Why did he did so?
-
- Posts: 4828
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Why did he did so?
It would, but white would have been a pawn up. If black wanted to retain winning chances, 2...Rxf2+ would probably have been best.
-
- Posts: 21322
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
Count the pawns. White retakes on f1 and is a pawn up.Barry Sandercock wrote:2..Bg7 would have stopped White's perpetual check.
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
What's this combination based on?
-
- Posts: 4828
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: Why did he did so?
Some poor analysis, for starters: 3...Rf1+ is a rather stronger response to 3.Kh1 than 3...Nf2+ is.
-
- Posts: 8838
- Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
- Location: London
Re: Why did he did so?
I was about to say that... It is a nice combination, that wins a piece. White can't recapture on e4 as mate is forced. If the White queen wasn't undefended, then White might have time to capture on f8. I don't think any of the moves to save the queen really help (because of the mate on g2), so White is a piece down with further material loss to follow. White should just resign. Not much else to say.IM Jack Rudd wrote:Some poor analysis, for starters: 3...Rf1+ is a rather stronger response to 3.Kh1 than 3...Nf2+ is.
-
- Posts: 21322
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
Given Jack's line, a forced mate or loss of the Knight on e4. The ending was the two minor pieces is presumably good for Black, but not one you would want to play if short of time and without a 30 second increment.soheil_hooshdaran wrote:What's this combination based on?
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
What's this comination based on?
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
And what about
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
Ha!ha!IM Jack Rudd wrote:Some poor analysis, for starters: 3...Rf1+ is a rather stronger response to 3.Kh1 than 3...Nf2+ is.
true...I am a poor patzer!
-
- Posts: 5249
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Why did he did so?
Well that line is completely forced, so not much debate surely?soheil_hooshdaran wrote:And what about
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
What is the justification for 15...e5 in:
*
*
-
- Posts: 21322
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
My first thought is that the intention is to follow with .. Bxf3 and .. Nd4. But perhaps not, as this leaves the Knight unchallenged on d5. Maybe then it's to get f5 in, with play against the Kingside in the style of a Kings Indian.soheil_hooshdaran wrote:What is the justification for 15...e5 in:
*
It's one of those difficult decisions as to whether or when to incur the backward d pawn particularly against a half open d file. The success of the Sveshnikov suggests that it's frequently a plausible idea.
(edit) It's actually Sefc v Petrosian from 1957. Sefc went 16. Ne1 whereupon Petrosian played .. Nd4. Against an engine suggestion that 16. h3 should be played, the engine suggests .. Bxf3 17 Qxf3 f5.
The Soviet players of the 1950s knew things in these Kings Indian like positions that later became common knowledge.
(/edit)
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
What'd give White the advantage in:
-
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
What makes 1...Qa4 winning in:
-
- Posts: 21322
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Why did he did so?
It defends the Bishop on a2 and removes the Queen from the threat of the c4 pawn. I'm not sure I see why it's better than .. Qa5 or .. Qa6. Perhaps being closer to the King, it works better for constructing a mating net.soheil_hooshdaran wrote:What makes 1...Qa4 winning in: