02 Aug 08
Originally posted by TyrannosauruschexLooks complete rubbish to me. I think he overlooked 7. ... Ng4 and tried to bluff his way out of it.
I just saw a move get made - I think they are back.
Jeff Horners game is looking exciting - he is either a genius or a madman, judging from the position he has gone into.
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by Northern LadI suppose Black could force off White's bishop on c4 (8.g3 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Ne5), which might have meant that White had slight weaknesses around his king. Maybe he had a senior moment and thought that after 9. ... Ne5 he couldn't play his queen to e2 because of the black knight on d4? (which, of course, isn't there any more!)
I tend to agree. It's very strange to see Jeff playing this way. Why couldn't he have played simply 8.g3?
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by Fat LadyIn horner-Lalic I think 7.Bc4 is simply bad (although it was played by Kasparov back in 2003 against Leko). Theory moves on however, and 7..Ng4 (a novelty played by Eljanov back in 2004) gives black a very easy game, if not a clear advantage. In the notes to that game incidentally, 8.Bxf7+ is given a ? with the comment 'does not work'. On Chessbase 7.Bc4 has a very poor score.
I suppose Black could force off White's bishop on c4 (8.g3 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Ne5), which might have meant that White had slight weaknesses around his king. Maybe he had a senior moment and thought that after 9. ... Ne5 he couldn't play his queen to e2 because of the black knight on d4? (which, of course, isn't there any more!)
I think the line given by Fat Lady is correct: "I suppose Black could force off White's bishop on c4 (8.g3 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Ne5), which might have meant that White had slight weaknesses around his king."
Black has the 2 bishops, and a clear plan of exploiting the weak white squares around the white king by putting the bishop on b7 and playing for ...f5.
Anyway, an exciting game to be sure; maybe Horner was hoping to confuse/surprise Lalic - bluffng him with what looks like a dangerous attack but in reality isn't?
02 Aug 08
1 edit
Twelve year old Felix Ynojosa beat up Graham Buckley! I went to a junior tournament run by Nick Pert a few weeks ago and my son (then graded 27!) had to play Felix in the first round. When it became clear that Felix didn't have any real competition in the tournament I offered to play him myself, but fortunately for me Nick decided to let a much weaker adult play to make up the numbers and Felix won the event with 5/5. He's definitely one to watch.
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by Rene-ClaudeA great result by Davis to be sure:
Lee Davis breaks his duck! Is this the turning point?
🙄
34 Davis, Lee.............. 2071 (0) ½ - ½ Coates, David H......... 2037 (1)
He's running out of weak opponents though. Could still be a difficult second week for him.
02 Aug 08
Originally posted by Fat LadyI didn't mean to suggest that 8.g3 was particularly good for white. It isn't, but at least it leads to a halfway playable position unlike the unsound piece sac as played.
I suppose Black could force off White's bishop on c4 (8.g3 Nxf3+ 9.Qxf3 Ne5), which might have meant that White had slight weaknesses around his king. Maybe he had a senior moment and thought that after 9. ... Ne5 he couldn't play his queen to e2 because of the black knight on d4? (which, of course, isn't there any more!)
02 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Fat LadyI didn't think a FIDE 2037 was considered a "weak player" in this tournament.
A great result by Davis to be sure:
34 Davis, Lee.............. 2071 (0) ½ - ½ Coates, David H......... 2037 (1)
He's running out of weak opponents though. Could still be a difficult second week for him.
EDIT: Well I guess he's among the lowest 10 or so, but then so is Davis.