Only Chess
18 Jul 03
18 Jul 03
Originally posted by lloydkYes, that is a beauty.
Looking for interesting games played with Alekhine's Defense! My favorite (even though black lost) is Bronstein-Ljubojevic, 1973. For those who haven't seen it:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1034661
Here is a game where I played the Alekhine against Javierchaca, and lost : game n° 108689. It features strong queenside attack from Javierchaca, and a nice positional piece-for pawns sacrifice at move 22.Nxd5. He managed to keep my pieces away from the queenside and I couldn't stop his pawns.
If anyone has comments or suggestions, they are very welcome.
Gil.
18 Jul 03
I have a question. Being essentially a novice I notice that in your game example you resign the game. It appears, at least to my eyes, that there is a lot of game left there and the outcome is not at all decided yet.
My question is this, how did you determine that resigning at that position was the correct course of action? At the very least I could imagine a blood bath of exchanging pieces that could have changed the board.
I do resign games but when a match is much more developed and the imbalance of material is much more pronounced.
18 Jul 03
Originally posted by gregofthewebHe quits 'cause those pawns are unstoppable.
I have a question. Being essentially a novice I notice that in your game example you resign the game. It appears, at least to my eyes, that there is a lot of game left there and the outcome is not at all decided yet.
My question is this, how did you determine that resigning at that position was the correct course of action? At the very least I cou ...[text shortened]... s but when a match is much more developed and the imbalance of material is much more pronounced.
18 Jul 03
What am I missing.
If you sacrifice the rook at f5 and take the pawn at c5 it makes for a very interesting situation that develops into clearing that side of the board I believe.
rook takes pawn, rook takes rook.
Then black can take the pawn at d6 with his rook white has to move his bishop and black can stop the pawn at a5 with his rook.
If white takes the first rook with his queen black takes the second pawn with his queen and the situation is still undecided.
Maybe I'm just rambling.
18 Jul 03
Originally posted by gregofthewebAs said before, the pawns are unstoppable, that's why I resigned at that stage against a well known strong player.
What am I missing.
If you sacrifice the rook at f5 and take the pawn at c5 it makes for a very interesting situation that develops into clearing that side of the board I believe.
rook takes pawn, rook takes rook.
Then black can take the pawn at d6 with his rook white has to move his bishop and black can stop the pawn at a5 with his rook.
I ...[text shortened]... he second pawn with his queen and the situation is still undecided.
Maybe I'm just rambling.
Let's see about your suggestion:
after my 33....Rf5, could follow (in line with your suggestion):
34.a5 Rxc5
35.Rxc5 Rxd6
36.Rxd6 Qxd6
37.Ba4 and I have to loose another tempo protecting my bottom line from mate. White is the exchange up, and still an unstoppable pawn. Neither Ne8, nor Qf8 or Qd8 or Qe7 or Kf8 can change this.
I hope this answers your question. Feel free to ask further.
Gil.
18 Jul 03
Gil, that's a really interesting game. I have a question though (forgive me if it's a little amateurish.) On move 18, rather than playing 18. ... Bg5, what about playing b6? Would this have been able to break up his advancing pawns sufficiently to make the game winnable? Or is the threat of a4 on the next move after an exchange and his again having side by side pawn advance (this time in the a and b file) too negative of a prospect to consider? Also, chances are he would not have made the knight sac since while your d pawn is controlling the center it is not as important to the advance of the a or b pawns.
-mike
19 Jul 03
1 edit
Originally posted by sintubinThanks Sintubin!
Yes, that is a beauty.
Here is a game where I played the Alekhine against Javierchaca, and lost : game n° 108689. It features strong queenside attack from Javierchaca, and a nice positional piece-for pawns sacrifice at move 22.Nxd5. He ...[text shortened]... ne has comments or suggestions, they are very welcome.
Gil.
Great game from both parts, I don't knew it.
Now, I don't want to spoil things, but...
