View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Jan 20, 2018 12:53 am



Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56] 
Author Message
Video Manager

Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 6:17 pm
Posts: 524
Post kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
Poster: kamus
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800) | Videos Made: 241
Login or register to rate this video...
Average Rating: 5.00 (5)

Video Tags: Nimzo-Larsen Attack

This is half of a dual commentary. Other half: kamus - Tourney Rnd 4: Eimaj vs kamus

Video Download: Login or register to download this video for your iPhone/iPod Touch

Like (Login Required)
Liked By: Fox, gentlewhisper, Andrewrun, Sarciness, eimaj, flushrivet, Robert_T


Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:45 pm
Profile
Premium Member
Premium Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:31 am
Posts: 1636
Location: Germany
Rating: Over 9000
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
Ah well,..now looking at that I am not really satisfied with stuff.
Think that my whole defensive play was rather bad 27...Qe7, 29...Qf7, 31...Bxf6 all look a bit weird.
Was actually quite satisfied with my position and thought white's attack won't lead to anything but ..well,..turned out differently :D

and yes,...I think you are +2-0=0 now... ^^

edit:
Aha! You were recording our Skpye conversation too....so, well...that "shut up!" in the end hopefully didn't sound rude. I just tend to blush when people start to thank me for stuff, etc..

_________________
Greetings from northern Germany!
PM me for Facebook :)


Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:45 pm
Profile ICQ
Knight

Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:21 pm
Posts: 51
Rating: 1500
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
Interesting game. I knew a guy who had a similar problem, where he'd go up material and then suddenly just lose it. I played him in a tournament game knowing this, but he got a good lead out of the opening (King's Indian for white, and I'd never played against it, being relatively new to the game). At one point, I just blundered an entire knight, but strangely, it opened up the middle of the board where I was really strong. Eventually, my pieces just started getting around his newly-exposed king, and were no longer stepping on each others' feet, and he gave back an exchange. Then, later, I basically trapped his queen and he resigned. This game reminded me of it, not that that's what happened (just your comment).

I really laughed when you said, "I think I've made some sort of error here." Good stuff man.


Thu Jan 12, 2012 2:17 pm
Profile
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 2856
Location: Maryland, USA
Rating: 1698
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
gentlewhisper wrote:
Ah well,..now looking at that I am not really satisfied with stuff.
Think that my whole defensive play was rather bad 27...Qe7, 29...Qf7, 31...Bxf6 all look a bit weird.
Was actually quite satisfied with my position and thought white's attack won't lead to anything but ..well,..turned out differently :D

and yes,...I think you are +2-0=0 now... ^^

edit:
Aha! You were recording our Skpye conversation too....so, well...that "shut up!" in the end hopefully didn't sound rude. I just tend to blush when people start to thank me for stuff, etc..


Yeah, that's just the kind of rude, boorish behavior we've come to expect from you! :evil: Nah, it was totally cool- my wife tells me to shut up all the time!

Good game!- you definitely had the upper hand in the later middlegame. My 19th move, Nd2 was a stinker and Rybka just about snorted in disgust when I ran that move through the engine. Your low time was an issue at the end and there was probably a safe way to get to what was probably a decent endgame for you. Also, I didn't know this at the time but after Nxc6 in the opening, the standard response is Bxc6, though I thought your reply was OK- Chessbase ID'ed your move as a "novelty". Thanks again and good luck in the rest of the tourney. :)

_________________
illigetimi non carborundum.


Thu Jan 12, 2012 2:19 pm
Profile WWW
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 2856
Location: Maryland, USA
Rating: 1698
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
GW's video of the same game can be found here: viewtopic.php?t=9893&p=69306#p69306


_________________
illigetimi non carborundum.


Thu Jan 12, 2012 2:22 pm
Profile WWW
Premium Member
Premium Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:31 am
Posts: 1636
Location: Germany
Rating: Over 9000
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
Ok, so anaylsis is basically what I came up with during a mostly sleepless or nightmarish night, and during my trip back
home. Of course now checking with the comp.
Thought I just post here. (Engine btw is a brutal Fritz 7 running with 32MB --- NOT! kidding)

***** after 6.Bxc6
Image

1)6...bxc6 7.Ne5 Bf5 8.Nxc6 Qc7 9.Ne5 B-pair+development but -1 pawn (engine +0.5)

