Pokerstars IoM 3-11 Oct 2015

[LawrenceCooper]

(some time later) yes, I think it is a draw now. I probably seem silly for doubting Keith, but it's an instructive ending to look at.

A familiar experience for me, albeit rather too often from the other side of the board

[Jonathan Rogers]

seeing so far in advance (in keith's given line) that Black could retreat with ...Kd7 first and then Kd5 Ke7, so that e6 would not come with check, is impressive.

[NickFaulks]

Stockfish gets it immediately wrong (on chessbomb)

I've formed the opinion that the Chessbomb Stockfish is rubbish. It routinely thinks that a move is going to give a worthwhile advantage, then as soon as the move is played it doesn't like it any more. I can do that myself.

[Tim Harding]

Keith posted some analysis on Facebook:
...
The problem was that I thought the K+P ending was winning so I quickly played 44 Rg5. Then after she replied 44...Rxa5 suddenly I saw that she can draw the K+P after all: 45 Rxa5 bxa5 46 e4 Ke6 47 a4 Kd6 48 e5+ Ke6 49 Ke4 Kd7! 50 Kd5 Ke7 51 d5 g5 52 hxg5 h4 53 g6 h3 54 g7 h2 55 g8(Q) h1(Q) CHECK!

There is something wrong in that variation. Either Lawrence or Keith made a typo. 51 d5 is illegal... I suppose 51 e6 was meant.

[Tim Harding]

Stockfish gets it immediately wrong (on chessbomb)

I've formed the opinion that the Chessbomb Stockfish is rubbish. It routinely thinks that a move is going to give a worthwhile advantage, then as soon as the move is played it doesn't like it any more. I can do that myself.

With all these online evaluations (it's the same on Chess24) the engine goes deeper the longer the opponent thinks.
Conversely, the quicker the reply the shallower the search and the evaluation is then frozen and not subsequently reviewed.

Therefore these evaluations are more meaningful before time trouble/ quickplay finishes arise.

Unless the material is sufficiently reduced that the engine can call a tablebase for the evaluation which then becomes either 0.0 or mate in X with nothing in between (no "human difficulty" factor).

[Jon Mahony]

Queen against rook should be a win according to Fine's Basic Chess Endings, but obviously not easy.

Should be, but I couldn't do it recently, wound up taking the Rook with Queen in frustration First time I've had it. Computer made it look so easy too.

[Barry Sandercock]

Round 5. Alan Merry playing the Centre Counter against Michael Adams. Should be interesting to see how it goes. My favourite opening.

[Jon Mahony]

I'm quite a Merry fan, he played some good Chess at the British, his position looked almost untenable in one of his games against a GM (Summerscale?), but he got the draw.

Centre counter is one of my fave’s for white after 2.d4, right into a BDG, shame you studied all that Qd6 stuff black

[Roger de Coverly]

Round 5. Alan Merry playing the Centre Counter against Michael Adams.

Adams seemed well prepared in his tiebreak game in the World Cup

http://www.chessbomb.com/arena/2015-wor ... cka_Viktor

[Simon Brown]

Don't think this will last long after 8. Nb5....

[Roger de Coverly]

Don't think this will last long after 8. Nb5....

It demonstrates the potential hazards of not playing your regular opening. Merry usually meets e4 with e5 or e6.

It's an interesting move order from Adams, deferring Nf3 in favour of setting up Nb5 or d5 (against .. e6) tactics.

The clock times are a bit bizarre, Merry has used hardly any time, whilst Adams has taken half an hour. For what it's worth, the chessbomb stockfish would have you take the Rook on h8 rather than the Bishop on f5.

1. e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3 Qa5 4. d4 c6 5. Bc4 Bf5 6. Bd2 Nd7 7. Qe2 Ngf6 8. Nb5 Qb6 9. Nd6+ Kd8

[Matthew Turner]

Ba5 maybe?

[Simon Brown]

Maybe not as it's check!

[MartinCarpenter]

Looks rather like the sort of thing I've done when a little overawed - which takes rather less impressive players than Adams!

You don't consciously give up or anything, but if your subconscious does then it tends to show.

[Tim Harding]

Stockfish gets it immediately wrong (on chessbomb)

I've formed the opinion that the Chessbomb Stockfish is rubbish. It routinely thinks that a move is going to give a worthwhile advantage, then as soon as the move is played it doesn't like it any more. I can do that myself.

Further to my comment above, the same effect can occur even early in the game if one player moves fast and the other doesn't.

A good example is Greenfeld-Short today. Going by Stockfish on Chess24.

When Nigel played 7...a5 (after about a minute) assessed as -0.12 Stockfish's recommended reply was 8 e3. After 17 seconds Greenfeld played that and the assessment was -0.23 based on the reply 8...dxe3.
Nigel then thought almost half an hour before playing that move and the evaluation changed to slightly positive for White because the engine had much more time. Until something sharply tactical happens, I don't think these small swings are very meaningful; they just reflect the depth of search.

Greenfeld is still behind on the clock because he spent nearly an hour about to move 7.