| |
Main
Date: 04 Jun 2006 17:57:10
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: About "How to study Endings"
|
Hello,
Recently it has ben discussed here How to study endings.
I propose an ending to analyze:
It seems to me that white achieved an ending a little better but only a
mistake for black allowed the win (It was a 15min+3sec game)
Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??
[Event "Match des Legendes"]
[Site "Porto Vecchio FRA"]
[Date "2006.05.26"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Spassky, B."]
[Black "Karpov, Ana"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B17"]
[WhiteElo "2548"]
[BlackElo "2672"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "2006.05.26"]
1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.h3
Bf5 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 e6 10. O-O Be7 11. c4 O-O 12. b3 c5 13. Bb2 cxd4
14. Rfd1 Qa5 15. Bxd4 Rfd8 16. Qe2 Qf5 17. Rd3 Qe4 18. Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Rad1
Kf8 20. Kf1 f6 21. Be3 Rxd3 22. Rxd3 Ke8 23. Nd2 Nxd2+ 24. Rxd2 a6
25.Ke2 Rd8 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27. c5 Kd7 28. Kd3 Bd8 29. b4 Bc7 30. Kc4 h5
31. a4 Be5 32. b5 axb5+ 33. axb5 Kc7 34. g4 hxg4 35. hxg4 Kd7 36. f4 Bb2
37. f5 e5 38. Kd5 Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40.Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4 Bc3 42. Bg3 1-0
|
|
| |
Date: 10 Jun 2006 22:12:38
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
>
> Would you be interested in doing something similar for next moves (the
> ones more interesting)?
>
I'll look at the remaining moves from Black's perspective.
21. Be3
Most moves lose material. Rxd3 and b6 seem solid. I prefer 21 ... Rxd3
as it simplifies the board and moves Black closer to a draw.
If 21. ... <most moves > 22. Rxd1 Rxd1 23. Bxa7
If 21. ... <most moves > 22. Rxd1 Bxd1 24. Bxa7
If 21. ... <most moves > 22. Rxd1 Bxd1 24. Bxa7 Rxa7 25. Rxd1+
21. ... Rxd3 22. Rxd3
Black should avoid seventh-rank infiltration by the enemy bishop with
Ke8. I prefer 22. ... Ke8. Bc5 forces an exchange but presses too
hard... White picks up a free tempo.
22. ... Ke8 23. Nd2
White demands an exchange--his knight for Black's well-posted knight.
If Black declines via Nc5 he loses his outpost anyway, so it's best to
accept with 23. ... Nxd2. This also moves us closer to the desired
draw.
23. ... Nxd2 24. Rxd2
Black would like to exchange Rooks, because White's rook has control
over d-file. However, before he can do that he has to address the weak
a7 pawn. b6, a6, or a5 would accomplish that. I prefer 24. ... a5.
24. ... a6 25. Ke2
Black is finally ready to exchange rooks. 25. ... Rd8 is the logical
next move.
25. ... Rd8 26. Rxd8
Obviously Kxd8 or Bxd8. Kxd8 leaves Black's bishop in-position
preventing White's a-b-c pawns from advancing. I prefer 26. ... Kxd8.
26. ... Kxd8 c5
Bring the king into play with Kd7 or Kc7. I prefer 26. ... Kd7 to use
safe light squares.
27. ... Kd7 28. Kd3
I prefer 28. ... a5, preventing defense of White's c-pawn by the b-pawn
for several turns, but Kc6 also seems fine here.
28. ... Bd8 29. b4
Bd8 is probably preparing for a later b3/b4. 29. ... Kc7 makes sense.
29. ... Bc7 30. Kc4
Bc7 points Black's bishop at both the kingside and queenside. If
counter-attack is his plan, perhaps 30. ... g5? That's probably also
why he hasn't commited his king with a move like Kc4.
30. ... h5 31. a4
Yup, counter-attack's exactly what he had in mind! Now 31. ... g5?
31. ... Be5 32. b5
I'm not sure what Be5 is trying to accomplish. It seems like White will
be able to chase the bishop away with f4! whenever he wants to.
A capture is fine here. Trade down to a draw! I prefer 32. ... axb6+
32. ... axb6+ 33. axb5
Black has to consider the possible pawn advances. If 35. c6 bxc6 36.
bxc6 Kxc6. If 35. b6 Kc6. Black can hold in either case. I prefer g5,
advancing Black's kingside pawns.
33. ... Kc7 34. g4
Exchanging pawns clears the way for promotion. 35. ... gxf4
34. ... gxf4 35. hxg4
Again, focusing on the kingside pawn majority, I prefer 35. ... f5.
35. ... Kd7 36. f4
What?! If Kd7, why did he bother with Kc7 two moves earlier? The bishop
must be moved to safety. Bb8 and Bb2 are possible. I prefer 38. ...
Bb2.
36. ... Bb2 37. f5
If 37 ... exf5 38. gxf5 Black would have no opportunity for
counter-play. 37. ... e5 seems like a strong move.
37. ... e5 38. Kd5
Uhoh. White seems to have the upper hand. Any move by Black has no
moves to improve his position, while White does. White probably wants
to play g5! I guess Black's best move is 38 ... Ba3, threatening
retaliation if 39. g5 fxg5 40. Bxg5 e4 41. Kxe4 Bxc5!
38. ... Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40. Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4
Yup, there's the expected sequence. But Bb2? I thought e4 was better at
clearing way for a draw. Now I would play Bc3 or Ba1, waiting moves.
41. ... Bc3 42. Bg3
Yikes?! Black has no way to defend the pawn and no good counter-attack.
42. ... Resign?
42. ... Resign
Now, your question was, what was the fatal mistake? I'll make my
guesses below and use Crafty to determine the continuations.
Guess #1: It was 40. ... Bb2. I liked 40. ... e4 better.
40. ... e4 41. c6+ bxc6 42. bxc6+ Kc7 43. Bd2 Bb2 44. Bf4+ Kc8 45.
Kxe4
Nope, obviously this is not a game-saving continuation.
Guess #2: It was 35. ... Kd7. I liked 35. ... f5 better.
35. ... f5 36. gxf5 gxf5 37. Bd4 Bxd4 38. Kxd4 f4 39. Ke4 Kd7 40.
Kxf4 Ke6 41. Ke4
Nope, obviously this is not a game-saving continuation.
Guess #3: It was 33. ... Kc7. I liked 33. g5 better, and Black returned
to d7 later.
33. ... g5 34. Bd4 Bxd4 35. Kxd4 Kc7 36. Ke3 Kd7 37. f4 g4 38. hxg4
hxg4 39. Kf2 Kc7 40. Kg3 f5 41. Kh4 Kd8 42. Kg5 g3 43. kf6 Kd7 44. Kf7
Kc7 45. Kxe6
At turn 33 the game did not look lost to me... how surprising. I guess
it's time to read the analysis posted by others. An interesting game...
a loss can be very subtle.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Jun 2006 00:50:01
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
En/na [email protected] ha escrit:
> Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
>
>>Would you be interested in doing something similar for next moves (the
>>ones more interesting)?
>
> I'll look at the remaining moves from Black's perspective.
>
> 21. Be3
> 21. ... Rxd3 22. Rxd3
> 22. ... Ke8 23. Nd2
>
> White demands an exchange--his knight for Black's well-posted knight.
> If Black declines via Nc5 he loses his outpost anyway, so it's best to
> accept with 23. ... Nxd2. This also moves us closer to the desired
> draw.
I do not think 23...Nxd2 to be bad but ...
I think 23...Nc5 to be playable too. I have not seen any clear way to
have advantage for white after it.
> 23. ... Nxd2 24. Rxd2
>
> Black would like to exchange Rooks, because White's rook has control
> over d-file. However, before he can do that he has to address the weak
> a7 pawn. b6, a6, or a5 would accomplish that. I prefer 24. ... a5.
Maybe 24...a5 is playable, but as pawns do not move backwards I prefer
not to play a pawn in an square where it can be bloqued in the same
color as the bishops.
> 24. ... a6 25. Ke2
> 25. ... Rd8 26. Rxd8
> 26. ... Kxd8 c5
> 27. ... Kd7 28. Kd3
>
> I prefer 28. ... a5, preventing defense of White's c-pawn by the b-pawn
> for several turns, but Kc6 also seems fine here.
I continue thinking that I prefer to avoid placing pawn in black squares.
And here there are a nice tactical blow showing that 28...Kc6!! was the
best move (here ... read previous posts)
> 28. ... Bd8 29. b4
> 29. ... Bc7 30. Kc4
> 30. ... h5 31. a4
>
> Yup, counter-attack's exactly what he had in mind! Now 31. ... g5?
I do not know if you propose 31....g5 or you reject it.
> 31. ... Be5 32. b5
>
> I'm not sure what Be5 is trying to accomplish. It seems like White will
> be able to chase the bishop away with f4! whenever he wants to.
From e5 black bishop has more options/suqares than from c7.
> 32. ... axb6+ 33. axb5
>
> Black has to consider the possible pawn advances. If 35. c6 bxc6 36.
> bxc6 Kxc6. If 35. b6 Kc6. Black can hold in either case. I prefer g5,
> advancing Black's kingside pawns.
I would consider all pros and contras because that move (33....g5) can
produce a bad bishop and can help white opening the kingside to attack
with his king.
> 33. ... Kc7 34. g4
> 34. ... gxf4 35. hxg4
>
> Again, focusing on the kingside pawn majority, I prefer 35. ... f5.
Tha 35...f5 seems to lose. It should be noted that opening the kingside
helps white. And allowing white to play Kd5 can be a mistake too.
After 35...f5? 36.gf ef 37.Bd4 white will eat black kingside pawns in
the pawn ending.
Engines propose here 35...g5 but I think it can be a mistake too.
(but here I'm not so sure)
> 35. ... Kd7 36. f4
>
> What?! If Kd7, why did he bother with Kc7 two moves earlier? The bishop
> must be moved to safety. Bb8 and Bb2 are possible. I prefer 38. ...
> Bb2.
Black is waiting. White is better but maybe He has not enough advantage.
In that cases it's very difficult to know if black must wait or must
play to search some activity.
> 36. ... Bb2 37. f5
>
> If 37 ... exf5 38. gxf5 Black would have no opportunity for
> counter-play. 37. ... e5 seems like a strong move.
