Originally posted by buffalobillthe fact that Petrosian lost with fxg just reinforces in my mind what a move it is - dynamic and tactical. Petrosian was a good player but not know to play aggressively or tactically if positional factors could be used - I personally find his games on the whole boring and it's no suprise he lost playing fxg - it's not his style - I'm suprised he played it.
gxf6 looks flawed particular since Petrosian lost playing it. I guess you've got the choice of staying on the line and play for a draw with Nxf6. Or, you could take IM off the line with Qxf6. This line looks okay with no obvious flaws. However, I'd stick with the percentages and play Nxf6.
Call me overconfident, but the simple Nxf6 will probably take it for us.
Ironman cannot play Ne5 immediately due to tactical reasons, well, I suppose he could, but it wouldn't be his best move right away.
Nxf6 maintains our ironclad pawn structure and still allows us castle on either end. It also threatens a d5 outpost that Ironman will find hard to kill (perhabs he would play/risk c4?). It also has an added bonus for tactical reasons, notice that after Nxf6, our queen is indirectly threatening a discovery on Ironman's undefended rook. He simply has to to something to deal with this minor threat. This gains us time, and gives us the iniative. So although Nxf6, in the eye's of the beholder, may look as drawish as it can be, it is the more agressive move of them all, it's also the best defensive move, so when you have a single move that is the best offensive/defensive move simultaneously, it should be easy to pick that move:
VOTE: Nxf6
I'm liking qxf6 right now. The knight post at d5 isn't worth a whole lot right now in my mind, as there's still a pawn on the board to knock it off. Also, moving the knight to f6 takes it farther away from the white king. g takes f6 of course gives double pawns, on the other hand it does prevent the white knight from taking the e5 outpost. Keep in mind that if 16... qxf6 white can't move the knight right away or he loses the rook. The rook should go to g4 to allow the knight to move, as Re4 is met by 0-0-0 followed by Nc5 pinning the pawn to the queen, removing our king from where white's pieces are and in addition forking white's queen and rook. so after 16... Qxf6 17. Rg4 0-0-0 prevents the knight from coming to e5 and in fact even threatens the queen.
Game 868388
if we play Qxf6, then surely ironman will cover the f4 square with something during the next few moves, either his g-pawn, queen or second rook will do fine, then just slide his rook over from h4 and all our queen can do is retreat .. leaving his rook ready for action ... i do not like this .. we willl probably lose. :'(
if we play gxf6; against a weak player i would encourage this, it opens a way in for our cramped rooks if our opponent plays poorly and lets us use it ... but here we are still the underdogs. we will be taking a backward step, and probably be slaughtered for it. :'(
if we play Nxf6 we can play for a draw.🙂
i say in the next round we not only have Nxf6 as an option in the votes ... but also:
Nxf6 offering ironman a draw and request a rematch with us as white.
lets not waste our time and ironman's time if we really believe the draw is inevitable.
lets bask in the glory of a drawn game as black against ironman 😏
then, when we are white we go for the win 😉
Originally posted by Vengoropatubusthis thread is not the place to cast your vote ... that will happen in a different thread soon.
On second thought, I'm on board with nxf6 now. Not for the reasons the above poster cited though.
this thread is to explain your reasons so that others can be better informed.
please tell us your reasons.
Originally posted by ExiledI agree with Exiled's analysis. The N goes to a great square on f6. Our pawn structure is our strength. I can't see any weaknesses in our position. If white wants to play this thing out deep into an endgame we're fine. I say we keep our pawn structure in tact. No need to create a weakness that IM can attack.
Call me overconfident, but the simple Nxf6 will probably take it for us.
Ironman cannot play Ne5 immediately due to tactical reasons, well, I suppose he could, but it wouldn't be his best move right away.
Nxf6 maintains our ironclad pawn structure and still allows us castle on either end. It also threatens a d5 outpost that Ironman will find hard to ki ...[text shortened]... best offensive/defensive move simultaneously, it should be easy to pick that move:
VOTE: Nxf6
Mostly because my entire line is avoided by Qa3 after black's 0-0-0. In addition, the e7 square is better for the queen anyway because its transit to the queenside doesn't have to go through a pawn.
