| |||||||||
From | Message | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
tigerblood 15-Jun-11, 03:42 |
![]() |
||||||||
|
![]() ![]() You know, there is a point in a chess game where if you see you are losing and Doomed, it becomes prudent, even imperative, to make the surprising move, the imprudent move, the move that just might imbalance things and turn things around -- just the surprise alone of an opponent on the defense switching to offense, to Active Defense can produce surprisingly good results: what Black needs to do is --- Black's sole hope is -- COUNTERaTTACK oh well, their moves are their choices, their fate. Our next move? |
||||||||
easy19 18-Jun-11, 13:33 |
![]() |
||||||||
tigerblood 18-Jun-11, 16:01 |
![]() |
||||||||
wildfiree 20-Jun-11, 09:54 |
![]() Bh6 is in my humble opinion the best move here. |
||||||||
tigerblood 26-Jun-11, 04:18 |
![]() |
||||||||
|
![]() Why not take it? In effect, we have one potential attacker standing like a wallflower with no place to dance: our Queen's Bishop, the dark-squared Bishop, at e3. Why not bring her to the dance? We need more than our Queen as an attacker to win. And if we exchange Queens, we need our bishop to coordinate with our f-rook to win. And if we want to bring our b3-rook into the attack, we need the bishop to move out of the way. Sounds like a bishop move is called for. We could --- yes, we could listen to the h5 pawn's "lust to expand" as Aron Nimzovich puts it, and promote it -- But do we want to give our opponent those 3 tempi to organize a defense of his King? And do we want our own h-pawn to block our bishop from attacking the King's only defender on our very next move (with Bh6 blocked by h5-h6)? Of course we could win with h6. To be deviously cunning, even the cute 36 Bg5 would be a winning tactical blow. Try it. ![]() We do have a luxury of fine choices, and sometimes a won game is challenging to win because it's a challenge to pick the best one. Ardin has made an absolutely superlative selection with 36 Bh6. . |
||||||||
tigerblood 26-Jun-11, 05:38 |
![]() |
||||||||
wildfiree 26-Jun-11, 12:07 |
![]() |
||||||||
easy19 26-Jun-11, 12:10 |
![]() But if i have to decide now then Bh6 is the move to make. so lets move that piece |
||||||||
|
![]() ![]() The intention was a Club endgame we could all learn from. To be fair to our opponent, the starting position certainly offered Black some prospects for a dandy counter-attack against a possibly over-extended White Kingside. But Black's counter-attack never saw the light of day. Now that the game is for all practical purposes over, and we prepare to do battle again, let's at least offer our opponent some insight as to why Black lost. |
||||||||
tigerblood 02-Jul-11, 12:48 |
![]() |
||||||||
shamash 03-Jul-11, 08:01 |
![]() |
||||||||
|
![]() and it may be that losing positions don't lose themselves. It is one thing to have gotten into a losing position -- but it takes real attitude to turn a losing position into a lost game. One of our strengths has been our optimism, whether the instinctual, creative initiative of Freddy, the cheerful, confident, insightful bravado of Ardin, or the resolute, courageous and joyful fierceness of Debbie. When the top Russian grandmasters were called upon to account for the one-by-one 6-0 thrashing of their best champions by Bobby Fischer, leading up to the Fischer-Spassky World Championship match that questioned Soviet hegemony in competitive chess, Paul Keres came up with the one trait of their opponent that they had under-rated and were unable to match. Not the depth of his chess knowledge, nor the strength of ability to calculate and foresee moves -- what made him stand out and dominate was the strength of his personality. Fischer's personality, determined to win, unable to accept losing, was his stength that Overcame opposition at the board. Just as we have shown that strength, our opponent has demonstrated a dour, resigned, fatalistic acceptance of their impending demise. Making moves with hesitancy and not conviction. Making moves that from the beginning believed our propaganda (way to go, Debbie!), believed our take on the position ("No way out. Every option looks bad to me. We may be approaching the game end instead of the endgame." Here, Black basically quoted my May 4th, vaporous "This next move is not only the beginning of the endgame, it is the beginning of the end for Black." So that we defeated them in the head long before we defeated them on the board. Consequently, Black began making moves "just to keep the game going," "just to keep the game alive," "we have no chance," "we will probably lose anyway," "I don't see anything good coming out of it;" the resigned & passive: "there is no option, and then we will find out what variation they are going to attack us with" (!"), and even when picking a strong response, our opponent's attitude is a resigned, "I can see nothing better." Losing is a state of mind. Losing is a fatalistic acceptance of defeat from one's earliest moves. A loss is nothing to be ashamed of. But giving up on yourself is. . |
||||||||
tigerblood 03-Jul-11, 13:52 |
![]() That's a true leader! Thank you, Shamash, you bring out the best in all of us. |
||||||||
|
![]() Guess that makes our selection of a move a selection of which can of trash to take out. Or which piece to take out. Botvinnik used analyze moves at the chessboard by seeing it in zones. Zones of attack, zones of control, zones of blockade, zones of de-blockade, occasionally zones of retreat. Seems like, the zones of this board that matter are zones in our control, and under our attack. ![]() Botvinnik would then see that his pieces had targets, and that his pieces controlled the paths (or trajectories) of attack. We have targets, we have control, we have the threat of a passed pawn, and most best we even have the threat of a potential mating line. Okay, what's next? what plan (or sequence of objectives), and what moves? |
||||||||
tigerblood 06-Jul-11, 14:01 |
![]() |
||||||||
|
![]() ![]() It's our move. Deb's suggestion is 37 Rbf3. Any other candidates, and the reasons for them? |
||||||||
|
![]() |
||||||||
|
![]() 37 Rbf3 certainly wins. And normally the line inaugurated by such a move might well be our choice. However. . . our opponents once again have helped us, selecting from the candidate moves in the position one of the worst possible, and most disastrous moves for Black --- Why? Precisely because it allows the capture that brigadecommander sees: 37 Rxf6! ![]() kudos to Janet for seeing just why Black's 36...Re8 was not just an inaccuracy, but a serious error -- a losing error -- positionally and tactically. A Warm Welcome to The Team. |
||||||||
tigerblood 13-Jul-11, 16:43 |
![]() |
||||||||
wildfiree 14-Jul-11, 00:08 |
![]() |
||||||||
shamash 14-Jul-11, 01:46 |
![]() |
||||||||
|
![]() And her idea rests on the shoulders of your ideas, from 5 moves earlier, of 32 f4 and 33 g5 -- winning the g5 square for our Queen's Bishop to respond 38 Bg5 [pinning and winning the Queen], if Black should respond 37...QxRf6. You may recall a couple of moves ago you identified Rxf6 as a candidate move. Deb advocated all along for pushing that g-pawn, absolutely necessary to make this line playable. So that's our move, team. |
||||||||
blueshrimper 18-Jul-11, 12:07 |
![]() I wanted to be the first to congratulate you all on the win. I hope to start a new thread where the two teams can now come together to give their thoughts on the game. I hope you will all join me there. |
||||||||
|