Maybe 37... e5 was a mistake (allowing white king to go to d5)
> 37. ... e5 38. Kd5
>
> Uhoh. White seems to have the upper hand. Any move by Black has no
> moves to improve his position, while White does. White probably wants
> to play g5! I guess Black's best move is 38 ... Ba3, threatening
> retaliation if 39. g5 fxg5 40. Bxg5 e4 41. Kxe4 Bxc5!
>
> 38. ... Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40. Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4
>
> Yup, there's the expected sequence. But Bb2? I thought e4 was better at
> clearing way for a draw. Now I would play Bc3 or Ba1, waiting moves.
40...e4 loses the e pawn after Be3
> 41. ... Bc3 42. Bg3
> 42. ... Resign
>
> Now, your question was, what was the fatal mistake? I'll make my
> guesses below and use Crafty to determine the continuations.
>
> Guess #1: It was 40. ... Bb2. I liked 40. ... e4 better.
> 40. ... e4 41. c6+ bxc6 42. bxc6+ Kc7 43. Bd2 Bb2 44. Bf4+ Kc8 45.
> Kxe4
> Nope, obviously this is not a game-saving continuation.
Strange line: 40...e4 41.Be3 seems good enough.
> Guess #2: It was 35. ... Kd7. I liked 35. ... f5 better.
> 35. ... f5 36. gxf5 gxf5 37. Bd4 Bxd4 38. Kxd4 f4 39. Ke4 Kd7 40.
> Kxf4 Ke6 41. Ke4
> Nope, obviously this is not a game-saving continuation.
I agree
> Guess #3: It was 33. ... Kc7. I liked 33... g5 better, and Black returned
> to d7 later.
> 33. ... g5 34. Bd4 Bxd4 35. Kxd4 Kc7 36. Ke3 Kd7 37. f4 g4 38. hxg4
> hxg4 39. Kf2 Kc7 40. Kg3 f5 41. Kh4 Kd8 42. Kg5 g3 43. kf6 Kd7 44. Kf7
> Kc7 45. Kxe6
>
> At turn 33 the game did not look lost to me... how surprising. I guess
> it's time to read the analysis posted by others. An interesting game...
> a loss can be very subtle.
I think black was waiting, 33...g5 is a non-back decision.
AT
|
| |
Date: 08 Jun 2006 09:41:05
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
> No, the Classical Variation is the one with 4...Bf5. This is called
> the Smyslov Variation (or the Petrosian/Smyslov, or simply the Modern
> ...Nd7 Variation).
In ECO they're the "B17 Caro-Kann, Steinitz variation" and "B19
Caro-Kann, Classical variation". Kasparov and Shirov recently played
B19, while Karpov prefers B17. I guess both variations (and others) are
alive and well.
> 5. Ng5 is the current main line, but bookish. The old main line was 5.
> Bc4 Ngf6 7. Ng5 e6 8. Qe2 (threatening 9. Nxf7) Nb6 and now White had
> to choose between 9. Bb3 and 9. Bd3. (The White d-pawn isn't really
> hanging, e.g. 9. Bd3 Qxd4? 10. Ng1f3 followed by Ne5)
The pawn seemed to be hanging until I read your explanation. I looked
at 5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 Qa5 7. Bd2 Qb6 yesterday.
> 5. Bc4 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nf6 6. c3 Bf5?? (6...Qc7 or 6...e6) 7. Qb3 winning
> a pawn is an old trap.
I wouldn't fall for that one, but it's a nice trick.
> > I consult with Rybka. Nd2 is a huge blunder. 20. Nd2 Nc5 21. Bxc5 Rxc5
> > 22. Be3. Drat. I can play 19 moves as good as Spassky
>
> Talk about delusions of grandeur! Even Ray only claims he can make 14
> "perfect" moves in the opening. You're a long way from playing 19 moves
> "as good as Spassky."
I'm still going through your analysis... very interesting. So my one
missed combo per per twenty five moves is not the only thing separating
me from Spassky, but it's the most obvious. It feels silly even
discussing strategy when I make mistakes like that! Back to tactics,
tactics, and more tactics...
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2006 21:14:11
From: chasmad
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
[email protected] wrote:
> I've analyzed half the game. I have a couple questions:
>
> A. On move 8, why did Spassky choose Bd3 over Bc4?
> B. On move 12, why did Spassky choose b3 over c5?
>
> > 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7
>
> This is the Caro-Kann, Classical Variation.
No, the Classical Variation is the one with 4...Bf5. This is called
the Smyslov Variation (or the Petrosian/Smyslov, or simply the Modern
...Nd7 Variation).
>Black is believed to be passive yet solid, and games draw
>more often with this opening than others.
>
> White can attack the center with c3, Nf3, and Bf4. Black may be
> considering e5 or f5. White should answer Nf3, the least-commital move.
>
> > 5. Nf3
5. Ng5 is the current main line, but bookish. The old main line was 5.
Bc4 Ngf6 7. Ng5 e6 8. Qe2 (threatening 9. Nxf7) Nb6 and now White had
to choose between 9. Bb3 and 9. Bd3. (The White d-pawn isn't really
hanging, e.g. 9. Bd3 Qxd4? 10. Ng1f3 followed by Ne5)
5. Bc4 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nf6 6. c3 Bf5?? (6...Qc7 or 6...e6) 7. Qb3 winning
a pawn is an old trap.
