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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 21 Oct '07 16:51
    If a master of defence played against a master of attack - who would come out on top?
  2. 21 Oct '07 16:58
    Originally posted by Tyrannosauruschex
    If a master of defence played against a master of attack - who would come out on top?
    If the master of attack had white, then he would win. It has long been assumed (although I am not sure ever proven) that the perfect game for white is winning. It will always be true of man that the winner is the player who makes the last but one mistake.
  3. 21 Oct '07 17:04
    Originally posted by Tyrannosauruschex
    If a master of defence played against a master of attack - who would come out on top?
    me
  4. 21 Oct '07 17:07
    Originally posted by Policestate
    If the master of attack had white, then he would win. It has long been assumed (although I am not sure ever proven) that the perfect game for white is winning. It will always be true of man that the winner is the player who makes the last but one mistake.
    no, a perfect game is a draw, even with the +one tempo, it's a draw.
    Winning comes from finding imperfections in your opponent's play, and exploiting them. If you are incapable of spotting these imperfections, however slight, and your opponent can not find your imperfections, then it is a draw.
  5. Standard member Yuga
    Renaissance
    21 Oct '07 17:11
    Originally posted by Policestate
    If the master of attack had white, then he would win. It has long been assumed (although I am not sure ever proven) that the perfect game for white is winning. It will always be true of man that the winner is the player who makes the last but one mistake.
    I dare you to find an improvement on this game.

    Anand - Kramnik (Advanced chess rapid) 2002
    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1252103
  6. 21 Oct '07 17:29 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Yuga
    I dare you to find an improvement on this game.

    Anand - Kramnik (Advanced chess rapid) 2002
    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1252103
    why not 11. cxd5? or 11. ... Nxg4? and I like 20. ...Bg4 better.
  7. Standard member Korch
    Chess Warrior
    21 Oct '07 17:39
    Originally posted by Policestate
    If the master of attack had white, then he would win. It has long been assumed (although I am not sure ever proven) that the perfect game for white is winning. It will always be true of man that the winner is the player who makes the last but one mistake.
    I would disagree that perfect game for white is winning - in my opinion in opening black can afford to play some odd moves and make draw even if white plays perfect.
  8. Standard member Yuga
    Renaissance
    21 Oct '07 17:44 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by rubberjaw30
    why not 11. cxd5? or 11. ... Nxg4? and I like 20. ...Bg4 better.
    cxd5 leaves black with an isolated d-pawn so white will have a small initiative but Black can easily solve the problem of his c8 bishop.

    If Nxg4, white has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn. I know that white scores extremely well in the line if white takes on g4; nevertheless, I will check these lines.

    I am not sure how the best line goes after Bg4; Qe4 seems obvious but I will check these lines.
  9. 21 Oct '07 17:48 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Yuga
    cxd5 leaves black with an isolated d-pawn so white will have a small initiative but Black can easily solve the problem of his c8 bishop.

    If Nxg4, white has more than sufficient compensation for the pawn. I know that white scores extremely well in the line if white takes on g4; nevertheless, I will check these lines.
    I didn't analyze them at all, obviously, so you may very well be correct that Nxg4 is bad... obviously Kramnik thought so!
  10. 21 Oct '07 17:57
    i would like to think that master defense can thwart masterful attack. conceptually, to attack implies overextention and weakeness upon one's self, and therefore cool can defense prevail and exploit. however, it is easiler said than done.
  11. 21 Oct '07 19:43
    Originally posted by Korch
    I would disagree that perfect game for white is winning - in my opinion in opening black can afford to play some odd moves and make draw even if white plays perfect.
    We also have to take into account that we don't know what the perfect moves are so we can't really make assumptions either way.
  12. 21 Oct '07 20:07
    Originally posted by Korch
    I would disagree that perfect game for white is winning - in my opinion in opening black can afford to play some odd moves and make draw even if white plays perfect.
    I mean from a mathematical perspective. Mistakes would not be part of this equation. Theoretically there is a perfect chess game - a game whereby whatever black plays, white can secure an eventual advantage. What I dont know is whether this would be enough to win. Only a computer far more powerful that one so far conceived could calculate this, but it is possible.

    I appreciate that this was not the posters question - he was clearly talking about humans, with a style of chess. The perfect game would not be a 'style', it would be a inconceivably complex computation.
  13. 21 Oct '07 20:08
    Originally posted by Yuga
    I dare you to find an improvement on this game.

    Anand - Kramnik (Advanced chess rapid) 2002
    http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1252103
    Game 1252103
  14. Standard member Yuga
    Renaissance
    21 Oct '07 21:54
    Originally posted by hamltnblue
    Game 1252103
    That's extraordinary endgame technique. In the position after move 25, I think that Black should have aimed to get his bishop to c6. If this is possible, Black may be able to draw.

    Black should have played d6 before Nf6 in the opening. I prefer d6/e6/Nge7 in that closed Sicilian line.
  15. 21 Oct '07 22:10
    Originally posted by Policestate
    If the master of attack had white, then he would win. It has long been assumed (although I am not sure ever proven) that the perfect game for white is winning. It will always be true of man that the winner is the player who makes the last but one mistake.
    By who? Kasparov and every other GM I've heard speak on this issue considers chess a draw with perfect play. If White wins by force with perfect play, something would be wrong with the game.