| |
Main
Date: 13 Oct 2006 18:58:11
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Would you have drew this game?
|
I played a game on ICC (g8wrb, white). I think my opening play was much
better than his, but I made a few errors along the way. In the endgame
it went down to
Me (white): queen, knight + 3 pawns.
Him/her (black): queen, + 4 pawns.
So I had a slight material advantage, but his pawns were much better
placed than mine.
Rather than take one of my pawns, which would have given him 3 connected
passed pawns, he played for a draw by repetition.
I could have avoided the draw, but thought I was better to accept the
draw, rather than try to play on with the extra material.
I'm just interested in what others think. Had I been black, I would have
tried for a win, even with a slight material disadvantage. I might throw
it into a chess engine and see if I win for either side.
I've stuck it into 2 chess engines. Both think when I was on move, the
advantage was with me, and therefor I should not have gone for the draw.
Crafty 20.01 gives +2.18
Toga II 1.2.1a gives +1.75
[Event "ICC 30 20"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.10.13"]
[Round "-"]
[White "g8wrb"]
[Black "dinozorman"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "1317"]
[BlackElo "1419"]
[ECO "C50"]
[ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
[Opening "King's pawn game"]
[NIC "IG.03"]
[Time "05:15:35"]
[GameType "ICCStandard"]
[TimeControl "1800+20"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.d4 Nxd4 5.Nxe5 Ne6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Nf3 Ne7 8.Be3
c5 9.
a3 Nc6 10.O-O Bd7 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1 O-O-O 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.Nxd6+ Bxd6 15.Qxd6
Qxb2 16.Qd3 Qf6 17.Rab1 Nf4 18.Qb3 b6 19.Bxf7 Rhf8 20.Bc4 Qg6 21.Bxf4
Rxf4 22.
Bd3 Bh3 23.Bf1 Bxg2 24.Bxg2 Rg4 25.Rxd8+ Nxd8 26.Ne1 Rxe4 27.Qg3 Rg4
28.Bh3 h5
29.Bxg4+ hxg4 30.Nd3 Ne6 31.Re1 Nd4 32.Kf1 Nxc2 33.Nf4 Qc6 34.Qg2 Qb5+
35.Re2
Qb1+ 1/2-1/2
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
|
| |
Date: 14 Oct 2006 01:53:36
From: Sanny
Subject: Dave, have you played a game Recently?
|
Have you played any game Recently at GetClub Chess.
It looks lots Deeper
Makes Moves in time.
Play a game and see http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
Both things you complained were rectified today.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 17:00:04
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> In fact 35.Re2 was not played at all. This is the corrected PGN. You
> will noticed the repetition at the end, which is not apparent in the PGN
> posted.
In Q+N+2P vs Q+3P, I think a draw is the likely outcome, even if you
avoided this voluntary three-time repetition. As White, I drew against
Crafty with no trouble (after move 38 of your game).
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 h6 4. d4 Nxd4 5. Nxe5 Ne6 6. Nc3 d6 7. Nf3
Ne7 8. Be3 c5 9. a3 Nc6 10. O-O Bd7 11. Qd2 Qc7 12. Rfd1 O-O-O 13. Nb5
Qb6 14. Nxd6+ Bxd6 15. Qxd6 Qxb2 16. Qd3 Qf6 17. Rab1 Nf4 18. Qb3 b6
19. Bxf7 Rhf8 20. Bc4 Qg6 21. Bxf4 Rxf4 22. Bd3 Bh3 23. Bf1 Bxg2 24.
Bxg2 Rg4 25. Rxd8+ Nxd8 26. Ne1 Rxe4 27. Qg3 Rg4 28. Bh3 h5 29. Bxg4+
hxg4 30. Nd3 Ne6 31. Re1 Nd4 32. Kf1 Nxc2 33. Nf4 Qc6 34. Qg2 Qb5+ 35.
Ne2 Nxe1 36. Qxg4+ Kb7 37. Kxe1 Qb1+ 38. Kd2 Qb2+ 39. Ke3 Qxa3+ 40. Kf4
Qa4+ 41. Kg3 Qxg4+ 42. Kxg4 b5 43. h4 a5 44. Kf3 b4 45. Ke3 Kc6 46. Kd3
a4 47. Kc4 Kd6 48. h5 Kc6 49. Nc1 a3 50. Nb3 a2 51. f4 Kd6 52. Na1 Ke6
53. Kxc5 Kf5 54. Kxb4 Kxf4 55. Ka3 Kg4 56. Kxa2 Kxh5 57. Nb3 Kh4 58.
Nd2 Kh3 59. Kb2 Kg2 60. Kc3 Kg1 61. Kd3 g5 62. Ke2 Kh2 63. Ne4 Kg1 64.
