26 Feb 07
Originally posted by DeepThoughtI didn't mean to sound defensive, I understood what you were getting at. 😉
I'm not saying I'd have gotten it right, I was more interested in why you played the one move instead of the other, in the hope of finding some explanation that'll help me avoid such moves - that makes it sound a worse move than it was, but you see what I'm getting at.
I really think I simply missed the critical variation, and I wasn't too keen on getting into complications with Korch.
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by cmsMasterI think that this answers my question, and justifies my point from earlier. You missed the critical variation (who doesn't) and didn't want to get into complications against a much stronger player. As a consequence you played a move where you could predict what would happen, rather than one your nose was (may have been) telling you was stronger out of fear of your opponent. The problem with this observation is that a lot of the time, against all players, the move whose consequences you can predict is the best, not objectively, but due to the fact that if you can predict what is going to happen you are both more comfortable and are less likely to go wrong in the ensuing play. The question is had Korch been a 1,200 player would you have played differently?
I didn't mean to sound defensive, I understood what you were getting at. 😉
I really think I simply missed the critical variation, and I wasn't too keen on getting into complications with Korch.
26 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by DeepThoughtActually no, my analysis was completely off, I somehow thought I would be down material after exf6. I don't think I wrote it down though, so it's hard to say where I misstepped.
I think that this answers my question, and justifies my point from earlier. You missed the critical variation (who doesn't) and didn't want to get into complications against a much stronger player. As a consequence you played a move where you could predict what would happen, rather than one your nose was (may have been) telling you was stronger out of ...[text shortened]... nsuing play. The question is had Korch been a 1,200 player would you have played differently?
Yeah, I didn't write it down, I remember thinking for some reason that I'd be a rook down..(?) It's kind of a shame I calculated wrong.
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by cmsMasterI know that miscalculating feeling 🙁
Actually no, my analysis was completely off, I somehow thought I would be down material after exf6. I don't think I wrote it down though, so it's hard to say where I misstepped.
Yeah, I didn't write it down, I remember thinking for some reason that I'd be a rook down..(?) It's kind of a shame I calculated wrong.
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by cmsMasterDuring the game I underrated 17.exf6 - only analyses it with Rybka after the game showed me that this move was best choice for white and not SO bad I thought.
Message Log:
17 Black If you took on f6 then after bxc3+ your position was hopeless. At least I think so.
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by GolubThis position I would assess as slightly better for white, since he will be able to maintain the strong pawn centre. Better is 6...Bb6, when the critical line is 7.Nc3 0-0 8.e5 dxe5 9.fxe5 Nd5 10.Bg5 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Qd5 12.Bd3. 11...Qe8? is inferior in view of the strong piece sacrifice recommended by Joe Gallagher 12.Bd3 f6 13.0-0 which I successfully played against the since banned Yozzer in Game 997086.
Just a comment on the opening..
Isn't usually 4. c3 required if white wants an advantage here? Forgive my ignorance, I do not play these openings, but it is quite interesting anyway each time anyone speaks about the King's Gambit.
1. e4 e5 2. f4 Bc5 3. Nf3 d6 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Bd2 Bxd2+
8. Nbxd2
[fen]rnbqk2r/ppp2ppp/3p1n2/8/3PPP2/5N2/PP1N2PP/R2QKB1R b KQkq - 0 8[/fen]
PS. Interesting game and comments.
As someone who plays both sides of the KG, I am fairly convinced that black's best defence is to accept the Gambit and against 3.Nf3 play 3...g5! It's what I always play as black and what gives me most problems as white.
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by Northern LadInteresting! As a player who frequently plays the KG as white I find 3. .. d5 gives me most problems (so I now always play that as black although tend to go for the Faukbeer Counter Gambit) whereas I get good results against 3. .. g5 and excellant results against Fishers Defense.
This position I would assess as slightly better for white, since he will be able to maintain the strong pawn centre. Better is 6...Bb6, when the critical line is 7.Nc3 0-0 8.e5 dxe5 9.fxe5 Nd5 10.Bg5 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Qd5 12.Bd3. 11...Qe8? is inferior in view of the strong piece sacrifice recommended by Joe Gallagher 12.Bd3 f6 13.0-0 which I successfully pla ...[text shortened]... 3.Nf3 play 3...g5! It's what I always play as black and what gives me most problems as white.
I guess it depends on individual styles and both (all 3) moves are reasonable.
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by Northern LadI think that player when he/she choose opening lines must more think which lines more suits his style, not which of them is "the best".
As someone who plays both sides of the KG, I am fairly convinced that black's best defence is to accept the Gambit and against 3.Nf3 play 3...g5! It's what I always play as black and what gives me most problems as white.
Personally I feel that gambits are not created for me. Thats the reason why I` dont like accept gambits (unless they are obviously incorrect) and why I`m playing gambits mostly against weaker players.
26 Feb 07
1 edit
Originally posted by mathmo23.b4 can be better than 23.Re4, but anyway after 23...Ra4 (with idea f6-Kf7-Rd2) black holds their advantage. If 24.Re4 then black will play 24...Kf8 with plan of doubling rooks on a-file.
How do you think white is after 23 b4 trying to create some play against black's doubled pawns?
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by KorchThe point I was trying to make is that defences like 3...d5 are fairly 'normal' chess, where white has some chances for a small plus but black should equalise with a bit of care. 3...g5! on the other hand is a definite attempt at refutation (holds on to the pawn for one thing) and is currently doing pretty well at the moment both in theory and practice. If anyone knows of a good line against 3...g5 I'd be mightily interested...
I think that player when he/she choose opening lines must more think which lines more suits his style, not which of them is "the best".
Personally I feel that gambits are not created for me. Thats the reason why I` dont like accept gambits (unless they are obviously incorrect) and why I`m playing gambits mostly against weaker players.
26 Feb 07
Originally posted by Northern LadIn my opinion after 3...d5 black can equalise. This is one of the lines why I dont play KG as white.
The point I was trying to make is that defences like 3...d5 are fairly 'normal' chess, where white has some chances for a small plus but black should equalise with a bit of care. 3...g5! on the other hand is a definite attempt at refutation (holds on to the pawn for one thing) and is currently doing pretty well at the moment both in theory and practice. If anyone knows of a good line against 3...g5 I'd be mightily interested...
Also don`t forgot that playing KG against you your opponent is wanting to play sharp tactical lines with attack - from this point of view 2....exf4 3.Nf3 g5 is all what white wants. Its good if black likes such position too, but what should play black if they wants simply get out of opening with good position? I`m not gonna declare 2...Bc5 as the best reply for black, but its good practical choice.
27 Feb 07
Originally posted by KorchOf course, 2...Bc5 is a respectable line for black. Nevertheless, I can't help feeling that if all black players played that, the King's Gambit would rival the Ruy Lopez in popularity. Many players, including strong GMs, play the Vienna or Bishop's Opening, hoping to transpose into a KG Declined.
In my opinion after 3...d5 black can equalise. This is one of the lines why I dont play KG as white.
Also don`t forgot that playing KG against you your opponent is wanting to play sharp tactical lines with attack - from this point of view 2....exf4 3.Nf3 g5 is all what white wants. Its good if black likes such position too, but what should play black if t ...[text shortened]... ition? I`m not gonna declare 2...Bc5 as the best reply for black, but its good practical choice.
27 Feb 07
Originally posted by Northern LadI totally agree, I really think white gets a fine position in the 2...Bc5 lines, the game in the OP of this thread demonstrates that to some extent - Korch is a huge favorite in any game against me, I managed to get decent chances against him until a couple of errors. This game clearly wasn't lost because of the opening - nor was it won because of it either, of course.
Of course, 2...Bc5 is a respectable line for black. Nevertheless, I can't help feeling that if all black players played that, the King's Gambit would rival the Ruy Lopez in popularity. Many players, including strong GMs, play the Vienna or Bishop's Opening, hoping to transpose into a KG Declined.