British Chess Championships 2010

[JustinHorton]

I'd love to see what the clock situation is, as well. As it is, move 160 appears to be where it will be finishing

I hope for George's sake he doesn't end up defending R&B v R. Keith has an amazing score in that ending. Apart from 126 Re7 which seems to win

I've not got my computer running, but having looked at that is there any chance Black has 126..Re5 127 Be6 Bf8+ 128Re8 Rf5+?

[JustinHorton]

(No there isn't, on relatively sober reflection, as White has 128 Kxf8 Rxe6 129 g7+)

[LozCooper]

I'd love to see what the clock situation is, as well. As it is, move 160 appears to be where it will be finishing

I hope for George's sake he doesn't end up defending R&B v R. Keith has an amazing score in that ending. Apart from 126 Re7 which seems to win

I've not got my computer running, but having looked at that is there any chance Black has 126..Re5 127 Be6 Bf8+ 128Re8 Rf5+?

I think he can safely play 126... Re5 127 Be6 Bf8 128 Kxf8 and avoid any stalemate tricks. How they can analyse at all after eight hours is beyond me though

[Alex Holowczak]

The clock times were thus: Keith had 30 minutes more than Salimbeni by about move 60. Salimbeni was down to his 30 second increments, plus a minute or two. Keith eventually fell back to 4 minutes when the fifty move rule came to pass.

There was one point where he played Rc7, not Rd7 (as picked up earlier by Loz); Keith sighed (presumably in despair) when George played Re5+... He laughed it off though.

Given George is Under 18, and therefore some people think he can't play endgames by default (since he's probably never played an adjournment in his life), I think he did pretty well there.

[Phil Makepeace]

We engage in a bit of light ribbing today.

[LozCooper]

Given George is Under 18, and therefore some people think he can't play endgames by default (since he's probably never played an adjournment in his life), I think he did pretty well there.

Anyone having to play 160 moves against Keith has my upmost sympathy . My database alleges 92 is the most I ever had to play. Not surprisingly, it ended with him mating me in a R&B v R ending

[Carl Hibbard]

Anyone having to play 160 moves against Keith has my upmost sympathy . My database alleges 92 is the most I ever had to play. Not surprisingly, it ended with him mating me in a R&B v R ending

Last upload from site was 22:19 so perhaps a new record

[JustinHorton]

Given George is Under 18, and therefore some people think he can't play endgames by default (since he's probably never played an adjournment in his life), I think he did pretty well there.

Anyone having to play 160 moves against Keith has my upmost sympathy . My database alleges 92 is the most I ever had to play. Not surprisingly, it ended with him mating me in a R&B v R ending

125, my record: bishop and knight mate.

[Richard Bates]

Given George is Under 18, and therefore some people think he can't play endgames by default (since he's probably never played an adjournment in his life), I think he did pretty well there.

Anyone having to play 160 moves against Keith has my upmost sympathy . My database alleges 92 is the most I ever had to play. Not surprisingly, it ended with him mating me in a R&B v R ending

125, my record: bishop and knight mate.

Yes, but what is your maximum against Keith?

[JustinHorton]

Yes, but what is your maximum against Keith?

I don't know: we've only played once, in that five-minute tournament in York in 2000 where I earned my only win against an IM at any time-limit. As I recall, against Keith I lost on time with king, knight and pawn against king and knight. Must have been a lot of moves I reckon, but probably not 125.

[Ian Thompson]

125, my record: bishop and knight mate.

I not only beat your 38 moves to mate from your diagram, I equalled the 28 moves to mate by your Nalimov tablebases. My Nalimov tablebases are obviously better than yours though because mine reckon its mate in 21 from the starting position. The main line below is my mate in 28. The variation is the Nalimov tablebases mate in 21.

[White "Shredder"]
[Black "Thompson"]
[Result "0-1"]
[FEN "8/b7/n7/2k5/8/2K5/8/8 w - - 0 89"]

89. Kd2 (89. Kd2 Kd4 90. Ke2 Ke4 91. Kd1 Bd4 92. Kd2 Nc5 93. Ke2 Nb3 94. Kf1 Kf3 95. Ke1 Bc5 96. Kf1 Nd2+ 97. Ke1 Ke3 98. Kd1 Kd3 99. Ke1 Bd4 100. Kd1 Bf2 101. Kc1 Nc4 102. Kd1 Ne3+ 103. Kc1 Kc3 104. Kb1 Kb3 105. Kc1 Be1 106. Kb1 Bd2 107. Ka1 Nc2+ 108. Kb1 Na3+ 109. Ka1 Bc3#) 89... Kd4 90. Ke2 Nc5 91. Kf3 Kd3 92. Kf2 Ke4 93. Kg2 Ne6 94. Kh2 Kf3 95. Kh1 Bb8 96. Kg1 Nc5 97. Kh1 Ne4 98. Kg1 Nf2 99. Kf1 Bh2 100. Ke1 Ne4 101. Kd1 Be5 102. Kc2 Nc5 103. Kd2 Kf2 104. Kd1 Bc3 105. Kc2 Bb4 106. Kd1 Kf1 107. Kc2 Ke2 108. Kc1 Kd3 109. Kd1 Na4 110. Kc1 Bd2+ 111. Kb1 Kc3 112. Ka2 Bc1 113. Kb1 Kd2 114. Ka1 Kc2 115. Ka2 Nc3+ 116. Ka1 Bb2# 0-1

[JustinHorton]

So it does. How odd.

[Philip Adams]

Can anyone explain the opening in Adair - Tymrakiewicz? I play Alekhine's Defence myself, but this exotic line against the Voronezh variation with 9... Bf5 with multiple piece and exchange sacrifices throughout a long middlegame, in exchange for White's weak black squares, loose king and poor development, is entirely unknown to me. Is this new (old!?) theory? Has Tymrakiewicz just made it up, and just played a lovely game? Was it sound? Anyone have an engine running on it?

The line 9...Bf5 against the Voronezh has been extensively examined by the Alekhine Defense (sic) Working Group, a Google group offshoot of the Chess Publishing forum that was set up by the strong American corres. player Mark Morss. As far as I know, the line played in Adair-Tymrakiewicz was first proposed by Mark. Yesterday I posted tentative analysis of this game as as well as Tymrakiewicz's Rd.1 game against Rich (also featuring 9...Bf5 against the Voronezh) at the Chess Publishing forum, in this thread:
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/Y ... 335807/all

Phil Adams

[Carl Hibbard]

I am expecting boards 1-6 to struggle hosting wise today as they are still broadcast from one of the old servers

[Paul McKeown]

The line 9...Bf5 against the Voronezh has been extensively examined by the Alekhine Defense (sic) Working Group, a Google group offshoot of the Chess Publishing forum that was set up by the strong American corres. player Mark Morss. As far as I know, the line played in Adair-Tymrakiewicz was first proposed by Mark. Yesterday I posted tentative analysis of this game as as well as Tymrakiewicz's Rd.1 game against Rich (also featuring 9...Bf5 against the Voronezh) at the Chess Publishing forum, in this thread:
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/Y ... 335807/all

Phil Adams

Thanks - it makes a lot of sense. That game did not have the feel of a blunder by Black, but of a consistent strategic choice well executed. Will study in detail - and perhaps launch over the board.

Once more, thanks!

Paul McKeown