Kf3 Kh2 65. Nxg5 1/2-1/2
I wouldn't spend too much time on this endigame study---K+P or K+R
endings are more common and important to master.
---
likesforests
Become a Chess Expert -- http://likesforests.blogspot.com/
|
| |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 21:27:06
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
In article <[email protected] >,
"Dave (from the UK)"
<[email protected] > wrote:
> [Event "ICC 30 20"]
> [Site "Internet Chess Club"]
> [Date "2006.10.13"]
> [Round "-"]
> [White "g8wrb"]
> [Black "dinozorman"]
> [Result "1/2-1/2"]
> [WhiteElo "1317"]
> [BlackElo "1419"]
> [ECO "C50"]
> [ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
> [Opening "King's pawn game"]
> [NIC "IG.03"]
> [Time "05:15:35"]
> [GameType "ICCStandard"]
> [TimeControl "1800+20"]
>
> 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.d4 Nxd4 5.Nxe5
??
5.Bxf7+! (hard to even give it an exclamation point, actually) Kxf7
6.Nxe5+ Kf6 (white wins easily) 7.Qxd4 with a large advantage at no risk.
> Ne6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Nf3 Ne7 8.Be3
> c5 9.
> a3
I don't understand what this is trying to accomplish. Black's pieces are
a mess. He's got no development. CHARGE! 9.Qd2 intending 0-0-0 (with the
threat of Bxe6 & Bxc5) seems like a good first thing to consider. You
> Nc6 10.O-O
Unambitious. Black's threatening nothing so why not Nd5 first?
> Bd7 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1 O-O-O 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.Nxd6+ Bxd6 15.Qxd6
> Qxb2
An atrocious move on his part. This game shouldn't be about pawns at
this point.
> 16.Qd3
Again, a very conservative response. Instead why not open up his king
via Bxe6 Bxc6 Qxc5. Then you've got the threat of Rb1 with all sorts of
firepower pointing at his monarch.
> Qf6 17.Rab1 Nf4 18.Qb3 b6 19.Bxf7
Look harder! Also, understand the strategic nature of the position.
Opening up his f-file helps him get to your king. Instead 19.Bxc5! opens
up his king (because ... bxc5? 20. Qb7#)
> Rhf8 20.Bc4 Qg6 21.Bxf4
> Rxf4 22.
> Bd3
Again, unamibitious. Bd5 is a more aggressive way to defend the pawn.
> Bh3 23.Bf1 Bxg2 24.Bxg2 Rg4 25.Rxd8+ Nxd8 26.Ne1 Rxe4 27.Qg3
Again, very conservative play from you. You're terrified of the mate on
g2, of course, but you're trading into a bad endgame.
> Rg4
> 28.Bh3 h5
> 29.Bxg4+
A mistake on your pawn. Don't be hasty. 29. f3! wins you a rook for a
pawn, rather than for a bishop.
> hxg4 30.Nd3 Ne6 31.Re1 Nd4 32.Kf1
Ug. You're playing not to lose here. Why? Why? 32. Re7!
> Nxc2 33.Nf4 Qc6 34.Qg2 Qb5+
> 35.Re2
> Qb1+ 1/2-1/2
He offered a draw?
But rather than worry about the endgame, you should be taking a hard
look at your extremely passive play, which, in my book, started at least
on move 9, and got worse throughout the game.
You can't play chess scared. You just can't.
|
| | |
Date: 14 Oct 2006 01:13:43
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Ron wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Dave (from the UK)"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> > [Event "ICC 30 20"]
> > [Site "Internet Chess Club"]
> > [Date "2006.10.13"]
> > [Round "-"]
> > [White "g8wrb"]
> > [Black "dinozorman"]
> > [Result "1/2-1/2"]
> > [WhiteElo "1317"]
> > [BlackElo "1419"]
> > [ECO "C50"]
> > [ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
> > [Opening "King's pawn game"]
> > [NIC "IG.03"]
> > [Time "05:15:35"]
> > [GameType "ICCStandard"]
> > [TimeControl "1800+20"]
> >
> > 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.d4 Nxd4 5.Nxe5
>
> ??
