My best chess game

and, the position before R sack is that kind of nice attacking position where you think you MUST have something winning, because all the pieces look so good...and you want to spend all your time checking it...
somehow strategically won I could say...
on the other side look at my games against Korch to see the opposite...finding a long nice tactic combination doesn't mean I am a very strong accurate player, it means that I was lucky to find the nicest combination in this game

Originally posted by vipiu
still, if you check all the game with an engine you can find out that I played inferior natural good looking moves like Rg8(which Fritz says it is worse than directly e5)...or my a5 was not so good also...
and also try to let Fritz for some time analyzing to see how long it takes to find Rxg2(I left it for about a minute and it did not find it, but after I mo ...[text shortened]... ves all the time...it is not so difficult to analyze(especially with the help of an extra board)

You don't have to prove you didn't cheat, Fat Lady has to prove you did. I ask again of the doubters, have you put this through Fritz and does it find it, and does it play it in an identical manner?
Finding an 11 move checkmate, starting with an 'illogical' sacrifice is asking a lot of Deep Blue. The fact that there are two intermediate (unforced) moves in the variation add to my argument that it would take a computer many weeks to find this line. There are many trillions of combinations to look at in a line of this complexity. Vipiu states Fritz suggests better moves. How then can he be cheating?
The doubters keep saying " I cant say he is cheating as it is against the rules" but then they say it anyway. So provide the evidence? Or do intelligent people just sling mud and hide behind the rule saying cheating can't be discussed?

Originally posted by Policestate

The doubters keep saying " I cant say he is cheating as it is against the rules" but then they say it anyway. So provide the evidence? Or do intelligent people just sling mud and hide behind the rule saying cheating can't be discussed?

Jealousy

Originally posted by Fat Lady
Unfortunately the rules about accusing people of cheating prevent me from writing what I would like to about this game.

Someone pointed out to me that Ironman used to often to show off his latest brilliancy and in this thread Thread 74077 we had someone trying to pass off a well known puzzle as his own, so there is a precedent for cheats to ...[text shortened]... e I would happily congratulate him on a fantastic piece of accurate calculation. But I don't.

I did check his game with Rybka 2.3.2. and can say that Rybka does not see 19....Rxg2!! even after long time and only after 19...Rxg2 20.Kxg2 is done (after 20 min) Rybka notices 20...Qb7 with 21....Qxf3.

So I dont believe that black cheated in this game - engine would not play 19...Rxg2!!

Originally posted by Korch
I did check his game with Rybka 2.3.2. and can say that Rybka does not see 19....Rxg2!! even after long time and only after 19...Rxg2 20.Kxg2 is done (after 20 min) Rybka notices 20...Qb7 with 21....Qxf3.

So I dont believe that black cheated in this game - engine would not play 19...Rxg2!!

thanks for support...

super...I heared Rybka is stronger than Fritz in tactics...
on analyzing the game with Fritz I noticed something...after I waited only one minute and it did not find the Rxg2, I moved forward a couple of moves...it realised that the line is winning for black...and when I moved backward the game it considered imediately Rxg2 with plus for black...
somehow it cached the played variation I suppose...

anyway, unfortunately my general play level(not especially in this game) can prove that I do not use computer's help

It is too bad that someone's hard work at a good chess game has turned into a thread filled with insinuations about cheating.

If any user feels someone is cheating they should use site feedback and report it as such, and have some shred of evidence to back their claim.

Please end the talk about cheating in this thread and future threads, the forums are not the place for this topic.

Originally posted by vipiu
I think I have just finished my best chess game ever (still, I need to recheck it wit a computer to see if my sacrifices were correct)...anyway, the Q sack is for sure winning:

Game 3967407

awesome!

great game! well done!

Originally posted by Forum Moderator
It is too bad that someone's hard work at a good chess game has turned into a thread filled with insinuations about cheating.

If any user feels someone is cheating they should use site feedback and report it as such, and have some shred of evidence to back their claim.

Please end the talk about cheating in this thread and future threads, the forums are not the place for this topic.

Agreed. I personally can't stand the concieted idiots who can't accept that someone else is better than them. Shame on anyone who even thought of tainting this thread with cheating accusations. This may be one of the best games ever played on this site and it's about time it gets the credit it deserves.

Originally posted by ih8sens
Agreed. I personally can't stand the concieted idiots who can't accept that someone else is better than them. Shame on anyone who even thought of tainting this thread with cheating accusations. This may be one of the best games ever played on this site and it's about time it gets the credit it deserves.

Its a very nice game, but lets not go overboard 😛

One of the best tactics, yes.

The queen sac was good! The Rook sac was amazing!!

For the Rook sac to work you have to be prepared to sacrifice the queen and most good players would give up calculating the line at that point and not seen the subsequent forced win.

I play a lot of (many unsound) sacrifices and the Rook sac is not one I even came close to looking at.

Originally posted by vipiu
I think I have just finished my best chess game ever (still, I need to recheck it wit a computer to see if my sacrifices were correct)...anyway, the Q sack is for sure winning:

Game 3967407

For what its worth I have just put this into Fritz 8. Up to move 19 there is nothing to suggest white is using this particular engine.

Fritz rated the position after move 19. Bh2 fairly quickly as about -1.00 (i.e. a pawn up for black) and suggested the "obvious" 19. ... a4 as best and 19. ... Qc6 (or Qa6) next best (this actually would have been my probable choice). Even after 13 minutes it was not suggesting the sacrifice 19. RXg2 as one of its top 10 choices but it had by now evaluated 19. ... a4 as -1.25 and had 19. ... Qc6 as only its 3rd choice at -1.06.

After the move 19. ... Rxg2 Fritz immediately assesses 20. Kxg2 as equal. After 15 seconds Fritz decides 20. Qc6 is better for black but after 2 minutes this assessment is still only -0.88. 20. Qb7 is initially rated equal when the best follow up is assessed as Nf4 (although after time Fritz changes this assessment to Kg1 as best for white and decides it is -2.16 in blacks favor).

I have to conclude that no engine user would choose the Rook sacrifice. It is certainly not unsound but it is also not obviously best initially although maybe it will be after 20 minutes. Why play it or even look for it when Fritz suggests a perfectly reasonable (19. ... a4) winning move immediately

So what of the position after 21. Bg3. Fritz immediately rates QXf3 as the only winning move for black. This only is important. The alternatives 21. ... h5 and 21. ... 0-0-0 obviously fail so white eventually must look at the Q sacrifice when a forced win is immediately discovered by Fritz after KXf3 although at this stage this may become obvious to a human player.

My conclusion is it would be very unlikely for an engine user to choose 19. ... Rxg2 and although an engine user would choose Qxf6 so, after careful analysis would many human players.

My only caveat is that maybe Fritz 10 or another engine would choose 19. Rxg2 and if so I would like to know which.

Originally posted by Dragon Fire
\
My only caveat is that maybe Fritz 10 or another engine would choose 19. Rxg2 and if so I would like to know which.[/b]

Interestingly enough my Fritz 10 did not see Rxg2 after 6 minutes of thinking (on a Core 2 Duo Processor) yet when the move is made it can see that it is winning in 16 seconds. Then when I go back a move the little cheater makes me think that it saw Rxg2 all along 😛.

that was a really interesting game. for a being a 1245 on here I know I have a lot to learn and I cant truly see this game the way you higher players do. But it was worth my time studying the game!

thanks

Originally posted by MikeBruce
that was a really interesting game. for a being a 1245 on here I know I have a lot to learn and I cant truly see this game the way you higher players do. But it was worth my time studying the game!

thanks

Yeah I think the moral of the story is always give serious consideration to playing any forcing move in any position.

Fascinating game - beautiful to watch.

Just out of interest did Telboy 2 message you during the onslaught, Vipiu?