Game 2423887
Game 2423892
I can't wait for the analysis of these games when they're through.
Originally posted by vipiuI don't usually follow book for 19 moves, but that is a book line of the french. It will be interesting to see which of the two have improvements (or just deviations) on existing theory which may win them the game.
maybe he will loose this:
http://www.chessatwork.com/gameanalysis/boardhistory.php?gameid=2423887
I thought I had real winning chances here but Weyerstrass defended brilliantly and my pawn advantage came to naught.
Game 1783702
Originally posted by GatecrasherThen to top it all off, he made off with the LOTR Return of the King Collectors Edition DVD. 😀
I thought I had real winning chances here but Weyerstrass defended brilliantly and my pawn advantage came to naught.
Game 1783702
Excellent game by both of you.
Originally posted by GatecrasherI've done some analysis of this game with the aid of an engine, Fritz8, which is far weaker in CC than Weyerstrass, so maybe any my mention of the inaccuracies are a bit unfair. I've had to do some pruning of lines anyway.
I thought I had real winning chances here but Weyerstrass defended brilliantly and my pawn advantage came to naught.
Game 1783702
Are you sure that your position was not winning? Would you have been better off to trade off pawns on move 24 (my following analysis applies if you had played the pawn trade, and not Bb3, although even then it appears you had winning chances), and then somehow blockade off the a pawn, while simultaneously actualizing your Kside pawn majority?
For example, could you use the rook and bishop simultaneously to deny the passed a pawn access to a light square (such as a2), advance your Kside pawns, safely, your K supporting the pawns, and then pushing your pawns to victory? Are you able to preserve your f-pawn, produce a pair of passed connected pawns and maintain your pawn advantage?
Perhaps Black could plan to cause bring the King over to the queenside and facilitate advancement of the a pawn, but that would take very much time, probably too much time.
Stating the obvious here, but naturally you would also have to avoid a rook trade; in post-game analysis, undoubtedly an engine may recommend a rook trade when you may have better.
The position after Black's move 22 would a very interesting case study.
White has the extra pawn and Black has little compensation, Black has a rook on the second rank, but still...; Black's Queenside pawns may be a problem, but white may block them off, but in my inexpert opinion, supported with some pruned analysis of a maybe 2500 rated engine, I believe white has a technical win.
Well played. This is only the second game on this site that I've deduced in which somebody truly had winning chances against Weyerstrass. The other game is: Game 1397460.
Two games that appear losing for Weyerstrass but are not:
Game 685913
Game 1131346
And the engine evaluations are unable to determine that those two games are drawn until one plays down those lines due to the horizon effect.
White’s play through move 23 appears accurate.
24. Bxb5 may have been preferable; possibly more winning chances in the following lines here
30. Rc8! was possibly white’s last chance to produce winning chances.
White’s play appears accurate otherwise. A few of the lines, I have analyzed, but they are missing here, as I pruned some of the non-winning lines.
[Event "Tolkien Clan Return of the King Tournam"]
[Site "http://www.redhotpawn.com"]
[Date "2006.02.06"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Gatecrasher"]
[Black "Weyerstrass"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "D34"]
[Annotator "Yuga"]
[PlyCount "73"]
[EventDate "2006.??.??"]
1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 e6 3. d4 c5 4. cxd5 exd5 5. g3 Nc6 6. Bg2 Nf6 7. O-O Be7 8. Nc3
O-O 9. Bg5 Be6 10. dxc5 Bxc5 11. Bxf6 Qxf6 12. Nxd5 Qxb2 13. Nc7 Rad8 14. Qc1
Qxc1 15. Raxc1 b6 16. Nxe6 fxe6 17. e3 h6 18. Rc4 Rxf3 19. Bxf3 Ne5 20. Bg4
Nxc4 21. Bxe6+ Kf8 22. Bxc4 Rd2 23. Re1 (23. h4 g6 24. Re1 (24. g4 Kg7 (24...
Ke7 25. Kg2 Kf6 26. Kf3 Ke5 27. g5 hxg5 28. hxg5 Kf5 29. Rg1 a5) (24... Rc2 25.