> Ngf6
>
> White's knight is under attack. 6. Ng5 h5 Na3 leaves his knight badly
> posted, 6. Nc5 Nxc5 dxc5 loses his central pawns. Nd2 blocks the
> dark-squared bishop while Nc3 blocks the c-pawn. Nc3 seems best as
> Black has no d-pawn, so the c-pawn shouldn't need to be active in the
> near future.
>
Do you actually mean to say that "if 6. Ng5 h6 7.Nh3"?
6. Ng3 has been popular, avoiding exchanges without obstructing the
c-pawn.
> > 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6
>
> I totally missed Nxf6. That's even better!
>
> Ne5 gives White's knight an outpost, puts pressure on f7, and prevents
> e5. With Black's d-pawn gone and f-pawn blocked, the output should last
> several turns.
Old stuff! 7. Ne5 was popular until it was discovered that 7...Be6! or
7...Nd7!? are okay for Black.
>
> Bc4 is also good, putting pressure on f7 and enabling a kingside castle.
>
But Black is okay after 7... Bf5 and 8...e6, when the B on c4 is not
doing much and might provoke a later pawn storm with ...b5 and ...a5.
> > 7. h3 Bf5
>
> I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says h3(-.21) is playable, as are
> my variants: Bc4(-.17), Ne5(-.17).
>
7. h3 is a old favorite of Spassky's. He "threatens" 8. Bd3 when Black
has no good place for his QB.
> Bf5 doesn't pose any immediate threats. I don't want to exchange
> bishops as the light-squared bishop is probably White's good and
> Black's bad bishop.
>
Black needs to develop his Bc8 before playing ...e6.
> > 8. Bd3 Bxd3
>
> I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says Bd3(-.32) is a mistake
> compared to my variants. Bd3 (-.32), Bc4 (+.06), Ne5 (-0.01). Why did
> Spassky choose Bd3?!
>
It leaves Black with a rather passive position where he must have good
drawing chances but almost zero chances of winning. Not a bad choice
by an older White player who can keep the draw in hand while probing
for mistakes.
> Qxd3 is the obvious continuation to avoid doubled pawns.
>
> > 9. Qxd3 e6
>
> This seems like a quiet moment. White has good responses to e5, c5,
> Qa5, and Bc5. This is a good opportunity to castle O-O.
>
> > 10. O-O Be7
>
> Bf4 seems strong linking White's rooks, developing a new piece, seizing
> a long diagonal, and further dominating the e5 square. Ne5 and Re1 are
> also playable.
11. Bf4 strikes at nothing. Spassky cleverly puts his QB on d4, where
it is very active (eyeing a7 and f6).
>
> > 11. c4 O-O
>
> I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says c4(-.35) is playable as are
> my variants: Bd3 (-.35), Ne5 (-0.34), Re1 (-.35). I guess they're all
> about the same.
>
> c5 seems like a logical follow-up, entombing Black's bishop. If b6,
> then b4. Ne5 or Bf4 also make sense. Re1 probably doesn't achieve as
> much.
>
12. c5?? Bxc5. Even if it weren't tactically bad, a move like 12. c5
is positionally suspect in that it leaves White with a backward d-pawn
and a hole on d5 that Black can easily occupy.
> > 12. b3 c5
>
> Again, I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says b3(-.26) is a mistake
> compared to my variant: c5 (+.72), and playable compared to my variants
> Ne5 (-.23) and Bf4 (-.34). What did Spassky choose b3?!
Are you sure your computer didn't see 12. c5 Bxc5?
12. b3 is a good move, putting the White B to work on a long diagonal
that will soon be opened (after ...cxd4) and protecting the c-pawn from
eventual attacks along the c-file.
>
> Ba3 seems a good reply. 13. Ba3 cxd4 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Qxd4 or 13. Ba3
> Qa5 14. Bxc5 Bxc5 15. dxc5 Qxc5. Bb2 and Be3 are also playable. A
> bishop move is needed here because dxc5 is suicide, cxd5 Qxd5 allows a
> queen exchange, and cxd5 Nxd5 Bc5 gives Black a nice attack.
>
13. Ba3 is just silly. White isn't eager to swap this piece so easily.
> > 13. Bb2 cxd4 14. Rfd1 Qa5
>
> Recapturing the pawn should be a priority. The bishop recapture looks
> best, followed by the queen, and then by the knight in order or
> strength.
>
> > 15. Bxd4 Rfd8
>
> Expected. The Queen should move out of the pin. Safe squares are b1,
> c2, e2, f1, and e3. Qc2 is best as it maintains pressure on g6.
What on earth does g6 have to do with anything?? Do you mean that the
move 16. Qc2 inhibits the Black queen from occupying f5? So what?
After 16. Qc2?! Rac8 White has to worry about possible ...b5 and ...Nd5
ideas.
>
> > 16. Qe2 Qf5
>
> I consult with Rybka. Qe2(-.30) is playable compared with my variant,
> Qc2 (-.33). I guess the idea behind Qe2 is to facilitate Ne5, finally
> seizing the outpost. Back-rank mate tactics are finally starting to
> appear.
>
> Rd3 is good here, preparing to bring the second rook into action.
>
> > 17. Rd3 Qe4
>
> It's a close call. I would play Qxe4 to avoid complications, but Re1
> looks playable.
I would be tempted to try 18. Re3 and chase the Black queen around, but
evidently White judged that the ending would be more unpleasant for
Black than the middlegame.
>
> > 18. Qxe4 Nxe4
>
> Rad1. There seems no easy way to kill the knight, but this move both
> protects against Nc5 and continues the offensive push.
>
> > 19. Rad1 Kf8
>
> Black is protected now against a back-rank mate, and his pieces are
> coordinated. White should exchange or chase away the enemy knight with
> Nd2.
I don't see why.
>
> > 20. Kf1 f6
>
> I consult with Rybka. Nd2 is a huge blunder. 20. Nd2 Nc5 21. Bxc5 Rxc5
> 22. Be3. Drat. I can play 19 moves as good as Spassky
Talk about delusions of grandeur! Even Ray only claims he can make 14
"perfect" moves in the opening. You're a long way from playing 19 moves
"as good as Spassky."
> but that 20th move is why I'm not a master!
It's not "that 20th move" but a general case of cluelessness that gets
you.
>He must have seen this, else he'd surely have chased away the enemy knight.
He probably never even wasted time looking at a move like 20. Nd2.
Charles
|
| |
Date: 06 Jun 2006 15:13:52
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
> Ray Gordon said:
> 5. Ng5 was played in the recent computer world championship.
Interesting. I was thinking 5. Ng5 is bad because 5. Ng5 h6 Ne4, 5. Ng5
h6 Nh3, 5. Ngg5 h6, Ngf3 were obviously bad moves.
However, 5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 is quite good! Black can go wrong, and even
if he plays perfectly white still retains the better position.
>> 5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 Qa5
If 6. ... fxe6 it's mate with 7. Qh5+ g6 8. Qxg6#. Only Qb6 or Qa5+
save the day.
>> 7. Bd2 Qb6
Any move except Qb6 loses to Nc7.
>> 8. Nxf8 Nxf8 9. Bc3 Nf6
|
| | |
Date: 06 Jun 2006 19:11:50
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
>> 5. Ng5 was played in the recent computer world championship.
>
> Interesting. I was thinking 5. Ng5 is bad because 5. Ng5 h6 Ne4, 5. Ng5
> h6 Nh3, 5. Ngg5 h6, Ngf3 were obviously bad moves.
5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6!!
> However, 5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 is quite good! Black can go wrong, and even
> if he plays perfectly white still retains the better position.
Yep. The computer even goes a step further here, meeting ....h6 with a
winning sacrifice on f7.
>>> 5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 Qa5
>
> If 6. ... fxe6 it's mate with 7. Qh5+ g6 8. Qxg6#. Only Qb6 or Qa5+
> save the day.
Soltis published this about 20 years ago which is where I found it. I think
Kasparov or someone he was playing tried it.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
| |
Date: 06 Jun 2006 14:55:35
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
I've analyzed half the game. I have a couple questions:
A. On move 8, why did Spassky choose Bd3 over Bc4?
B. On move 12, why did Spassky choose b3 over c5?
> 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7
This is the Caro-Kann, Classical Variation. Black is believed to be
passive yet solid, and games draw more often with this opening than
others.
White can attack the center with c3, Nf3, and Bf4. Black may be
considering e5 or f5. White should answer Nf3, the least-commital move.
> 5. Nf3 Ngf6
White's knight is under attack. 6. Ng5 h5 Na3 leaves his knight badly
posted, 6. Nc5 Nxc5 dxc5 loses his central pawns. Nd2 blocks the
dark-squared bishop while Nc3 blocks the c-pawn. Nc3 seems best as
Black has no d-pawn, so the c-pawn shouldn't need to be active in the
near future.
> 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6
I totally missed Nxf6. That's even better!
Ne5 gives White's knight an outpost, puts pressure on f7, and prevents
e5. With Black's d-pawn gone and f-pawn blocked, the output should last
several turns.
Bc4 is also good, putting pressure on f7 and enabling a kingside
castle.
> 7. h3 Bf5
I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says h3(-.21) is playable, as are
my variants: Bc4(-.17), Ne5(-.17).
Bf5 doesn't pose any immediate threats. I don't want to exchange
bishops as the light-squared bishop is probably White's good and
Black's bad bishop.
> 8. Bd3 Bxd3
I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says Bd3(-.32) is a mistake
compared to my variants. Bd3 (-.32), Bc4 (+.06), Ne5 (-0.01). Why did
Spassky choose Bd3?!
Qxd3 is the obvious continuation to avoid doubled pawns.
> 9. Qxd3 e6
This seems like a quiet moment. White has good responses to e5, c5,
Qa5, and Bc5. This is a good opportunity to castle O-O.
> 10. O-O Be7
Bf4 seems strong linking White's rooks, developing a new piece, seizing
a long diagonal, and further dominating the e5 square. Ne5 and Re1 are
also playable.
> 11. c4 O-O
I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says c4(-.35) is playable as are
my variants: Bd3 (-.35), Ne5 (-0.34), Re1 (-.35). I guess they're all
about the same.
c5 seems like a logical follow-up, entombing Black's bishop. If b6,
then b4. Ne5 or Bf4 also make sense. Re1 probably doesn't achieve as
much.
> 12. b3 c5
Again, I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says b3(-.26) is a mistake
compared to my variant: c5 (+.72), and playable compared to my variants
Ne5 (-.23) and Bf4 (-.34). What did Spassky choose b3?!
Ba3 seems a good reply. 13. Ba3 cxd4 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Qxd4 or 13. Ba3
Qa5 14. Bxc5 Bxc5 15. dxc5 Qxc5. Bb2 and Be3 are also playable. A
bishop move is needed here because dxc5 is suicide, cxd5 Qxd5 allows a
queen exchange, and cxd5 Nxd5 Bc5 gives Black a nice attack.
> 13. Bb2 cxd4 14. Rfd1 Qa5
Recapturing the pawn should be a priority. The bishop recapture looks
best, followed by the queen, and then by the knight in order or
strength.
> 15. Bxd4 Rfd8
Expected. The Queen should move out of the pin. Safe squares are b1,
c2, e2, f1, and e3. Qc2 is best as it maintains pressure on g6.
> 16. Qe2 Qf5
I consult with Rybka. Qe2(-.30) is playable compared with my variant,
Qc2 (-.33). I guess the idea behind Qe2 is to facilitate Ne5, finally
seizing the outpost. Back-rank mate tactics are finally starting to
appear.
Rd3 is good here, preparing to bring the second rook into action.
> 17. Rd3 Qe4
It's a close call. I would play Qxe4 to avoid complications, but Re1
looks playable.
> 18. Qxe4 Nxe4
Rad1. There seems no easy way to kill the knight, but this move both
protects against Nc5 and continues the offensive push.
> 19. Rad1 Kf8
Black is protected now against a back-rank mate, and his pieces are
coordinated. White should exchange or chase away the enemy knight with
Nd2.
> 20. Kf1 f6
I consult with Rybka. Nd2 is a huge blunder. 20. Nd2 Nc5 21. Bxc5 Rxc5
22. Be3. Drat. I can play 19 moves as good as Spassky but that 20th
move is why I'm not a master! He must have seen this, else he'd surely
have chased away the enemy knight.
|
| | |
Date: 08 Jun 2006 22:49:07
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
En/na [email protected] ha escrit:
> I've analyzed half the game. I have a couple questions:
>
> A. On move 8, why did Spassky choose Bd3 over Bc4?
> B. On move 12, why did Spassky choose b3 over c5?
The most interesting half game is missing :-)
>>1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7
>>5. Nf3 Ngf6
>
> White's knight is under attack. 6. Ng5 h5 Na3 leaves his knight badly
> posted, 6. Nc5 Nxc5 dxc5 loses his central pawns. Nd2 blocks the
> dark-squared bishop while Nc3 blocks the c-pawn. Nc3 seems best as
> Black has no d-pawn, so the c-pawn shouldn't need to be active in the
> near future.
6.Ng3 is a possible move avoiding exchanges
>>6. Nxf6+ Nxf6
>
> I totally missed Nxf6. That's even better!
>
> Ne5 gives White's knight an outpost, puts pressure on f7, and prevents
> e5. With Black's d-pawn gone and f-pawn blocked, the output should last
> several turns.
>
> Bc4 is also good, putting pressure on f7 and enabling a kingside
> castle.
Here 7.Bd3, 7.Bc4 and 7.Ne5 are more common.
>>7. h3 Bf5
>
> I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says h3(-.21) is playable, as are
> my variants: Bc4(-.17), Ne5(-.17).
>
> Bf5 doesn't pose any immediate threats. I don't want to exchange
> bishops as the light-squared bishop is probably White's good and
> Black's bad bishop.
>
>>8. Bd3 Bxd3
>
> I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says Bd3(-.32) is a mistake
> compared to my variants. Bd3 (-.32), Bc4 (+.06), Ne5 (-0.01). Why did
> Spassky choose Bd3?!
Maybe a Bc8 would be bad, but the Bf5 seems well placed and d3 and c2
are under pressure. White bishop in c4 is not specially more active.
I think the exchange can be played and can be avoided, in the last case
white can try to use the Bf5 preparing some g4 once black king has
castled but in this case white king is not specially sure.
> Qxd3 is the obvious continuation to avoid doubled pawns.
>
>>9. Qxd3 e6
>
> This seems like a quiet moment. White has good responses to e5, c5,
> Qa5, and Bc5. This is a good opportunity to castle O-O.
>
>>10. O-O Be7
>
> Bf4 seems strong linking White's rooks, developing a new piece, seizing
> a long diagonal, and further dominating the e5 square. Ne5 and Re1 are
> also playable.
>
>>11. c4 O-O
>
> I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says c4(-.35) is playable as are
> my variants: Bd3 (-.35), Ne5 (-0.34), Re1 (-.35). I guess they're all
> about the same.
