Following the trodden path

A month ago I played against  Qxd5 variation in French, Tarrasch and yesterday I got it again.  This time it was an expert, rated 300 higher than me, here is the game. I played the opening better than the first time and was equal after it. Then he started to improve the position of his pieces unless he made a move Rae8. I decided it’s a moment to exchange his bishop on a long diagonal, and then he started rooks/queens exchange. Fritz didn’t quite like the latter one,  saying I would be equal without it.  Anyway we went into B+N vs. B+N endgame and bishops were soon exchanged too.  I got a protected passed pawn on “c4”, he had a pawn majority in the center.

He advanced the pawns on the kingside and I thought that it’s time to counterstrike with h4. The move looked good, but as soon as I made it I realized that he can play f3! and get 2 passed pawns on “h”, which I didn’t like at all. But he didn’t see it and made a move losing a pawn. Finally all the pawns on the kingside disappeared. Fritz evaluated the position as difficult to win with me having only 0.43 advantage. My time, which was always less than his by 15-20 minutes finally approached 10 minutes (vs. 20) when he made a mistake.

I didn’t see it, played a wrong move 62. a6 and after 62… Kb6 he offered a draw. The proof of me not thinking clearly at that moment is that I refused it. The guy looked somewhat offended  (by the way I actually expected him to do it much earlier in the game, not wanting as much lower player to do it myself, but he probably waited for my mistake in the time trouble). Anyway,  in a few moves the draw became inevitable. I had a feeling that I missed something and of course Fritz  told me that 62. Nf1 was winning. A little consolation can be found in a fact that the move doesn’t look obvious and in a shootout it took Fritz and Crafty a 13-ply depth to win,  with 9 or 11-ply they drew. But if you get an idea that the “a” pawn is untouchable and the key to win is to get his “b”  pawn,  getting 2 pawns in the knight ending then maybe you can win somehow, taking into account that you are not playing against Fritz or Crafty.

Anyway, not a bad result and I like this Tarrasch draw more than the first one.

It seems me I should spend some time on this variation, as you guys said before – it became a mainline.

 

I’ll take the point

I played yesterday in my new club, G/90. I am not satisfied with my play,

I think I wasn’t fully concentrated, also my chronic undercalculating.

Anyway, the result was good – I won.

It was another +100 rated guy, it’s like I am playing in U2000 tournament.

I was White and it was Ruy Lopez, Classical variation, 3. … Bc5.

I never played against this variation OTB, a few correspondence games that I don’t remember.

It showed, as I missed winning a piece at the very early stage and got under some pressure later.

At one moment, I made a wrong move, allowing my opponent to win an exchange, but he missed it.

Than we got a position, where I deliberately allowed his rook on the 1st line (following queens exchange)

to relieve the pressure on “d” line. It actually brought me even bigger dividends,

as we exchanged both rooks and went into the knight endgame, where I clearly had better perspectives.

I played pretty well this part, except made a stupid mistake losing a pawn, which he didn’t notice.

My “a” and “b” passed pawns decided the game, sacrificing themselves but distracting Black’s knight and king.

I’ll let you to find the tactics, consider it like a tactics exercise.

I will post Fritz annotations later, Fritz had his day on this one :).

I played yesterday in my new club, G/90.  I am not satisfied with my play.  I think I wasn’t fully concentrated, also my chronic under-calculating and maybe I played too fast, I had ~25 minutes left when it finished on 52nd move (my opponent actually had more) .  Anyway, the result was good – I won.  It was another +100 rated guy,  it’s like I am playing in U2000 tournament.  I was White and it was Ruy Lopez, Classical variation, 3. … Bc5.  I never played OTB against this variation ,  had a few correspondence games that I don’t remember.  It showed,  as I missed winning a piece at the very early stage and got under some pressure later. At one moment I made a wrong move allowing my opponent combination winning an exchange, but he missed it. Then we got a position where I deliberately allowed his rook on the 1st line (following queens exchange) to relieve the pressure on “d” line. It actually brought me even bigger dividends, as we exchanged both rooks and went into the knight endgame where I clearly had better perspectives.  I played pretty well this part,  got  “a” and “b” passed pawns. Then I made a stupid mistake losing a pawn, which again he didn’t notice. The pawns eventually decided the game, sacrificing themselves but distracting Black’s knight and king.  I posted the game, raw pgn,  you can consider it as a tactics exercise,  try to find missing stuff.  I will post Fritz’s annotations later, Fritz had his day on this one :).  OK, here is what Fritz says about the game.  I could win a piece with 6. d4 and  22.  …  Nd4 was winning exchange.   46. a5 was losing  a pawn due to 46.  …  Nxa5. 

“The winner is the player who makes the last but one mistake” – Savielly Tartakower

 

Knight endings

I recently had a blitz, where having a knight + pawns vs. pawns, I drew in time trouble.

The dissapointing result attracted my attention to knight endings.

I found a section about that in the book “Theory and practice of of chess endings” by A.N. Panchenko.

Here I want to show a few examples from this book and from the game Alexander Grishuk vs. Judit Polgar.

One of the principles – knight is a very bad fighter against rook pawn.

The reason is that knight controls essentually less squares being on the rim.

In the case of K+N+RP vs. K+N the weaker side can’t survive without help of the king.

Pic 1

1. Nd4+ – fork, very typical for knight endings. 1. …Nxd4 2. Kf6 – deflection!

Pic 2

2. … Nc2 3. h5 Ne3 4. Kg5 – deflection again!

Pic 3

Nc4 5. h6

I recently had a blitz game where having a knight + pawns vs. pawns  I drew in the time trouble.  The dissapointing result attracted my attention to knight endings.

I found a section about that in the book “Theory and practice of the chess endings” by A.N. Panchenko,  great book with very easy explanations.

Here I want to show a few examples from this book and from the game Alexander Grishuk vs. Judit Polgar.

One of the principles – knight is a very bad fighter against rook pawn.  The reason is that knight controls essentually less squares being on the rim.  In the case of K+N+RP vs. K+N the weaker side can’t survive without help of the king.

1. Nd4+ – fork, very typical for knight endings. 1. …Nxd4 2. Kf6 – deflection!

2. … Nc2 3. h5 Ne3 4. Kg5 – deflection again!

Nc4 5. h6

Another principle – quickness of the knight. It  helps to survive in the following, looking hopeless,  position

1. Ne6 g4 2. Ng7 f4 3. Nh5

3. … f3 4. Nf6 g3 5. Ne4 g2

6. Nd2+ Kd3 7. Nxf3

And here is a nice swindle from the game A.Grishuk vs. J.Polgar

1. … Ng4 !!

Now 61. … Nxg4 is stalemate, all other variations lead to draw, see comment here:

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1468281

In the game happened:

2. Nd3 Nh2+ 3. Ke4 Ng4 4. Ne5 Nf6+ 5. Kf3 Ng4 6. Nc4 Nh2+ 7. Ke4 Nf1

8. Ne3 Nxg3+ 9. Ke5 Kh2 10. Kd6 Nh5 11. f5 Ng7 12. f6 1/2-1/2