Author: Günther Simon
Date: 03:33:47 07/09/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 09, 2005 at 03:20:52, Drexel,Michael wrote:
>On July 08, 2005 at 17:16:36, Günther Simon wrote:
>
>>On July 08, 2005 at 15:20:50, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>
>>>[Event "Ehlvest-Zappa(C)"]
>>>[Site "New York, USA"]
>>>[Date "2005.7.8 15:12"]
>>>[Round "?"]
>>>[White "Zappa(C)"]
>>>[Black "GM_Ehlvest"]
>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>[WhiteElo "0"]
>>>[BlackElo "0"]
>>>[TimeControl "7200+0"]
>>>
>>>1. e4 g6 2. d4 d6 3. Nc3 c6 4. Be3 Nf6 5. Be2 Nbd7 6. f4 b5 7. a3 Nb6 8. d5 Bb7
>>>9. Nf3 a6 10. dxc6 Bxc6 11. Qd4 Na4 12. Nxa4 bxa4 13. Ng5 e6 14. Qc3 Bb7 15. f5
>>>exf5 16. Bc4 d5 17. exd5 Bg7 18. Qe5+ Qe7 19. Qxe7+ Kxe7 20. O-O-O Kd7 21. Nxf7
>>>Rhe8 22. Rhe1 Ng4 23. Bc5 Ne5 24. Nd6 Nxc4 25. Nxc4 Rad8 26. Re6 Bh6+ 27. Kb1
>>>{White wins} 1-0
>>
>>I completely fail to understand the choice of ...Na4? instead of the natural
>>11...Rb8? (BTW it also seems he did not know the thematic d5!, which can bust
>>Black in the early stage, if being not carefully after early ...b5 in those
>>systems? Does Ehlvest play this kind of Pirc normally?)
>>
>>Guenther
>
>8.d5 doesn´t bust black at all. Of course he could have also played 7...a6 or
>7...Bg7 as computers don´t understand anything and think white is much better
>after e5 followed by Sxd5 and exd6 but this is simply wrong.
>The double pawns in the center are useful and cover many important squares.
>
>But also 7...Nb6 is possible. Black has a playable position after 10...Na4!? and
>probably also after 11...Rb8 12.e5.
>a6 _and_ Na4 is not playable because of the refutation 13.Ng5!. A move he had
>probably missed or at least underestimated.
>
>Zappa played strong but not perfect. Black got the chance to get back in to the
>game with 17...Rc8 after which 18.d6 is not quite as strong as it looks.
>
>Michael
You missread my message obviously, I said nothing about '8.d5 did bust Black'.
I said _in brackets_ '8.d5 _can_ bust Black in early stage .... in those
systems'. That is a completely different meaning.
Instead you wrote a lot of sentences just to agree in a somehow hidden way,
that 11...Na4? _in this game_ is bad, like I had already told.
Or did you mix 11...Na4 with 10...Na4? (10...Na4 does not exist here)
Guenther
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.