The way I see the position right now, black can't castle kingside. If he does, the rook comes over to threaten the g-pawn, the knight goes up to its e5 post preventing the g-pawns advancement the queen gets behind it to create a batter and if it moves it just comes into heaver fire from the new knight placement at e5. Could this be prevented? probably. The knight on d7 controls the white knight's e5 outpost, which is an important central square anyway, so other than it being on a semi-open file, it's just fine where it is. The advantage to moving it is that it prevents white's rook from entering the scene at g4. Unfortunately, to do this black's f pawn gets blocked and would be unable to move until we move the knight off. That's unfortunate because the f pawn has the potential to control both e5 and less importantly g5 which are the white knight's only possible entrance squares into the game. On the other hand, white's knight can't really do anything from that e5 square, except attack our knight, and he's going to move anyway. What I'd really like to do is break into white's queenside obviously, since the king is there. Possibly moving Nb6 and Qb4 then Na4. I'm worried about the kingside though. Taking with either the knight or the queen takes two extra moves to execute the plan, and I don't like doubling pawns. Also keep in mind that the knight moves are quickly silenced by a quick simple Qb3. One series I had been looking at was Nxf6 reclaiming lost material, and c4 preventing the knight from reaching its outpost and that's pretty ugly for black. Qb4 could be good here, but Pa3 rears its ugly head here and black must retreat back to e7 or b6. Neither of which are very good squares. That was pretty much a long winded way of saying that black can't attack white's king yet without using both knight and queen.
So if we can't attack the queenside, and castling kingside could crumble under positional pressure, we're left with fighting kingside and castling queenside. This gives extra credibility to the threatened discovered attack created by Nxf6. In response to nxf6, white could play 17. Ne5 Nd7 threatening the rook and knight at the same time, but white dodges easily with Rg4 beginning to put pressure on g pawn. If black takes the knight, the pawn takes and black is pretty much forced to play c5 lest white get queen rook and rook aligned on the d file. after they get there, black moving to d7 brings checkmate so black would either have to castle or break a way for the rook on the queenside. At this time, white has better mobility and could bring the rook and queen battery to any file due to blacks reserved pawn movement. And I'm losing my train of thought here. I'll be back when my mind is ready to think again. Sorry about the abrupt end, but bye.
Another important question to ask is, IF Ironman gets his knight to e5, what will happen?
The awnser is, surprisingly, not much. Just imagine the knight on e5 right about now, you will see it simply doesn't do that much. Knight outposts are only good if they threaten tactics, forks, peices, pawns, etc. On e5, I don't see Ironman's knight threatening much of anything (at least immediately, so we have time to chase it off if it goes there) unless we castle kingside, but remember, we still have a choice in that.
Also, has Ironman ever lost a game against a black player? This is for fun, why go for the draw? Let's make some history and test his endgame metal, besides, the game would probably be instructive for those who wish to study endgames.
I am quite naturally good at endgames for my rating. I win endgames like the one we are about to go in quite often. Granted, they were not against Ironman, but personally I think Gary Kasparov would have trouble winning an endgame as white against us in this position if we don't make any stupid blunders or endgame tactical oversights.
A lot of people are saying we are still cramped and in trouble, that's an illusion, cramping is only a problem if your peices are inactive and uncordinated. If you still manage good active and cordinated peices, and have no weaknesses, yet you are cramped, in such rare cases, it's better to be cramped, as the one who has more space is perhabs overextended somewhat and ahs more endgame weaknesses. Anyways, I'm explaining modern chess theory I often use in weird openings and endings that isn't accepted as cannon truth among top GM's, I'm "different" that way, so, for now, I'll shut my mouth. The queens and rooks are still around and it's still very much a middle game, but I think the endgame will be at a slight advantage for us, and I will explain this better once/if we get there.
The choice between Nxf6 and gxf6 boils down to what kind of game you want to play rather than which one is objectively better.
Nxf6 leads to a balanced postion, probab;y leading to a long, technical, manoevering phase, where we have good chances of holding a draw, as long as we play accurately and avoid making any significant mistakes. Qxf6 is similar, but with a less desirable arrangement of pieces for black.
gxf6 leads to an unbalanced more open postion, with more tactical opportunities for both sides. It is the more risky option, but the more interesting one. It runs some risk of losing, but gives us some chance of winning.
Nxf6 is the accountant's move, gxf6 the artist's one.
We have challed Ironman to a game of chess, I say we give him one ... gxf6.