2 edits
My Hillingdon league game (playing white) from last night...comments welcome. After reading a post in the forum here I scanned my copy of Micheal Steans "Simple Chess" before I went out and this got me thing about outposts. The bishop sac was unsound I know giving away a healthy advantage I'd worked hard to accumulate. I was through the time controls so didn't need to make my last few moves so could have just waited and sealed a move...but in the end a accepted a draw - the team result was unaffected.
(The players things not accepting my pgn for some reason :-(...
[White "Mahout"]
[Black "HIARCS 11.2 SP"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D35"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 Bd6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. c5 Be7 7. Qc2 h6 8. Bd3
Nc6 9. a3 b6 10. b4 a5? 11. b5 bxc5? 12. bxc6 cxd4 13. exd4 Bd6 14. Nb5 Ba6 15.
Nxd6 Bxd3 16. Qxd3 Qxd6 17. Ne5 Nh7 18. O-O f6 19. Ng6 Rfe8 20. Qh3? Qxc6 21.
Bxh6? gxh6 22. Qxh6 Qd7 23. Rfe1 Qg7 24. Qh5 Ng5? 25. Re3? Qh7 26. Qxh7+ Kxh7
27. Nf4 Rab8 28. Rc1 Re7? 29. h4 Ne4 30. Re2?? Rc8 31. f3 Ng3 32. Ree1 Rce8 33.
Rc5? Nf5 *
1 edit
Originally posted by Mahout
My Hillingdon league game (playing white) from last night...comments welcome. After reading a post in the forum here I scanned my copy of Micheal Steans "Simple Chess" before I went out and this got me thing about outposts. The bishop sac was unsound I know giving away a healthy advantage I'd worked hard to accumulate. I was through the time controls so di Rab8 28. Rc1 Re7? 29. h4 Ne4 30. Re2?? Rc8 31. f3 Ng3 32. Ree1 Rce8 33.
Rc5? Nf5 *
2 edits
The Knight was indeed on a good square.
White could have maintained it there with tactical threats.
18.Qg3 instead of 0-0 (threat Bxh6)
The more you look at the better it becomes - note the standard
defence Kh8 rules out f6 for a few moves. (Ng6+)
Time to play 0-0, with ideas a4 and Ba3 or Ra3-the Kingside.
Also consider h2-h4 with King flitting by hand to f1 & g1.
1 edit
Originally posted by greenpawn34Ah OK..I get it. I did consider this but was wary of getting into a queen exchange at this stage and I hadn't seen how it would prevent f6 and keep my knight in its sweet spot.
The Knight was indeed on a good square.
White could have maintained it there with tactical threats.
18.Qg3 instead of 0-0 (threat Bxh6)
[fen]r4rk1/2p2ppn/2Pqp2p/p2pN3/3P4/P5Q1/5PPP/R1B1K2R[/fen]
The more you look at the better it becomes - note the standard
defence Kh8 rules out f6 for a few moves. (Ng6+)
Time to play 0-0, with ideas a4 and Ba3 or Ra3-the Kingside.
Also consider h2-h4 with King flitting by hand to f1 & g1.
Originally posted by Diet CokeYes I was surprised by this too and it gave me a significant lead. Maybe he had that rhyme " aknight on the rim is dim" playing in his head.
Is there any reason Why 11...Na7 or Nb8 weren't played.
They're not great squares for the knight, but better than losing it for one pawn and no position.
1 edit
Originally posted by Mahoutfrom what I can see, your main mistake on this game was not being calm and patient. when you are a piece up, there are very few things that you need to do: defend if the opponent has compensation, trade down and calmly and patiently convert the game into an endgame. these may not be easy, but they are very plain and simple.
My Hillingdon league game (playing white) from last night...comments welcome. After reading a post in the forum here I scanned my copy of Micheal Steans "Simple Chess" before I went out and this got me thing about outposts. The bishop sac was unsound I know giving away a healthy advantage I'd worked hard to accumulate. I was through the time controls so di Rab8 28. Rc1 Re7? 29. h4 Ne4 30. Re2?? Rc8 31. f3 Ng3 32. Ree1 Rce8 33.
Rc5? Nf5 *
Whenever I get a piece up, my relief isn't because now I can attack him more effectively or mate him, it's more because I now don't need to struggle for choosing between plans, or even managing to building up one. There are so many positions when I don't know what to do. but when up a piece, all you need to do is simplify the position.
the bishop sac wasn't a mistake of inaccuracy, because there wasn't any possibility of combination, but it was more of a strategical mistake. you don't need to rush, attack and overkill. just play some patient chess and your extra piece will begin to prove itself.
Originally posted by diskamylYour right. That would have been much easier. I was so focused on getting to check mate that I failed to notice that simply preserving my advantage would have sufficed. A piece for a pawn up at the end of the evening and my opponent would have given me the game. I will try and remember to think about this before my next match.
from what I can see, your main mistake on this game was not being calm and patient. when you are a piece up, there are very few things that you need to do: defend if the opponent has compensation, trade down and calmly and patiently convert the game into an endgame. these may not be easy, but they are very plain and simple.
Whenever I get a piece up, my ...[text shortened]... d overkill. just play some patient chess and your extra piece will begin to prove itself.
A couple of thoughts about the opening ...
I used to play the QGD alot and was always surprised by how many people played as you did with e3 before developing the Bishop on c1.
It's not a bad move of course but it seems to me that Bg5 (or even Bf4) must be more in keeping with opening principles - getting pieces developed and so forth.
Also I'm not sure about c4-c5. It gains a tempo on the bishop (which should have been on e7 in the first place) but takes the pressure of the centre. You'll never be able to play cxd5 anymore. Sure it led you to winning material but only because Black played badly.
2 edits
Originally posted by MahoutAfter 31..Ng3 white should have played 32.Rxe6 surely. Black can't capture as he loses the c-pawn when the knight lands on e6. Therefore white just plays to get his knight on e6 and wins easily.
My Hillingdon league game (playing white) from last night...comments welcome. After reading a post in the forum here I scanned my copy of Micheal Steans "Simple Chess" before I went out and this got me thing about outposts. The bishop sac was unsound I know giving away a healthy advantage I'd worked hard to accumulate. I was through the time controls so di Rab8 28. Rc1 Re7? 29. h4 Ne4 30. Re2?? Rc8 31. f3 Ng3 32. Ree1 Rce8 33.
Rc5? Nf5 *
Something like 31..Ng3 32.Rxe6 ..R(anywhere along 6th rank) 33.Rc6 with the knight following up on e6 the next move.
Originally posted by JonathanB of LondonI've always found that keeping ones options open with regard to the black bishop is in whites interests in the QG. White just seems to experience less trouble if he clears the kingside early. Perhaps this is just something i perceive rather than anything concrete...
A couple of thoughts about the opening ...
I used to play the QGD alot and was always surprised by how many people played as you did with e3 before developing the Bishop on c1.
It's not a bad move of course but it seems to me that Bg5 (or even Bf4) must be more in keeping with opening principles - getting pieces developed and so forth.
...[text shortened]... play cxd5 anymore. Sure it led you to winning material but only because Black played badly.
Originally posted by MarinkatombThat's what I wanted to do but then calculated:
After 31..Ng3 white should have played 32.Rxe6 surely. Black can't capture as he loses the c-pawn when the knight lands on e6. Therefore white just plays to get his knight on e6 and wins easily.
Something like 31..Ng3 32.Rxe6 ..R(anywhere along 6th rank) 33.Rc6 with the knight following up on e6 the next move.
32 Rxe6...Rxe6
33 Nxe6...Ne2! Forking king and rook
and I just couldn't work it out any other way - unless I missed something
1 edit
Originally posted by Mahoutyou had 30.f3 31.Nxd5!. when you played Re2 instead you lost that chance because Ng3 was hitting the rook.
That's what I wanted to do but then calculated:
32 Rxe6...Rxe6
33 Nxe6...Ne2! Forking king and rook
and I just couldn't work it out any other way - unless I missed something
Originally posted by JonathanB of LondonWell yes…encouraged by JonathonB to look closely I’ve done a little more study on these first few moves and the reasons behind them and put my thoughts down - including the mistaken thinking.
A couple of thoughts about the opening ...
I used to play the QGD alot and was always surprised by how many people played as you did with e3 before developing the Bishop on c1.
It's not a bad move of course but it seems to me that Bg5 (or even Bf4) must be more in keeping with opening principles - getting pieces developed and so forth.
...[text shortened]... play cxd5 anymore. Sure it led you to winning material but only because Black played badly.
It interests me how we learn and how we remember and apply knowledge. As I’m playing much less at the moment – this is just my third game this season – and have less time to study it makes finding the best way to acquire and apply knowledge in a short time is important. I find it easier to remember ideas than specific variations but seem to manage to apply the right idea to the wrong variation at times.
Also shown is a little analysis from my old Hiracs engine. It was set to show suggestions for anything more than 0.01 of a point advantage - a tenth of a pawn, not because such a fine distinction is important, I just wanted it to spew out more alternatives.
I used three depths of analysis – 4 mins 30 secs (4’30&rdquo😉 per move, 15” per move and 5” per move. And I’ll call them High,Meduim & Low – H,M,L. The different analysis from these settings can be interesting or amusing…and I plan to run the game through Fritz sometime soon.