>
> c5 seems like a logical follow-up, entombing Black's bishop. If b6,
> then b4. Ne5 or Bf4 also make sense. Re1 probably doesn't achieve as
> much.
>
>>12. b3 c5
>
> Again, I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says b3(-.26) is a mistake
> compared to my variant: c5 (+.72), and playable compared to my variants
> Ne5 (-.23) and Bf4 (-.34). What did Spassky choose b3?!
Spasski played the same position 19 years ago with Benko. He played
12.Qe2. Last year He played the same 12.b3 as here
If you mean 12.c5 it seems a mistake (12...Bxc5)
12.b3 seems a natural move preparing Bb2.
>>13. Bb2 cxd4 14. Rfd1 Qa5
>
> Recapturing the pawn should be a priority. The bishop recapture looks
> best, followed by the queen, and then by the knight in order or
> strength.
>
>>15. Bxd4 Rfd8
>
> Expected. The Queen should move out of the pin. Safe squares are b1,
> c2, e2, f1, and e3. Qc2 is best as it maintains pressure on g6.
>
>>16. Qe2 Qf5
>
> I consult with Rybka. Qe2(-.30) is playable compared with my variant,
> Qc2 (-.33). I guess the idea behind Qe2 is to facilitate Ne5, finally
> seizing the outpost. Back-rank mate tactics are finally starting to
> appear.
>
> Rd3 is good here, preparing to bring the second rook into action.
16.Qe3 is another option
>>17. Rd3 Qe4
>
> It's a close call. I would play Qxe4 to avoid complications, but Re1
> looks playable.
>
>>18. Qxe4 Nxe4
>
> Rad1. There seems no easy way to kill the knight, but this move both
> protects against Nc5 and continues the offensive push.
>
>>19. Rad1 Kf8
>
> Black is protected now against a back-rank mate, and his pieces are
> coordinated. White should exchange or chase away the enemy knight with
> Nd2.
>
>>20. Kf1 f6
>
> I consult with Rybka. Nd2 is a huge blunder. 20. Nd2 Nc5 21. Bxc5 Rxc5
> 22. Be3. Drat. I can play 19 moves as good as Spassky but that 20th
> move is why I'm not a master! He must have seen this, else he'd surely
> have chased away the enemy knight.
I think you mean 21...Rxd3. 20.Nd2 is a blunder.
Do not worry, all we are very far from Spasski level and Spasski himself
has played sometimes blunders too!!
Would you be interested in doing something similar for next moves (the
ones more interesting)?
Antonio
|
| |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 11:10:01
From: Holbox
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
I think black problems started with 25...Rd8?! after 26.Rxd8 black has
less options for a draw. Better was, IMHO, trying to exchange the
bishops and..., only after that, go for a rook exchange (there are only
one column opened which means exchange can't be avoided).
...Bxc5!! Nice tactic.
Antonio Torrecillas ha escrito:
> En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:
>
> > Hello John,
> > thanks, ... and some comments belov.
> >
> >> Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
> >> 28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
> >> and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
> >> with the chosen move.
> >
> > 28...Kc6 was also the engine suggestion in Shredder and Fritz analysis
> > (but not Rybka) but I do not see any difference after white pays Kc4
> > followed by b4, a4, b5. Anyone can see the difference?
> >
> > Antonio
>
> An Add/correction
>
> I understand just now why that was a universal proposal of engines:
>
> After 28...Kc6! 29.Kc4 a5!
>
> - and now if white try to play a3, b4-b5 there is a tactical blow:
> 30.a3? Bxc5!! winning a pawn.
>
> - white can not play either 30.f4 Bxc5!!
>
> - that mean 30.a4 with no future for white 3-2 majority.
>
> In that example we can see how much tactics and endings/strategy are
> related. And more, I think that tactical resource to be more difficult
> to see that many mate combinations.
>
> Antonio
|
| |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 00:04:33
From: John Sheatsley
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
"Antonio Torrecillas" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hello,
>
> Recently it has ben discussed here How to study endings.
>
> I propose an ending to analyze:
>
> It seems to me that white achieved an ending a little better but only a
> mistake for black allowed the win (It was a 15min+3sec game)
>
> Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??
>
> [Event "Match des Legendes"]
> [Site "Porto Vecchio FRA"]
> [Date "2006.05.26"]
> [Round "2"]
> [White "Spassky, B."]
> [Black "Karpov, Ana"]
> [Result "1-0"]
> [ECO "B17"]
> [WhiteElo "2548"]
> [BlackElo "2672"]
> [PlyCount "83"]
> [EventDate "2006.05.26"]
>
> 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.h3
> Bf5 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 e6 10. O-O Be7 11. c4 O-O 12. b3 c5 13. Bb2 cxd4
> 14. Rfd1 Qa5 15. Bxd4 Rfd8 16. Qe2 Qf5 17. Rd3 Qe4 18. Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Rad1
> Kf8 20. Kf1 f6 21. Be3 Rxd3 22. Rxd3 Ke8 23. Nd2 Nxd2+ 24. Rxd2 a6 25.Ke2
> Rd8 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27. c5 Kd7 28. Kd3 Bd8 29. b4 Bc7 30. Kc4 h5 31. a4 Be5
> 32. b5 axb5+ 33. axb5 Kc7 34. g4 hxg4 35. hxg4 Kd7 36. f4 Bb2 37. f5 e5
> 38. Kd5 Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40.Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4 Bc3 42. Bg3 1-0
>
Hi, Antonio!
This game was featured in IM Andrew tin's ChessBase
radio show last week. Some of his comments were:
"17. ... Qe4? Very passive. Surely 17. ... Nh5! would have
given Black at least equal chances."
"27. c5 The King comes to c4 and a passed pawn will
be established. After that the White King tries to find a
way to invade on the kingside. I'm very surprised Karpov went
for this ending."
"34. g4! Forcefully driving home his advantage. Black's
kingside is softened up ready for the future invasion."
Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
with the chosen move.
Others?
Regards,
John
|
| | |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 15:11:22
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
Hello John,
thanks, ... and some comments belov.
En/na John Sheatsley ha escrit:
> "Antonio Torrecillas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??
>>
>>[White "Spassky, B."]
>>[Black "Karpov, Ana"]
>>
>>1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.h3
>>Bf5 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 e6 10. O-O Be7 11. c4 O-O 12. b3 c5 13. Bb2 cxd4
>>14. Rfd1 Qa5 15. Bxd4 Rfd8 16. Qe2 Qf5 17. Rd3 Qe4 18. Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Rad1
>>Kf8 20. Kf1 f6 21. Be3 Rxd3 22. Rxd3 Ke8 23. Nd2 Nxd2+ 24. Rxd2 a6 25.Ke2
>>Rd8 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27. c5 Kd7 28. Kd3 Bd8 29. b4 Bc7 30. Kc4 h5 31. a4 Be5
>>32. b5 axb5+ 33. axb5 Kc7 34. g4 hxg4 35. hxg4 Kd7 36. f4 Bb2 37. f5 e5
>>38. Kd5 Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40.Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4 Bc3 42. Bg3 1-0
>>
> Hi, Antonio!
>
> This game was featured in IM Andrew tin's ChessBase
> radio show last week. Some of his comments were:
>
> "17. ... Qe4? Very passive. Surely 17. ... Nh5! would have
> given Black at least equal chances."
Fritz, Rybka (the free version) and Shredder also suggest 17...Nh5 as
equal, ... but I'm not sure about 17.... Qe4 being a mistake. If the
ending can be "saved" it can be not a mistake.
> "27. c5 The King comes to c4 and a passed pawn will
> be established. After that the White King tries to find a
> way to invade on the kingside. I'm very surprised Karpov went
> for this ending."
That position is the kind of ending that can be draw in a big percent
and offer little chances to win for white, ... but there are very few
options to be lost. Being Karpov a Caro-Kan player he can reach those
kind of ending very often but with not special danger.
> "34. g4! Forcefully driving home his advantage. Black's
> kingside is softened up ready for the future invasion."
Fritz, Shredder and Rybka proposed 35...g5 but his is not entirely
clear (at least for me) ... there is a difficult pawn ending after
36.Bd4 and some other options.
If this is finally good, It should be added that white could have
avoided that playing first 34.f4 Bb2 and then 35.g4.
Another "all engine" propositions were 37...Be5 and 33...h4.
> Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
> 28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
> and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
> with the chosen move.
28...Kc6 was also the engine suggestion in Shredder and Fritz analysis
(but not Rybka) but I do not see any difference after white pays Kc4
followed by b4, a4, b5. Anyone can see the difference?
Antonio
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Jun 2006 15:32:45
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:
> Hello John,
> thanks, ... and some comments belov.
>
>> Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
>> 28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
>> and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
>> with the chosen move.
>
> 28...Kc6 was also the engine suggestion in Shredder and Fritz analysis
> (but not Rybka) but I do not see any difference after white pays Kc4
> followed by b4, a4, b5. Anyone can see the difference?
>
> Antonio
An Add/correction
I understand just now why that was a universal proposal of engines:
After 28...Kc6! 29.Kc4 a5!
- and now if white try to play a3, b4-b5 there is a tactical blow:
30.a3? Bxc5!! winning a pawn.
- white can not play either 30.f4 Bxc5!!
- that mean 30.a4 with no future for white 3-2 majority.
In that example we can see how much tactics and endings/strategy are
related. And more, I think that tactical resource to be more difficult
to see that many mate combinations.
Antonio
|
| |
Date: 04 Jun 2006 18:51:37
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: About "How to study Endings"
|
> Hello,
>
> Recently it has ben discussed here How to study endings.
>
> I propose an ending to analyze:
>
> It seems to me that white achieved an ending a little better but only a
> mistake for black allowed the win (It was a 15min+3sec game)
>
> Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??
>
> [Event "Match des Legendes"]
> [Site "Porto Vecchio FRA"]
> [Date "2006.05.26"]
> [Round "2"]
> [White "Spassky, B."]
> [Black "Karpov, Ana"]
> [Result "1-0"]
> [ECO "B17"]
> [WhiteElo "2548"]
> [BlackElo "2672"]
> [PlyCount "83"]
> [EventDate "2006.05.26"]
>
> 1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3
5. Ng5 was played in the recent computer world championship.
--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918
|
|
