British 2016 Round by Round
-
- Posts: 4662
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Howell in trouble now (move 30). Perhaps we have been overestimating his position (or underestimating Keith's position, as in the past), though I would have thought that Howell did have reasonable compensation for the exchange?
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Sorry Jack!IM Jack Rudd wrote:Er, I'm gaining rating points so far.Clive Blackburn wrote:I see that Jack lost again, not a good start to the championship for him
-
- Posts: 8475
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Yeah, but we know you're better than 2213.IM Jack Rudd wrote:Er, I'm gaining rating points so far.Clive Blackburn wrote:I see that Jack lost again, not a good start to the championship for him
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 4662
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
I am assuming computers will find improvements on Keith's play since move 30, but it's been a fun game to watch
-
- Posts: 4662
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Nice win for David Coleman over Marcus Harvey. Again, it is not obvious where the IM norms will come from (Batchelor apart).
-
- Posts: 8475
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Without a computer, I fancied 32...Bf2. Easier to play in somebody else's game, of course.Jonathan Rogers wrote:I am assuming computers will find improvements on Keith's play since move 30, but it's been a fun game to watch
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a QR code stamped on a human face — forever.
-
- Posts: 7262
- Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
I think that's a much fairer assessment than some of the drivel being spouted on Chess24 albeit they did have a point that 32...Bf2 looked strong.Jonathan Rogers wrote:I am assuming computers will find improvements on Keith's play since move 30, but it's been a fun game to watch
-
- Posts: 4829
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Well, after today's result, Payne must be in with a shout.Jonathan Rogers wrote:Nice win for David Coleman over Marcus Harvey. Again, it is not obvious where the IM norms will come from (Batchelor apart).
-
- Posts: 3452
- Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
I had assumed our own Peter Farr had not in fact been thinking about his 50th move for 10 minutes but rather the game had been agreed drawn. Apparently not.
I’m all for the 'going around and around' technique as an attempt to win games that can’t/shouldn't really be won, but Black’s continuing here seems unduly optimistic.
I’m all for the 'going around and around' technique as an attempt to win games that can’t/shouldn't really be won, but Black’s continuing here seems unduly optimistic.
The Abysmal Depths of Chess: https://theabysmaldepthsofchess.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 624
- Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:20 pm
- Location: Horsham, Sussex
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
I'm fairly sure you've got the wrong Peter there.Jonathan Bryant wrote:I had assumed our own Peter Farr had not in fact been thinking about his 50th move for 10 minutes but rather the game had been agreed drawn. Apparently not.
I’m all for the 'going around and around' technique as an attempt to win games that can’t/shouldn't really be won, but Black’s continuing here seems unduly optimistic.
-
- Posts: 3452
- Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Oh so I have. It was Peter Shaw. Which explains how you were able to simultaneously post this comment and agree a draw, I suppose.PeterFarr wrote:I'm fairly sure you've got the wrong Peter there.Jonathan Bryant wrote:I had assumed our own Peter Farr had not in fact been thinking about his 50th move for 10 minutes but rather the game had been agreed drawn. Apparently not.
I’m all for the 'going around and around' technique as an attempt to win games that can’t/shouldn't really be won, but Black’s continuing here seems unduly optimistic.
The Abysmal Depths of Chess: https://theabysmaldepthsofchess.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 624
- Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:20 pm
- Location: Horsham, Sussex
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
Jonathan Bryant wrote:Oh so I have. It was Peter Shaw. Which explains how you were able to simultaneously post this comment and agree a draw, I suppose.PeterFarr wrote:I'm fairly sure you've got the wrong Peter there.Jonathan Bryant wrote:I had assumed our own Peter Farr had not in fact been thinking about his 50th move for 10 minutes but rather the game had been agreed drawn. Apparently not.
I’m all for the 'going around and around' technique as an attempt to win games that can’t/shouldn't really be won, but Black’s continuing here seems unduly optimistic.
-
- Posts: 1356
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:52 am
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
David Howell wins an exciting ending against Keith Arkell.
-
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
-
- Posts: 2393
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:44 pm
Re: British 2016 Round by Round
PS What on earth is the massive box to Gawain's right in the photo doing?
1. An arbiter in disguise?
2. Gawain's undercover Cray Supercomputer assistance?
3. Dave Clayton's live games transmission equipment?
Gawain's nonchalant whistling would suggest 2.
And what on earth is the thing sitting on top of the disguised arbiter/supercomputer/live games transmission kit?
1. An arbiter in disguise?
2. Gawain's undercover Cray Supercomputer assistance?
3. Dave Clayton's live games transmission equipment?
Gawain's nonchalant whistling would suggest 2.
And what on earth is the thing sitting on top of the disguised arbiter/supercomputer/live games transmission kit?