Someone (I don't want to mention who, but is more than evident) has treated Javier as a "bad manners" person (he stated this implicity in his profile) because Javier (who was timed out very recently by this person) continued a dificult endgame that he (the owner of the profile) consider as a technical loss...
HE may be a very good player, but isn't by no way GOD...
I have analyzed the endgame in question, and takes me (YMMV) almost between 10 and 20 moves to decide it. And the minimum slip from the winning side, and the game may result in a draw.
So, Mr. God, please descend from your horse. Put your feet on the earth...
There are some valuable chess players that really BELONG here.
As far as I know, Javier will finish his current game with Bennett, and then he will leave RHP.
He is not a Pawn Star, but is here from two years ago.
And he isn't a pawn star because he lacks the money to subscribe. Of course, as he hasn't a female screen name, he didn't get a sponsor.
It is a pity to see a good person, a gifted chess player and a good friend depart from RHP.
19 Jul 03
Originally posted by LittleBearI must protest against the 'female handle gets sponsor' part!
Thanks Sintubin!
Great game from both parts, I don't knew it.
Now, I don't want to spoil things, but...
Someone (I don't want to mention who, but is more than evident) has treated Javier as a "bad manners" person (he stated this implicity in his profile) because Javier (who was timed out very recently by this person) continued a dificult endga ...[text shortened]...
It is a pity to see a good person, a gifted chess player and a good friend depart from RHP.
As far as I know,Miss Hope is the only sponsored person around here,so it must refer to her.I sponsored her,without knowing who I was sponsoring.The female handle had nothing to do with it!It could have been your friend Javier!
The rest of your post,I agree with😏
19 Jul 03
Originally posted by SirLoseALot
I must protest against the 'female handle gets sponsor' part!
As far as I know,Miss Hope is the only sponsored person around here,so it must refer to her.I sponsored her,without knowing who I was sponsoring.The female handle had nothing to do with it!It could have been your friend Javier!
The rest of your post,I agree with😏
SirLoseALot,
no intention from my part to relate this case with that of you and Miss Hope. Nevertheless, it is evident that a female nick can atract (and it will do) for sure, sooner or later, the attention of any guy here... 😀
Regards
The bear of little brain
19 Jul 03
Originally posted by LittleBearYeah😞 We,males,are a sorry bunch😳
SirLoseALot,
no intention from my part to relate this case with that of you and Miss Hope. Nevertheless, it is evident that a female nick can atract (and it will do) for sure, sooner or later, the attention of any guy here... 😀
Regards
The bear of little brain
Our minds get overruled by a 15-20cm thingy🙄
19 Jul 03
Originally posted by LittleBearThat is very true. But the attention is not always positive, as in the case of SirLoseALot. A female nic seems to attract a fair bit of negativity from certain male players around here. Just look at the seemingly endless conversation about Miss Hope when she first arrived. The pooor girl had not had a chance to settle down and complete one game before it started.
SirLoseALot,
no intention from my part to relate this case with that of you and Miss Hope. Nevertheless, it is evident that a female nick can atract (and it will do) for sure, sooner or later, the attention of any guy here... 😀
Regards
The bear of little brain
19 Jul 03
Originally posted by legionnaireAfter b6, he would probably have played c6, to be followed later by b5, creating a protected passed pawn. I think my best move after that was still Bg5 to free f6 for my knight. Rc8 was also possible, but still b5 would follow.
Gil, that's a really interesting game. I have a question though (forgive me if it's a little amateurish.) On move 18, rather than playing 18. ... Bg5, what about playing b6? Would this have been able to break up his advancing pawns sufficiently to make the game winnable? Or is the threat of a4 on the next move after an exchange and his again having ...[text shortened]... wn is controlling the center it is not as important to the advance of the a or b pawns.
-mike
But this is by no means enough to state that your move wouldn't have been better in the end, perhaps even on the contrary. Thanks for the remark.
Gil.