Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Terrible play... some advice ? (Read 18319 times)
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 2958
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #25 - 09/01/18 at 19:59:26
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 09/01/18 at 14:57:43:
Thanks Bibs. 

For those interested, all of the Samisch games in this thread made it into my book Opening Repertoire: The Modern Samisch, and I spend a lot of time discussing these (and other) positional pitfalls and nuances. 

Good thing too that they're in the book! I for one would never have thought of checking the Torre subforum, of all places, for material on the Sämisch King's Indian. Can't recall noticing this thread earlier.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #24 - 09/01/18 at 14:57:43
Post Tools
Thanks Bibs. 

For those interested, all of the Samisch games in this thread made it into my book Opening Repertoire: The Modern Samisch, and I spend a lot of time discussing these (and other) positional pitfalls and nuances.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2088
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #23 - 09/01/18 at 09:47:31
Post Tools
Thanks for posting that game.
Completely agree EricTR. See the plans in action, in glorious Technicolor. It is deliciously Irving Chernev.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #22 - 02/11/14 at 15:54:46
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 02/11/14 at 15:38:10:
That looks pretty thematic, right there.
Comparable to Petrosian-Camara, Nice olympiad 1974, which ECO used as the reference game for the none-too-impressive-looking 6...Nbd7 and 7...e5.  That one took longer.


Yep, very similar.  Here's the game:



Nothing like watching World Champions (and ex-World Champions) beating up on fairly strong mortals to learn how to play a certain position type.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4443
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #21 - 02/11/14 at 15:38:10
Post Tools
That looks pretty thematic, right there.
Comparable to Petrosian-Camara, Nice olympiad 1974, which ECO used as the reference game for the none-too-impressive-looking 6...Nbd7 and 7...e5.  That one took longer.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #20 - 02/11/14 at 15:14:37
Post Tools
Looking through some Samisch games I stumbled across one:



It's closer to what might have happened in Hicetnunc's game, especially regarding Black's queenside pawn structure and light squared weaknesses.  White just exchanges everything off but the dark-squared bishop and wins due to his enormous space advantage.  Also note that the knight on c5 did absolutely nothing; without ...f5 there is no pressure on e4.  I may be overestimating White's advantage here, but around move 16 I'd say that he's just strategically winning.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #19 - 02/06/14 at 18:57:04
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 02/06/14 at 18:41:36:
Indeed it's quite different from hicetnunc's note.  For the record, the Informant version had 17...Qxd2+ 18. Nxd2 b5 as equal, and called 24...Rxf5 an error, giving 24...Be8 25. Nxg5 (only move) hg 26. Rxg5 Kh8 27. Nxe4 Bxb2 with the idea ...Rxd5 =.


I think that Black's already nearly lost or lost at that point, and I disagree that 24...Rxf5 is a substantial error.  24...Be8 25.Bxg5! improves I think, when Black shouldn't win the d5-pawn unless I've missed something.  White's winning.

Also, it's hard for me to say that 17...Qxd2 is equal.  Black's passive and doesn't have any counterplay, though I agree that White's advantage is small because Black gets the dark-squared bishop into the game in time.  Something like 18.Nxd2 b5 19.Nf2 Rfc8 20.0-0 Bf8 21.Rfc1 Be7 22.b4 must be a little better for White, but certainly well within the "Kasparov isn't going to lose this" margin.  Black is the one that needs to be careful though, not White, for instance 22.b4 axb3 23.axb3 Kf8 24.Kf1 Bd8? 25.Rxa8 Rxa8 26.Bxc5 dxc5 27.Nd3.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4443
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #18 - 02/06/14 at 18:41:36
Post Tools
Indeed it's quite different from hicetnunc's note.  For the record, the Informant version had 17...Qxd2+ 18. Nxd2 b5 as equal, and called 24...Rxf5 an error, giving 24...Be8 25. Nxg5 (only move) hg 26. Rxg5 Kh8 27. Nxe4 Bxb2 with the idea ...Rxd5 =.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #17 - 02/06/14 at 17:50:03
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 02/06/14 at 16:26:26:
ErictheRed wrote on 02/06/14 at 10:43:49:
The one game with these totally blocked kingsides (as could happen after 15.h5 g5 in your game) that I always think of is: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070619. 

Bareev annotated it in Dvoretsky's Positional Play.  Black's position was so desperate that he had to give up a piece for complications, and even then White was for choice, then just winning.  It took an incredible amount of "Kasparovness" for Black not to lose that game.  In my head, I imagine that if Black wasn't the reigning World Champ with all of his intimidating body language, etc, that Bareev would have scored the full point.


This is interesting -- did Bareev write something like, "I've really changed my mind since my Informant notes, when I thought it should be equal with or without the piece sac"?


I don't know the Informant notes to which you're referring, and I may be exaggerating a bit about how desperate Black's position was, as Bareev does indicate that Black was probably OK (though White still for choice) without the piece sac.  Some hyperbole on my part perhaps, but I meant later in the game.

Reading between the lines a bit, Bareev seems to indicate that 26...Bb5? should have been the losing mistake.  His annotations were more conversational than anything else, however, and I don't have the book with me.  The feeling I got from his annotations were more that "Black would be okay after 17...Qxd2 because he's Kasparov" more than Black is objectively fully equal.  But I do think that Black can hold without too many problems in that ending because he has time to route his bad bishop outside of the pawn chain, i.e. ...Bg7-f8-e7-d8, etc. 

I didn't mean to suggest that White was winning or anything after 17...Qxd2, but I think the game does demonstrate how desperate Black's position can be in these structures.  If he weren't able to get his king's bishop outside of the pawn chain and advance his pawns to a4 and b5, for instance, I think he's strategically lost.  I meant that this game was instructive because it shows how Black should defend actively if he ends up in this kind of kingside bind.  It's unlikely that Hicetnunc's opponent could have managed getting his pawns off of a5, b6, and c7, which would have meant complete disaster as he could never activate his king's bishop, as Kasparov could. 

I can say that I recently spent many hours analyzing this game (with the aid of an engine), and that I personally think that Bareev underestimated his advantage at times.  FWIW, I think that Black was lost after 23...f5? (my annotation), which Bareev makes no comment on.  My analysis indicates that Kasparov could have held/had full counterplay/unclearness/whatever after 23...Be8!, the point being that 24.Nf2 f5! 25.gxf5 Bxh5+ gets the White h-pawn off of the board and gives Black connected passed pawns and a lot of counterplay.  One very fun line (not at all forced) goes 26.Kd2 Rxf5 27.Nfxe4 Rfxd5!? 28.Nxd5 Rxd5+ 29.Ke1! Re5! 30.Ng3 Rxe3+ 31.Kd2 Rxg3! 32.Rxg3 Be5! and I don't know how to evaluate that position.

In the game, Bareev's 26.Rh1! should have won, depriving Black of connected passed pawns.  Bareev says that his 29.Rd1? was the mistake that let victory slip. 

I don't want to post more of my analysis at this time, sorry.
« Last Edit: 02/06/14 at 18:50:56 by ErictheRed »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kylemeister
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 4443
Location: USA
Joined: 10/24/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #16 - 02/06/14 at 16:26:26
Post Tools
ErictheRed wrote on 02/06/14 at 10:43:49:
The one game with these totally blocked kingsides (as could happen after 15.h5 g5 in your game) that I always think of is: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1070619. 

Bareev annotated it in Dvoretsky's Positional Play.  Black's position was so desperate that he had to give up a piece for complications, and even then White was for choice, then just winning.  It took an incredible amount of "Kasparovness" for Black not to lose that game.  In my head, I imagine that if Black wasn't the reigning World Champ with all of his intimidating body language, etc, that Bareev would have scored the full point.


This is interesting -- did Bareev write something like, "I've really changed my mind since my Informant notes, when I thought it should be equal with or without the piece sac"?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1941
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #15 - 02/06/14 at 14:54:23
Post Tools
Interesting idea for a thread although for many of us the normal answer to 'what didn't I understand about this game' is nearly everything Wink

I hadn't fully realised the centre was still flexible when black went a5. I don't want to believe that black was planning a queenside pawn storm that undeveloped but you never know Smiley

Perhaps rather kinder to credit him with the plausible enough idea of Ba6 to swap those bishops. White's d5/Bb5+ combination then rather forestalled that plan, at the cost of shutting the center etc.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 194
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #14 - 02/06/14 at 14:49:14
Post Tools
dfan wrote on 02/06/14 at 13:49:58:
Many thanks not just to everyone who has chimed in on this game but also to hicetnunc for posting it for comment. I've learned a lot. I'd love to see a weekly "What didn't I understand about this game?" thread. Maybe I'll start the next one...


Yes, we could create a special section in the forum. Why not call it : 'We're good chess players... in theory'  Grin
  

43 yo, 2000 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
dfan
God Member
*****
Offline


"When you see a bad move,
look for a better one"

Posts: 717
Location: Boston
Joined: 10/04/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #13 - 02/06/14 at 13:49:58
Post Tools
Many thanks not just to everyone who has chimed in on this game but also to hicetnunc for posting it for comment. I've learned a lot. I'd love to see a weekly "What didn't I understand about this game?" thread. Maybe I'll start the next one...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ErictheRed
God Member
*****
Offline


USCF National Master

Posts: 2425
Location: USA
Joined: 10/02/05
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #12 - 02/06/14 at 11:27:40
Post Tools
P.s. I also want to say that 9...a5 is NOT about securing the c5-square for the knight, or that it shouldn't be.  Before White has played d4-d5, that square isn't available yet, anyway.  It looks more like the start of a general pawn-storm against White's king, with intended follow-ups of 10...c7-c6, 11...b6-b5, etc.  I'd rather have just played 9...a6 if I were Black though, with ideas of ...b5 and ...c5.

After the structure in the center solidifies into the "d5 pawn chain," though, the move 9...a5 just became a glaring weakness as White dominates all of the queenside light squares and can immediately use b5.  Somewhat paradoxically, it's often not appropriate for Black to play this way (plopping a knight on c5).  The key, to me, seems to be whether Black can generate pressure against e4 or not.  If he can't, then he shouldn't do it.  Better to play ...a6, ...c6, ...b5, possibly ...Nd7-b6 and on to c4 or a4, etc.

I'm reminded of this thread where I tried to make that point, and quoted Chris Ward: http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1371733367

It's just another extremely common amateur positional error.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 194
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: Terrible play... some advice ?
Reply #11 - 02/06/14 at 11:19:19
Post Tools
IMJohnCox wrote on 02/06/14 at 01:04:50:
In reply to the OP; you've received some good advice but I'd also say that gxf6 was, as you point out yourself, a truly terrible move. This structure is not good for White unless he can dominate f4 and g5 and basically win in the attack; in any kind of endgame it's terrible. And you're never going to manage that when your opponent has an unopposed dark-squared bishop, which you've just freed at a stroke.

This is for some reason not obvious at first sight; I remember once making the same kind of mistake myself.

Also (others have said this I know), when you say that ...g6 is good because it prepares to lock up the position, this suggests to me that you really don't understand these positions at all. If the kingside is locked up by h5 g5 then Black can essentially resign; White just prepares and pushes forward on the queenside, and Black is crushed. ...g6 may or may not be a good move, but it certainly isn't a good move because it prepares to close the kingside.

In fact, you're quite right to agonise about this game, I would say, because it's precisely the sort of game which offers excellent opportunities to understand things you presently don't and hence improve. I wouldn't say giving up the opening was the right response, though.


Thanks for taking the time to share your views : this is really appreciated !

I've gone over this game two more times with friends, and things start to become clearer. As you say, this game is a great learning experience. I won't drop the opening, just wondering about the choice of Nc3 vs. a Nd2/c3 set-up as it opens the door to a wide range of different positions.

I now fully appreciate the big advantage for white after 15.h5 g5, but in our analysis,  15...Bg5+ proved quite resilient, so I now wonder about the value of the h4/g4 approach as a whole. Still ploughing...  Smiley
  

43 yo, 2000 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo