Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/23 08:23Hi, I am in no way an expert. I spent the last three days (couple of hours a day) to understand two things about this game:
Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/23 11:19Umberto welcome to the forum
Since I am by no means an expert I would like to leave giving an opinion and/or advise to other members here who definitely have more experience than I do.
Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/23 11:49I shall react this afternoon!, i will take about an hour to browse through it and comment, but i will reply!,, just bit bust atm. Im sure we have a residential Grandmaster lurking on the forum somewhere maybe he could give us an opinion
Ill probably disagree with him, just for the thrill of it
Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/23 12:01Thanks everyone. I will also run this game through an engine to see the comments. I was just surprised that after move 18-20 I didn't found any good move!
Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/24 11:28Dear Umberto, White's problems began with the patzer move 10. Nh4. Instead of this, White could have taken with either the bishop or the knight; e.g. 10. Bxd4 or 10. Nxd4 and either way he wins material and gets a clear edge. Before 10. Nh4, both white and black were playing like masters until move 9 when white essayed 9. a4?!, a move I cannot find in my database of 3 million games. I wanted to analyze the whole game for you but it's not really worth the effort. It's too flawed and there were so many weak moves starting from move 10 that the game does not deserve to be studied, I'm sorry to say. The move 9. a4?! was apparently intended to prevent an ...a6 then ...b5 sally by black, but the move creates a permanent weakness at b4. White would do well to read more on the openings, and endeavor to learn tactics and strategy.
Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/24 12:45Thanks a lot for the analysis... I am very new to chess and I am learning. Sometime I win sometime I don't... I knew this one was played very badly. At least I got 9 moves ok I'll check my game again from scratch tonight. Thanks again!
Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/24 17:53Hi ,
1. Why didn't you put your d-pawn to d4 in your third or fourth or fifth move? Do you usually play that way against sicilian or you just wanted to experiment? Do you like position with the blocked center? Some players do.
2. I guess that you and your opponent wanted to keep the center blocked and that was why you did not noticed black's 6.. d5! or black's 7.. d5! or blacks 8.. d5 moves. Or.. you saw 6.. d5 but hoped to win in the tactical complications (after 7.Bb3 d4, 8.e5 Nd7 9.Bg5 f6 10.exf6 gxf6 11.Qe2) ?
3. You 9.a4 was not the best move but if you went 14. b5 instead of 14. bxc5? the was no reason to lose immediately.
4. Yes, 10.Nh4 was.. far from ok. Try 10.Nxd4 next time.
5. After 18. g3 you would trap black bishop. Look at that.
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/25 01:47I replayed the moves and observed that black erred on move 6. Black could have pushed his e pawn to the 5th rank then to the 4th forking the knight and bishop on the 3rd. The combination could have resulted on a piece against 2 pawns for black. I have not replayed the whole game yet. But I'll do it sometime later if I have time.
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/25 08:19to landix: you are right, I mentioned it above. Black could do it in his 6th, 7th and even 8th move
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/28 00:55Gentlemen:
There is nothing unusual about the move order of both White and Black players during the first 8 moves. It is a Sicilian Modern Three Knights (B30/B50) variant that has been played in Trippe-Mir Wais, NRW Holiday Open 2000 (0-1); Doan Nhu Tao-Mach Phu Ngan, Vietnam Championship Girls Under 9, 2001 (draw); Ng Wan Jie-Koh How Yee, 3rd ASEAN Championship G-U10, 2002 (draw); and in William-Meyer, Germany Championship Girls U14, 2002 (0-1). The first 8 moves played are book moves and are unique to this variation, until white deviated with 9.a4 which is sort of logical if one wants the c4 bishop to remain where it is without being threatened by a later ...b5 by black. I think Umberto's question is where the mistakes were made or where the fatal mistake was made. So the commentary should start WHEN a player leaves book and starts on his own. Although 9.a4 for me is a waste of time, one can sometimes afford loss of tempo in a closed game, so I wouldn't call it a mistake. I say again that White began going downhill when he did not take at d4. This he followed with more weak moves that soon enabled black to take complete control of the game. My point is that his choice of opening is not the question here, because there certainly is nothing wrong with his selection as the whole variation (up to Move 8) appears in the respected Encyclopedia of Chess Openings. Meaning, he was doing fine up to that time and proposing other moves would have altered his personal choice of opening. It's like he played the Sicilian Three Knights and then being told after the game: "Why did you not play the Sicilian Najdorf instead?" I don't think that's what Umberto wants to know. Therefore, I say again: the move 10.Nh4 is pointless and weakens the position. Remember the saying "knight on the rim is grim." So also here. I said it would not be worthwhile to analyze the whole game because white seems to be on a self-destruct mode after Move 9. Consider: he allowed black's d4 knight to remain at d4 when he could have captured it, allowed black's bishop to take at h2, hanged a whole piece later in the game, etc. So I just pointed out where his problems all began, and that is when he did not take at d4, enabling his opponent's knight to establish a strong and menacing post. So there.
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/28 09:121. I can't agree that the first 8 moves are ok. Yes, they were played many times by not very strong players. You show three games (Trippe-Mir game has 6.0-0 0-0 which makes some tactical difference after 8.d5!) played by not very strong players, two of the games were played in Under10 and Under14 championships. I found over 30 games in my databases. But it proves nothing!
To make a long story short please just show me how you (and Umberto) would play after Black's 6.. d5!
2. I do not recommend this particular line for White for beginners. And I think that the choice of the opening was among the reasons of losing the game. Of course I am not sure if Umberto IS a beginner, just guessing..
3. The moves: 9.a4 and 10.Nh4 were not good but.. they were not losing the game. White could play 14.b5 instead of 14.bxc5 and after 14.b5 Bd7 15.Nf3 e5 16.Ng5 Rf8 17.a6 bxa6 18.Rxa6 the position is equal imho.
4. There was still no need to lose if White played 19. g3 instead of 19.Nf3. After 19.g3 h6 20.Nf3 Bxg3 21.fxg3 Qxg3 22.Nd2 g5 23.Nb3 Qe5 I would not be happy with White's position but it is playable. And another line: instead of 26.Ne2, it was 26.e6 fxe6 7.Bxe6+ Rxe6 28.Rxe6 Kf7 29.Rae1 Rf8 30.R6e2 f3 31.Re6 Qxa5 Also 30.f3 was stronger than 30.Rec1: (30.f3 Bxf3 31.Qxf3 Bg3 32.Qc3 Qxc3 33.Bxc3 Ne3+ 34.Kg1 Bxe1 35.Rxe1) though White's position is very difficult and probably lost.
I also strongly disagree with your opinion that "..there were so many weak moves starting from move 10 that the game does not deserve to be studied" - analysing of lost games is very useful for beginners and for experts. Always.
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/28 09:26Thanks to all for your reply. I _am_ a beginner, but later this evening I will analysie your posts in details! Thanks for the discussion. Is very instructive!!
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/28 14:15potfur wrote: 1. I can't agree that the first 8 moves are ok. Yes, they were played many times by not very strong players. You show three games (Trippe-Mir game has 6.0-0 0-0 which makes some tactical difference after 8.d5!) played by not very strong players, two of the games were played in Under10 and Under14 championships. I found over 30 games in my databases. But it proves nothing!
To make a long story short please just show me how you (and Umberto) would play after Black's 6.. d5!
2. I do not recommend this particular line for White for beginners. And I think that the choice of the opening was among the reasons of losing the game. Of course I am not sure if Umberto IS a beginner, just guessing..
3. The moves: 9.a4 and 10.Nh4 were not good but.. they were not losing the game. White could play 14.b5 instead of 14.bxc5 and after 14.b5 Bd7 15.Nf3 e5 16.Ng5 Rf8 17.a6 bxa6 18.Rxa6 the position is equal imho.
4. There was still no need to lose if White played 19. g3 instead of 19.Nf3. After 19.g3 h6 20.Nf3 Bxg3 21.fxg3 Qxg3 22.Nd2 g5 23.Nb3 Qe5 I would not be happy with White's position but it is playable. And another line: instead of 26.Ne2, it was 26.e6 fxe6 7.Bxe6+ Rxe6 28.Rxe6 Kf7 29.Rae1 Rf8 30.R6e2 f3 31.Re6 Qxa5 Also 30.f3 was stronger than 30.Rec1: (30.f3 Bxf3 31.Qxf3 Bg3 32.Qc3 Qxc3 33.Bxc3 Ne3+ 34.Kg1 Bxe1 35.Rxe1) though White's position is very difficult and probably lost.
I also strongly disagree with your opinion that "..there were so many weak moves starting from move 10 that the game does not deserve to be studied" - analysing of lost games is very useful for beginners and for experts. Always.
I didn't say the moves were okay. The fact that the moves were played by toddlers doesn't negate the fact that the whole line is mentioned in the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings, as do some of the four-move mates inflicted on patzers just like me. 6...d5! indeed is the strongest move of the position, but unfortunately black missed it. Now again this is besides the point, not only because black missed it but because I personally wouldn't play 6.Be3 if I was crazy enough to try this variation. I'd be inclined to play 6.Bg5 instead. But this also besides the point, because the issue is that they've reached the 8 moves already. Now if I were to stretch your version of it, I might as well comment also that white would have been better off avoiding the variation altogether, playing 1.d4 or 1.Nf3 instead,if you get my drift. The moves 9.a4 and 10.Nh4 were not good and did not really lose the game, BUT THEY LED TO THE LOSS OF THE GAME. Tell me, would you play these moves too? You said that if White played 19.g3 instead of 19.Nf3, his game would still be playable, thus: 19.g3 h6 20.Nf3 Bxg3 21.fxg3 Qxg3 22.Nd2 g5 23.Nb3 Qe5. But I say that after 19.g3 h6 20.Nf3 Bxg3 21.fxg3 Qxg3 22.Nd2, 22...Ng4!! ends it all, my friend. The pedestrian 22...g5 just won't work. I know you can figure this one out so I need not elaborate. So tell me, will you still be happy with White's position after 22...Ng4? You said that also playable is 26.e6 fxe6 7.Bxe6+ Rxe6 28.Rxe6 Kf7 29.Rae1 Rf8 30.R6e2 f3 31.Re6 Qxa5. But your 26.e6 fxe6 27.Bxe6+ Rxe6 28.Rxe6 fails to 28...Qf7! (not 28...Kf7); e.g.: 29.Rae1 Bg3! 30.Ne4 Bd7 31.Nd6 Bxe6 32.Qxg4 Bxg4 33.Nxf7 Bh3+ 34.Kg1 Kxf7 35.fxg3 fxg3 36.Rb1 Re8-+. I guess you can easily figure out why white has to play 30.Ne4 in this variation. Well, patzers like myself will always be patzers. I do analyze my lost games, too, and find out where I went wrong. But if i really want to learn, I don't go about analyzing games played by players weaker than I am ... I analyze the games of those players much, much better than I am. There, I will surely learn. And this will be my last post on this subject. Cheers!
