|
|
|
6. e5
>< school keeping me from being active with this...
|
I'm upset we didn't castle >.<
6. e5
|
Votes
6. e5: 37 (not counting carloselcoco's post) (hype[NZ], Bill Murray, Raysalis, jdseemoreglass, keyStorm, Malli, chesshaha, Malinor, EnderSword, LaXerCannon, pburns, shackes, Jumbled, EvilNalu, Boozerr, enigmaticcam, tyr, aphorism, itsjustatank, zasta, Chezus, wizard1944, wuBu, Varpulis, Sandwhale, Blazinghand, Shootist, timh, Sc1pio, Empyrean, carloselcoco?, GolemMadness, SOB_Maj_Brian, imBLIND, sleepingdog, GreatestThreat, WarChimp, Misder, durza, Archers_bane, DibujEx, Babyfactory)
6. e5 with official protest of our choice of 5th move: 2 (mcc, gogogadgetflow)
6. Bxc6: 1 (qrs)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RxTJa.png)
Summary of Discussion
I still think that 6. Bxc6 deserved more consideration than it received + Show Spoiler [main advantage of 6. Bxc6] +Its main advantage over 6. e5 is that it refrains from such early pushing of our central pawns. Since pawn moves cannot be undone, they need to be carefully weighed. Although there may be pros and cons both to having our pawn on e4 and to having it on e5, with a pawn on e4, e5 can be played at any time, whereas the converse is not true.
The potential disadvantages of such an early push are 1) weakening our control over d5 and 2) possibly allowing Black to exchange off our advanced pawns at a later point in the game.
After 6. e5
+ Show Spoiler [Extended discussion] +6. e5 poses a direct threat ( 7. PxN) that Black needs to respond to, so his options at this juncture are limited. Unless he wants to sacrifice material for nothing, Black must either move his King's Knight or play 6...Qe7 (pinning the e-pawn to the King, so that 8. PxN becomes impossible). Of the 5 Knight moves available to Black, we can essentially rule out 6...Ng7, which undevelops a piece and blocks Black from castling, and 6...Nh5, which leaves the Knight no place to run after 7. g4. 6...Ng4 is technically playable, but appears very weak for Black: after 7. cxd4 our e-pawn is protected from capture by any of Black's pieces, and when the g4 Knight is driven off again by h3, he has nothing to play but ...h6, after which Bxh6 gains us a tempo (by trading an undeveloped piece for a developed one) and weakens Black's pawns (by isolating and doubling his h-pawns) and his Kingside. Therefore only three Black moves are under consideration: 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4, and 6...Qe7.
- 6...Nd5:
General
This is perhaps the solidest move for Black: it answers the threat by moving the Knight to a strong central square where it is active yet has places to retreat to, and cannot easily be driven away with tempo.
Possible responses
Our best response according to current consensus is 7. 0-0. The point of this move is that it takes advantage of the temporary pin on Black's d-pawn resulting from ...Nd5: if Black now plays 7...PxP? then 8. QxN. We use the time to move our King to safety before recapturing the pawn. This eliminates all possible Black tactics resulting from PxP Bb4+. (While these tactics do not threaten us, they do create threats that limit our possibilities and allow Black to partially dictate the direction of the game. 7. 0-0 denies Black this chance.
In this post, jdseemoreglass offers two lines following 6. e5 Nd5, one a book line and one the result of his own analysis. There has been no further discussion of this line yet.
- 6...Ne4:
General
This aggressive move has both pros and cons for Black. On the pro side, it exerts substantial pressure on us in the short term. On the con side, it commits Black to a position that he cannot maintain for long.
6...Ne4 exerts more pressure on us than 6...Nd5 for two reasons: - Unlike after 6...Nd5, after 6...Ne4, the d4 pawn is not pinned. This means that 7...dxc3 (consolidating Black's pawn advantage) becomes an immediate threat that we must take into account.
- Unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 controls the d2 square. This has immediate ramifications for the line 7. PxP Bb4+ 8. Bd2/Nd2 (8. Nc3? loses a piece). For instance, the move Bd2, which in other variations is our best response to ...Bb4+, becomes far less attractive in this line, as it allows Black to play 8...NxB (9. NbxN), exchanging Knight for Bishop (on such open boards as this one, Bishops are generally better, especially when one possesses the pair, as Black does), temporarily pinning our Knight on d2, and generally, strengthening the power of Black's dark-squared Bishop along the important a5-e1 diagonal.
On the other hand, unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 leaves Black with no place to retreat if attacked. This limits Black's options for when the Knight is attacked.
Possible responses
As mentioned, with 6...Ne4, Black threatens to capture a pawn. Our reply must take this into account. Three possible moves have been suggested:- 7. PxP is the most direct response, eliminating the threat to our pawn by capturing first.
In other lines where we play PxP, Black has a choice of moves with his Bishop, including ...Bb6, ...Bb4+, and a variety of other, playable but less promising-looking moves with his Bishop. In this case, the vulnerability of the e4 Knight makes it less clear whether Black is free to play any of these moves in response to ...PxP. The lines where White attacks the Knight directly with 7. Qe2 (see below) are relevant here, but I haven't spent much time looking at those yet, so I don't have an informed opinion as to whether or not 7. PxP Bb6 (or some other Bishop move) is viable for Black.
- In any case, the only Black response that has been discussed to 7. PxP is 7...Bb4+. As mentioned above, this is a more aggressive variation of ...Bb4+ than other scenarios because the Knight on e4 exerts pressure on d2.
- Here the best continuation is reasonably clear: we certainly don't want to sacrifice material or lose the ability to castle, we most likely do not want to play 8. Bd2 for reasons mentioned above, and 8. Nfd2 slows our development, so we presumably will play 8. Nbd2.
The continuation from here has been discussed to some extent: briefly, although Black is exerting a bit of short-term pressure on our position, he cannot keep it up: once we castle, the pin on our Knight is gone, and Black's e4 Knight is threatened (and has no especially good place to retreat to). Black can force a couple of exchanges in this line if he wishes, but the has no way (that we've found) to cash in on his short-term pressure. Exchanges benefit us more than Black here, as Black will be exchanging strong, developed pieces for undeveloped ones.
- See the second spoiler of this post by jdseemoreglass again for some further analysis on this line. Note, however, that his "example of a solid continuation" has been called into question: this post, which jdseemoreglass has not responded to, suggests that it drops a pawn for Black.
- 7. 0-0 ignores the threat to our pawn in favour of continuing our development. This line has received quite a lot of discussion.
- The most challenging response that Black can play (in terms of challenging the correctness of our move) is 7...dxc3, grabbing the material offered him, and betting that we do not get sufficient compensation for it. A couple of White responses have been suggested for this move, although neither has been analyzed to a clear conclusion. In all of the lines analyzed, Black retains a material advantage of one pawn, sometimes two, in exchange for which White gets a substantial lead in development. jdseemoreglass and Raysalis (though they advocate different lines) are each optimistic about White's chances in these lines, whereas qrs (I) is more pessimistic about White's ability to prevent Black from holding on until he has reached a winning endgame.
- The more aggressive of the two White responses is 8. Qd5, first recommended by Raysalis, and endorsed by our esteemed opponent himself as "a nice find for a few reasons in that line".
8. Qd5 forks Black's Knight and Bishop, and since the Knight is protecting the Bishop and nothing is protecting the Knight, threatens to capture one of them. This touches off a flurry of tactics, but at the end of the day Black retains his one-pawn lead. 8...Nd2 counter-attacks White's Rook. 9. B/NxN PxB/N 10. N/BxP Bishop moves allows black to simply retain his single pawn advantage.
The alternative preferred by Raysalis was 9. QxB NxR, after which either 10. KxN PxP 11. BxP or 10. NxP NxP 11. KxN. In either case, the result is unclear: Raysalis feels it to be advantageous for white, jdseemoreglass is noncommittal, qrs (I) favors black, and no one else has expressed an opinion.
- jdseemoreglass suggested the alternative 8. Qc2, attacking Black's e4 Knight (who has nowhere safe to move) and pinning Black's c-pawn to his Bishop. This post contains jdseemoreglass's suggested continuation: he analyzes it to a point where White is down by two pawns-worth of material, but has a substantial mobility advantage. Again, there is no consensus as to who is ahead in this line.
Note that this line has not seen much discussion and some points about it are not clear. For instance, in the linked post, jdseemoreglass says that "defending [the Knight] with a pawn will lead to en passant". In fact Black does defend his e4 Knight with a pawn and White captures this pawn en passant (with the pawn that had been guarding d6 and f6), then Black will be free to retake the pawn with his e4 Knight. It is not clear why this should not be an option for Black.
- Note: from here till the end of the post, I give only a skeletal summary for the time being.
7. Qe2 addresses the threat to the pawn by counter-attacking the e4 Knight. This move leads to some very sharp and interesting lines. See the original lines given by jdseemoreglass, in the post linked above.
- 6...Qe7 temporarily addresses our threat to Black's Knight by pinning our e-pawn to our King. Furthermore, it threatens the e-pawn by adding a second attacker, where we currently have only one defender. The consensus is that our best response to this is 7. 0-0. This allows Black to (at least temporarily) win a pawn with 7...NxP, but the consensus is that this would be a mistake for Black, although the details of the following lines are still under discussion.
Note: this summary has been taking me a very long time to write up, so I'm taking a break from it. All the lines that we've been discussing for the next couple of moves are there, but some of the later discussion is abbreviated. I'll fill in the missing details sometime later.
PS On September 01 2011 00:49 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 23:22 qrs wrote:On August 31 2011 13:54 Empyrean wrote:
Gonna bandwagon onto 6. e5 since I've been busy lately X_X I don't understand reasoning like this. If you don't have enough time to figure out which move you think is best, wouldn't it make the most sense to simply abstain? A "bandwagon" vote seems to say nothing more than "this move is the one that most of the other voters prefer", which at best is stating the obvious, and at worst could even distort the vote if for whatever reason the current prevailing opinion changed. No offense meant; I just don't understand. On my next move vote, instead of a thorough analysis of multiple lines, my reason will be "qrs voted for it so it must be good." I think qrs might implode  Something else I don't understand: why do people use "implode" instead of "explode"? It's almost never the right word.
|
16987 Posts
On August 31 2011 23:22 qrs wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2011 13:54 Empyrean wrote:
Gonna bandwagon onto 6. e5 since I've been busy lately X_X I don't understand reasoning like this. If you don't have enough time to figure out which move you think is best, wouldn't it make the most sense to simply abstain? A "bandwagon" vote seems to say nothing more than "this move is the one that most of the other voters prefer", which at best is stating the obvious, and at worst could even distort the vote if for whatever reason the current prevailing opinion changed. No offense meant; I just don't understand.
I didn't have time this voting cycle to actually look at the position very much, but I'm still "active" I guess (in the sense that I haven't quit). If it were any closer (which it obviously isn't), I probably wouldn't have voted for anything.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
|
PS Show nested quote +On September 01 2011 00:49 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 31 2011 23:22 qrs wrote:On August 31 2011 13:54 Empyrean wrote:
Gonna bandwagon onto 6. e5 since I've been busy lately X_X I don't understand reasoning like this. If you don't have enough time to figure out which move you think is best, wouldn't it make the most sense to simply abstain? A "bandwagon" vote seems to say nothing more than "this move is the one that most of the other voters prefer", which at best is stating the obvious, and at worst could even distort the vote if for whatever reason the current prevailing opinion changed. No offense meant; I just don't understand. On my next move vote, instead of a thorough analysis of multiple lines, my reason will be "qrs voted for it so it must be good." I think qrs might implode Something else I don't understand: why do people use "implode" instead of "explode"? It's almost never the right word.
Implode: To collapse inward as if from external pressure, to break down or fall apart from within.
Seems like a pretty accurate word choice to me
+ Show Spoiler +
I don't quite understand why you say Bxc6 retains our pawn structure... after the recapture we are in exactly the same situation, with our e-pawn undefended.
In fact, the situation is even worse, since the d-file is now open for a queen trade, which allows the tactical trick of:
6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. cxd4 Nxe4!
We can't capture the bishop, because after the queen trade, black has the move Nxf2+, grabbing the rook.
|
I've got very little to add to this as we've hashed this over in quite some detail. I do want to re-quote my response to jdseemoreglass' excellent analysis from the previous move, though, as based on his re-analysis I'm not sure this was seen.
