Gryzemuis on 18/9/2013 at 02:08
That was a pretty good game, Hopper.
If anyone wants to check it out, it's here: (
http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=75746010)
On Friday we played the first 10 moves. The Dragon variation of the Sicilian opening. The first 10 moves were all according to one of the main lines in the opening books. I had not expected that. :) Long time ago, when I decided I should spend some time studying the opening, I had picked the Sicilian defense as my answer against 1.e4. But the Najdorf variation (5. ..,a6), not the Dragon variation (5. ..,g6). However, at our (amateur) level, I noticed many players play a bit passively. Playing g6 and Bg7 is much more aggressive for black. So I actually played the Dragon (g6) way more than the Najdorf (a6). But now I got into a real Dragon, without really knowing the opening theory. And it seemed Hopper did know it, because he followed the main line for 10 moves ! I was getting worried. :)
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/80pflmu9mkza.pngDuring the weekend Hopper was away, but we played a few more moves. And continued Monday afternoon. I managed to exchange a knight against white's dark-squared bishop. I always thought that was good. (White can't neutralize black's g7 bishop so easily now). However, I found myself in a position where I had no counterplay at all. My moves a6 and b5 seemed threatening maybe, but in reality, they were harmless. White's pawn attack comes first, and all black can do, is wait for the inevitable. White marched his g- and h-pawns. My Bc6 was bad, as I lost control over e6.
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/1uh668s8g6w94.pngI should have kept my head cool. And played Bb7 or Nd7. But I couldn't. So I played pawn h5. White now had advantage. And a point he can attack. My only hope was to play d6-d5 at some point. But that was impossible because white seemed to control d5. So I decided to play e7-e6. To prepare d6-d5. I had seen the sacrifices of the bishop or knight on e6. But I did some analysis, and saw I had two moves that could save me: Nh5-f4, which covers my weak square g6, and at the same time, attack the white queen. And the move Qf6, which covers g6, threatens mate on b2, and actually allows me to take a white piece on e6 (after white plays c3). However, Nh5-f4 and Qd8-f6 are only possible *after* white plays g6xh6. And white didn't. Hopper immediately sacrificed on e6. Now I was sure I was going to lose. White had played calmly, slowly building his attack. White had not made a mistake. Heck, Hopper even had not given me a single opportunity for some counter-play.
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/3ue61aqthmecs.pngAs you can see, if black takes the knight, white can take the pawn, give check, and on the next move take the black rook on c8. Two white pieces traded against 2 black pawns and a rook. And the black king is unprotected. However, before finishing this combination, Hopper decided to open the g-line.
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/jpeoo4tzrcrz.pngThis was the position of late Monday night. White has 2 main options. He could take the black rook on c8. And have a small advantage (+0.5). I would have played the wrong reply, I would have played Nf4, Qf6 and Rxc8. If white would have taken the pawn on d6, he'd have a winning advantage (+2.0). I just saw with my chess-engine now that white should have played Rxg6. Black could not take the rook. Or else white plays e4-e5 and Ne3-g4++ mate.
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/40l88ktevrlk.pngLucky for me, Hopper didn't see Rxg6 either.
The next morning, the game continued. Maybe it was the early hour, but here follow the 2 moves that gave me an opportunity to fight back. 22. Nd5, Bxd5 23. exd5, Qf6.
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/amey20p0jt10.pngFor the first time, I felt I might not lose this game. Qf6 was one of the two moves I had set my hopes on. Qf6 threatens mate on b2 ! Thanks to the dragon-bishop on g7. White has to react. And black wins a tempo, so he can move his rook from c8. Suddenly black is up a piece versus 2 pawns. My engine now gives black (-1.6) advantage.
White plays c3 to prevent mate. Black gets to play his 2nd liberating move: Nf4. White's best move is Qc2. Which allows black to play b5-b4. Suddenly the black pawns on the queenside turn out to be useful after all.
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/1yeiokcmrmit.pngWhite continues the attack on the black king. He opens the h-file. But black's king can hide relatively safely on g8.
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/4j0jfmpd5bc4c.pngHere black has a distinct advantage (-2.5). Black's king is in relative safety. The pawn on c3 is a real threat against the white king. White can't take the c3-pawn without opening the lines to his king. Black has the initiative, although white is not defeated yet. 10 Moves later, white resigned.
Pretty good game, I'd say. I was lucky to win in the end. If it hadn't been for those 2 white moves on Tuesday-morning, which gave me a chance for counter-play, I think I'd lost.
Looking forward to the next game.
That one might take a few days too.
Nuth on 8/10/2013 at 19:20
"Clash of the Titans" is over. LittleFlower and split our two games and since our tie-break points are equal, we co-finished in 1st place. First game was very close, second game I got trounced. Congrats to LittleFlower/Gryzemuis.
faetal on 8/10/2013 at 20:14
Great! Well done to you both :)
Gryzemuis on 8/10/2013 at 20:27
Congratulations, Nuth/Quasimorphy.
That were two fun games.
In the first game, you used an unorthodox opening (a3).
(
http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=76470768)
My position was a little better at first. But you kept maneuvering slowly. And move by move you started pressing. When I started to worry about endgame and you controlling the open c-file, then came the sudden blow 28. Ng5. I had not seen that move at all. Pressure on f7, and nothing I could do to defend. But 2 moves later, you played 30. Bc4. You lost a move. And you blocked your Rc1 from c8. Suddenly I could breath again. If you had played:
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/4c8jta5oy7f.png30. Nxf7, Rxf7
31. Rc8+, Bf8
32. Qh6, Qd6
33. Bxf7, Kxf7
34. Qxh7
Inline Image:
http://www.chessvideos.tv/bimg/49vwjz4lw7wgk.pngThat is a forced line, and would have given white a +6 advantage. I saw the line at the board, but I couldn't determine if it was bad, or straight losing. And I certainly didn't see a defense. But because of Bc4, I got to live a bit longer. Until I missed 41. Rb2. There was a defense: g6-g5. But I would not have found that move, even if I had kept looking for an hour. Well deserved victory, grats.
(
http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=76748930)
In the second game, I got some pressure out of the opening. Indeed, as you said, the engine suggests that Bxf3 was premature. I kept looking for that sacrifice on e6 or f7. But there never seemed to be a moment where such a sacrifice was the correct move. My only hope was the fact that I had still moves available to improve my position. While black had no real good moves left.
Then you castled queenside. The engine says that the position is still relatively equal (+0.5). But it gave me a new plan: open the queenside, and attack the black king. Bg5 was maybe not so good (it gave me a tempo). But once I got that pawn on c6, and noticed it was kinda poisoned, I felt I might gonna win. (Qxc6 would allow me to play c4, pin and win the Nd5. And bxc6 would open the b-file, giving my 2 rooks more attacking power).
Good games. As you said, we are probably equal strength. Although I suspect you are much better in blitz games than I am. I'm happy there wasn't a blitz tie-breaker. You would have surely won. :)
Nuth on 8/10/2013 at 22:40
I expected the Sicilian from you in the first game and wanted to play something that would give you something you might not have seen before. I've played 2.a3 a few times, and it's always led to interesting games. Hadn't played against 2...g6, so when you played that, it threw me into unfamiliar territory, too. I had it in my head early that I needed to contest the long diagonal hence 12.Bb2, but you had just played e5 blocking the diagonal which for some reason didn't dissuade me from Bb2. That move was definitely a waste of time for me and I spent quite a bit of the game trying to redeploy my pieces. Lots of maneuvering. Your queenside pawns were worrisome and weakening them was an objective that was always in the back of my mind. I had some pins on that side of the board for a while which looked promising but led nowhere. 28. Ng5 did turn out to be the crucial move of the game. I considered the forcing line you mentioned but thought 32...Qd6 adequately defended. I completely missed 33. Bxf7 Kxf7 34. Qxh7. Toward the end of the game I thought it was going to be a repetition draw because I didn't see at first that I would have an x-ray defense of my rook after you took pawn with 47...Qxe4+. Good game.
Second game I also wanted to play something that might be a bit unexpected. I played 3...dxe4--headed toward the Fort Knox variation. It's supposed to lead to a position that's hard to crack open. I haven't played it much but thought I knew the general ideas of it well enough--the pieces are developed thus and so, the pawn structure looks like this, etc. The bishop on c6 is typically exchanged for the knight on f3. Ummm...well...it shouldn't have been exchanged in this game, at least not when I exchanged it. That was a big mistake. I was sweating that LF was going to unleash an attack because my e6 and f7 pawns were so weakened. I might have been able to defend but I doubt it. If it had been a blitz game I would have felt almost obligated to attack if I were in LF's position. As it was, I was still tied into such a knot that I couldn't wriggle free without wriggling myself into a different mess. Good job by LF in making me pay for that mistake. I got demolished in that game and feel LF is the legitimate winner of the tournament because of that. We have the same score but the score doesn't tell the story.
Gryzemuis on 9/10/2013 at 13:59
Quote Posted by Nuth
I wanted to play something that would give you something you might not have seen before.
Yes, I hadn't seen it before. I had seen the idea of playing b2-b4 to remove black's pawn on c5, and gain control over d4. But not by playing a3 early.
I hope you have seen the rules of chess.com.
(
http://support.chess.com/Knowledgebase/Article/View/124/0/cheaters--cheating-what-you-need-to-know)
Quote: "In turn-based chess, you may consult books or databases (including the Chess.com Explorer) for opening moves."
So I did use the opening explorer on (
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/explorer?node=371816&move=2.5&moves=e4.c5.a3&nodes=21720.32033.371816) www.chessgames.com. I did not want to study the openings in great detail. Just get an idea about the basic idea of an opening variation. And to make sure I would not fall into an opening trap. So I used maybe 10-15 minutes per move looking at the opening explorer. I understood the idea of b2-b4 after a2-a3. And I saw how black's bishop Bg7 could be used. You were out of known territory on move 2, when I played g7-g6. I was out of known territory when you played c2-c3 on the 4th move. :) The opening explorer stopped for me after 2. a3, g6. And all games I found played 4. Nc3 in stead of 4. c3.
In the 2nd game, the opening explorer worked better for me. Again I used it only quickly to find the main line. The explorer stopped after 7 moves. The most played move was Ne4-g3. But I liked Ne4-g5 better. (The stats for games in the database was: 14 games, 8 white wins, 6 draws). But the main fact was that it seems more aggressive. And it gave me a plan: sacrifice on e6 or f7.
I doubt you used an opening explorer. So I don't feel proud about using this tool, even though it is not cheating. I didn't use the explorer in my games against Mopgoblin and Hopper. (Although Hopper and me did follow a mainline in the Sicilian Dragon. I knew that one).
Quote:
Your queenside pawns were worrisome and weakening them was an objective that was always in the back of my mind.
During the game, I felt that 10.Ba4 was a mistake. It allowed me to build my space advantage with the a,b&c pawns. But according to my engine, it didn't matter much.
As you must have noticed, my strategy was completely about controlling the square d4. That's why I played e5 (although I usually don't like blocking my Bg7). That's why I traded my light-squared bishop against Nf3. I had hoped that the space advantage would allow me to use my 2 knights to keep pushing your pieces in even more cramped places. That didn't work. I hadn't seen Bb3 becoming very powerful.
Quote:
I completely missed 33. Bxf7 Kxf7 34. Qxh7.
I had seen it, and didn't like it for black. But it was my best option (aka it would have been forced). The trick (which I see now, after looking at my engine analysis) is for white to use the h- and g-pawns. And threaten to mate black's king.
Quote:
Toward the end of the game I thought it was going to be a repetition draw because I didn't see at first that I would have an x-ray defense of my rook after you took pawn with 47...Qxe4+. Good game.
I saw you repeat the position 2 times. You raised my hopes of getting a schwindle-draw by repetition of moves. But then at the last moment you saw it after all. :) Grats. The schwindle would have made me feel bad anyway. (Or maybe not. They say a good schwindle of a lost game feels better than a proper win. :)). Playing Qf3 would have made me lose pawn d4. And that would have been fatal, I think. Playing d4-d3 gave me some fighting chances. I couldn't see all variations, but it felt I had a chance to either get perpetual check, or threaten to promote my d-pawn. But my calculations were not good enough.
Quote:
It's supposed to lead to a position that's hard to crack open.
I didn't know that. But I experienced it during play. I am usually trying to be aggressive. Go for the checkmate. After all, Tal is my favorite chess-player by far. I was expecting Nf6, and was hoping for a particular variation. None of that. And I know very little about the french defense.
Quote:
I was sweating that LF was going to unleash an attack because my e6 and f7 pawns were so weakened. I might have been able to defend but I doubt it. If it had been a blitz game I would have felt almost obligated to attack if I were in LF's position.
I don't think there was ever an attack possible on e6 or f7. You were always one move ahead. My engine kinda confirmed it. There was an attack possible on h7. But I was afraid for g6, capturing my bishop. My engine now says it was possible. But it would have led me to a small advantage (less than +1). So I decided to keep building my position. E.g. putting both rooks on the e-file. Playing c4 and advancing b- and a-pawns. Playing Bc3. To me it felt I had good moves left, while black had almost none.
Black couldn't castle queen-side, because Ng5xf7 would fork the rooks. Black couldn't play h6, because it would allow Bg6+ (after Ng5 sacrifice). Black couldn't castle king-side, because I could attack h7. I was not unhappy with the position. I just needed patience.
Quote:
As it was, I was still tied into such a knot that I couldn't wriggle free without wriggling myself into a different mess. Good job by LF in making me pay for that mistake. I got demolished in that game and feel LF is the legitimate winner of the tournament because of that. We have the same score but the score doesn't tell the story.
I think differently. Because I used an opening explorer tool. And besides that, I also used the "analyze-button". It's allowed according to the chess.com rules. (Or else the button should not even have been on the webpage). I hope others use it too. It makes it so much easier to look at variations before you make a move. I started using it during my match with Hopper. I do not feel totally comfortable with it, because you can't do this during a regular game behind a real board. The analyze-button is not allowed during on-line (blitz) games. For some reason (after looking at your blitz games), I think you are much better at visualizing lines. And therefor I think you'd beat me in regular games.
Have you ever had a rating ?
Many years (decades even) I've played at a club. This was before the web existed. Some players at the club had official ratings (Fide/KNSB (the dutch chess federation)). Other players had ratings internal to the club. The clubs try to balance both internal and official ratings. So that they are kinda similar. My rating had climbed from 1500 (starter) to over 1700 quickly. I felt my rating would have been somewhere between 1700 and 1800. Nowadays my chess skills behind the board are worse, but my understanding of the game might be a little better. (I do watch games online, and do the daily chesspuzzle on chessgames.com since a decade or more).
So I hope my chess-rating would still be ~1800 if I'd play official games again. I tried a few blitz-games on chess.com, but I quickly realized I need a lot of practice to get my rating to a decent level. Too many blunders. I might get my blitz rating to a respectable number. But I do not want to invest even more time in playing chess. Chess eats your soul. Gaming already eats too much of my time as it is. :)
I enjoyed all the games. Thanks Mopgoblin, Hopper and Nuth. If someone wants another game against me, let me know. Although there are more than enough other opponents on chess.com.
Nuth on 9/10/2013 at 21:39
Yeah, I chose not to use the Opening Explorer or other sources of information after the games had started even though I knew it was allowed. Before game 2 I looked over some material on the Fort Knox variation of the French in one of my books. It's playable against 3.Nc3 or 3.Nd2, and I had decided I was going to play it if either of those were your third move. Possibly an unwise choice by me since it leads to positions that aren't very French-like, but it's generally fairly straightforward, and I thought I could get to the middlegame without much danger by using it. Guess I was wrong about that. Haha.
I did use the analysis board from time to time. Hadn't used that prior to our games.
Nah, I've never had an official rating. Almost all of my chess has been on the internet or against a computer. I use my blitz rating on chess.com to estimate my strength. People who have made comparisons with official ratings seem to think blitz ratings there are somewhat underinflated. Mine varies quite a bit depending on how drowsy I am when playing. I was up to 1480 or so a couple of weeks ago which is probably pretty close to where it would be if I only played when awake. Factor in the underinflation and I'd probably be 1550-1600 if I had an official rating. I think I have the potential to improve quite a bit, but I really need to play a lot more slow games(and analyze them afterwards) to do it.
Fun games in the tournament against everyone. I really enjoyed it.
faetal on 21/11/2013 at 15:02
Wow, 3rd youngest GM at 13, youngest ever world champion and highest rating in history.
That's pretty impressive.
Nuth on 21/11/2013 at 19:37
I don't think Carlsen beats Kasparov's record for youngest World Champion, but the gap in strength between Carlsen and everyone else is amazing. He's not quite champion yet, but he only needs a draw in the last three games(and he has White in two of those), so it's pretty safe to say, yeah, he's won the match. I expected Carlsen to win, but I expected Anand to put up a bit more of a fight.
Carlsen's first defense of the title may be more interesting than this match. There are a couple of other young guns(Karjakin and Andreikin) qualified to compete for the title shot and a few old dogs(Kramnik, Topolov, and Aronian) who I'd expect to give Carlsen a tougher time than Anand did. I don't see anyone beating Carlsen though. He's one of the greatest, possibly the greatest, player of all-time.
Edit: Aronian is younger than I thought he was but still not really a youngster.
