Smash-A_Bashkuev 2

[A_Bashkuev]

Didn't like them - especially 13 ...e4. I've already taught by you don't come ahead by naked on the sabre. Qc7? You prefer to cave in really closed defence? Yeah, I've got rally weak bishop in this chain, but you preferred to see me with good things but deep in some trenches? I've tried to have as many chances on counter-attack as possible, but bringing my Queen onto c7 square was really anticlimactic from my point of view. By the way, are you sure that Kh8 is already invalid? My Qc7 is admitting of this fact, but our position still keeps some of my options open! It is no statement that I have intention to make Kh8 move . Yep, I've lost with my white bishop main part of my possible impact (& made your g3 move possible), but... I think I don't lose this game yet. It's gloomy & doory , but it isn't lost completely

10.d5 Ne7
11.e4 c6
12.Bg5 cxd5
13.exd5 Bf5
14.Bxf6 gxf6
15.Nd2 Rc8
16.Qb3 b6
17.Ba6 Rc7
18.Nc4 Bd3
19.Rd1 Bxc4
20.Bxc4 Ng6

 

[Smash]

Maybe you will play Rc5 now

21.Nb5


Oh no you havn't lost by any means.Qc7 is move I would play.I am comfortable in cramped defensive positions.I play the French all the time..we French players are a bit odd in what we are willing to accept .Sometimes we accept losses as a result

after 13...e4 and 14.Nd2 Ng4 its not great but maybe better than what it is now.Maybe not though.15.h3 is no good so I play 15.Ndxe4 and it starts to get complicated.You can try 15....Bxh2+,or 15....f6.I still like all the space I would have though.

In g4 line Kh8 is very good to fizzle out the attack.Kh8 is a move that may or may not be played yet .I hope not cuz it will mean I haven't forced you into anything else and/or a half open g file aimed right at my king's fortress

But I think I am spending too much time looking at what did not happen.Maybe this is your plan?

 

[A_Bashkuev]

Is it my plan? Do you have a some plan, Mr. Fix? Yes, I have both of them, Mr. Fix! If plan A would fizzle, then I'll go to plan B, Mr. Fix! And if your plab B go haywire as well Mr.Fix? Oh, It can't be so, Mr. Fix, because it can't be so!
Well, what is our plan?

21. Nb5 f5

 

[Smash]

I'll bite

21. Nb5 f5
22.Nxc7

 

[A_Bashkuev]

Huh? Ug-h?? Can you do it??? Wow...

Strange thing is occured. I knew that you MUST make you move Nb5, because it is obvious & you words about Rc5 is applied & i begin my analyses from it's move. But in some moment (I checked it by my memo's) I began to pretend that you've made move Bb5, because... because my future after Nb5 would really grim, but after Nb5 I've got couple of kicks yet. Case of really wishful thinking - it seems.

Well, it was really good party, because I think if you'd made any pointless move (as Bb5 for example) my position immediately would come to life, but in our case I wasn't lost yet, but I knew that I was on my way to losing. (I think - German generals after Kursk battle in 1943 had the same feeling as well.)
Yes, i think that 16. .. b6 move broke my backbone & Qc7 was strictly better. You are right of course. I'm not sure that 15. ... Qc7 would be potent, but ... I think that it is some "horse blinds" effect - I was waiting your Qb3 move & made some preparations (defensible by its Nature) & just miss opportunity to make really bright move in response. Yes, I'm stubborn fool for my inability to admit fact that opponent can make some sound suggestion during the party without some evil ideas behind them.

I think that against weaker opponent I'd make move Qxc7 & try to save what I can save, but against you.... I just concede.

Well, no one can ask continuation after two losses in a row, but if you haven't any other time consuming projects, would you play with me again? Don't be obliged to agree - I'll understand. But if you will concede to it, pls make your move as a white.

Sincerely yours, Alex.

P.S. Your playing is really damaging for any of your opponent self-respect then I begin to develop some inferiority complex & to wonder - if I've already got age senility? I played couple of light "coffee" parties with my old friends & began couple of correspondense parties in I-net as well (one of them with Dell19 here) & some self-confidence returned to me.

Well, now I know - my losses to you isn't sign of my weak playing skills, but it's result of yours outstanding performance. I'm glad to get this experience in any case. Thank you!

 

[Panzar75]

The position looks all but lost to me... True you're a piece for rook down in material, but with no major weak spots and all pieces in action against the white King (not to mention a few pawns), I would not have given up just yet.

Still, good game, both of you.

 

[A_Bashkuev]

Yeah, sure. I know it. But I studied other Smash's games & I'm sure - for him this is enough. I prefer to play other game with this bright player, then be pain in ass for myself .
Worst of all I have no idea - what I'll do in this play now, because I between Scilla & Harybda here:
I can't let other exchange now, or simplifications, but my white squares are weak & White "white" bishop became really potent now. It will (with Queen help) menace my castle position after three-four moves later & it is really grim perspective, because I can't improve my white squares now or later.
Then I MUST try to exchange it & it is possible after big exchange in center & bring great simplifications. Then his Rook eat alive my Knight in open! Have you other reasons? Any ideas? I have none.

Do you want to play with me, by the way? I'd like some more action! I've got really few games in last time & begin to feel taste for it (my first game against Smash was really horrible.)

Sincerely yours, Alex.

 

[Smash]

I think maybe you give too much respect.True,this position is not very good for you but the first game could have been extended.

I will play again.I wish to see some of your e4 defense.

 

[Panzar75]

Extended indeed... I let my Chessmaster program (rating 2872) handle the game from your position and gave it 20 minutes.

Turns out that it came to a draw by the 50-move rule in move #140, which indicates that at least - the game is not completely lost.

I admit that having a good mathematical chance of draw and actually making it are two separate things, but even if you don't make the optimal moves, your opponent probably won't either.

I don't know how valid this data is, but I never win against the computer on half the level I had evaluating this game, so I trust its moves anyway.

Personally, I would have played a little differently. (Then again I'm no 2800 player.) As for the Bishop, e4 and keeping the pawn on d5 blocked takes it out of immediate action. I'm not sure, but I might have played Qb8 on move 24 keeping the diagonal under pressure. After Kh8 and if neccessary f6 (possably with a Be5 at some point) and Rg8 there would be quite a lot of pressure against the white King. White is ahead, but you never know...

Chessmaster 8000 (rated at 2872) playing both sides, 10 minutes per game and player.

22. ---, Qxc7
23. Rac1, e4
24. Bb5, Qe7
25. Rc6, Rd8
26. Qc3, Qg5
27. g3, Ne7
28. Rc4, Qg4
29. Ba4, a6
30. Bb3, b5
31. Qa5, Rd7
32. Rc3, Qe2
33. Rb1, f4
34. Qxa6, e3
35. Rf1, Qxb2
36. Rc8+, Kg7
37. Qxb5, Nxc8
38. Qxd7, Qxb3
39. Qg4+, Kh6
40. Qxc8, exf2+
41. Rxf2, Qd1+
42. Kg2, Qxd5+
43. Rf3, fxg3
44. hxg3, Bxa3
45. Qg8, Be7
46. Qxf7, Qe5
47. Qf4+, Qxf4
48. Rxf4, Kg6
...
139. Rf8, Bd2
140. Rf7

Draw by 50-move rule.

In between lots of moves where eventually both pawns were exchanged and not much more. Bishop vs. Rook is, as far as I know, always a draw.

I could play a game or two. I have one game currently at another board, but the pace is hardly killing me at a move every 3-4 days...

 

[Bismarck]

Originally posted by Panzar75
Extended indeed... I let my Chessmaster program (rating 2872) handle the game from your position and gave it 20 minutes.

Turns out that it came to a draw by the 50-move rule in move #140, which indicates that at least - the game is not completely lost.

I admit that having a good mathematical chance of draw and actually making it are two separate things, but even if you don't make the optimal moves, your opponent probably won't either.

I don't know how valid this data is, but I never win against the computer on half the level I had evaluating this game, so I trust its moves anyway.

Personally, I would have played a little differently. (Then again I'm no 2800 player.) As for the Bishop, e4 and keeping the pawn on d5 blocked takes it out of immediate action. I'm not sure, but I might have played Qb8 on move 24 keeping the diagonal under pressure. After Kh8 and if neccessary f6 (possably with a Be5 at some point) and Rg8 there would be quite a lot of pressure against the white King. White is ahead, but you never know...

Chessmaster 8000 (rated at 2872) playing both sides, 10 minutes per game and player.

22. ---, Qxc7
23. Rac1, e4
24. Bb5, Qe7
25. Rc6, Rd8
26. Qc3, Qg5
27. g3, Ne7
28. Rc4, Qg4
29. Ba4, a6
30. Bb3, b5
31. Qa5, Rd7
32. Rc3, Qe2
33. Rb1, f4
34. Qxa6, e3
35. Rf1, Qxb2
36. Rc8+, Kg7
37. Qxb5, Nxc8
38. Qxd7, Qxb3
39. Qg4+, Kh6
40. Qxc8, exf2+
41. Rxf2, Qd1+
42. Kg2, Qxd5+
43. Rf3, fxg3
44. hxg3, Bxa3
45. Qg8, Be7
46. Qxf7, Qe5
47. Qf4+, Qxf4
48. Rxf4, Kg6
...
139. Rf8, Bd2
140. Rf7

Draw by 50-move rule.

In between lots of moves where eventually both pawns were exchanged and not much more. Bishop vs. Rook is, as far as I know, always a draw.

I could play a game or two. I have one game currently at another board, but the pace is hardly killing me at a move every 3-4 days...

Chessmaster rated at 2872?? Even the strongest computers have no better than an estimated 2700 performance

 

[Smash]

Chessmaster rated 2872?..I don't think so.Not ELO anyways.More like 2000>2100.

My answer to 22... Qxc7 was going to be 23.Bb5.23...e4 can be played now.I play 24.Qh3 next and we have something completely different.

The program I have been hearing alot about is Fritz7.It supposedly has beaten some GMs.Not strong GMs,but GMs none the less.

But unless you have Deep Blue-Home Version ,I wouldn't trust a program's analysis too much.This game is a win for white.The f pawns are very weak.

 

[Panzar75]

If you say so... I only trusted what the program say. And it does vary from time to time, so I figured it depended on the system configuration. (I have a pretty good computer) Maybe not an ELO rating then... I took a look just now and it say "Rating: 2869".

I really don't follow the elite and I have no idea if it's an unreasonable rating. But it's pretty hard to win against it even if its real rating is lower than previously stated.

No doubt you can play differently, and no doubt your position is better. I just argue that the position is far from lost.

Edit: I just read my own post and realized it sounded a bit like I had beaten Chessmaster on its hardest level. I have not even been close to a draw despite playing chess for 20 years now.

 

[Bismarck]

Originally posted by Panzar75
If you say so... I only trusted what the program say. And it does vary from time to time, so I figured it depended on the system configuration. (I have a pretty good computer) Maybe not an ELO rating then... I took a look just now and it say "Rating: 2869".

A while ago, Junior (one of the top programs) scored a 2550-2600 performance in a tournament, I think. Fritz 7 running on a multiprocessor machine would probably do somewhat better

I'd peg chessmaster at 2250-2300 or so, running on a strong computer

However, this strength is largely tactical. Computers are not very good at endgames, where you need a plan. UNLESS they manage to transpose into a tablebase position (which they can play perfectly)

Panzar, I could handle another game. If you want, just open a new thread and make a move