2)6...Bxc6 7.Ne5
2.1) 7..Bb5 8.(d3?) keeps B-pair, Ne5 stays, B blocks Q-pawns and mght be kicked later for a tempo (engine +0.3)
2.2) 7...Rc8 if 8.Nxc6 loses B-pair but healthy structure and Ne5 gone (engine =)

I guess a problem is that bxc6 might be nice if the double c5-push (against d4) was possible. d4 wasn't played in the game though. => Idea ok, position didn't fit idea

***** 9.f4 and 14.g4 c4
I don't like these moves on principle. f4 alone is very weakening and g4 looks like suicide
after 14.g4
Image

I like that the computer doesn't dislike my 14...c4 pawn sac.Problem is that if played like in the game it leads to the
mentioned 17.Nxd6 tactic, which is simply winning for white. Computer plays it differently:

1.) 15.dxc4 and now either 14...Ne4 or 14...Ba6 so using the newly available e4 square.
Both lines are a few moves deep but engine says -0.2

Ok, sad that I misplayed it. Pawn sac for activity was a nice idea. I am positive though that I would have played the
14...Ne4 line in a long game because I would have spotted the Nxd6 stuff and Ne4 just looks like a nice in-betweener. Even during the game I was concerned about opening the d-file.
Although...probably with more time I would have played 14...Rd8 instead, preparing ...c4. I don't usually give pawns that lightly.
Even though in the game it turned out ok (as the Nxd6 stuff wasn't played) it's the first move I am not really satisfied
with. Like it but played it in a sloppy way. Typical blitz move/transformation for me.


***** 17.Bxf6
I am actually surprised that the engine finds that acceptable. Ok, probably just means it holds tactically ... lol^^
Can't be good. White will get other opportunities to weaken blacks king and then the B will be a monster.

**** until 19...Bb4 the moves are very sloppy by both, especially as black doesn't immediately get the B out of d6.
After18...Ba6:
Image

1.) 19.Qxa5 is perfectly playable. In the end it's 2 pawns for the exchange and the initiative. Probably simply winning for
white.

***** 19.Nfd2? Bb4 black is back in the game.

**** before 22....Bf8
Image

1.) instead: 22...Bxd2
Remember that I played that very quickly but I still feel it's ok. I didn't want to go into a pure major piece endgame
because I felt it didn't offer much, and I actually wanted to play the position for a win. So, thinking long term I wanted to
keep B>N on the board to have a imbalance/asymetry. (engine: =)

2.) instead 22...Rd6
As said during the game: "I wonder if I can make sth out of that pin." No time to think about it, so play sth. different and
make sure you don't leave your R potentially hanging on d6.

3.) instead 22...Bc5
Most natural move ever.

Basically, even thogh 22...Bf8 doesn't really lose, it throws blacks possible grip away. Again, I would attribute that to not
having enough time to think...sounds like using a lame excuse twice, but I am a slow thinker :P

***** before 24....Rxd1 25.Nxf6+
Image

During the game I thought 25.Nxf6+ is nothing serious. Later I thought that this might have been the losing mistake and now I see again that engine says it is "nothing serious" (although here it translates to: Maybe computer holds it^^).

It's like I thought after the game. h8 is simply the wrong square. g8 or g6 are more relevant for the King.
1st on g8 K protects B (might save a tempo) and 2nd g8 is a white square so the h8-a1 diagonal isn't that beautiful.
Black is very shaky though (+0.7 and defending)


Anyway, basically I think 2 moves are most interesting:

14...c4 interesting complications.

22...Bf8: Probably the losing move because now white gets to breathe again and starts a nice attack. White actually gives
black 1 move time to move the B back to a reasonable square as he plays 23.Re2 but instead 23...Rb4 24. Ne4 more or less seals the deal.

I think black had a nice middlegame and good endgame prospects but got lucky once (c4 variations. Idea ok, calculation not), then lost the grip on the position(Bf8, rather wtf?!), and then white managed to execute a nice attack.

_________________
Greetings from northern Germany!
PM me for Facebook :)


Last edited by gentlewhisper on Fri Jan 13, 2012 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Fri Jan 13, 2012 8:44 am
Profile ICQ
Site Moderator
Site Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 2856
Location: Maryland, USA
Rating: 1698
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
After the initial happiness of winning the game subsided, I also did a hardheaded analysis. I too, was deeply unsatisfied with my game. Rather than regenerate your analysis (which is essentially the same as mine) I'll use words. I think my opening was OK and even though there were other possibilities at various points, the decisions I made seemed to be decent ones. Once we reached the middlegame my analysis and calculation became very superficial. I would calculate a line like: 17.Nxd6, Rxd6 Be5 RxQ (I'm scared now!) BxQ , fuzzy, fuzzy, aw screw it- too complicated -let me analyze a simpler line:17. Bxf6, gxf6, Q moves somewhere, fuzzy, fuzzy, well at least no rook is taking my queen in this line- sure, I'll do that! Maybe it's my older brain, but I just sort of stopped calculating in forcing sequences before the end of the line because I guess I'm just lazy (and stupid!). I also failed to anticipate your plans- i.e. I thought you played Bc8 to avoid losing the two bishops and to then play Nd7 (which is a ridiculous move) instead of seeing your plan to play Ba6! I also completely failed to look at all your replies after 19. Nd2? where any idiot could see that 19...Bb4! is a strong, maybe even winning reply. I was acting like I was the only one who had a plan and failed to adequately look at Black's possible plans. Also, my g4 thrust had more to do with what I wanted to play rather than what the position demanded. I may have won the game, but in hindsight, I didn't feel like I deserved to! If it weren't for your time pressure, there was a pretty good chance it would have been 0-1. But as they say, you learn from your mistakes and hopefully I'll do better in the next game. The one good thing about the game was I got a little more confidence in the Nimzo-Larsen which I like for its flexibility. Thanks again for the interesting contest. :)

_________________
illigetimi non carborundum.


Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:09 am
Profile WWW
Premium Member
Premium Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:31 am
Posts: 1636
Location: Germany
Rating: Over 9000
Rating Class: Class B (1600-1800)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
kamus wrote:
After the initial happiness of winning the game subsided, I also did a hardheaded analysis. I too, was deeply unsatisfied with my game. Rather than regenerate your analysis (which is essentially the same as mine) I'll use words. I think my opening was OK and even though there were other possibilities at various points, the decisions I made seemed to be decent ones. Once we reached the middlegame my analysis and calculation became very superficial. I would calculate a line like: 17.Nxd6, Rxd6 Be5 RxQ (I'm scared now!) BxQ , fuzzy, fuzzy, aw screw it- too complicated -let me analyze a simpler line:17. Bxf6, gxf6, Q moves somewhere, fuzzy, fuzzy, well at least no rook is taking my queen in this line- sure, I'll do that! Maybe it's my older brain, but I just sort of stopped calculating in forcing sequences before the end of the line because I guess I'm just lazy (and stupid!). I also failed to anticipate your plans- i.e. I thought you played Bc8 to avoid losing the two bishops and to then play Nd7 (which is a ridiculous move) instead of seeing your plan to play Ba6! I also completely failed to look at all your replies after 19. Nd2? where any idiot could see that 19...Bb4! is a strong, maybe even winning reply. I was acting like I was the only one who had a plan and failed to adequately look at Black's possible plans. Also, my g4 thrust had more to do with what I wanted to play rather than what the position demanded.
Rapid game arguement is valid for you too :mrgreen: I think that frustration is an integral part of analysing a rapid game because one never had the time to go deep into a line or position. Rapid play doesn't allow / need accuracy , which is the main aspect of an OTB game and analysis.

I may have won the game, but in hindsight, I didn't feel like I deserved to!

Good ! That's the spirit ! :twisted: *evil grin*

If it weren't for your time pressure, there was a pretty good chance it would have been 0-1. But as they say, you learn from your mistakes and hopefully I'll do better in the next game. The one good thing about the game was I got a little more confidence in the Nimzo-Larsen which I like for its flexibility. Thanks again for the interesting contest. :)
Same. I really enjoyed playing with you, and sharing analysis is also always fun.
Being down 2 games against you now just means we both have to make it into the playoffs, get paired against each other and I win 2-0 :lol:


_________________
Greetings from northern Germany!
PM me for Facebook :)


Fri Jan 13, 2012 3:41 pm
Profile ICQ
Premium Member
Premium Member

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:04 pm
Posts: 337
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: kamus - Kamus v Gentlewhisper Rnd 1: 01/12/12 [51:56]
I just want to say thanks - to both players - for such an interesting and entertaining game and videos.


Mon Jan 16, 2012 4:12 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 9 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF