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

Only Chess Forum

  1. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    10 Mar '12 15:46
    As an ongoing thing, I am tracking when in my otb games we leave anything resembling "theory" so far in 30 games we left book on average move 8....

    last night's position.



    I played an old 1930's move Qb3 played by Reshevsky, Fine and later Geller. My guess is they didn't have any theory they just played on the principle of putting pressure on the d pawn and disrupting the development of the Light Square Bishop. Anyway clearly my opponent (rated 1943) was disturbed by the move (playing the classical grunfeld plus a non mainline is good enough to ruin any chance that he had "Seen" this before.) and immediately blundered playing Nbd7 and I slowly ground him down up a pawn into a winning endgame.
  2. 11 Mar '12 03:37
    He's done it again!

    He showed us a position and then....nothing.

    Nimzo my dear friend every spare moment since the February 1st I have
    been looking at games on RHP where one lad wins a safe pawn and totally screws
    up the grinding down into a win part.

    Actually grinding down is the wrong word.
    That makes it sound like a hard slog when infact it can be very easy.

    The RHP game usually and needlessly turns into a tactical melee with pieces
    and pawns and Kings and Queens left hanging.
    Great fun for me and I am enjoying every minute of it.

    But it would be good to see a clean, no nonsense win every now and then.
    It's been a while since I saw a good simplification combo.
    That is a sac combo that does nothing more than to win back the material
    invested to chop wood and break any counter play before it even starts.

    The standard cop out is now is for someone to post a Capablanca game to show
    us how it's done.
    The trouble being Capablanca cannot answer questions and Capa was a genius.

    If one of our own kind has an OTB example of how to win with a safe pawn up
    then perhaps some on here might just realise that such games (the bread butter
    of the good players) are not just the preserve of the GM's.

    Bascially what I am saying is show us the game!!!
    Please use the PGN thingy and not fen snap shots.

    And don't groan - it's your thread.
  3. 11 Mar '12 10:01
    Lol but Greenpawn is right. Show us the game rather than just a guy blundering a pawn. Most people over 1500 OTB should be able to see that a pawn would be lost in that position.
  4. 11 Mar '12 10:46
    as much as I enjoy reading GP's postings
    as much am I annoyed by GP's repeated correcting of other players postings.
  5. 11 Mar '12 13:29
    Originally posted by watchyourbackrank
    as much as I enjoy reading GP's postings
    as much am I annoyed by GP's repeated correcting of other players postings.
    ahh dude, as much as i like Nimzo's posts and as much as i like GPs posts, Nimzo did
    leave us kind of hanging.
  6. 11 Mar '12 15:15
    Hi watchyourbackrank



    I know what I am like. I'm never shy in coming forward.
    Just roll your eyes, shake your head and say 'he's at it again'.
    Moaning and Trolling.

    But if you don't ask, you don't get.
  7. 11 Mar '12 16:52
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Hi watchyourbackrank



    I know what I am like. I'm never shy in coming forward.
    Just roll your eyes, shake your head and say 'he's at it again'.
    Moaning and Trolling.

    But if you don't ask, you don't get.
    but why discourage players from posting chess in the chess forum?
    I don't get it.
  8. 11 Mar '12 17:45
    Ah...I never thought I might be actually discouraging players from posting.
    I thought most people by now just accepted my wee rants.

    OK - I'll tone down.

    Cheers.

    GP.
  9. Subscriber Paul Leggett
    Chess Librarian
    11 Mar '12 19:45
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    He's done it again!

    He showed us a position and then....nothing.

    Nimzo my dear friend every spare moment since the February 1st I have
    been looking at games on RHP where one lad wins a safe pawn and totally screws
    up the grinding down into a win part.

    Actually grinding down is the wrong word.
    That makes it sound like a hard slog when infact ...[text shortened]... lease use the PGN thingy and not fen snap shots.

    And don't groan - it's your thread.
    GP, you know darn well that as soon as someone posts a game like this, you'll complain about endings being boring, and that the game needed an opening trap somewhere!

    I remember one time I showed a King's Gambit game I played here, where I systematically traded down to a won ending (my most successful KG strategy, at least in CC), and you dogged me and (in jest) dubbed me "He who trades queens in the King's Gambit".

    It was all fun, but I remember thinking that forum publishing is like chess magazine publishing- readers want tactical games that end in 30 moves or less, and people leave for the doors as soon as the queens leave the board.

    I agree with your post, but I have a hard time accepting that you were the one who wrote it! Of course, it is entirely possible that there was some "word processor engine" assistance in your post- I'm still batch analyzing your noun and verb matchup rates...
  10. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    11 Mar '12 20:13
    I hate the pgn thingy... it allows comments but no subvariations... but fine. Working on it now.
  11. 11 Mar '12 21:01
    "......you'll complain about endings being boring,"

    It was expected of me, someone had to do it.

    "but I remember thinking that forum publishing is like chess magazine publishing..."

    Correct. I did run my own chess magazine for 3-4 years 'Capatal (sic) Chess.'
    OK it was more Tal than Capa but I know what sells.

    Hi Nimzo.

    It's up to you mate, do what you want.

    I'm joining the faceless thumbs up/down crowd.
  12. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    11 Mar '12 22:16 / 2 edits


    The last few moves might be off, as my scoresheet got a touch illegible but the idea is roughly right. Anyway, I didn't bother posting the full game score originally as the discussion wasn't about the middle game but that at 1900 studying openings doesn't mean a whole lot when you drop a pawn the moment you are out of your comfort zone.
  13. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    11 Mar '12 22:22
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    "......you'll complain about endings being boring,"

    It was expected of me, someone had to do it.

    "but I remember thinking that forum publishing is like chess magazine publishing..."

    Correct. I did run my own chess magazine for 3-4 years 'Capatal (sic) Chess.'
    OK it was more Tal than Capa but I know what sells.

    Hi Nimzo.

    It's up to you mate, do what you want.

    I'm joining the faceless thumbs up/down crowd.
    please don't, I would rather have you ding me verbally for being "lazy" than to just zap my post with a quiet thumbs down.

    haha.
  14. 12 Mar '12 11:57
    Hi Nimzo.

    Good. It can be hard to note up a game where nothing appears to happen but
    at that level these games are more frequent that a chance to get in the bang
    bang sac mate attack. Getting them off to pat and making it look wasy is in
    itself an art form.

    Now please don't take this as harsh criticism and please don't let it you
    stop from posting in the future. But may I add that in the final part of the
    game there is one note missing. Somewhere in the there you could have added:

    "My only concern in wrapping up this game was not to trade too many pawns
    and allow Black the opportunity to give up his Knights for the remaining pawns
    leaving me with two Knights and no way of mating the Black King."

    If I was Black it is what I would have been angling to do.

    chessH - jansax RHP 2010 Game 6779346

    Black was forced to adopt this plan.


    White played 49.c8=Q too soon. 49.Nf5 just wins.

    Black had to play 49...Nxc8. Then all the he need do was
    to give up his Knight for the last pawn and force White to take his pawns.

    It ended:


    Black played 56...Nxe3 and the game was drawn after White tried
    for more than 20 moves to mate with two Knights against a bare King.

    If my post has upset anyone then I'm sorry.

    Russ will soon be hosting a new forum called Nanny Counselling
    were people like nasty me and the Marauding No1 are not allowed.

    You can go there and to get a cuddle, a blanket and hear some nice words.
  15. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    12 Mar '12 13:02 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Hi Nimzo.



    "My only concern in wrapping up this game was not to trade too many pawns
    and allow Black the opportunity to give up his Knights for the remaining pawns
    leaving me with two Knights and no way of mating the Black King."
    This is very true and certainly was on my mind during the game. Once I picked off the second pawn my first thought was to try and get a pair of knights off the board so he could only sac his knight for 1 pawn.

    Other thoughts that cross one's mind is mating with 2 knights vs King and pawn Troitzky style.. a pattern I have never bothered to study.