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/28 17:51Dear Chicaron,
you wrote:
first post: "Before 10. Nh4, both white and black were playing like masters until move 9."
second post: "There is nothing unusual about the move order of both White and Black players during the first 8 moves (..) The first 8 moves played are book moves and are unique to this variation."
third post: "I didn't say the moves were okay."
Now I understand, White and Black were playing like masters but even masters can sometimes play moves which are not ok. Couldn't agree more .
Your analysis is excellent and I like it very much. 19.g3 h6 20.Nf3 Bxg3 21.fxg3 Qxg3 22.Nd2, 22...Ng4!! ends it all and I would be very unhappy with White's position here. .. but what if 20.Nh3 Bxg3 21.fxg3 Qxg3, 22.Re3 .. ?
Umberto is a friend who asks for help to understand the lost game. What I want to say is that there was not one or two moves which lost the game. In such game, between the beginners, one should always be creative, look for opportunities to improve one's position as the chances of the opponent's blunder are high. I do not defend White's 9th and 10th move but it was not 10.Nh4 that finally lost the game. White had a chance to recover after 14.b5 Bd7 15.Nf3..
And you are right saying that you don't analyze games played by weaker players. But we are trying to help our friend Umberto here, aren't we? And for this purpose analyzing Umberto's games not Capablanca's or Anand's is the best way, isn't it? In my humble opinion of course
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/28 18:27.. and to show my point of view I would like to present a game played by kids in a school tournament:
You can prepare an interesting and useful,lasting 2 x 45min analysis of this game for the group of children. You can't tell them which exactly move lost the game (btw it was white(!) who eventually won after the long battle). You can't tell them that the game is too weak to be examined. You can help them to improve their skill. We love this game, don't we?
Re:Where is the fatal move? Is the white doomed? - 2008/01/29 00:44potfur wrote: .. and to show my point of view I would like to present a game played by kids in a school tournament:
You can prepare an interesting and useful,lasting 2 x 45min analysis of this game for the group of children. You can't tell them which exactly move lost the game (btw it was white(!) who eventually won after the long battle). You can't tell them that the game is too weak to be examined. You can help them to improve their skill. We love this game, don't we?
Dear potfur,
I do teach chess among public primary school pupils in my country. We don't send our wards to tournaments raw and unprepared to the extent that the Queen goes out early, especially on the second move. First, we teach them the basics, then concepts behind moves, then the openings, then tactics and strategy, and so forth and so on. You don't send raw recruits to battle and expect them to win the war, do you? I can therefore assure you that you'll never see the kind of game you gave as example being played by our pupils. But the most important thing we tell the kids is that chess should merely be an avocation, and should be used as a stepping stone for higher education. You see, most schools and universities in the city where I live offer full scholarships to their chess varsity players. With regards to Umberto, I already threw my two cents of advice and I was surprised why you have to stretch it to the point where we have to trade analysis on what otherwise is, to be frank about it, a rather poor and highly-flawed game. Perhaps now Umberto would realize where he made the mistakes (which is right out of the opening) and shell a few bucks for a good book to improve his understanding of the game. When I was learning chess, my late father taught me most of the rudiments. He'd tell me why a piece should go here or there, why is it necessary to play or not to play this or that move. He gave me no analysis of what could or might have been, because that would have been useless. What he wanted to convey were the IDEAS behind each move. Perhaps you could start a forum for beginners and maybe I could help you in this regard. I wanted to start it myself, but working with government is taking much of my time that I can only play online during weekends if there are no take-home assignments to do. I also write a daily chess column in a regional newspaper here and organize tournaments if I have the time. I don't play the game seriously anymore; meaning, no more tournaments for me. Been there, done that sort of thing. Incidentally, I LIKE the game but I don't LOVE it. Love requires heart, body and soul and these I cannot yield to any game, be it royal or rough. Have a nice day!
post new topic
maybe he could give us an opinion
I'll check my game again from scratch tonight. Thanks again!