Originally postedGeez....will you guys stop calling me bitter!
Seeing the bitterness of xs
I've played two games against Ironman31 in the Xmas Grand 2004 III, and learned (as white) that when you make moves he expects, trouble follows. Applying this to logic with the black pieces I faired much better.
In the games posted by tmetzler: (which some posters here have not reviewed)
Game 761974 Game 783257
Game 541191 Game 725818 Game 822066
I thought fckallie and SteveC did better not exchanging bishops.
If the "if,then" scenario of Qb6 plays out as described than yes, it would be weak. I like it for three reasons: 1.) he does not expect it. 2.) it creates a forced move. 3.) we keep our bishop. How about:
12.... Qb6
13. O-O-O Nf6 (he may not castle Qb3?)
14 ??? Be7 (a trap to spring later)
My point being that any line described after Qb6 is subject to what white plays. Unfortunately I can't say what that move will be.
There is no sense in including Qb6 in the vote, as it's already been voted down.
...pram rolling off into the sunset.
xs, I do agree with you in a sense, ppl shouldn't bash you for suggesting alternatives, the point of this kinda freelance voting is so people can perhabs consider/spot non mechanical moves as a group that individuals normally would not spot, this is our only way to actually beat him, if not, then as stated already, it's simply Ironman against the best player who votes here, and we all know that's an easy win for Iornman.
The problem is, we shouldn't go crazy and treat the game like any other ordinary game and play naturally. Trying to "do something", "stir things up", or "play imbalanced" in some silly attempt to try and confuse a GM player won't work. Consult the chess academies in Chessmaster2k, all good players agree this is phycologicly a bad way to approach a game against a good player. GM's are not afraid of complications, that's why they are GM's, they revel in them. If you wouldn't play that move against say, a 1500 rater xs, why play it against Ironman of all people?
Your variation leads to complications, tactics, in an inferior position for us. As interesting as it is, and complicated, I don't think Iornman will have trouble baging a tactical game where HE has a SLIGHT ADVANTAGE, if we want to play tactics with Ironman, better we have the edge, but even then he is deadly, so winning a tactical game were he has a textbook advantage is probably routine to a 700 win plus player who probably wins such games routinely, as I'm sure many players have the "what do I have to lose" attitude and they just go for it, all but to be schooled.
Iornman's tactics are just nuts anyways xs, I'm not saying we should avoid tactics at all costs as that is too timid, but to embark on tactical quests, against Ironman where he has more options then us, nope, sorry, don't think this is too wise. Our goal is to win/draw, not make the game an issue of chess magazine because "it's interesting".
I agree with flexmore, it's one way to lose, and even you admit the situation changes dramaticly depending on white's play and white has a lot of responses so it's "unclear", well, I'm tell you Ironman WILL find the best move CRYSTAL CLEAR, and it may perhabs be a move we never considered. Playing a game against this guy of, "oh, let's make the game imbalanced, complex, and trap like, and maybe he won't find the best move and we can exploit a mistake" is one way to lose quickly. He DOESN'T MAKE MISTAKES guys, NEVER, so we have to be extra careful to do the same.
Originally posted by xsI couldn't help it 🙂 Please accept my sincere apologies.
Geez....will you guys stop calling me bitter!
As for the move in question after 12...Qb6 13.O-O-O Ngf6 I've been looking at 14.Ne5 (the most logical move considering White's layout) and now 14...Nxe5 15.dxe5 Nd5 /what else/ 16.c4 seems to win the knight, unless I am missing something.
Is there a suitable alternative to 14...Nxe5? if not the move 12...Qb6 is flawed.
This is a difficult one because after: 13... Bd6 14. Bxd6 Qxd6 15. Ne4 Qf1 (or else 15... Rg4 losing at least a pawn) 16. Ne5 0-0-0 and white has the advantage, but I think the attack is mostly blunted. White, though, is easily able to switch the Queen to the left flank and from there start up new pressure aided by the knights.
b6 has promise, but it still looks wrong.
Originally posted by ilywrinI do feel stupid. This variation turns out to be favorable for black after 16...Qd8! attacking the rook at h4 and wining the tempo to save the knight.
As for the move in question after 12...Qb6 13.O-O-O Ngf6 I've been looking at 14.Ne5 (the most logical move considering White's layout) and now 14...Nxe5 15.dxe5 Nd5 /what else/ 16.c4 seems to win the knight, unless I am missing something.
Is there a suitable alternative to 14...Nxe5? if not the move 12...Qb6 is flawed.
So 12...Qb6 stands fully rehabilitated now.
Originally posted by ilywrinWell spotted, Sherlock. So in this line: 12...Qb6 13.O-O-O Ngf6 14.Ne5 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Nd5 16. Be3 (nullifies Qd8) Qc7 17. Re4 O-O-O and honours even.
I do feel stupid. This variation turns out to be favorable for black after 16...Qd8! attacking the rook at h4 and wining the tempo to save the knight.
So 12...Qb6 stands fully rehabilitated now.
Maybe better for White is 15. Bxe5 but Black is able to bring a lot of pressure on the Pawn on d4 perhaps to winning advantage. I'm a believer! Qb6 is it.
Originally posted by buffalobillI'm still a bit worried about the last two variations posted.
Well spotted, Sherlock. So in this line: 12...Qb6 13.O-O-O Ngf6 14.Ne5 Nxe5 15.dxe5 Nd5 16. Be3 (nullifies Qd8) Qc7 17. Re4 O-O-O and honours even.
Maybe better for White is 15. Bxe5 but Black is able to bring a lot of pressure on the Pawn on d4 perhaps to winning advantage. I'm a believer! Qb6 is it.
Ilywrin, have u looked a bit further on in that variation? I'm not sure IM wouldn't mind saccing the rook, by playing 17. cxd5 Qxh4 18. dxc6 That leaves us in quite a bit of trouble IMO, although I haven't found a crushing white attack yet, there are numerous different ways of playing it, and IM is a much better player than me.
buffalobill, I'm not sure that's how it would go. While your line looks good, and I can't really find fault with it, I just have this to say...IM isn't going to play a move which will leave him in a weaker position than another move. So basically, if one of these variations is to be played, then my guess is it will be the one ilywrin outlines above, because, while looking good in theory, the 16. Be3 is a weaker move, IMHO.
Having said all that, Qb6 has been shown to be quite valid, and will be added to the vote.
D
Game 868388
Vote open.
Vote here please... http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=20504&page=%201
D
Originally posted by RagnorakI am sorry I was a bit sick these last few days. I will give it a thorough investigation today but just a few notes:
I'm still a bit worried about the last two variations posted.
Ilywrin, have u looked a bit further on in that variation? I'm not sure IM wouldn't mind saccing the rook, by playing 17. cxd5 Qxh4 18. dxc6 That leaves us in quite a bit of trouble IMO, although I haven't found a crushing white attack yet, there are numerous different ways of playing it, and IM is a much better player than me.
18...Qxf4+? seems to lose, so the candidates are 18...Rd8 and 18...Be7. I personally prefer 18...Rd8, for 18...Be7 19.Qd7+ Kf8 c7 (or cxb) seems a clear win.
So the variation that needs to be seen is 18...Rd8. After 19.Qxd8 Qxd8 20. Rxd8 Kxd8 21.cxb Kc7 (thank God for the pawn at e5) Black seem to be holding pretty well.
19.c7!? is along with 19.cxb7 the moves to be considered. However, 19.c71? is the more dangerous. Now I believe it is almost forced 19...Rxd3 20.Rxd3! (20.c8Q+? Qd8!) 20...Qxf4+ (for the lack of a better move). 21.Kb1! Qxc4 22.Rd8+ Ke7 23.c8Q Qxc8 24.Rxc8 Kd7 with a complicated position, though it would seem Black have enough resources to draw.
Originally posted by RagnorakMy comment(Exchanging Bishops is not development) was in reply to:
Hey xs,
can u explain how exchanging a non-developed piece for a developed piece isn't development?
D
richjohnson posted
"Dancing around with the Q wont help solve black's underdevelopment problem."
As for explanation...I guess its just a difference in play styles. Imho, development is more than "getting the pieces out" for exchange. Exchanges with no positional or tactical benefit hold value in accelerating the game, only if you have a strategic advantage over your opponent. Generally used to gain time, gain space, or create immediate threats.
As (after the exchange) white's Ne4 again puts the question to our queen, she will continue to dance. What have we developed?
Note: I realize my style of play is unorthodox to most, and my move suggestions unpopular to the point of disdain...however, sometimes the unusual becomes the variation.