|
Team Chess |
Kirr
Member #5,060
September 2004
|
Yes, otherwise we'll capture on f4 or move to g4, both are good for us. -- |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
I don't think there's any question that white has no better than fxg5, sad as that is. As an aside, can someone explain what the rationale behind g5 was and why people thought it was a good idea? |
Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
|
30.) fxg5 . r . . . . k .* p . r . . p p . P . p . p . . . . . P p P . P . . . q . b . . . . . P . . . . . . . . Q . B . P R . R . . . K . {"name":"show.php","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/8\/d\/8d499262c0d7654aa9906a9e90a8c6b1.gif","w":400,"h":430,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/8\/d\/8d499262c0d7654aa9906a9e90a8c6b1"} Why g5 was good? I already gave my view to that on the previous page. --- 0xDB | @dennisbusch_de --- |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Quote: Why g5 was good? You have got to be kidding. |
Kirr
Member #5,060
September 2004
|
I don't believe white can invade on the king-side - their bishop is useless with all their pawns on dark squares. And their rooks are bound to defending their pawns. Oppositely we now have h vertical for our attack. We can move our rook c7-c8-h8-h3 for example.. For that we will have to move g6 and Kg7 first, so it's quite long plan.. Another idea is to move Rb3 first to attack pawn c3 and to bind their rook at c1. If white replies with Qd4 we will move Qe2 - we don't want to exchange queens as long as it is possible. Later we can move Rc7-c8-b8, and then Rb3-b2 and Rb8-b3, or something like that. What do you think, team-mates? Probably white will advance h pawn now, if they want to be consistent with their previous plans. -- |
Rampage
Member #3,035
December 2002
|
Longest on-topic thread ever! I hope we'll see this thread living for a year . -R |
Kirr
Member #5,060
September 2004
|
I remember similar post in this thread about half a year ago -- |
FMC
Member #4,431
March 2004
|
Team-mateS? Are you kidding? I'd like to open the H vertical, so i vote for g7-g6 [FMC Studios] - [Caries Field] - [Ctris] - [Pman] - [Chess for allegroites] |
Kirr
Member #5,060
September 2004
|
I thought we also have Flad? Anyway, I don't see any problems with g6 so let's move it. 30... g6 . r . . . . k . p . r . . p . . P . p . p . p . . . P p P . P . . . q . b . . . . . P . . . . . . . . Q . B . P R . R . . . K . * {"name":"show.php","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/4\/c\/4c512abc8508553ab0c360ec728e52cb.gif","w":400,"h":430,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/4\/c\/4c512abc8508553ab0c360ec728e52cb"} Now the king-side is blocked, which means they can't do anything, but we still can infiltrate their camp through the h line. -- |
Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
|
We could get our queen to f4 and our bishop to h4 now. edit: I vote against queens exchange.:) --- 0xDB | @dennisbusch_de --- |
FMC
Member #4,431
March 2004
|
Back from amsterdam in time to revive the thread? [FMC Studios] - [Caries Field] - [Ctris] - [Pman] - [Chess for allegroites] |
Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
|
Ok, i vote for pawn to h4 and if nobody objects within the next 24 hours, I will move that. --- 0xDB | @dennisbusch_de --- |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Is there any point in me saying what I think about h4? |
Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
|
How should i know? If you don't say it we'll never know, so far i don't take that as a veto to h4.;) --- 0xDB | @dennisbusch_de --- |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Well, the entire plan of pushing pawns on the kingside was wrong to begin with, h4 being no different in that regard. The difference is that at this point, the position is so horrible that it hardly matter if you play h4 or not. |
Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
|
Well time is up, i disagree to "the position is so horrible" and since it doesn't matter for you Evert, i'm moving the pawn to h4. 31... h2-h4 . r . . . . k . * p . r . . p . . P . p . p . p . . . P p P . P . . . q . b . . P . . P . . . . . . . . Q . B . . R . R . . . K . {"name":"show.php","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/9\/b9d57b0ca4fe241682de689025d6102d.gif","w":400,"h":430,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/b\/9\/b9d57b0ca4fe241682de689025d6102d"} --- 0xDB | @dennisbusch_de --- |
Krzysztof Kluczek
Member #4,191
January 2004
|
I wasn't involved in the game too much, but I have to agree with Evert - the only thing white king needs at the moment is a big "Welcome" sign. By moving kingside pawns white left king without any blockers, which blockers are now helping to defend black king - now the only white piece that has any chances to get to black king is the queen and even it can't do it because it's now key defense element now. ________ |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Quote: i disagree to "the position is so horrible" Read a chess book and then comment again. |
Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
|
I fail to see any black pieces that are dangerous to our king. They don't have that many move options now. Let's check it: option: black advances f pawn to line 6 option: black advances f pawn to line 5 option: they move their queen or rook [append] --- 0xDB | @dennisbusch_de --- |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
The position is not hopeless because of the concrete tactical threads black has, it is hopeless because of the many strategic options black has. By their very nature these cannot be pinned down to a single sequence of moves that can be calculated easily, it much more long term than that. Every single thread white can defend against. However, there are many more threads that white needs to at least keep an eye on. Black can bide his time, increase pressure here, then switch his attack there. At some time there will come a point where white simply cannot defend all his weaknesses as well as he should and the defence will break down. Now do you finally see what I mean when I say the position is hopeless? If this were a real match and I were black, I would feel fairly secure that I'm going to win. |
Fladimir da Gorf
Member #1,565
October 2001
|
I think Nf5 - Nh3 - Qg4+ (leading to a checkmate) sounds pretty good... Their response would be Qe3, but is that enough? After Nb4 I don't think so... OpenLayer has reached a random SVN version number ;) | Online manual | Installation video!| MSVC projects now possible with cmake | Now alvailable as a Dev-C++ Devpack! (Thanks to Kotori) |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Quote: Nf5 - Nh3 That's a Bishop, not a Knight. |
Fladimir da Gorf
Member #1,565
October 2001
|
Whoops, I always forget the names in the english notation... Bf5 - Bh3 - Qg4+ OpenLayer has reached a random SVN version number ;) | Online manual | Installation video!| MSVC projects now possible with cmake | Now alvailable as a Dev-C++ Devpack! (Thanks to Kotori) |
Dennis
Member #1,090
July 2003
|
Evert said: Now do you finally see what I mean when I say the position is hopeless?
I only see that the position is tricky and that we must pay close attention to what we move and in which order. I do see that white also has many strategic options, just think the move options I listed above a little further and it becomes visible that the positions in which we might have bishop and/or queen then will be fortunate, because they can be used to disturb blacks attack plans, as they will threaten fields that black will have to move to, if they want to have a raid on our king. Also we might get options to disturb them by putting them into check, spoiling their movement possibilities even further. And when they are in check they lose a move, which we can use to build up our attack group. Fladimir said: Bf5 - Bh3 - Qg4+
This plan can be countered by putting whites bishop to d4 to block off the black queen. Or by using the white queen on d4 for the same effect. [append] --- 0xDB | @dennisbusch_de --- |
Fladimir da Gorf
Member #1,565
October 2001
|
Quote: Or by using the white queen on d4 for the same effect. After which black will happily play Qe2. OpenLayer has reached a random SVN version number ;) | Online manual | Installation video!| MSVC projects now possible with cmake | Now alvailable as a Dev-C++ Devpack! (Thanks to Kotori) |
|
|