The Hiracs engine displays results in this format:
(+1.0) +1.5 38.Nf6e5 etc.
(+1.0) meaning the evaluation of the move I’ve just made puts me 1 pawn ahead
+1.5 is the evaluation if alternate sequence Hiracs recommends is measured (one and a half pawns ahead in this example)
Lastly the suggested moves are displayed.
For a book I use Chris Wards “Play the Queens Gambit” (PTQG) both for reference and study with this opening and find I it excellent. Anyway:
1.e4…d5
2.c4….e6
Now I knew to avoid the “notoriously dull and drawish” exchange variation arising from pxp but had remembered this wrong. That advice (in PTQG) was for the semi-slav: 1.e4…d5, 2.c4…c6 and the not this line. In fact for black this line is a method of avoiding the dull exchange in the semi slav. My error but no harm done yet.
3. Nc3…Nf6
4.e3…
Still don’t want to exchange for the (wrong) reason stated above. Chris Ward advocates cxd5 here. A point to remember.
But also I did know I was restricting the bishop. When I saw the post with the suggestion for Bg5 I was surprised I didn’t think of it….having played the Trompovsky a few times (1.d4…Nf6, 2.Bg5) I should be looking for this active developing move.
But checking the book it warned me of the Cambridge Springs variation: 4.Bg5…Nbd7, 5.e3…c6, 6.Nf3…Qa5 ..and I’ve been hammered by this once at the club and Chris Ward warns against it for white…enough said…a line for me to avoid. Besides someone who knows the Cambridge Springs in detail is probably a much better player than me anyway.
4….Bd6
H(-0.10) +0.01 4….Be7
M(-0.18) +0.01 4…c5
L (-0.07) +0.01
4…c6
I knew this was a poor move for black just because it didn’t look right and I think this “knowledge” comes from playing similar lines a lot and it being unusual. Although I think there are some tried and tested “best moves” in openings that are critical at GM level but perhaps less significant in the old Hillingdon league div 3. So on with the quest for knowledge - why is it bad?
-It can be attacked by c5 ….but then c5 isn’t such a good move for white so this can’t be the reason.
-It reduces the influence of the queen on the centre – that seems like a good reason.
-Nb5 can attack it – maybe… but I wasn’t about to move my knight up the board just yet.
-It can be blocked in after the Knight moves Nf3 and Ne5 especially when mobility is important for this bishop as blacks central pawns block the light squared bishop in. Now black has two bad or badish bishops – yes probably an even better reason.
-Be7 and possibly Bb4 are better moves– yes a good simple reason I’d not thought of before – it has better squares to go to.
5.Nf3…I considered the immediate c5 but was also aware that although it wasted a move for black it did move the bishop to a better square. 5. c5 is also moving a pawn twice in the opening and moving a pawn when an impotant piece could be developed. Also I liked getting the knight out and was already eyeing up e5 as a potential out post.
I didn’t want to develop the light sq bishop here and risk losing a tempo (by moving the bishop twice) if the pawn is taken and I have to recapture. This is an idea gained from a book and it seems reasonable here.
5…0-0
6. c5 I wanted to chase it away as I didn’t like it there contesting my potential knight outpost. Even though Hiracs agrees with the move I agree with the post above saying there is something better here. It forces Black to improve the position of the Bishop and can be attacked straight away by black playing b6
7.Qc2
H Agrees with the move.
M(+0.01) +0.24 7.b4…b6, 8a3…c6,9.Be2…Nbd7, 10. 0-0…a5, 11.Bb2…bxc5
L Agrees with the move
I quite fancied myself with this move thinking it was setting up a battery on the diagonal and also applying pressure on the cfile but now I’m not so sure…I think there was better. Will have to take a closer look at b4 as suggested by Hiracs
7…h6
H 9-0.260 +0.14 7…b6, 8. cx b6…axb6, 9. ne5…Ba6
M(-0.26) -0.01 7…b6 8. cx b6…axb6, 9. ne5…Ba6
L(-0.33) -0.19 7…B6
I clearly remember being told at the club how this sort of defensive move in the opening is premature and weak:
-It loosens or weakens pawns around the king.
-It defends against a move that is not a direct threat when you don’t know if your opponent is planning it…so this wastes a tempo at a crucial time
8. Bd3
H(+0.13) +0.20 8.Ne5
M Agrees with the move
L Agrees with the move
9.a3
You could say I’m just doing what black did on move 7 with a premature defensive move but I thought the threat of Nb4 was real …attacking my light squared bishop (my good bishop by the fact that my pawns are on the central dark squares.) and so pushing it off a good diagonal.
OK – I’m done for now!