Originally posted by wolfgang59Yes indeed.
Beautiful endgame.
Almost as if he was using the RHP analyze board!
I'd like to see how Mr. Pawn throws up this game - he's a much better writer than I am. Analysis board or not 😉. Anything to put us back on the chess topic in the chess forum. I'll be looking for a Mr. Pawn article here soon...
Q
"I'd like to see how Mr. Pawn throws up this game."
🙂
I only write what I think know about and this is a Korchnoi game.
("What is he up too?" I've often said to myself as I sit there and stare at an
unannotated move in a game, "What is he up too." )
But as this is a classical KP game I'm on home turf and can follow what is going
on.....up to a point. I'll have a bash till I get stuck.
15....a6 I'm stuck. Time to talk my way out of it.
Black to play.
Korchnoi wants to carry on with his Kingside attack but wants White to play d5
to lock the centre. Flank attacks are best met with action in the centre.
Dibyendu Barua is no dope and he won't play d5 unless he wants to.
So Korch fed him some positional bait. 15...a6
"Look. Play d5 my Knight goes back to b8 and the pawn on a6 will not let me play
Na6 - c5. You must be happy with that?"
White played 16.d5.
Then a few moves later. I'm stuck again.
Black played 21...b5 which is one of those Korchnoi moves.
Why make pawn moves on the side you are not attacking. (anti rule of thumb)
Was Qe3 hitting b6 a threat? How about Bc8 and Nd7.
The move 21....b5 chases the Knight across to the Kingside where it played an
important role in defending.....Korchnoi I hate you!
After that there seems to be loads going on. Black's attack looks good,
White's counter attack looks good. Moves 35-40 honk of time trouble.
40...Qf3+ looks good for Black. Was move 40 the time control and
Korch as usual deep in TT? That is the only explanation for how he missed that.
"Mr. Dibyenduh was in deep thought in the above position."
I strongly suspect that move 41 & 42 were was also blitz'd by both sides.
White played 42.Qg4 and Korch took the Queens off. 42...Qxg4.
If a gumboil hacker like me can see 42...Qxh2+ 43.KxN Qxb2
(I'll take any form of counter play to avoid an ending.) 🙂
I'm very surprised Korchnoi missed it. (TT?)
That position is not easy for White. The b-pawn is massive.
Threat Q+ and b2.
Anway......The smoke clears and White has fluked an ending.
Knights hate Rook Pawns this has been known since Eve ate the apple.
(I love using biblical terminology when I know RJ is watching.)
1.a5 and the pawn promotes.
and the phrase;
" A Knight cannot defend pawns with separate colored promotion squares."
Wins this years Einstein's 'stating the bleeding obvious' award.
And here...(did that Knight really need to go to a8?)
The note reads: "That [b8] knight needs to stay dominated...Be8!"
How about the Bishop in danger of being trapped by b5 and Be8 is the only move.
After that it's a straight forward win based on the rule that passed pawns
must be pushed and the Knight cannot handle a Rook's pawn.
"This is one of the most magnificent endings ever played."
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me that is just another flawed GM game
with missed chances and trick in the ending. Nothing special.
Knight v Rook's Pawn. The Defence
With the pawn on h6 If Black has access to d6, c8 and b5 he draws.
You have seen how to do it, now do it. Now this is beautiful.
If White can get his knight to f1 or g4 with the pawn on h6 then it's drawn.
Grigoriev 1832
Originally posted by greenpawn34My opponents Knights have always been a problem for me OTB because
"I'd like to see how Mr. Pawn throws up this game."
🙂
I only write what I think know about and this is a Korchnoi game.
("What is he up too?" I've often said to myself as I sit there and stare at an
unannotated move in a game, "What is he up too." )
But as this is a classical KP game I'm on home turf and can follow what is going
on.....up ...[text shortened]... 6... Kf2 7. Nh2 Kg2 8. Ng4 Kg3 9. Ne3 h2 10. Nf1+[/pgn]
of my lack of visualization. I seem to always get caught in a knight's fork
when I think I am winning.
RJ, there is no way on Earth that you can be worried about a knight fork with a rating of 2200+. Sometimes I'm caught out by them, but at the end of a 3+ move combo only. What you say and how you play are so so different, hence these repeated questions of legitimacy. Starting a thread with "can someone use a computer for me to check a random pgn" doesn't deflect suspicion in the slightest.
I disagree with Smitty, RJ threads are not the best. I almost miss skeeter...
Originally posted by morgskiYou are talking about RHP where there is no visualization problem. I am
RJ, there is no way on Earth that you can be worried about a knight fork with a rating of 2200+. Sometimes I'm caught out by them, but at the end of a 3+ move combo only. What you say and how you play are so so different, hence these repeated questions of legitimacy. Starting a thread with "can someone use a computer for me to check a random pgn" doesn't def ...[text shortened]... slightest.
I disagree with Smitty, RJ threads are not the best. I almost miss skeeter...
talking about OTB play where I have to move the pieces with my mind
and try to remember where they are in a plan of attack or defense.
Originally posted by morgskieveryone has their weaknesses? just the other day we were calling him a cheat
RJ, there is no way on Earth that you can be worried about a knight fork with a rating of 2200+. Sometimes I'm caught out by them, but at the end of a 3+ move combo only. What you say and how you play are so so different, hence these repeated questions of legitimacy. Starting a thread with "can someone use a computer for me to check a random pgn" doesn't def ...[text shortened]... slightest.
I disagree with Smitty, RJ threads are not the best. I almost miss skeeter...
but now we know he's a good player ? so now he is a sandbagger idk ? give him a break before he shoots himself in the head.
Originally posted by RJHindsRJHinds, this is nonsense. Even I know this. I'm a bad player at the chess table and I'm better here. And indeed the possibility of setting up a board with the position from my game and moving pieces around is partly the reason why I'm better here. But not this much better. There's a simple reason for this. I'm bad at chess but I know my math. Finding a three move combination when you have no idea where to look has too high a complexity to be tractable when there's no computer involved. In a game I'm playing right now, I missed a one-move shot from my opponent. He was kind enough to let me remove a conditional move I told him about. But if he didn't, and he had every right to do so, I would have to resign. The shot was immediately obvious, and I can't believe I didn't see it -- and yet I didn't. I'd been moving the pieces around like crazy before that, but it didn't help. Simply, I happened not to move that particular piece to that particular square.
You are talking about RHP where there is no visualization problem. I am
talking about OTB play where I have to move the pieces with my mind
and try to remember where they are in a plan of attack or defense.
I can agree that a mistake like this might never happen to an a bit stronger player. But others will. The complexity of finding a combo by simply moving the pieces around grows exponentially with the number of half-moves. No way a player who doesn't know the appropriate patterns can fight a 2200+ player and win. Maybe once, by extreme luck, twice by unimaginable luck.
PS: Please note that I'm not asking for any comments on the game. I think it's fine to say what I've said about it because my opponent and I have exchanged messages about the situation and it's common knowledge for us now.
Originally posted by RJHindsAgain, this brings it back to my question - Do you think we are all stupid?
You are talking about RHP where there is no visualization problem. I am
talking about OTB play where I have to move the pieces with my mind
and try to remember where they are in a plan of attack or defense.
Originally posted by WanderingKingYou can delete conditional moves as long as they have not been automatically played. Just edit you conditional moves.
... In a game I'm playing right now, I missed a one-move shot from my opponent. He was kind enough to let me remove a conditional move I told him about. But if he didn't, and he had every right to do so, I would have to resign. The shot was immediately obvious, and I can't believe I didn't see it -- and yet I didn't. I'd been moving the pieces around l ...[text shortened]... didn't help. Simply, I happened not to move that particular piece to that particular square.
I've accidentally set up blunders in the past and removed them in this way.