>
> 5.Bxf7+! (hard to even give it an exclamation point, actually) Kxf7
> 6.Nxe5+ Kf6 (white wins easily) 7.Qxd4 with a large advantage at no
> risk.
>
I think your move 5. Nxe5 was good too, but your followup indicates
that you did not see the power of the attack on f7. Since you are only
on move 5 this is a pretty good point to remember if you continue with
this opening. For example after:
5 ... Ne6 there is 6. Bxe6 dxe6 7. Qxd8+ Kxd8 8. Nxf7+ Ke8 9. Nxh8 and
you are a rook up.
> > Ne6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Nf3 Ne7 8.Be3
> > c5 9.
> > a3
>
> I don't understand what this is trying to accomplish. Black's pieces
> are a mess. He's got no development. CHARGE! 9.Qd2 intending 0-0-0
> (with the threat of Bxe6 & Bxc5) seems like a good first thing to
> consider. You
I agree! At this point you are ahead in development. Remember a easy
maxim "When you are winning, the win must be there!" Keep looking for a
way to press your advantage until you find it.
Both Qd2 and O-O are better than a3.
>
> > Nc6 10.O-O
>
> Unambitious. Black's threatening nothing so why not Nd5 first?
Unambitious, but not horrible. You are playing "automatic" moves. While
developing is good in prinicple, no principle by itself will win you
many games. The player must actively seek to obtain all advantages.
The point of posting the night on d5 is both that it has broad scope on
many targets and it cannot be dislodged by black's pawns. To challenge
it, Black must further sacrifice development time.
Nd5 was also preferred on move 12.
>
> > Bd7 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1 O-O-O 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.Nxd6+ Bxd6 15.Qxd6
> > Qxb2
>
Sending either queen into the opponents territory this early in the
game can quickly bite you back. Attacks on your queen can, in
principle, help your opponent reorganize his game. On prinicple you
might have legitamately chose a more conservative plan....
> An atrocious move on his part. This game shouldn't be about pawns at
> this point.
.. However in this case black has nothing better than the move played.
equally bad was 15. ... Ncd4 16. Qe7 Nf3 17. gf3 Qc7 and white still
has a good attack.
>
> > 16.Qd3
>
> Again, a very conservative response. Instead why not open up his king
> via Bxe6 Bxc6 Qxc5. Then you've got the threat of Rb1 with all sorts
> of firepower pointing at his monarch.
>
I like 16. Rab1 Qf6 17. Ba6 better, but the key is Black has just
opened a hole for you to shoot at his king! You have a lead in
development, a centralized queen, and now an opportunity to attack
queen then king. Attack!
>
> > Qf6 17.Rab1 Nf4 18.Qb3
a tactical mistake, Na5 diffuses your attack. Ba6 first!
> .. b6 19.Bxf7
>
> Look harder! Also, understand the strategic nature of the position.
> Opening up his f-file helps him get to your king. Instead 19.Bxc5!
> opens up his king (because ... bxc5? 20. Qb7#)
>
> > Rhf8 20.Bc4 Qg6 21.Bxf4
> > Rxf4 22.
> > Bd3
>
> Again, unamibitious. Bd5 is a more aggressive way to defend the pawn.
But more to the point, you seem to be operating without a plan. Your
queenside attack has fizzled, now what? You are a pawn up but your
queenside pawns are unconnected. Blacks king is still pretty open but
your pieces are not organized. Plan! What kind of endgame should you
pursue?
I suggest staking out the d-file, trading queens, and attacking the
kingside pawns asap. Then, your pawn up may be enough to win.
>
> > Bh3 23.Bf1 Bxg2 24.Bxg2 Rg4
This was not a sound sacrifice. Black does not have the strength to
pull this off!
You now have more power on the board. Look for an opportunity to
unleash it!
> 25.Rxd8+ Nxd8 26.Ne1 Rxe4
And that is all Black has! Your turn now! It must be there -- find it!
>27.Qg3
>
> Again, very conservative play from you. You're terrified of the mate
> on g2, of course, but you're trading into a bad endgame.
>
27. Qd5! and the bishop is one again a piece of might! Your rook will
come to d1 and the exposed Black king is in the crosshairs again.
> > Rg4
> > 28.Bh3 h5
> > 29.Bxg4+
>
> A mistake on your pawn. Don't be hasty. 29. f3! wins you a rook for a
> pawn, rather than for a bishop.
>
> > hxg4 30.Nd3 Ne6 31.Re1 Nd4 32.Kf1
>
> Ug. You're playing not to lose here. Why? Why? 32. Re7!
What he said!!
>
> > Nxc2 33.Nf4 Qc6 34.Qg2 Qb5+
> > 35.Re2
> > Qb1+ 1/2-1/2
>
> He offered a draw?
>
Corrected game went:
35. Ne2 Nxe1 36. Qxg4+ Kb7 37. Kxe1 (should grab the other g pawn
first) Qb1+ 38. Kd2 Qb2+ 39. Ke1 Qb1+ 40. Kd2 Qb2+ 41. Ke1 Qb1+
{Game drawn by repetition}
1/2-1/2
Since you asked, I'd say play on:
39. Kd3 (not Ke3) Qxa3 40 Nc3 and you have the advantages of a piece
and the ability to force a passed pawn on the undefended kingside. It
is a challenging but possible win.
> But rather than worry about the endgame, you should be taking a hard
> look at your extremely passive play, which, in my book, started at
> least on move 9, and got worse throughout the game.
>
> You can't play chess scared. You just can't.
Critical comments can be a bit bruising. I hope you recognize that we
are trying to help and hopefully there were some comments that did.
Good Luck,
Bob
--
|
| | | |
Date: 14 Oct 2006 03:31:33
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Bob wrote:
> Ron wrote:
>
> I think your move 5. Nxe5 was good too, but your followup indicates
> that you did not see the power of the attack on f7.
Yes, I totally missed a continuation that should have given me
sufficient advantage to win with.
>>I don't understand what this is trying to accomplish. Black's pieces
>>are a mess. He's got no development. CHARGE! 9.Qd2 intending 0-0-0
>>(with the threat of Bxe6 & Bxc5) seems like a good first thing to
>>consider. You
>
>
> I agree! At this point you are ahead in development. Remember a easy
> maxim "When you are winning, the win must be there!" Keep looking for a
> way to press your advantage until you find it.
>
> Both Qd2 and O-O are better than a3.
>
I don't know what I was thinking there. I often advance the a or h pawns
one to stop a pin from a bishop, but there was no risk of such a threat,
so I should have developed.
> Unambitious, but not horrible. You are playing "automatic" moves. While
> developing is good in prinicple, no principle by itself will win you
> many games. The player must actively seek to obtain all advantages.
Yes, that seems to be a trait of mine that is very evident to others - I
play too passively. I'll try to address that issue.
> The point of posting the night on d5 is both that it has broad scope on
> many targets and it cannot be dislodged by black's pawns. To challenge
> it, Black must further sacrifice development time.
>
> Nd5 was also preferred on move 12.
Yes I can see that - it would have been a very nice hole to put the
knight which had a nice outpost.
>>>Bd7 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1 O-O-O 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.Nxd6+ Bxd6 15.Qxd6
>>>Qxb2
>>
> Sending either queen into the opponents territory this early in the
> game can quickly bite you back. Attacks on your queen can, in
> principle, help your opponent reorganize his game. On prinicple you
> might have legitamately chose a more conservative plan....
My logic was that I could
a) capture Black's central (d-pawn) whilst giving up a less valuable
c-pawn.
b) Get the bishop pair
I did not think there was much risk to this, but retreated the queen
quickly after the two exchanges that took place.
>
>>Again, a very conservative response. Instead why not open up his king
>>via Bxe6 Bxc6 Qxc5. Then you've got the threat of Rb1 with all sorts
>>of firepower pointing at his monarch.
>>
>
> I like 16. Rab1 Qf6 17. Ba6 better, but the key is Black has just
> opened a hole for you to shoot at his king! You have a lead in
> development, a centralized queen, and now an opportunity to attack
> queen then king. Attack!
Although I was aware my position was better than his, I could not see
how to make an effective attack. That is clearly something I need to
concentrate on learning.
