How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Paul McKeown · Post by **Paul McKeown** » Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:33 pm

Regarding the Larsen provocation - the Lluben Popov variation - theoretically a White win. White would be mad trying it unless he had specifically studied it. See one of my posts somewhere on this forum.

Ian Stephens · Post by **Ian Stephens** » Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:37 pm

Thanks Geoff, I have not yet had chance to fully analyse the game, so here are some of my OTB thoughts:

3.Bb5 (Ruy Lopez, played it 31 times +19 =8 -4 I do feel comfortable playing the Spanish game)
5.d3 (I normaly castle here, decided to "slow play the opening)
8.Bc2 (thought 8.Bb3 was correct but wanted to support e4 and induce Black to play f5 as in the game)
9.exd5 (I played this move to prevent Bg4 which I thought could lead into some kind of "Marshall gambit" lines)
15..Nce7 (here I spent 5 mins trying to exploit the pin on e5)
19.Qe2 (I wanted to keep the e3 square for my bishop. It had taken me 34 of 90 mins to reach this winning position)
19..a8e8 (Here I began to sense danger and spent the next 7 mins looking at ways to prevent 20..f4 and thought why not play 20.f4 myself and hopefully stymie Blacks counterplay)
23..Nh4 (here I am faced with what I thought was a 50-50 move, I need to get the knight to c3 or d2. I recall looking at 24.Nd2 Rf6 25.Qe2 and then got concerned about 25..Nxg2 26.QxN Rg6 hence 24.Nc3)
26..Rf8 (I breathed a sigh of relief on this move as I thought I could of been mugged with 26..Nf3+ 27.Kh1 Qxh3+!! 28.gxh3 Rh6 with the "Fishing hook" mate about to befall me, or 29.Kg2 Nh4 perpetual,all ghosts of course)
27.Bd1 (later this was decried as a poor move by a team mate yet I thought it was the only move to thwart Nf3+ and could not play it quick enough)
27..Rf6 (spot on regards my time Geoff! The 8 moves from 20 to 28 cost me 37 mins 11 of them on 28.Nxf5 I figured the game stood or fell on this move, I rejected 28.Bd4 RxN 29.QxR Rg6 because my dark square Bishop which when I checked was back on e3 "Spotting more ghosts" I never quite saw the "bail out" as I saw no other move,I had also considered 28.Bg4 at this point dangerous)
31..Qxf4 (Here my opponent offered me the draw,I with 6 mins remaining he with 38 mins enough time as you rightly commented to have dodged 31..Bxf4. I now took stock,Blacks King is open to back rank threats,his queenside pawns are isolated, backward and weak, so in the "spirit of Bobby Fischer" 32.QxQ)
35.Bf3 (It was at this point all the nonsense with his "FIDO" rules began. I played the next 17 moves in around 90 seconds missing a bit but under time constraint you can understand, and offered the draw)
Thanks again for your analysis Geoff, almost all spot on, as I would contend that my opening strategy also contributed to winning the Knight, "Give them enough rope...." and all that, bit like a fishing pole!

Matt Mackenzie · Post by **Matt Mackenzie** » Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:04 pm

Paul McKeown wrote:
Geoff Chandler wrote:It's an extreme example of some of the difficult to play positions a computer will offer you.
The trouble in accepting it (blinded by the +1.05 evaluation) means you have to play
as strong as Rybka for the next 15 -20 which is beyond all but a handful of players.
Ollocks, I say. White has to play as strong as Rybka for the next 15 - 20 moves to justify losing a piece and pawn. Two can play at that game. I love attacking, I love defending. It's called chess, happy to take either side and I don't expect perfection from either.

2. f3? Crap.
2. Bc4?! Mediocre.

One bonus in playing the Alekhine is the vast number of rubbish ways White can try to avoid more theoretical lines.

I'm a 2 Nc3 player - and maintain it is actually quite decent. My score with it certainly suggests as much

Paul McKeown · Post by **Paul McKeown** » Fri Mar 30, 2012 7:21 pm

Matt,

As long as you are happy playing the Vienna Game, Vienna Gambit, Four Knights, Scotch Four Knights, etc., then, sure, 2. Nc3 is fine. I find a lot of White players are remarkably unhappy to see 2... e5! Hmmm, Belgrade Gambit... got coshed on the black side of that once... grrr....

Reckon old GC is angling for ye olde Reversed Latvian after 1. e4 Nf6 2. f3 e5 3. f4!

Hmmm, wonder what I would do with an Obverse Heffalump, 1. e4 Nf6 2. d3 e5 3. d4????

Actually 2. d3 is a bit of a nuisance move. As John Cox points out in his excellent book, 1. e4 Nf6 2. d3 e5 3. f4 is an invitation to "off piste complications" after 3... Nc6 4. fxe5 Nxe5 5 d4 Nxe4 6. Qe2 d5 7. dxe5 Qh4+ 8. g3 Nxg3 9. Nf3 Nxe2+ 10. Nxh4 Nxc1. I don't fancy any of that at all, so I reckon 3... d6 and some slow manouevring.

Paul

Ian Stephens · Post by **Ian Stephens** » Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:15 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote:Hi Roger.

The two things I think Ian should take from that game.
Is don't give up the White plus so easily and, if you can, avoid time trouble.

Wise words Geoff, and I believe it is also the advice Roger was conveying. Having analysed The position after 27...Rf6 I cant believe now, how I could not find the calm move 28.Bd4? almost anything but 28.Nxf5 was still winning for white, maybe I need to stop looking too deeply into every position and be more economical with my time also relax a little more at the board. The main thing is to enjoy your chess and learn from your mistakes, a bit like life!

Geoff Chandler · Post by **Geoff Chandler** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:17 am

Hi Paul.

Correct. 2.f3 is and go for a Latvian in reversed.
My pet Black defence. I also love playing against it.

Never tried 2.Bc4 v the ALekhine except in Blitz. Few take the pawn most play 2...e5

At the lower level where I hang about 2.Nc2 is very popular though
they have very little book back up. It is most liklely why the play it. To avoid theory.

Hi Ian

I liked you Bd1 it does stop a lot tricks. Black was reduced to aiming his pieces
at you King and see what turns up. (I know I have been there often enough.)
A lot of rule of thumb players would not have played that.

The ghost threats are what we all see. The good player can sift out the
real and the sham threats but they too must have sometime gone through the
ghost seeng phrase. It appears you learned more about chess from that one game
than a load of wins.

Michael Jones · Post by **Michael Jones** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 5:30 am

Geoff Chandler wrote:This example from a German lad whose name escapes me. (it's not Fritz)
He showed a whole serious of silly positions a computer take thinking it's OK.
This was just to give an idea of how dodgy analysing an opening with a box an be.

1. e4 c5 2. e5 Nc6 3. f4 g5 4. Bc4 gxf4 5. Bxf7+ Kxf7 6. Qh5+ {If 6...Kg7 White has a perpetual but the box cannot a mate for White so....} 6... Ke6 7. Qg4+ Kxe5 {I've no idea what Rybka thinks of this but Fritz used to say something Like +1 to Black. There is no forced win but would want to be Black here against someone like Jack Rudd licking his lips onthe other side of the board.?}your web browser and/or your host do not support iframes as required to display the chessboard

I played something similar in a 4NCL game once, marching my king into the centre in the opening (not one I'd prepared beforehand!), which looked like the only way I could avoid losing material. The game was drawn.

Paul McKeown · Post by **Paul McKeown** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 11:49 am

Geoff Chandler wrote:Never tried 2.Bc4 v the ALekhine except in Blitz. Few take the pawn most play 2...e5

Obviously after 1. e4 Nf6 2. Bc4, 2... e5 transposing into the Bishop's Opening is a good option, which gives Black easy play in well mapped out lines.

Taking on e4 with 2... Nxe4 is also fine. Played it once, won, but my opp had a much lower grade.

My favourite is 2... b5, though. If 3. Bxb5, then simply 3... Nxe4, without any of the complications, whereas in the other otb game that I saw 2. Bc4, the following sequence took place:

That deserves a diagram! I won, but again, my opp had a much lower grade.

Also fine for Black are 2... e6, followed by 3... d5 and the simple 2... d5. Any of these lines are fine for Black, and he probably also knows more theory about his choice than White does. Don't understand what White is really trying to do, except avoiding good main lines.

Paul McKeown · Post by **Paul McKeown** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:14 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote:Correct. 2.f3 is and go for a Latvian in reversed.
My pet Black defence. I also love playing against it.

Each to their own

Tell me, I heard the story once of two internationally titled Scots, who having had a long dispute about a particular variation in the Sicilian, when facing each other at the Scottish, started with 1. c3 e5 2. c4. Can you confirm or deny this particular Jockularity?

Geoff Chandler · Post by **Geoff Chandler** » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:25 pm

Hi Paul.

Joe Redpath played 1.c3 against IM Dougie Bryson in the Scots Ch. 2002.

Dougie replied 1...f4 and Joe swung it into a Pirc reversed.
Joe is a Pirc/Modern player so that appeared to be his plan all along....Joe Lost.

I cannot see them two getting involved in a Sicilian argument,
Joe very rarely played the Sicilian.

Dougie (Also a C.C. Grandmaster B.C. - Before Computers) I can see getting
mixed up in this kind of thing. It would appeal to his sense of humour.

I'm seeing a whole bunch of players including Alex and Lara tomorrow.
I'll make equiries.

I beat both Joe and Dougie the first time I played them.
Of course they were not the players they later became.
Wee Joe (I still call him wee Joe) attacked me like a demon throwng bits
at me and setting me......ME!! traps. I knew he would be a very good player.

Of course over the years they both gained a handsome revenge.
The last game v Dougie I played the Petroff for the 2nd time in my life
ready to play that 3...Nc6 trap that is being discussed on another thread.

He played 3.d4 OOPS!

I managed to dig out main theory OTB for a handful of moves then BANG!

IM Jack Rudd · Post by **IM Jack Rudd** » Mon Apr 02, 2012 5:55 pm

I had white against Francis Rayner in the 2008 British. The game started:

1.e4 Nf6
2.Nc3

...so he took the opportunity to transpose into a Vienna...

2...e5

...and then:

3.d4

All of a sudden, we're in a Centre Game, an opening I knew a lot better than him. 1-0 in 21 moves, if I remember correctly.

English Chess Forum

How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?

Re: How do you avoid disputes at the board?