14 Jan 12
It's not enirely Black's fault. 5.Nxc6 was often a an overture to a quick draw offer.
'A drap move offering White nothing' I recall one opening books comment.
When good players meet it takes two too tango.
It appears the players just let this one go to concentrate on their other game.
Game 8830858
Ths game was much more intereresting, no comments.
IT IS STILL IN PROGRESS.
15 Jan 12
Originally posted by greenpawn34I played both of these guys. I lost both of my games against cohanas.
It's not enirely Black's fault. 5.Nxc6 was often a an overture to a quick draw offer.
'A drap move offering White nothing' I recall one opening books comment.
When good players meet it takes two too tango.
It appears the players just let this one go to concentrate on their other game.
Game 8830858
Ths game was much more intereresting, no comments.
[b]IT IS STILL IN PROGRESS.[/b]
But King and Pawn gave me a draw on one of the games against him,
when I made the draw offer, even though he was a pawn ahead. He
apparently cares more about not losing than winning.
15 Jan 12
Originally posted by RJHindsSince you think there is a win in the endgame against Kings and Pawns in this game: Game 8695484 perhaps you could describe the winning endgame technique you would have used in his place. I'm sure we could all use the instruction.
I played both of these guys. I lost both of my games against cohanas.
But King and Pawn gave me a draw on one of the games against him,
when I made the draw offer, even though he was a pawn ahead. He
apparently cares more about not losing than winning.
Thanks in advance.
15 Jan 12
Originally posted by no1marauderI would be interested in knowing the winning solution to this game too. I don't accept draws in winning positions. 'Cares more about not losing than winning'? If you thought it was a win, then why did you offer me a draw?
Since you think there is a win in the endgame against Kings and Pawns in this game: Game 8695484 perhaps you could describe the winning endgame technique you would have used in his place. I'm sure we could all use the instruction.
Thanks in advance.
15 Jan 12
Originally posted by no1marauderI do not know if there is a win or not. But if I had been in his position
Since you think there is a win in the endgame against Kings and Pawns in this game: Game 8695484 perhaps you could describe the winning endgame technique you would have used in his place. I'm sure we could all use the instruction.
Thanks in advance.
and really wanted to win, I would have played some more to see what
would happen. I am not an expert in the endings so I could have
blundered and lost, so I offered a draw because I was not sure that I
could keep the rook pawn from queening even though it looked that way.
At the time I played him he had not lost a game but had some draws.
So since he was rated higher than me I thought maybe he was just
being nice in giving me the draw.
15 Jan 12
1 edit
Originally posted by greenpawn34Instead of 2...Rg1, I am sure Kings and Pawns would have played 2...Rxh4
Endgames.
It's OK boys I've got this one.
[pgn]
[FEN "8/4R1k1/2p4p/4K3/6rP/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
{This was the final postion with Black in check. I have therefore figured out it is Black to play.}1... Kg6 2. Rc7 Rg1 {This is the Lucena back-peddle.} 3. Kf4 Rf1+ 4. Kg4 Rf6 {Notice the cunning way Black defends his c-pawn.} 5. h5 {Mate! White missd this. My conclussion....White was sandbagging.}[/pgn]
P.S. On more study it looks like 2...Rc4 is even better, if Kings and Pawns
is playing for a win.
15 Jan 12
Originally posted by greenpawn34I think thats the best and sneakiest try.
Endgames.
It's OK boys I've got this one.
[pgn]
[FEN "8/4R1k1/2p4p/4K3/6rP/8/8/8 b - - 0 1"]
{This was the final postion with Black in check. I have therefore figured out it is Black to play.}1... Kg6 2. Rc7 Rg1 {This is the Lucena back-peddle.} 3. Kf4 Rf1+ 4. Kg4 Rf6 {Notice the cunning way Black defends his c-pawn.} 5. h5 {Mate! White missd this. My conclussion....White was sandbagging.}[/pgn]
Good work Mr. Pawn.
Don't care what the box says, thats good form!
Q
15 Jan 12
2 edits
Originally posted by PhySiQThe more I look at it, I think White should try for the draw with 2.Re6+
I think thats the best and sneakiest try.
Good work Mr. Pawn.
Don't care what the box says, thats good form!
Q
to insure he can get the c6 pawn. However, after Kings and Pawns
takes the h4 pawn, I am not sure White can stop the Black Pawn from
queening without losing his Rook. I am not an expert on these endings.
P.S. Kings and Pawns has already said this ending is a draw and he is
rated over 2400 on this site so I am sure he knows better than the rest
of us because he even taught chess for 16 years, I think is what he has
written on his profile page.
17 Jan 12
Originally posted by PhySiQI asked Kings and Pawns why he violated opening theory by moving
Put the box away and grab a wooden set. Study study study.
Q
his knight 3 times in the first 5 moves of the opening, but he has not
responded. There must be some exception in this particular opening,
but I do not know what it is. Does anyone have an idea?
17 Jan 12
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds]In my opinion 3.d4 is played for quick opening development.I was a little caught off guard about the comment about Nxd4 violating opening principles by moving a piece twice in the opening.
I think Black should take the d4 pawn and white should continue his
development of his pieces by playing 4.Bc4 (Scotch Gambit). White
however, plays 4. Nxd4 in order to maintain a material balance, but
it seems to violate opening principle by moving the knight twice. The
result of White's last two moves is to allow Black to gain a tempo by
attacking with 4...Nf6.
I suppose it is literally true, but I don't think the opening principle applies in the case of recaptures-otherwise we would have to categorically state that the Open Sicilian violates opening principles.
Larsen remarked one time that he thought that the Open Sicilian was strategically suspect because white trades a center pawn for a wing pawn, but that's as far as he went.
17 Jan 12
😕
There I was just having a wee piece of fun with DJ. Talking out of the
back of head. Having a wee joke.
But as Paul said, some of the comments have got me too a wee bit worried.
A few I suspect are playing along. Q in the ending joke.
But....
I'm waiting for someone to tell me that 5.Nxc6 is not dull....
And it is certainly NOT a violation of an opening principle.
Unless you want to argue with a World Champion.
Kasparov (v Karpov in 1991) played 5.Nxc6 in that postion.
It is main line theory, has been since Mieses played it in the year dot.
The sharpest follow up is then 6.e5.
Perhaps I should have pulled my 'off to bed' gag a few moves later.
Korch warned me on numerous occassions not to go to far.
"People will believe everything you say."
I hope not. Else we are all in trouble. 🙂
So to make it up to DJ I will now seriously take a look at the game in the question.