Bb3 Rd2 26. Rc1 Ke7 (26... g5 27. hxg5 hxg5) 27. g5 hxg5 28. hxg5 Ke8 29. Kg2))
24... Kg7 25. Kg2 Kf6 26. Kf3 Rc2 27. Bb3 Rd2 28. Rc1 g5 29. hxg5+ hxg5 30. Rh1
a5 31. Rh6+ Kg7 32. Rc6 a4 33. Bc4 Rc2 34. Bd5 Rd2 35. Rc7+ Kg6) 23... b5 24.
Bb3 (24. Bxb5 Rxa2 25. Rc1 Bd6 (25... Bb6 26. Rc8+ Ke7 27. Re8+ Kf7 28. Kg2 Rb2
(28... Ra5 29. Bd7 Rd5 30. Ba4 Ra5 31. Re4 Kf6 $16) 29. Ba4 Rb4 30. Bd7 Rc4 31.
Rb8 Rb4 32. Bc6 Ke6 33. Rg8 Kf6 34. Kf3 a5 35. h4 Rc4 36. Bd5 Rc7 37. Re8 Re7
38. Rb8 Bc5 39. e4 Ra7 40. Re8 Be7 41. Kf4 g5+ 42. hxg5+ hxg5+ 43. Kg4 Ke5 44.
f4+ gxf4 45. gxf4+ Kd4 46. Kf5 a4 47. Ba2 a3 48. e5 Ke3 (48... Rb7 49. Ra8 Rb2
50. Ra4+ $18) 49. Rc8 $18) 26. Kg2 Ke7 27. Bc4 Ra3 28. Bd5 a5 29. Rc8 Rd3 30.
e4 a4 31. Ra8 a3 32. Ra7+ Kf8 33. Rf7+ Ke8 34. Rxg7 Rd2 35. Rh7 Bc5 36. Rxh6
Rxf2+ 37. Kh3) 24... Ke7 25. Kg2 a5 26. Rc1 Bb6 27. Kf3 a4 28. Bg8 Rb2 29. h4
h5 30. a3 (30. Rc8 Ba5 31. Ke4 Be1 32. f4 Bxg3 33. Rc7+ Kf8 34. Bd5 Bxh4 35.
Rf7+ Ke8 36. Rxg7 Bf2 37. f5 Be1 38. f6 Rf2 39. f7+ Ke7 40. Rg8 Bb4 41. Rb8 h4
42. Rxb5 Bd6 43. Rb7+ Kf8 44. Rd7 Rf6 45. Rd8+ Kg7 46. Rg8+ Kh7 47. Kd3 h3 48.
Rg4 h2 49. Rxa4 Kg7 50. Rg4+ Rg6 51. Rh4 Rg1 52. a4 Rd1+ 53. Kc4 Rc1+ 54. Kb3
Rd1 55. Rg4+ Kf6 56. Rd4 Rxd4 (56... Re1 57. Rh4 Rd1) 57. exd4 Ke7 58. a5 Bb8
59. Kb4 Ba7 60. Kc4 Bb8 61. Bf3 Kxf7 62. Kb5 Ba7 63. d5 Ke7 64. Kc6 Bd4 65. Kb7
Kd6 66. a6 Be3 67. a7 Bxa7 68. Kxa7 $18) 30... Ba5 31. Bh7 (31. Ke4 b4 32. axb4
Rxb4+ 33. Kd3 Rb2 34. Ra1 Rxf2 35. Rxa4 Be1 36. Ra7+ Kf8 $11) 31... Bd2 32.
Rc7+ Kd6 33. Rxg7 Be1 34. Ke4 Rb3 35. Rg6+ Kc7 36. f4 (36. Kf3 Rxa3 37. Ke2 Bc3
38. Rg5 Ra2+ 39. Kd3 b4 40. f4 Be1 41. Rxh5 Bxg3 42. Rb5 b3 43. h5 Rh2 44. Ra5
b2 45. Kd4 Bh4 $11) 36... Rxa3 37. Kd4 *
Thanks for the anlaysis Yuga. I haven't been over this game yet. But I remember being somewhat surprised by the aggresive 23 ... b5.
You are probably right that I should have exchanged pawns at this point. At the time I had an extra central pawn which was also passed. I thought it would be much better to block his queenside pawns rather than making the exchange and rewarding him with a passed pawn in return. In hindsight, though, a more aggresive approach may well have paid dividends. I probably violated Stienitz's first rule: If you have the advantage you have the duty to attack, or risk losing the advantage. I probably lost the advantage at this point without even realising it.
Anyway, worth looking at more closely when I get some time...