> But more to the point, you seem to be operating without a plan. Your
> queenside attack has fizzled, now what? You are a pawn up but your
> queenside pawns are unconnected. Blacks king is still pretty open but
> your pieces are not organized. Plan! What kind of endgame should you
> pursue?
>
> I suggest staking out the d-file, trading queens, and attacking the
> kingside pawns asap. Then, your pawn up may be enough to win.
>
>>>Bh3 23.Bf1 Bxg2 24.Bxg2 Rg4
>
> This was not a sound sacrifice. Black does not have the strength to
> pull this off!
It certainly had me worried I must admit. I was not too pleased about my
g-pawn being wiped out.
> You now have more power on the board. Look for an opportunity to
> unleash it!
>
>
>> 25.Rxd8+ Nxd8 26.Ne1 Rxe4
>
>
> And that is all Black has! Your turn now! It must be there -- find it!
I suspect he overlooked the pin the bishop call pull off. I don't know
this for sure, as he chose not to utter a word at the end of the game.
(I like to get the thoughts of my opponents after a game, but most don't
seem too keen.
>>27.Qg3
>>
>>Again, very conservative play from you. You're terrified of the mate
>>on g2, of course, but you're trading into a bad endgame.
>>
>
>
> 27. Qd5! and the bishop is one again a piece of might! Your rook will
> come to d1 and the exposed Black king is in the crosshairs again.
Yes, I was a bit passive, aiming to stop being mated on g2, but not
using my pieces to create threats of my own.
>>Ug. You're playing not to lose here. Why? Why? 32. Re7!
>
> What he said!!
Yes - completely ignoring that fact that I had got an advantage in the
opening and middle game and was playing not to lose, rather than to win.
> Corrected game went:
> 35. Ne2 Nxe1 36. Qxg4+ Kb7 37. Kxe1 (should grab the other g pawn
> first) Qb1+ 38. Kd2 Qb2+ 39. Ke1 Qb1+ 40. Kd2 Qb2+ 41. Ke1 Qb1+
> {Game drawn by repetition}
> 1/2-1/2
>
> Since you asked, I'd say play on:
> 39. Kd3 (not Ke3) Qxa3 40 Nc3 and you have the advantages of a piece
> and the ability to force a passed pawn on the undefended kingside. It
> is a challenging but possible win.
Thanks.
> Critical comments can be a bit bruising. I hope you recognize that we
> are trying to help and hopefully there were some comments that did.
I want critical comments - as long as they are constructive (which these
are).
Thanks a lot
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| | | | |
Date: 18 Oct 2006 17:59:05
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Dave (from the UK) <[email protected] > wrote:
> I often advance the a or h pawns one to stop a pin from a bishop,
> but there was no risk of such a threat, so I should have developed.
Apropos your generally passive play, remember that you only need to
defend against the pin if the pin is actually any good!
Dave.
--
David Richerby Natural Mouldy Smokes (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a pack of cigarettes but it's starting
to grow mushrooms and completely
natural!
|
| | |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 23:31:56
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Ron wrote:
>>Ne6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Nf3 Ne7 8.Be3
>>c5 9.
>>a3
>
> I don't understand what this is trying to accomplish. Black's pieces are
> a mess. He's got no development. CHARGE! 9.Qd2 intending 0-0-0 (with the
> threat of Bxe6 & Bxc5) seems like a good first thing to consider. You
I'm not sure what I was thinking of there I must admit.
>
>>Nc6 10.O-O
>
>
> Unambitious. Black's threatening nothing so why not Nd5 first?
You are not the first person to say my play is too passive. I will have
to look at changing that.
>>hxg4 30.Nd3 Ne6 31.Re1 Nd4 32.Kf1
>
>
> Ug. You're playing not to lose here. Why? Why? 32. Re7!
I did not see that I had some serious threats of my own.
>
>>Nxc2 33.Nf4 Qc6 34.Qg2 Qb5+
>>35.Re2
>>Qb1+ 1/2-1/2
>
>
> He offered a draw?
The end of the PGN is wrong. See corrected version. I posted later. I
took the draw at move 41. I never played 35.Re2.
41. Ke1 Qb1+
{Game drawn by repetition}
1/2-1/2
> But rather than worry about the endgame, you should be taking a hard
> look at your extremely passive play, which, in my book, started at least
> on move 9, and got worse throughout the game.
>
> You can't play chess scared. You just can't.