On August 25 2011 14:51 Picklesicle wrote:Re. jdseemoreglass' post, I'm only to going to comment on this line: + Show Spoiler +5. d4 exd4 6. e5 Ne4 7. Qe2 d5 8. exd6ep O-O 9. dxc7 Qd5 10. Bc4 Qd7 11. O-O By saying we should be really really careful here. + Show Spoiler +I know I espoused Qe2 in an earlier argument, but that was as a follow up to 0-0. Specifically, the line I was addressing was
5. 0-0 Nxe4 6. Qe2 In this case, there is an alternative move 7 for Black that has a lot of play: 5. d4 exd
6. e5 Ne4
7. Qe2 Nxf2!?And we should be really wary. 8. Kxf2?? d3+! and Black wins the queen. 8. Qxf2 Qe7 to protect the bishop and we're in very treacherous waters. Specifically, until we find a way to secure the queen and the g8-a7 diagonal, we can't really castle kingside. Definitely not on the next move as 9. 0-0?? d3+! and Black wins the queen again. We're up a minor piece for a pawn here, but traps abound and it is more than likely we'll need to equalize material to buy the time to get our exposed king out of the center while also getting our queen to safety. In other words, let's look closely at 5. d4 exd 6. e5 Ne4 and see what good play we have with it.
I still vote 6. e5, though the point is now academic.
qrs, while I think you raise good points overall, I [revised to: used to not] like 6. Bxc6 because [I'm revising my opinion: 6. Bxc6 is academic, but it is interesting, actually]:
+ Show Spoiler +this position is about to blow open. It's already on semi-open and very soon to become open. In this position, capturing the Knight does not really weaken Black's hold on the center and our light-squared Bishop is strong and active; exchanging it away should be for something that (not necessarily immediately) compensates us for that loss. Trading away a bishop that threatens to bounce back and menace the kingside, protect our centre or *eventually* trade is a big deal and the resultant position is ultimately equivalent to the current one without White having use or possession of their active bishop.
Black, on the other hand, would likely respond with dxc6 which would activate their currently undeveloped bishop, bring their queen to bear on the embattled center and trade away a knight for a bishop in a semi-open position (soon, due to the our 5. d4 move to likely be open).
The doubled pawns on the c-file are not a weakness for Black; with their pawn on the d-file now with additional queen protection, our primary active bishop removed from play and our knights far from any real outpost opportunities, black can look to Bb6 (or Be7 if there is time), c5 and 0-0 to bring a real fight to the center.
With our king still in the center, cxd is not yet a good play and Black is constantly threatening dxc without the pin resultant from 6. e5 Nd5 if Black takes that route (I think that Black gets more play out of Ne4). And then, if we were to play that line, we wouldn't want to exchange yet on move 7 for all the reasons jdseemoreglass and you yourself have outlined in the analysis on the previous move.
That threat of dxc is a potent one with the black queen and bishop pair in play as we have to be sure we can recover sufficient material or make up with a positional strength.
If you want a tactical analysis, here you go:
Consider the following starting with:
6. Bxc6 dxc6
A few options for white here. Black is threatening to win a substantial amount of material with cxd. If that is allowed to happen, then White is in a world of hurt as Black would force a queen trade. White pawn structure in the center is a mess and there is no bishop pair to back it up. The threat of the pawn on d4 has to be nullified. Note that this doesn't necessarily mean a direct capture.
7. cxd Nxe4!
and White is in trouble. A bishop capture is not an option:
8. dxc5?? Qxd1+!!
9. Kxd1 Nxf2+ winning the rook (yes, the Knight will be hard to save but White is down material here and cannot stop Black from castling and bringing his rook pair to bear down an open file. Black also now has a pawn majority on both sides of the board)
7. 0-0 dxc
8. Qxd8 Kxd8
9. Rd1+ Ke7
10 Nxc3 and play is about even. Black's king is in the centre unable to castle but has pawn majorities on both wings and the doubled c-pawn can easily be used to further bust up White's queenside pawns. This is not an unattractive position for either side.
7. 0-0 0-0
8. cxd and Black almost has to retreat his bishop. Bb6 and Be7 are the most likely candidates.
9. Nc3 develops the knight and protects e4. OR 9. e5
This is actually not bad for White.
Incidentally, Ng5, I will also say that although jdseemoreglass' method may have been a bit suspect, the intent of discouraging people from relying on "this is a book move" as their sole argument is a good one. We should be able to articulate why such-and-such is a good move, even if it is a "book move" and jdseemoreglass was addressing the people who would reject his (her?) analysis based on the sole, at least solely stated, reason that it wasn't a book move.
Lastly, I'm going to get up on a soap box regarding some who have blasted simplification as boring: perhaps simplification wasn't the best word when people were coming up with terms for all this, but a "simplified" position with pieces traded off is by no means less exciting or dramatic that one with a lot of pieces on the board... in fact, a simplified position can be easily be just as or even more complicated as the position before the trades took place. Minor piece positions are a great example of this. Also, why reject moves because they are "boring"? There are good moves (often, especially at this stage of the game, many different choices of them), there are bad moves and there are interesting and dubious moves. I've always been taught that patience is a good thing in chess. Not everything needs to be a brilliant combination of a kingside attack.
Edit: added some tactical analysis and thoughts on Bc6.
|
On September 01 2011 04:10 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +PS On September 01 2011 00:49 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 31 2011 23:22 qrs wrote:On August 31 2011 13:54 Empyrean wrote:
Gonna bandwagon onto 6. e5 since I've been busy lately X_X I don't understand reasoning like this. If you don't have enough time to figure out which move you think is best, wouldn't it make the most sense to simply abstain? A "bandwagon" vote seems to say nothing more than "this move is the one that most of the other voters prefer", which at best is stating the obvious, and at worst could even distort the vote if for whatever reason the current prevailing opinion changed. No offense meant; I just don't understand. On my next move vote, instead of a thorough analysis of multiple lines, my reason will be "qrs voted for it so it must be good." I think qrs might implode Something else I don't understand: why do people use "implode" instead of "explode"? It's almost never the right word. Implode: To collapse inward as if from external pressure, to break down or fall apart from within. Seems like a pretty accurate word choice to me I suppose if it's the "external pressure" side of it that you wanted to emphasize, you can make that case. In my opinion, that's secondary to the actual physical description of what someone looks like when he loses his cool, which is much more like exploding (spewing angry noises and such) than imploding (I don't know what image this should call to my mind).
I'd like to respond about the chess part, but that will have to wait for when I have more time. It's an interesting line that you and Pickle give, though. I'll get back to it...
Later, back at the ranch...
Re 6. Bxc6 (which yes, is academic at this point):
On September 01 2011 04:10 jdseemoreglass wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I don't quite understand why you say Bxc6 retains our pawn structure... after the recapture we are in exactly the same situation, with our e-pawn undefended.
In fact, the situation is even worse, since the d-file is now open for a queen trade, which allows the tactical trick of:
6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. cxd4 Nxe4!
We can't capture the bishop, because after the queen trade, black has the move Nxf2+, grabbing the rook. OK, first of all, I have to admit that I didn't spend a lot of time analyzing 6. Bxc6 It looked interesting initially, and I spent a bit of time on it in the beginning, but as the votes kept piling in for 6. e5, with no one even expressing interest in 6. Bxc6, let alone voting for it, I stopped looking at it, partly because it seemed like a waste of time, when it had no chance of winning the vote, and partly because I believe in the dialectic method of analysis (in general, not just chess), where one side tries to establish a point of view and the other side tries to refute it, rather than one person alternatingly taking both sides.
At all events, I missed the tactical trick that you and picklesickle point out. The main lines I was considering (as I said in this post) when I made my statements about pawn structure were + Show Spoiler +6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. cxd4 Bb6 and 7...Bb4+ 8. Bd2 BxB 9. Nb1xB
The line in question is quite an interesting one, and indeed does lead to a very different game. If we find it to be undesirable for us, I will certainly have to withdraw all my statements about what to expect from 6. Bxc6, pending further analysis.
In fact, however, although I could definitely be mistaken, I like the look of this line for us. I certainly don't agree with pickle's ?? or jd's casual assumption that there is no way we can go into this. As far as material is concerned, + Show Spoiler [continued] +the line seems fairly even: Black gets a two Pawns and a Rook for the Bishop that we capture initially and the Knight that has no escape from our territory. That leaves him a pawn up, but I feel confident that we will capture at least one of his doubled c-pawns, making the material even. As for position, I like ours fairly well, especially as we retain our slight development advantage, and our pieces can easily work together on such an open board.
Here's the line as far as I can reasonably confidently take it: + Show Spoiler +6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. cxd4 Nxe4 8. dxc5 Qxd1+ 9. Kxd1 Nxf2+ 10. Ke2 Nxh1 11. Bf4. The first five moves are just playing out the tactics that you showed. 11. Bf4 both threatens Black's c7 pawn before Black has time to mount a good defense, and prevents Black from doing any more damage with his Knight by forcing us to double pawns with ...Ng3+. Beyond this, I can't be quite as confident that you'll agree with what I call the best line, but at least a plausible continuation is 11...0-0 (starting to catch up on development without delay 12. BxP (capturing the pawn before Black has time to protect it; also preventing Black for the moment from placing a Rook on e8) 12...Rd8+ (developing a Rook with tempo, forcing our King to a less active position on the board; perhaps I should add threatening ...Re1 or the almost-as-uncomfortable ...Re2 if we allow these to be played) 13. Kc1 (the only move that prevents the Knight from escaping) 13...Bg4 (developing the Bishop and clearing the path for the Queen's Rook; threatening to exchange Bishop for Knight, which leaving us without the Knight pair and isolates our two Kingside pawns and perhaps I should add opens the door to the devastating ...Re1 if we are careless [e.g. 14. Kb1?]). Or perhaps you prefer 13...Bf5 (deploying the Bishop to an active position, with the intention of keeping it rather than exchanging it) 14. Nc3 (developing our remaining Knight and clearing the path for our Rook, guarding both essential squares e1 and e2, allowing our King the freedom to finish the job of killing the Black Knight with Kb1 etc.)
That brings us to this position + Show Spoiler +(possibly with Black Bishop on f5 instead of g4): ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iSGmT.png) Black to play
To me, it looks like an interesting position with play for both sides, but not one where I mind taking White. Do you disagree with my assessment of this position, or do you think that there's an improvement for Black in the line that I gave?
|
e5
+ Show Spoiler +I agree that the Knight takes later stops Bxc6
Also sorry, currently moving so I've been inactive xD
|
In fact, though, although I could definitely be mistaken, I like the look of this line for us. I certainly don't agree with pickle's ?? or jd's casual assumption that there is no way we can go into this. *snip*
I'm not saying that we have anything like a decisive advantage--the position is unclear to me, but I am saying that it's a position that I would not mind playing at all.
Sorry if I came off as dismissive; it certainly wasn't my intent. Actually, I think there are some very interesting options with 6. Bxc6 and I offered two lines of play that follow with 7. 0-0 that come out (to my mind) as at least even for White.
I edited my post pretty much immediately after I posted it, though the edit took me about 30 minutes, and I did so because as soon as I posted it I glanced up at my chessboards and smacked my forehead and said "Wait! What if White just castles on move 7?"
I'll look over my post again and see how I failed to communicate and do better; but yes: I think there is play to be had with 6. Bxc6. At the very least, there are not significantly more traps here than there are with 6. e5, + Show Spoiler +like some of the lines that follow 6. ... Ne4.
My apologies again.
In fact, as regards as the + Show Spoiler +material exchange you outline, the position is not unlike the one I described as a trap leading out of 5. 0-0, and also one danger with 6. cxd in which we do precisely the trade you're talking about. The position is a dynamic and dangerous one. My gut feeling is that Black's superior pawn structure is a strong advantage but it can't be denied that White's superior development at that point is also strong, especially if it can be brought to bear. I'm going to go ahead and post this update and find my lines and edit them in later.
|
Deadline for move 6 is over.
Let me reboot, make the statistics and clean up the roster now.
|
Picklesicle wrote:
I wanted to reply to the second half of the post, but then in the quote it brought up a crapload of spoilers so I just deleted it.
It was the thing arguing that few pieces can be dramatic and complicated as well. It is very very true and I wanted to address it.
One example is endgames. They are mostly like... These rare monsters or secret magicians in a world where everyone knows they exist and everyone always talks about reading or getting to know more about them - yet mostly noone does. Endgames with a few pieces can be insanely difficult. Only if you have studied those extensively can you start to really admire and respect what most top grandmasters do - Kramnik comes to mind as a prime suspect. Especially in endgames you often don't have the luxury of playing the second best move and still have good chances, be winning or avoid loss. It's a one mistake only phase, and you simply cannot see everything. You need to know incredible amount of theory, have an inhuman measure of intuition and be crystal sharp in your thought processes.
