View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Jul 22, 2018 7:48 am



 [ 6 posts ] 
Sarciness - Complex Scotch Ending (British Ch. R1) [49:02] 
Author Message
Video Manager

Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 6:17 pm
Posts: 524
 Sarciness - Complex Scotch Ending (British Ch. R1) [49:02]
Poster: Sarciness
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000) | Videos Made: 67
Login or register to rate this video...
Average Rating: 5.00 (2)

Video Tags: 1.e4 Endgame Paulsen Variation Scotch Scotch Game

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

Like (Login Required)
Liked By: katar, kamus


Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:14 pm
King
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 12:19 pm
Posts: 1890
Location: Los Angeles
Rating Class: Expert (2000-2200)
 Re: Sarciness - Complex Scotch Ending (British Ch. R1) [49:
A good solid game!
9.b3 is more like ?! because of a5 as played.
Agree Bg4 unnecessarily "fancy". If white can castle long the pawn moves f3 and g4 are not inconvenient for White.
Agree White should go f4 instead of h4. Black is probably in trouble there.
16:39 you said Black king may be unsafe on queenside. Actually i think Black king is safe anywhere. Black is active and queens are off = no danger imo.
19:56 you analyze f6?! Just looks like a bizarre counterintuitive move to me. You just improved the bishop with d6-d5! (great move), your DS bishop is active now with great squares, so why then instantly try to trade it after just improving its scope? Instead Black should play to dominate the dark squares (c5,d4,e3) much like in the game. You commented somewhere in that f7-f6 variation that white's LS bishop is bad -- i disagree because all of white's LS pawns can move. Because the pawns are not fixed on lightsquares, the LS bishop is not really bad at all IMO.
24:53 Ne5xd3 so yeah, Black should just take the exchange on e2 and Black is clearly better
26:18 i wanted to play Bf5 and let White contemplate the threat of Bh3 checkmate, so he has to go Kg2 anyhow.
29:00 Be5? I didnt like this move, reminiscent of the idea of f6 and Bxf6. All black's pieces are active and good. Black can try to build an initiative and make threats. Instead this move just liquidates (mass exchanges from a superior position) letting white off the hook.
32'-33' Your intuition is good. You say "I just thought dxc4 was bad -- why is it bad?" Then you went off on a detour with long variations. To me, no variations are needed: White's minor pieces can barely move between the two of them. After dxc4 the white N&B suddenly come to life. I believe this intuitive assessment is pretty much accurate, so the long variations are unnecessary imo. d5-d4 keeps white bottled up and i really like your plan Re3-c3 then d4-d3. I would say you can trust your intuition more and feel free to make an intuitive assessment without the need to have long variations at times.
38'-39' your idea of Ra6 and the related analysis were both terrific imo. On general principles, rooks should almost always play "offense" rather than "defense."

All in all i thought you played a solid, logical game. Maybe i am lazy or out of practice, but i think you can trust your intuition more and think more in terms of general principles rather than solely variations. For example, just noticing the passivity of white's pieces and a sense of keeping white bottled up would lead you to avoid moves like Be5 and d5xc4 more or less on principle without really calculating any variations at all.

:)

_________________
"Yes, I have played a blitz game once. It was on a train, in 1929." -Botvinnik


Thu Aug 06, 2015 2:14 am
King

Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 2:38 am
Posts: 745
Rating: 1802
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
 Re: Sarciness - Complex Scotch Ending (British Ch. R1) [49:
Katar, thanks for your detailed comments!

> 9.b3 is more like ?! because of a5 as played.

It probably is dubious, but the more I look, the more I like 9...Qe6 with 10...a5 to follow.

>19:56 you analyze f6?! Just looks like a bizarre counterintuitive move to me. You just improved the bishop with d6-d5! (great move), your DS bishop is active now with great squares, so why then instantly try to trade it after just improving its scope? Instead Black should play to dominate the dark squares (c5,d4,e3) much like in the game. You commented somewhere in that f7-f6 variation that white's LS bishop is bad -- i disagree because all of white's LS pawns can move. Because the pawns are not fixed on lightsquares, the LS bishop is not really bad at all IMO.

