but I'll think harder before making a move like that in the future.

    So, where did my opponent lose the game? Was it by not playing Qd7 like was suggested by ResigningSoon or by moving the dark squared bishop too many times or something else? I know that prematurely pushing his d pawn at the end was probably the coup de grace, but I felt I had a winning position before that anyway.
  9. 08 Oct '08 15:37
    Originally posted by sh76
    So, where did my opponent lose the game? Was it by not playing Qd7 like was suggested by ResigningSoon or by moving the dark squared bishop too many times or something else? I know that prematurely pushing his d pawn at the end was probably the coup de grace, but I felt I had a winning position before that anyway.
    Maybe Qd7 at some point would've been better yes. He definitely didn't do a good job with the dark-squared bishop either, indeed. (should've kept it on e7 and play Re8 and then Nd7 at some point)
    I think the losing move was 23. ..d4. After something like 23. ..Re8 24. Rxe8+ Qxe8 the endgame is probably drawn, though black will have to fight for it.