Originally posted by EladarThis is the critical position.
After Nxe6
Qxc1
I just don't see a good way out for white after that. But hey, I'm not very good so I'm sure there's something else there that I'm not seeing.
18. Nxe6! is indeed the strongest move, objectively.
18.. Qxc1, as has been pointed out, is Black's best response.
Then White should play 19.Bxc1! Bxd4 20.Nxd8 Rxd8 21.Bxb7 (or Bf3) Bxe2 22.Re1.
At the end of this forced line, White emerges with a safe extra pawn. However despite this the ending looks a bit drawish.
I think Streetfighter's queen sacrifice was much more interesting.
It also might have been the best option for a practical point of view, if White needed to win at all costs, although Black could have defended better at several points and should have drawn the game.
Originally posted by streetfighterClearly it was a mistake. I reckon it was one of those times where you touch the piece (in this case, his bishop) and don't think quickly enough to say "j'adoube". Of course it wouldn't be "street fighting" chess to just resign in such a quiet and embarassing manner, so you played on. The rest is history. New history, but history none the less.
Just noticed this post - thanks guys : )
This game featured in GM Jonathan Rowson's Sunday Herald column last Saturday up here in Scotland. We both missed lots of opportunities apparently, but I guess that's not so surprising in such an unusual position!?
[b] Anyway, there's a free copy of Streetfighting Chess up for grabs for whoever comes up wi ...[text shortened]... get writing!
You can enter too Greenpawn, even though you've got a copy already : )[/b]
Almost every single rule of chess is related rather to the agent of the probabilities than to the factuality of the cause-effect principle. Most of the problems that they arise through the game they have almost nothing to do with a general “correct” approach "as is" -finally the chessplayer has to treat each exact position by means of empiricism. I can see that finally Streetfighter imprisoned the Black Queen at a whole area and then he conducted an h-pawn lateral attack, but this is too deep to be calculated although a strong player is aware of the concepts of the fortress, of the imprisonment and of the lateral attacks.
Since in our case too the observer is not solely a part of the problem but also the part of the solution, it seems to me that Streetfighter decided to replace the smoothness of the position into a chaotic tsunami and then he took a deep breath and on he went with his windsurf high on Tal, transforming also the thesis into a box at which nobody knew whether the cat was dead or alive -if one could accept that there was actually a cat inside it, that is. So he brought up a position whereas his sac could work or could work not, but at the time of the sac he could not also see the exact outcome as it was finally played.
However asymmetry, and of course a sac, are independent sources of dynamism. From the point singularity Big Bang emerged. Streetfighter’s opponent was ready to fall asleep in that position -and then along came the sac. This was a new condition through a blast and the opponent had to react genuinely. I know alright that Streetfighter was thirsty for asymmetry by any means.
But how can a player react once trapped into a chaotic condition Over The Board? The complications are too many to be calculated. I would probably sac my Queen if I was playing against an 1180ELO –but why should I play solely in order to keep my ELO and not to enjoy the Immortal Game? Why should I replace the joy of the Royal Game with the idiotic attitude to hold with my teeth and my nails a number? Why should I replace the joy of a pure duel with the nonsensical practice of that novice who thinks that he is training in martial arts but when the time comes he is afraid to deliver a kick and to receive a punch?
Streetfighter decided to sac his Queen simply because he is Streetfighter and because he bows to the Immortal Game. To be yourself and genuine and to bow to the Immortal Game is the single agent behind every brilliancy afterall😵
You missed 17. Bf6 and didn't see NXe6 so thinking you had contrived to lose you sac'd the Q in desparation.
I wouldn't have had the balls to play it. I am asking myself whether I'd even have looked at it any more than notice that QXB was a move and instantly dismissing it. Even getting into this position took courage. Its a complex position with a lot that can go wrong. Well played!
In the words of Siegbert Tarrasch - Streetfighter was attempting to acquire a reputation of being a dashing player at the cost of losing the game.
I think Streetfighter knew he had no chance of winning money in this tournament and that his only chance of getting something was to go for the brilliancy prize. In the absence of a couple of players playing a mirror images of the Opera Game, Greenpawn was bound to award this to anyone who sacrificed a queen.
Originally posted by Fat LadyI think you have a winner!! 🙂
In the words of Siegbert Tarrasch - Streetfighter was attempting to acquire a reputation of being a dashing player at the cost of losing the game.
I think Streetfighter knew he had no chance of winning money in this tournament and that his only chance of getting something was to go for the brilliancy prize. In the absence of a couple of players playing a ...[text shortened]... or images of the Opera Game, Greenpawn was bound to award this to anyone who sacrificed a queen.
It's going to be a tough one to decide-
Eladar's 'offensiveness'?
Blackbeetle's excessive verbiage?
cguy1 managing to fit 'heroin' into a sentence about chess?
Dave Tebb's chess logic?
A few others with good ideas?
I might end up sending them a chapter each! Then they'd all have to be nice to each other if they wanted to read the whole book ; )
Originally posted by streetfighterMy excessive verbosity and my broken English aside, your OTB fantasy has invigorating properties indeed😵
It's going to be a tough one to decide-
Eladar's 'offensiveness'?
Blackbeetle's excessive verbiage?
cguy1 managing to fit 'heroin' into a sentence about chess?
Dave Tebb's chess logic?
A few others with good ideas?
I might end up sending them a chapter each! Then they'd all have to be nice to each other if they wanted to read the whole book ; )
Originally posted by streetfighterThe street fighting image is just an illusion. In fact, your mummy wouldn't let you go to the tournament alone - as usual - and was playing White on the board next to you. She was about to promote a pawn for a second queen and didn't have one to hand... But hey, no shame, afterall our parents made sacrifices for us...
WHY I SACCED MY QUEEN in this game?
Originally posted by VarenkaHahaha,I think that one takes the cake...ehr...book 😵
The street fighting image is just an illusion. In fact, your mummy wouldn't let you go to the tournament alone - as usual - and was playing White on the board next to you. She was about to promote a pawn for a second queen and didn't have one to hand... But hey, no shame, afterall our parents made sacrifices for us...
What I found very interesting about this game was the fact that Black did "the right thing" from move 22 onwards in that he swapped off material when he was ahead. However Streetfighter correctly judged that these exchanges actually improved his position. A lone queen can be surprisingly impotent when it hasn't got another piece to help it gang up on weak squares. These attempts by Black to swap off material allowed White's h-pawn to get from h2 to h6 completely unmolested.