Why is this position evaluated so?

Technical questions regarding Openings, Middlegames, Endings etc.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:52 am

A routine case of trying to bash the King down the f file. One threat is to play f5-f6, then Qc3-d2-h6-g7 mate. I suppose Black has to play .. f6, but it's still the case as Black, that you are trying to identify the threats and fend them off.

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 3476
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:29 pm

Because it's far easier for white to build up a kingside attack from that position than it is for black to do anything meaningful.

soheil_hooshdaran
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by soheil_hooshdaran » Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:51 pm

Where is White's "pleasant initiative" here?

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 3476
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:09 pm

Again, try to do something meaningful as black. White has better-placed pieces and chances of a kingside attack.

Mike Truran
Posts: 2294
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Mike Truran » Mon Jun 20, 2016 10:31 pm

And once the backward d6 pawn falls (as it will at some stage), the pawn on c5 is instantly vulnerable.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 6563
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Mon Jun 20, 2016 11:13 pm

Is it not already close to winning for White? White to move would take the d6 pawn. Black to move seems to only have the moves 1...Qc7 or 1...Ne5 or 1...Na5 (or even 1...h6 or 1...d5), and you would suppose White has something concrete after those moves. Why would the annotator stop and assess the position here as a "pleasant initiative"? Surely a few more moves should be given?

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 3476
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Mon Jun 20, 2016 11:22 pm

Fritz 5.32, incidentally, evaluates the position as -0.25, and recommends 1...Bb7 for black.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 6563
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Mon Jun 20, 2016 11:46 pm

Silly computer. Giving up the d6 pawn and trying to win the e4 pawn - that will never work... :D

NickFaulks
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by NickFaulks » Mon Jun 20, 2016 11:59 pm

IM Jack Rudd wrote:Fritz 5.32, incidentally, evaluates the position as -0.25, and recommends 1...Bb7 for black.
So what has it got after 2.Qxd6?

User avatar
IM Jack Rudd
Posts: 3476
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
Location: Bideford

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by IM Jack Rudd » Tue Jun 21, 2016 1:20 am

NickFaulks wrote:
IM Jack Rudd wrote:Fritz 5.32, incidentally, evaluates the position as -0.25, and recommends 1...Bb7 for black.
So what has it got after 2.Qxd6?
2...Na5, to be followed by ...Qb6.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 6563
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Jun 21, 2016 9:07 am

1...Bb7 2.Qxd6 Na5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.e5 presumably fails to something, or peters out to equality.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 6563
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Jun 21, 2016 4:40 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:1...Bb7 2.Qxd6 Na5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.e5 presumably fails to something, or peters out to equality.
I was wondering if anyone would follow up on this. Would the time spent analysing this position (followed by use of a computer engine) be useful or not? i.e. Is this a good training position? Is it another position from a Grivas book (mentioned earlier in the thread)?

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 16083
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Roger de Coverly » Tue Jun 21, 2016 5:50 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote: Is this a good training position?
A pragmatic way of answering that question would be to establish if a position with similar themes was likely to arise in your own games.

Trying to work out the opening from the position, it looks as if it might be one of the more modern interpretations of the Benko. Black has played b5xc4 and White retook with the Bishop. Also Black left out an early .. d6 and White tried to take advantage of this with d5-d6. If the assessment with the help of the engine is equal, that's practical knowledge to 1 d4, 2 c4 players and Benko ones of what ideas are available in those types of positions. Particularly it seems the initial glance of "crushing for White" is nowhere near true.

E Michael White
Posts: 1258
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:31 pm

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by E Michael White » Tue Jun 21, 2016 11:08 pm

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:1...Bb7 2.Qxd6 Na5 3.Bxf7+ Kxf7 4.e5 presumably fails to something, or peters out to equality.
4.e5 probably loses to 4. ... Nc4. Instead White's 4.Ne5 is better.

1. Bb7 isn't a very good attempt. Black should instead try 1... Na5 2. Bxf7+ Kxf7 3. Nd5 (3. Bxf6 Bxf6 4. Qd5+ Kg7 5. Qxa8 Bxc3 6. bxc3 Nc6 7. Rfb1 Qe7 8. Rb8) 3... Kg8 4. Nxf6+ Bxf6 5. Qd5+ Kg7 6.e5 , which engines shuffle to =.

User avatar
Christopher Kreuzer
Posts: 6563
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:34 am
Location: London

Re: Why is this position evaluated so?

Post by Christopher Kreuzer » Tue Jun 21, 2016 11:32 pm

It's not an easy position to analyse, is it? Jack has already checked it with an engine. Are there any other strong players around who might be willing to give their view on whether this is an easy position to assess (the position in the diagram above)? And what they think the verdict should be?

Post Reply