Good insights here, your comments make sense.

>29:00 Be5? I didnt like this move, reminiscent of the idea of f6 and Bxf6. All black's pieces are active and good. Black can try to build an initiative and make threats. Instead this move just liquidates (mass exchanges from a superior position) letting white off the hook.

Yes, Be5? was a clear mistake. I was better, and I should have gone on the attack. With the sequence that followed, white was handed the initiative.

> 32'-33' Your intuition is good. You say "I just thought dxc4 was bad -- why is it bad?" Then you went off on a detour with long variations. To me, no variations are needed: White's minor pieces can barely move between the two of them. After dxc4 the white N&B suddenly come to life. I believe this intuitive assessment is pretty much accurate, so the long variations are unnecessary imo. d5-d4 keeps white bottled up and i really like your plan Re3-c3 then d4-d3

I'm challenging myself to analyse more and assume less as this has got me into troube in the past. In take this case I used my intuition during the game and then only when coming to make the video did I spend time analysing. I say "spend", "waste" would be more accurate, as you point out!

> 38'-39' your idea of Ra6 and the related analysis were both terrific imo. On general principles, rooks should almost always play "offense" rather than "defense."

> All in all i thought you played a solid, logical game. Maybe i am lazy or out of practice, but i think you can trust your intuition more and think more in terms of general principles rather than solely variations. For example, just noticing the passivity of white's pieces and a sense of keeping white bottled up would lead you to avoid moves like Be5 and d5xc4 more or less on principle without really calculating any variations at all.

Cheers, I'll do my best!

_________________
http://www.chessvideos.tv/wiki/index.php/Sarciness%27_Videos


Fri Aug 07, 2015 12:08 pm
King
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:10 am
Posts: 261
Location: Southern Germany
Rating: 2249
Rating Class: National Master
 Re: Sarciness - Complex Scotch Ending (British Ch. R1) [49:
katar has already given some good comments. What I would like to add is:

- I don't like d6 at all, more logical seems to go either Qg5 Bxf8 Qc1+ Qd1 Qxd1+ Kxd1 Rxf8 where black should have no problems or to keep everything on the board going c5 which is directed against white's normal setup with g3.
Btw in the variation with 0-0-0 Kd7 and Qf6 I thought white could go Ne5+ followed by Qxg4+, but I am not sure if I remeber the position right ;-)

- Be5 is illogical, Bf4 seems promising. Where is the Nd2 going to? I had only a quick look but this gives black a big advantage. If the Nd2 moves (and it must) then dxc4 is an option further opening the position and giving an open file for your second rook. Maybe Bf4 is even stronger when prepared by a4...

- Your idea with Kf1 and Bd1 seems to be bad, because after Rxe1+ Kxe1 Re8+ Kf1 Bd3+ Kg2 Re1 white can hardly move

- As katar already said the whole Ra6 stuff is bad, after Nd7 black seems to be much better, white must take care of Nd2 and black is able to relocate the N which before was somewhat stuck on b6.
Hmm, that was my first impression. Now after some analysis I think Ra6 draws.

What I would critisize in general:
1) It seems to me that you are approaching the position in a too static way. You should try to play the position more dynamic and consider more forcing moves.
2) You should have thought about getting your worst piece (Nb6) back into the game at some point. Funny enough that Bf4 idea really does that as a side-effect.
3) I am sure that you gave away the win and you must find the point where the evaluation changes from large advantage to equal in the analysis. To find the turning points in the game is a very important skill to learn and that's what analysing by hand teaches you. Afterwards, the engine runs and you see where it changes the evaluation and you can compare.

Also, it would helpful if you would post the gamescore so that comments and variations could have move numbers instead of video time...

_________________
Veni, vidi, fleri!


Sun Aug 09, 2015 9:27 am
King

Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 2:38 am
Posts: 745
Rating: 1802
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
 Re: Sarciness - Complex Scotch Ending (British Ch. R1) [49:
Hi Zeit, I don't quite know what you mean when you say play the position more dynamic- could you be a bit more specific? How might I go about changing my mindset during a game?

10...Qg5!? I didn't see it, nor that my queen could get to c1 and trade. Looks like it just instantly equalises, although it does trade queens a bit early for my liking. That looks objectively like it might be best, but are you sure that 10...d6 is bad? I think in the game if I'd played Bf5 instead of Bg4 then I'm probably about equal too. I don't like the look of 10...c5 as it just seems to create a hole on b5 for white to exploit.

22...Bf4!? looks interesting, I much prefer it to what I played in the game. I think also 22...a4!? deserves consideration. 22...Be5? was the biggest mistake I made in the game and certainly a major turning point.

I thought the Ra6 ideas were good for white, and I thought Katar liked the idea of activating the rook too. Perhaps we can discuss some variations?

Here's the PGN, I'll make sure I paste them in future videos.
[Event "British Championships U180"]
[Site "Warwick University"]
[Date "2015.07.27"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Bryant"]
[Black "Ish"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[WhiteElo "1947"]
[BlackElo "1802"]
[ECO "C45k"]
[EventDate "2015.07.27"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 exd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nxc6 bxc6 6.e5 Qe7 7.Qe2 Nd5 8.c4 Nb6 9.b3 a5 10.Ba3 d6 11.exd6 cxd6 12.Nd2 Bg4 13.f3 Qxe2+ 14.Bxe2 Bf5 15.g4 Bg6 16.h4 h5 17.g5 Be7 18.Bb2 O-O 19.O-O d5 20.a3 Rfe8 21.Rfe1 Bd6 22.Kg2 Be5 23.Bxe5 Rxe5 24.Bf1 Rae8 25.Rxe5 Rxe5 26.Rc1 d4 27.b4 axb4 28.axb4 Re3 29.Ra1 Rc3 30.Kg3 d3 31.b5 cxb5 32.cxb5 Rc2 33.Rd1 Rb2 34.Ne4 Rxb5 35.Rxd3 Rd5 36.Rb3 Nd7 37.Nc3 Rc5 38.Bh3 Bf5 39.Bxf5 Rxf5 40.Ne4 Rd5 41.Rc3 Kf8 42.Rc8+ Ke7 43.Kf4 g6 44.Ra8 Rf5+ 45.Ke3 Rd5 46.Ra7 Ke6 47.Ra6+ Ke7 48.f4 Rd1 49.Nf2 Re1+ 50.Kf3 1/2-1/2

_________________
http://www.chessvideos.tv/wiki/index.php/Sarciness%27_Videos


Mon Aug 10, 2015 2:58 pm
King
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 11:10 am
Posts: 261
Location: Southern Germany
Rating: 2249
Rating Class: National Master
 Re: Sarciness - Complex Scotch Ending (British Ch. R1) [49:
What I mean by more dynamic is keeping your opponent busy with some threats and playing with the initiative. For my taste you did give white too much time to consolidate.

Hm, why I dislike d6 is relatively simple, if white keeps the tension with f4 I do not see how black can develop. Btw, according to Megabase d6 was played twice, in one game white exchanged on d6 (Gmaj-Jurkiewicz) and black equalized effortlessly (including Bg4, which is in fact ok, the moves were identical to your game). In the other game white went f4, had a winning position and lost (Dunn-Hunt). The pin on d6 is annoying, black has one useful move with the Bc8, but afterwards I don't see a good follow up as 0-0-0 seems dubious with the pawn on a5, it might be ok if it still was on a7. Maybe I am too pessimistic ...

My first thought was Ra6 is bad, because of Nd7 and only then Rc2. But I played that against the engine and we more or less returned to the game position. I don't have the moves of that anymore, but I could replay.

Later in the game you played too hasty, 33. ... Rb2 was not the best. You should have played Na4, threatening Nb2, and after 34. Ra1 Nc5 35. Rd1 Rb2 then your d-pawn has better protection, however I am not sure if you can more than an endgame with an extra f-pawn

_________________
Veni, vidi, fleri!


Tue Aug 11, 2015 6:07 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
   [ 6 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:
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF