Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 12:59:44 12/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On December 27, 2001 at 10:23:46, Sune Larsson wrote: >On December 27, 2001 at 09:01:53, Torstein Hall wrote: > >>On December 27, 2001 at 08:26:18, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On December 27, 2001 at 08:11:39, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On December 26, 2001 at 17:32:14, Sune Larsson wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 26, 2001 at 17:10:35, Martin Müller wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>>here the game: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Shredder 6 - Plaskett,GM [E21] >>>>>>26.12.2001 >>>>>>[Müller,Martin] >>>>>> >>>>>>800MB, LINKS >>>>>> 1.Sf3 Sf6 2.c4 e6 3.Sc3 Lb4 4.d4 b6 5.Dc2 Lb7 6.a3 Le4 7.Dd1 Lxc3+ 8.bxc3 d6 >>>>>>9.e3 c5 10.Le2 0-0 11.0-0 Sc6 12.Lb2 De7 13.Sd2 Lg6 14.Tc1 Tac8 15.Te1 Sa5 >>>>>>16.Sb3 Sxb3 17.Dxb3 e5 18.Da4 h5 19.Lf3 Se4 20.Le2 f5 21.Tcd1 Tc7 22.Ld3 Sf6 >>>>>>23.Dc2 e4 24.Le2 Lf7 25.Tc1 Tfc8 26.Da4 Dd7 27.Db3 Le8 28.Da2 Da4 29.Ld1 Da6 >>>>>>30.Le2 Lf7 31.d5 Le8 32.Tcd1 La4 33.Td2 Te8 34.h3 Tce7 35.Lf1 Dc8 36.Tde2 Kh7 >>>>>>37.Td2 g5 38.Db1 Kh6 39.Lc1 Tg8 40.Le2 De8 41.Tb2 Kg7 42.Ld2 Kh8 43.Tf1 Ld7 >>>>>>(Tc7) 44.Dc2 -0.82/13 1:51 Teg7 (g4) 45.Tbb1 -1.02/12 1:41 De5 (f4) 46.Lc1 >>>>>> -1.40/12 48 h4 47.Kh1 -3.11/14 1:09 g4 48.hxg4 -2.16/13 15 Sxg4 49.Lxg4 >>>>>> -1.97/14 0 Txg4 50.Tg1 -3.34/14 1:38 Dg7 (Le8) 51.De2 -2.81/14 30 Le8 >>>>>>52.Df1 -4.40/14 14 Lh5 53.Ld2 -4.64/15 51 Dh7 (Df6) 54.Kh2 -4.39/14 1:12 >>>>>> Tg3 55.Te1 -4.85/14 33 Lf3 56.gxf3 -5.33/17 0 Txg1 (exf3) 57.Dxg1 >>>>>>-4.27/15 17 Txg1 58.Txg1 -4.57/16 0 exf3 59.e4 -4.64/16 9 fxe4 (De7) >>>>>>60.Tg4 -4.48/15 1:05 0-1 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What a lesson! Shredder was totally chanceless here... >>>>> >>>>> Sune >>>> >>>> >>>>I was interested to know what was the losing material >>>>move of shredder so I tried yace(only material) version to go >>>>backward in order to find out the losing mistake. >>>> >>>>The values of material that yace knows are: >>>>Queen=10.01,Rook=5,Bishop=3.5,Knight=3.4,Pawn=0.8 >>>> >>>>Here is some analysis of yace after learning that the game >>>>positions were not good: >>>> >>>>Yace seems to say that 45.R2b1 was losing material when >>>>45.Be1 was better. >>>> >>>>Yace also believes that later moves in the game >>>>(46.Bc1 and 47.Kh1) were blunders but maybe >>>>it simply cannot see deep enough becaue it has no game to learn >>>>that 45.Be1,46.Rfe1,47.f3 are also bad. >>>> >><LARGE SNIP> >>I think it is obvious that the game was gone for white at move 45. No improvment >>in 45.Be1 eg. 45...f4 etc. etc. >>I think white in a "higher sence" lost at the move 7.Qd1. I think 7.Qd2 Bxc3 >>8.Qxc3 0-0 is about equal and white is not stuck with the bad double pawn. >>Should give Shredder a better chanse to play the position. >> >>Torstein > > > Exactly my thoughts when I played through this game. After 7.Dd1 Lxc3+ 8.bxc3 > d6, white's game is very difficult to handle. I have seen several similar Yes, Qd1 is _HORRIBLE_. It is literally worse than losing 3 tempos. How come? Qc2-Qd1 is two tempos on the spot. However, a3 becomes a wasted tempo (the third one) because in such positions Black would take in c3 with a lot of pleasure withouh being forced. Saemisch like variations when white plays a3 meant to have a quick take over of the center to attack on the king side. Generally, the knight is not in f3 obstructing a desirable f4. All this here is not possible so a3 is out of place, hence another wasted tempo. That is three, because Be4 from black is useful. Now, why do I say that is worse than 3 tempos? because after Black takes in c3 the pawn is _much_ better off in a2 than a3. Like my wise teacher used to say "you wish that a3-a2 could be legal so you can play it". It was apparent in the game, After Na5 (with the pawn on a2) White could play Nb3 rejecting the knight in a5 because if Nxb3 White plays axb3 solving all problems. After a3 has been played, this is not possible anymore. Since white would wish to take back a3, then this is like 4 tempos wasted in only one move. HORRIBLE. The position is closed, so those tempos are not translated into a furious attack, but they are translated to a comfortable game where black can set the kind of position that it wants. In the Nimzoindian against a GM that is 0-1 anyway. Regards, Miguel > games where IM:s/GM:s were playing black vs masters. White must try to > open up the position for his bishops and go for some attack on the king side. > He has to play Nd2 and prepare the pawn push e4. Slow maneuvering from white > in such positions is the way to a slow death. You are right, for Shredder > it had been way better to play 7.Qd2 or 7.Qb3, then black has to part with > one of his bishops and white avoids the double pawn. > > Sune
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.