Thanks, I'll bear that in mind. Someone else made the same comment about
my play being too passive. I'll have to look at being more active.
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 13:16:23
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> >>I could have avoided the draw, but thought I was better to accept the
> >>draw, rather than try to play on with the extra material.
> >
> >
> > 36.Re1 (forced) Qxe1#. Black was very foolish to offer a draw, and
> > White was very lucky to accept the draw. :-)
>
> I can't see a mate, nor can either chess engine I have put this through
> - are you sure about this ???
I popped it into crafty and it prints, "15/-32675 36.Re1 Qxe1#"
This is the position I see: http://tinyurl.com/vubow
> > Let's pretend there were no mating chances. After winning your rook and
> > trading knights, you're down to a Q vs Q endgame. He has three
> > connected passed pawns, and you have two split passed pawns.
>
> I'm totally lost. The rook was off the board by 35...Nxe1
Are we looking at different games? Here is the PGN I see in your
original message:
This is the PGN you posted: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.d4 Nxd4 5.Nxe5
Ne6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Nf3 Ne7 8.Be3 c5 9. a3 Nc6 10.O-O Bd7 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1
O-O-O 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.Nxd6+ Bxd6 15.Qxd6 Qxb2 16.Qd3 Qf6 17.Rab1 Nf4
18.Qb3 b6 19.Bxf7 Rhf8 20.Bc4 Qg6 21.Bxf4 Rxf4 22. Bd3 Bh3 23.Bf1 Bxg2
24.Bxg2 Rg4 25.Rxd8+ Nxd8 26.Ne1 Rxe4 27.Qg3 Rg4 28.Bh3 h5 29.Bxg4+
hxg4 30.Nd3 Ne6 31.Re1 Nd4 32.Kf1 Nxc2 33.Nf4 Qc6 34.Qg2 Qb5+ 35.Re2
Qb1+ 1/2-1/2
There's no 35...Nxe1 in the above game.
> > Play might go like this: 36.Re1 (forced) Nxe1 37.Qg3 Nd3+ 38.Ke2 Nxf4
> > 39.Qxf4 Qb2+ 40.Kf1 Qxa3 41.Qxg4+ Kb8 42. Qxg7
> >
> > Q vs Q is often drawish, but Black has winning chances. White should
> > accept the draw, but Black shouldn't offer one.
>
> Strange, both chess engines thought White (me) had the advantage at the
> end, but we (you and I) both thinking drawing was the best I was going
> to get and Black was silly to offer it.
On the board I'm seeing White ends up with two pawns vs three pawns.
That is my basis for saying White should accept the draw.
> Quite how I was supposed to have an advantage while my king suffered
> almost endless checks on a jouney across the board I will never know!!!
Perpetual checks are the danger in Q vs Q. A pawn up, it's still a draw
half the time.
---
likesforests
Become a Chess Expert -- http://likesforests.blogspot.com/
|
| |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 12:02:46
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>
> > I could have avoided the draw, but thought I was better to accept the
> > draw, rather than try to play on with the extra material.
>
> 36.Re1 (forced) Qxe1#. Black was very foolish to offer a draw, and
> White was very lucky to accept the draw. :-)
>
> Let's pretend there were no mating chances. After winning your rook and
> trading knights, you're down to a Q vs Q endgame. He has three
> connected passed pawns, and you have two split passed pawns.
>
> Play might go like this: 36.Re1 (forced) Nxe1 37.Qg3 Nd3+ 38.Ke2 Nxf4
> 39.Qxf4 Qb2+ 40.Kf1 Qxa3 41.Qxg4+ Kb8 42. Qxg7
>
> Q vs Q is often drawish, but Black has winning chances. White should
> accept the draw, but Black shouldn't offer one.>
That should be, 37.Qc3+, but the idea is similar. 37.Qg3 runs into the
knight tactic 37...Nf3+ 38.Ke2 Nd4+ 39.Ke3 Nf5+ (fork).
---
likesforests
Become a Chess Expert -- http://likesforests.blogspot.com/
|
| |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 11:49:45
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> I could have avoided the draw, but thought I was better to accept the
> draw, rather than try to play on with the extra material.
36.Re1 (forced) Qxe1#. Black was very foolish to offer a draw, and
White was very lucky to accept the draw. :-)
Let's pretend there were no mating chances. After winning your rook and
trading knights, you're down to a Q vs Q endgame. He has three
connected passed pawns, and you have two split passed pawns.
Play might go like this: 36.Re1 (forced) Nxe1 37.Qg3 Nd3+ 38.Ke2 Nxf4
39.Qxf4 Qb2+ 40.Kf1 Qxa3 41.Qxg4+ Kb8 42. Qxg7
Q vs Q is often drawish, but Black has winning chances. White should
accept the draw, but Black shouldn't offer one.
---
likesforests
Become a Chess Expert -- http://likesforests.blogspot.com/
|
| | |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 20:47:07
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
[email protected] wrote:
> Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>
>
>>I could have avoided the draw, but thought I was better to accept the
>>draw, rather than try to play on with the extra material.
>
>
> 36.Re1 (forced) Qxe1#. Black was very foolish to offer a draw, and
> White was very lucky to accept the draw. :-)
I can't see a mate, nor can either chess engine I have put this through
- are you sure about this ???
>
> Let's pretend there were no mating chances. After winning your rook and
> trading knights, you're down to a Q vs Q endgame. He has three
> connected passed pawns, and you have two split passed pawns.
I'm totally lost. The rook was off the board by 35...Nxe1
>
> Play might go like this: 36.Re1 (forced) Nxe1 37.Qg3 Nd3+ 38.Ke2 Nxf4
> 39.Qxf4 Qb2+ 40.Kf1 Qxa3 41.Qxg4+ Kb8 42. Qxg7
>
> Q vs Q is often drawish, but Black has winning chances. White should
> accept the draw, but Black shouldn't offer one.
Strange, both chess engines thought White (me) had the advantage at the
end, but we (you and I) both thinking drawing was the best I was going
to get and Black was silly to offer it.
This is from Crafty:
score 2.13
39. Kd3 Qb1+ 40. Ke3 Qb3+ 41. Kf4 Qa4+ 42. Kg5 Qc6 43. Kh4 Qc7 44. Qe4+
Qc6 45. Qf5 Qg2 46. Qd7+ Ka6 47. Qa4+ Kb7 48. Qf4
I've got Toga on here too, but have no convient way of collecting the
data and posting on the web. But it too felt the advantage was with White.
Quite how I was supposed to have an advantage while my king suffered
almost endless checks on a jouney across the board I will never know!!!
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 20:06:47
From: Bob
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Dave (from the UK) wrote:
> >
> >
> > > I could have avoided the draw, but thought I was better to accept
> > > the draw, rather than try to play on with the extra material.
> >
> >
> > 36.Re1 (forced) Qxe1#. Black was very foolish to offer a draw, and
> > White was very lucky to accept the draw. :-)
>
> I can't see a mate, nor can either chess engine I have put this
> through - are you sure about this ???
Perhaps there is some problem with the posted game. As posted the final
postion:
2k5/p5p1/1p6/2p5/5Np1/P7/2n1RPQP/1q3K2 w - - 0 36
is a mate after 36.Re1 (forced) Qxe1#
> >
> > Let's pretend there were no mating chances. After winning your rook
> > and trading knights, you're down to a Q vs Q endgame. He has three
> > connected passed pawns, and you have two split passed pawns.
>
> I'm totally lost. The rook was off the board by 35...Nxe1
This move is not in the game you posted.
[Event "ICC 30 20"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.10.13"]
[Round "-"]
[White "g8wrb"]
[Black "dinozorman"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "1317"]
[BlackElo "1419"]
[ECO "C50"]
[ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
[Opening "King's pawn game"]
[NIC "IG.03"]
[Time "05:15:35"]
[GameType "ICCStandard"]
[TimeControl "1800+20"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 h6 4.d4 Nxd4 5.Nxe5 Ne6 6.Nc3 d6 7.Nf3 Ne7
8.Be3 c5 9.
a3 Nc6 10.O-O Bd7 11.Qd2 Qc7 12.Rfd1 O-O-O 13.Nb5 Qb6 14.Nxd6+ Bxd6
15.Qxd6
Qxb2 16.Qd3 Qf6 17.Rab1 Nf4 18.Qb3 b6 19.Bxf7 Rhf8 20.Bc4 Qg6 21.Bxf4
Rxf4 22.
Bd3 Bh3 23.Bf1 Bxg2 24.Bxg2 Rg4 25.Rxd8+ Nxd8 26.Ne1 Rxe4 27.Qg3 Rg4
28.Bh3 h5
29.Bxg4+ hxg4 30.Nd3 Ne6 31.Re1 Nd4 32.Kf1 Nxc2 33.Nf4 Qc6 34.Qg2 Qb5+
35.Re2
Qb1+ 1/2-1/2
In this game, white seems to be rather passive starting around move 30
and misses a few opportunities to attack, with a good game. of course,
I can't tell if this was the actual game ;)
> >
> > Play might go like this: 36.Re1 (forced) Nxe1 37.Qg3 Nd3+ 38.Ke2
> > Nxf4 39.Qxf4 Qb2+ 40.Kf1 Qxa3 41.Qxg4+ Kb8 42. Qxg7
> >
> > Q vs Q is often drawish, but Black has winning chances. White should
> > accept the draw, but Black shouldn't offer one.
>
> Strange, both chess engines thought White (me) had the advantage at
> the end, but we (you and I) both thinking drawing was the best I was
> going to get and Black was silly to offer it.
>
> This is from Crafty:
>
> score 2.13
>
> 39. Kd3 Qb1+ 40. Ke3 Qb3+ 41. Kf4 Qa4+ 42. Kg5 Qc6 43. Kh4 Qc7 44.
> Qe4+ Qc6 45. Qf5 Qg2 46. Qd7+ Ka6 47. Qa4+ Kb7 48. Qf4
>
> I've got Toga on here too, but have no convient way of collecting the
> data and posting on the web. But it too felt the advantage was with
> White.
>
> Quite how I was supposed to have an advantage while my king suffered
> almost endless checks on a jouney across the board I will never
> know!!!
Bob
--
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Oct 2006 22:37:40
From: Dave (from the UK)
Subject: Re: Would you have drew this game?
|
Bob wrote:
> Dave (from the UK) wrote:
>>I can't see a mate, nor can either chess engine I have put this
>>through - are you sure about this ???
>
>
> Perhaps there is some problem with the posted game. As posted the final
> postion:
> 2k5/p5p1/1p6/2p5/5Np1/P7/2n1RPQP/1q3K2 w - - 0 36
> is a mate after 36.Re1 (forced) Qxe1#
Sorry, I must have played around in a database and accidently altered
the moves. The game proceeded somewhat over what I posted. The last two
moves were *not* 35.Re2 Qb1+, which is why there is no mate.
In fact 35.Re2 was not played at all. This is the corrected PGN. You
will noticed the repetition at the end, which is not apparent in the PGN
posted.
[Event "ICC 30 20"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2006.10.13"]
[Round "-"]
[White "g8wrb"]
[Black "dinozorman"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
[WhiteElo "1317"]
[BlackElo "1419"]
[Opening "King's pawn game"]
[ECO "C50"]
[NIC "IG.03"]
[Time "05:15:35"]
[TimeControl "1800+20"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 h6 4. d4 Nxd4 5. Nxe5 Ne6 6. Nc3 d6 7. Nf3 Ne7 8.
Be3 c5 9. a3 Nc6 10. O-O Bd7 11. Qd2 Qc7 12. Rfd1 O-O-O 13. Nb5 Qb6 14.
Nxd6+ Bxd6 15. Qxd6 Qxb2 16. Qd3 Qf6 17. Rab1 Nf4 18. Qb3 b6 19. Bxf7 Rhf8
20. Bc4 Qg6 21. Bxf4 Rxf4 22. Bd3 Bh3 23. Bf1 Bxg2 24. Bxg2 Rg4 25. Rxd8+
Nxd8 26. Ne1 Rxe4 27. Qg3 Rg4 28. Bh3 h5 29. Bxg4+ hxg4 30. Nd3 Ne6 31. Re1
Nd4 32. Kf1 Nxc2 33. Nf4 Qc6 34. Qg2 Qb5+ 35. Ne2 Nxe1 36. Qxg4+ Kb7 37.
Kxe1 Qb1+ 38. Kd2 Qb2+ 39. Ke1 Qb1+ 40. Kd2 Qb2+ 41. Ke1 Qb1+
{Game drawn by repetition}
1/2-1/2
--
Dave (from the UK)
Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form: [email protected]
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.
http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
|
|