I was already a reasonable player when I decided that the next level of my studies should be endgames and 'more boring' positions. Within one or two years I think I more than doubled my insight and play strength. I still don't think I know nearly enough about any part of chess, but at that time endgames became a very strong pillar of my knowledge that I should deepen a dozen times over if I want to get anywhere.
The funny thing is, that I positively don't think you need that serious of endgame knowledge for reaching, for example, an international master title.
Most people see this as a disrespect - but I would beg to differ. There's no bigger respect to the game it self when you kneel before the beauty of it, admitting that even levels that are considered master-y mean nothing in the scheme of the grand picture. This is how I respect chess, and how I know I will always be a noobie.
Back to stats...
|
On September 01 2011 13:27 Ng5 wrote:I wanted to reply to the second half of the post, but then in the quote it brought up a crapload of spoilers so I just deleted it. It was the thing arguing that few pieces can be dramatic and complicated as well. It is very very true and I wanted to address it. One example is endgames. They are mostly like... These rare monsters or secret magicians in a world where everyone knows they exist and everyone always talks about reading or getting to know more about them - yet mostly noone does. Endgames with a few pieces can be insanely difficult. Only if you have studied those extensively can you start to really admire and respect what most top grandmasters do - Kramnik comes to mind as a prime suspect. Especially in endgames you often don't have the luxury of playing the second best move and still have good chances, be winning or avoid loss. It's a one mistake only phase, and you simply cannot see everything. You need to know incredible amount of theory, have an inhuman measure of intuition and be crystal sharp in your thought processes. I was already a reasonable player when I decided that the next level of my studies should be endgames and 'more boring' positions. Within one or two years I think I more than doubled my insight and play strength. I still don't think I know nearly enough about any part of chess, but at that time endgames became a very strong pillar of my knowledge that I should deepen a dozen times over if I want to get anywhere. The funny thing is, that I positively don't think you need that serious of endgame knowledge for reaching, for example, an international master title. Most people see this as a disrespect - but I would beg to differ. There's no bigger respect to the game it self when you kneel before the beauty of it, admitting that even levels that are considered master-y mean nothing in the scheme of the grand picture. This is how I respect chess, and how I know I will always be a noobie. Back to stats...
Thank you.
For me, I recall many years ago I was studying in Hungary. At the time, I met a local who described his chess as "decent, I guess.".
"Hey!" I thought, "That's how I describe my chess!"
So I played him. He was a strong Master and he handily crushed me. That was an extremely educational moment for me and not just from a chess standpoint.
A good friend of mine who is also my regular chess discussion buddy and also works in the theater once described chess as "like lighting design; there's so many beautiful aspects to it that it's almost transcendent. Every game is a new discovery and a new puzzle."
Sadly, he doesn't have the time he really wanted (and needed) to devote to both his art and his chess and when the time came that he had to choose, he chose his art.
I say sadly only because it is sad that there isn't enough time to do it all.
Here's to beautiful things.
Cheers.
|
You're welcome. 
OP updated, roster purged, everything is back to normal. I will try to mess around with Mathematica and Matlab to see if I can get a nice 3D distribution graph. Probably not for the next move, but I hope I'll find something decent.
Edit: I will try to move on Friday, as stated in the OP.
|
On September 01 2011 12:38 Picklesicle wrote:Show nested quote +In fact, though, although I could definitely be mistaken, I like the look of this line for us. I certainly don't agree with pickle's ?? or jd's casual assumption that there is no way we can go into this. *snip*
I'm not saying that we have anything like a decisive advantage--the position is unclear to me, but I am saying that it's a position that I would not mind playing at all. Sorry if I came off as dismissive; it certainly wasn't my intent. Actually, I think there are some very interesting options with 6. Bxc6 and I offered two lines of play that follow with 7. 0-0 that come out (to my mind) as at least even for White. I edited my post pretty much immediately after I posted it, though the edit took me about 30 minutes, and I did so because as soon as I posted it I glanced up at my chessboards and smacked my forehead and said "Wait! What if... No worries: I didn't take your tone as dismissive in the least. A post as long as that one is the opposite of dismissive imo, regardless of the conclusion it comes to. Absolutely no need to apologize.
Also, I did read your post after your edit. The "??" comment refers to the line I was responding to, and is still there, in the same place that you call the line "not an option".
To respond to the rest of your comments 6. Bxc6 now:
You give three lines. - The first is a tactical line following our most obvious 7th move, and the one I had initially counted on. You assess it as awful for White, I assess it as unclear, with play for both sides.
- The second is thematically similar to other variations that have been proposed in this game: + Show Spoiler [theme] + Here our assessments are the reverse; you find the position unclear with play for both sides, whereas I prefer Black there. (In general, I'm clearly more materialistic then most of you others who are posting analysis here: at least in correspondence chess, where our opponent has three days to find a correct defense, my default assumption is "if we can't find a win by force, then he probably can find some way to defend". If our opponent can defend long enough, of course, then a material advantage will in many if not most cases boil down to an endgame victory.
- The third leads by transposition essentially to the same position that I had originally expected to reach from 6. Bxc6. Both you and I liked this position for White.
In short, after 6. Bxc6 we have the following interesting situation:
|
On September 01 2011 02:24 qrs wrote:Votes 6. e5: 37 (not counting carloselcoco's post) (hype[NZ], Bill Murray, Raysalis, jdseemoreglass, keyStorm, Malli, chesshaha, Malinor, EnderSword, LaXerCannon, pburns, shackes, Jumbled, EvilNalu, Boozerr, enigmaticcam, tyr, aphorism, itsjustatank, zasta, Chezus, wizard1944, wuBu, Varpulis, Sandwhale, Blazinghand, Shootist, timh, Sc1pio, Empyrean, carloselcoco?, GolemMadness, SOB_Maj_Brian, imBLIND, sleepingdog, GreatestThreat, WarChimp, Misder, durza, Archers_bane, DibujEx, Babyfactory) 6. e5 with official protest of our choice of 5th move: 2 (mcc, gogogadgetflow) 6. Bxc6: 1 (qrs) Summary of Discussion I still think that 6. Bxc6 deserved more consideration than it received + Show Spoiler [main advantage of 6. Bxc6] +Its main advantage over 6. e5 is that it refrains from such early pushing of our central pawns. Since pawn moves cannot be undone, they need to be carefully weighed. Although there may be pros and cons both to having our pawn on e4 and to having it on e5, with a pawn on e4, e5 can be played at any time, whereas the converse is not true.
The potential disadvantages of such an early push are 1) weakening our control over d5 and 2) possibly allowing Black to exchange off our advanced pawns at a later point in the game. but the team has decided against it. The discussion, instead, has moved further along to Black's possible responses to 6. e5 and our options in response to those. After 6. e5+ Show Spoiler [Extended discussion] +6. e5 poses a direct threat ( 7. PxN) that Black needs to respond to, so his options at this juncture are limited. Unless he wants to sacrifice material for nothing, Black must either move his King's Knight or play 6...Qe7 (pinning the e-pawn to the King, so that 8. PxN becomes impossible). Of the 5 Knight moves available to Black, we can essentially rule out 6...Ng7, which undevelops a piece and blocks Black from castling, and 6...Nh5, which leaves the Knight no place to run after 7. g4. 6...Ng4 is technically playable, but appears very weak for Black: after 7. cxd4 our e-pawn is protected from capture by any of Black's pieces, and when the g4 Knight is driven off again by h3, he has nothing to play but ...h6, after which Bxh6 gains us a tempo (by trading an undeveloped piece for a developed one) and weakens Black's pawns (by isolating and doubling his h-pawns) and his Kingside. Therefore only three Black moves are under consideration: 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4, and 6...Qe7.
- 6...Nd5:
General
This is perhaps the solidest move for Black: it answers the threat by moving the Knight to a strong central square where it is active yet has places to retreat to, and cannot easily be driven away with tempo.
Possible responses
Our best response according to current consensus is 7. 0-0. The point of this move is that it takes advantage of the temporary pin on Black's d-pawn resulting from ...Nd5: if Black now plays 7...PxP? then 8. QxN. We use the time to move our King to safety before recapturing the pawn. This eliminates all possible Black tactics resulting from PxP Bb4+. (While these tactics do not threaten us, they do create threats that limit our possibilities and allow Black to partially dictate the direction of the game. 7. 0-0 denies Black this chance.
In this post, jdseemoreglass offers two lines following 6. e5 Nd5, one a book line and one the result of his own analysis. There has been no further discussion of this line yet.
- 6...Ne4:
General
This aggressive move has both pros and cons for Black. On the pro side, it exerts substantial pressure on us in the short term. On the con side, it commits Black to a position that he cannot maintain for long.
6...Ne4 exerts more pressure on us than 6...Nd5 for two reasons: - Unlike after 6...Nd5, after 6...Ne4, the d4 pawn is not pinned. This means that 7...dxc3 (consolidating Black's pawn advantage) becomes an immediate threat that we must take into account.
- Unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 controls the d2 square. This has immediate ramifications for the line 7. PxP Bb4+ 8. Bd2/Nd2 (8. Nc3? loses a piece). For instance, the move Bd2, which in other variations is our best response to ...Bb4+, becomes far less attractive in this line, as it allows Black to play 8...NxB (9. NbxN), exchanging Knight for Bishop (on such open boards as this one, Bishops are generally better, especially when one possesses the pair, as Black does), temporarily pinning our Knight on d2, and generally, strengthening the power of Black's dark-squared Bishop along the important a5-e1 diagonal.
On the other hand, unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 leaves Black with no place to retreat if attacked. This limits Black's options for when the Knight is attacked.
Possible responses
As mentioned, with 6...Ne4, Black threatens to capture a pawn. Our reply must take this into account. Three possible moves have been suggested:- 7. PxP is the most direct response, eliminating the threat to our pawn by capturing first.
In other lines where we play PxP, Black has a choice of moves with his Bishop, including ...Bb6, ...Bb4+, and a variety of other, playable but less promising-looking moves with his Bishop. In this case, the vulnerability of the e4 Knight makes it less clear whether Black is free to play any of these moves in response to ...PxP. The lines where White attacks the Knight directly with 7. Qe2 (see below) are relevant here, but I haven't spent much time looking at those yet, so I don't have an informed opinion as to whether or not 7. PxP Bb6 (or some other Bishop move) is viable for Black.
- In any case, the only Black response that has been discussed to 7. PxP is 7...Bb4+. As mentioned above, this is a more aggressive variation of ...Bb4+ than other scenarios because the Knight on e4 exerts pressure on d2.
- Here the best continuation is reasonably clear: we certainly don't want to sacrifice material or lose the ability to castle, we most likely do not want to play 8. Bd2 for reasons mentioned above, and 8. Nfd2 slows our development, so we presumably will play 8. Nbd2.
The continuation from here has been discussed to some extent: briefly, although Black is exerting a bit of short-term pressure on our position, he cannot keep it up: once we castle, the pin on our Knight is gone, and Black's e4 Knight is threatened (and has no especially good place to retreat to). Black can force a couple of exchanges in this line if he wishes, but the has no way (that we've found) to cash in on his short-term pressure. Exchanges benefit us more than Black here, as Black will be exchanging strong, developed pieces for undeveloped ones.
- See the second spoiler of this post by jdseemoreglass again for some further analysis on this line. Note, however, that his "example of a solid continuation" has been called into question: this post, which jdseemoreglass has not responded to, suggests that it drops a pawn for Black.
- 7. 0-0 ignores the threat to our pawn in favour of continuing our development. This line has received quite a lot of discussion.
- The most challenging response that Black can play (in terms of challenging the correctness of our move) is 7...dxc3, grabbing the material offered him, and betting that we do not get sufficient compensation for it. A couple of White responses have been suggested for this move, although neither has been analyzed to a clear conclusion. In all of the lines analyzed, Black retains a material advantage of one pawn, sometimes two, in exchange for which White gets a substantial lead in development. jdseemoreglass and Raysalis (though they advocate different lines) are each optimistic about White's chances in these lines, whereas qrs (I) is more pessimistic about White's ability to prevent Black from holding on until he has reached a winning endgame.
- The more aggressive of the two White responses is 8. Qd5, first recommended by Raysalis, and endorsed by our esteemed opponent himself as "a nice find for a few reasons in that line".
8. Qd5 forks Black's Knight and Bishop, and since the Knight is protecting the Bishop and nothing is protecting the Knight, threatens to capture one of them. This touches off a flurry of tactics, but at the end of the day Black retains his one-pawn lead. 8...Nd2 counter-attacks White's Rook. 9. B/NxN PxB/N 10. N/BxP Bishop moves allows black to simply retain his single pawn advantage.
The alternative preferred by Raysalis was 9. QxB NxR, after which either 10. KxN PxP 11. BxP or 10. NxP NxP 11. KxN. In either case, the result is unclear: Raysalis feels it to be advantageous for white, jdseemoreglass is noncommittal, qrs (I) favors black, and no one else has expressed an opinion.
- jdseemoreglass suggested the alternative 8. Qc2, attacking Black's e4 Knight (who has nowhere safe to move) and pinning Black's c-pawn to his Bishop. This post contains jdseemoreglass's suggested continuation: he analyzes it to a point where White is down by two pawns-worth of material, but has a substantial mobility advantage. Again, there is no consensus as to who is ahead in this line.
Note that this line has not seen much discussion and some points about it are not clear. For instance, in the linked post, jdseemoreglass says that "defending [the Knight] with a pawn will lead to en passant". In fact Black does defend his e4 Knight with a pawn and White captures this pawn en passant (with the pawn that had been guarding d6 and f6), then Black will be free to retake the pawn with his e4 Knight. It is not clear why this should not be an option for Black.
- Note: from here till the end of the post, I give only a skeletal summary for the time being.
7. Qe2 addresses the threat to the pawn by counter-attacking the e4 Knight. This move leads to some very sharp and interesting lines. See the original lines given by jdseemoreglass, in the post linked above.
- 6...Qe7 temporarily addresses our threat to Black's Knight by pinning our e-pawn to our King. Furthermore, it threatens the e-pawn by adding a second attacker, where we currently have only one defender. The consensus is that our best response to this is 7. 0-0. This allows Black to (at least temporarily) win a pawn with 7...NxP, but the consensus is that this would be a mistake for Black, although the details of the following lines are still under discussion.
PS Show nested quote +On September 01 2011 00:49 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 31 2011 23:22 qrs wrote:On August 31 2011 13:54 Empyrean wrote:
Gonna bandwagon onto 6. e5 since I've been busy lately X_X I don't understand reasoning like this. If you don't have enough time to figure out which move you think is best, wouldn't it make the most sense to simply abstain? A "bandwagon" vote seems to say nothing more than "this move is the one that most of the other voters prefer", which at best is stating the obvious, and at worst could even distort the vote if for whatever reason the current prevailing opinion changed. No offense meant; I just don't understand. On my next move vote, instead of a thorough analysis of multiple lines, my reason will be "qrs voted for it so it must be good." I think qrs might implode Something else I don't understand: why do people use "implode" instead of "explode"? It's almost never the right word.
My vote was not with official protest, it was more "We are doooooomed" . And even though because of that it is hard for me to care about outcome that I think is set I put actually most thought into this move. I don't like where e5 is going, but I found nothing better Bxc6 included.
Also implode and explode are both ok in the context he used it in. Unless you claim that people actually explode in such situations
|
On September 02 2011 00:41 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2011 02:24 qrs wrote:Votes 6. e5: 37 (not counting carloselcoco's post) (hype[NZ], Bill Murray, Raysalis, jdseemoreglass, keyStorm, Malli, chesshaha, Malinor, EnderSword, LaXerCannon, pburns, shackes, Jumbled, EvilNalu, Boozerr, enigmaticcam, tyr, aphorism, itsjustatank, zasta, Chezus, wizard1944, wuBu, Varpulis, Sandwhale, Blazinghand, Shootist, timh, Sc1pio, Empyrean, carloselcoco?, GolemMadness, SOB_Maj_Brian, imBLIND, sleepingdog, GreatestThreat, WarChimp, Misder, durza, Archers_bane, DibujEx, Babyfactory) 6. e5 with official protest of our choice of 5th move: 2 (mcc, gogogadgetflow) 6. Bxc6: 1 (qrs) Summary of Discussion I still think that 6. Bxc6 deserved more consideration than it received + Show Spoiler [main advantage of 6. Bxc6] +Its main advantage over 6. e5 is that it refrains from such early pushing of our central pawns. Since pawn moves cannot be undone, they need to be carefully weighed. Although there may be pros and cons both to having our pawn on e4 and to having it on e5, with a pawn on e4, e5 can be played at any time, whereas the converse is not true.
The potential disadvantages of such an early push are 1) weakening our control over d5 and 2) possibly allowing Black to exchange off our advanced pawns at a later point in the game. but the team has decided against it. The discussion, instead, has moved further along to Black's possible responses to 6. e5 and our options in response to those. After 6. e5+ Show Spoiler [Extended discussion] +6. e5 poses a direct threat ( 7. PxN) that Black needs to respond to, so his options at this juncture are limited. Unless he wants to sacrifice material for nothing, Black must either move his King's Knight or play 6...Qe7 (pinning the e-pawn to the King, so that 8. PxN becomes impossible). Of the 5 Knight moves available to Black, we can essentially rule out 6...Ng7, which undevelops a piece and blocks Black from castling, and 6...Nh5, which leaves the Knight no place to run after 7. g4. 6...Ng4 is technically playable, but appears very weak for Black: after 7. cxd4 our e-pawn is protected from capture by any of Black's pieces, and when the g4 Knight is driven off again by h3, he has nothing to play but ...h6, after which Bxh6 gains us a tempo (by trading an undeveloped piece for a developed one) and weakens Black's pawns (by isolating and doubling his h-pawns) and his Kingside. Therefore only three Black moves are under consideration: 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4, and 6...Qe7.
- 6...Nd5:
General
This is perhaps the solidest move for Black: it answers the threat by moving the Knight to a strong central square where it is active yet has places to retreat to, and cannot easily be driven away with tempo.
Possible responses
Our best response according to current consensus is 7. 0-0. The point of this move is that it takes advantage of the temporary pin on Black's d-pawn resulting from ...Nd5: if Black now plays 7...PxP? then 8. QxN. We use the time to move our King to safety before recapturing the pawn. This eliminates all possible Black tactics resulting from PxP Bb4+. (While these tactics do not threaten us, they do create threats that limit our possibilities and allow Black to partially dictate the direction of the game. 7. 0-0 denies Black this chance.
In this post, jdseemoreglass offers two lines following 6. e5 Nd5, one a book line and one the result of his own analysis. There has been no further discussion of this line yet.
- 6...Ne4:
General
This aggressive move has both pros and cons for Black. On the pro side, it exerts substantial pressure on us in the short term. On the con side, it commits Black to a position that he cannot maintain for long.
6...Ne4 exerts more pressure on us than 6...Nd5 for two reasons: - Unlike after 6...Nd5, after 6...Ne4, the d4 pawn is not pinned. This means that 7...dxc3 (consolidating Black's pawn advantage) becomes an immediate threat that we must take into account.
- Unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 controls the d2 square. This has immediate ramifications for the line 7. PxP Bb4+ 8. Bd2/Nd2 (8. Nc3? loses a piece). For instance, the move Bd2, which in other variations is our best response to ...Bb4+, becomes far less attractive in this line, as it allows Black to play 8...NxB (9. NbxN), exchanging Knight for Bishop (on such open boards as this one, Bishops are generally better, especially when one possesses the pair, as Black does), temporarily pinning our Knight on d2, and generally, strengthening the power of Black's dark-squared Bishop along the important a5-e1 diagonal.
On the other hand, unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 leaves Black with no place to retreat if attacked. This limits Black's options for when the Knight is attacked.
Possible responses
As mentioned, with 6...Ne4, Black threatens to capture a pawn. Our reply must take this into account. Three possible moves have been suggested:- 7. PxP is the most direct response, eliminating the threat to our pawn by capturing first.
In other lines where we play PxP, Black has a choice of moves with his Bishop, including ...Bb6, ...Bb4+, and a variety of other, playable but less promising-looking moves with his Bishop. In this case, the vulnerability of the e4 Knight makes it less clear whether Black is free to play any of these moves in response to ...PxP. The lines where White attacks the Knight directly with 7. Qe2 (see below) are relevant here, but I haven't spent much time looking at those yet, so I don't have an informed opinion as to whether or not 7. PxP Bb6 (or some other Bishop move) is viable for Black.
- In any case, the only Black response that has been discussed to 7. PxP is 7...Bb4+. As mentioned above, this is a more aggressive variation of ...Bb4+ than other scenarios because the Knight on e4 exerts pressure on d2.
- Here the best continuation is reasonably clear: we certainly don't want to sacrifice material or lose the ability to castle, we most likely do not want to play 8. Bd2 for reasons mentioned above, and 8. Nfd2 slows our development, so we presumably will play 8. Nbd2.
The continuation from here has been discussed to some extent: briefly, although Black is exerting a bit of short-term pressure on our position, he cannot keep it up: once we castle, the pin on our Knight is gone, and Black's e4 Knight is threatened (and has no especially good place to retreat to). Black can force a couple of exchanges in this line if he wishes, but the has no way (that we've found) to cash in on his short-term pressure. Exchanges benefit us more than Black here, as Black will be exchanging strong, developed pieces for undeveloped ones.
- See the second spoiler of this post by jdseemoreglass again for some further analysis on this line. Note, however, that his "example of a solid continuation" has been called into question: this post, which jdseemoreglass has not responded to, suggests that it drops a pawn for Black.
- 7. 0-0 ignores the threat to our pawn in favour of continuing our development. This line has received quite a lot of discussion.
- The most challenging response that Black can play (in terms of challenging the correctness of our move) is 7...dxc3, grabbing the material offered him, and betting that we do not get sufficient compensation for it. A couple of White responses have been suggested for this move, although neither has been analyzed to a clear conclusion. In all of the lines analyzed, Black retains a material advantage of one pawn, sometimes two, in exchange for which White gets a substantial lead in development. jdseemoreglass and Raysalis (though they advocate different lines) are each optimistic about White's chances in these lines, whereas qrs (I) is more pessimistic about White's ability to prevent Black from holding on until he has reached a winning endgame.
- The more aggressive of the two White responses is 8. Qd5, first recommended by Raysalis, and endorsed by our esteemed opponent himself as "a nice find for a few reasons in that line".
8. Qd5 forks Black's Knight and Bishop, and since the Knight is protecting the Bishop and nothing is protecting the Knight, threatens to capture one of them. This touches off a flurry of tactics, but at the end of the day Black retains his one-pawn lead. 8...Nd2 counter-attacks White's Rook. 9. B/NxN PxB/N 10. N/BxP Bishop moves allows black to simply retain his single pawn advantage.
The alternative preferred by Raysalis was 9. QxB NxR, after which either 10. KxN PxP 11. BxP or 10. NxP NxP 11. KxN. In either case, the result is unclear: Raysalis feels it to be advantageous for white, jdseemoreglass is noncommittal, qrs (I) favors black, and no one else has expressed an opinion.
- jdseemoreglass suggested the alternative 8. Qc2, attacking Black's e4 Knight (who has nowhere safe to move) and pinning Black's c-pawn to his Bishop. This post contains jdseemoreglass's suggested continuation: he analyzes it to a point where White is down by two pawns-worth of material, but has a substantial mobility advantage. Again, there is no consensus as to who is ahead in this line.
Note that this line has not seen much discussion and some points about it are not clear. For instance, in the linked post, jdseemoreglass says that "defending [the Knight] with a pawn will lead to en passant". In fact Black does defend his e4 Knight with a pawn and White captures this pawn en passant (with the pawn that had been guarding d6 and f6), then Black will be free to retake the pawn with his e4 Knight. It is not clear why this should not be an option for Black.
- Note: from here till the end of the post, I give only a skeletal summary for the time being.
7. Qe2 addresses the threat to the pawn by counter-attacking the e4 Knight. This move leads to some very sharp and interesting lines. See the original lines given by jdseemoreglass, in the post linked above.
- 6...Qe7 temporarily addresses our threat to Black's Knight by pinning our e-pawn to our King. Furthermore, it threatens the e-pawn by adding a second attacker, where we currently have only one defender. The consensus is that our best response to this is 7. 0-0. This allows Black to (at least temporarily) win a pawn with 7...NxP, but the consensus is that this would be a mistake for Black, although the details of the following lines are still under discussion.
PS On September 01 2011 00:49 jdseemoreglass wrote:On August 31 2011 23:22 qrs wrote:On August 31 2011 13:54 Empyrean wrote:
Gonna bandwagon onto 6. e5 since I've been busy lately X_X I don't understand reasoning like this. If you don't have enough time to figure out which move you think is best, wouldn't it make the most sense to simply abstain? A "bandwagon" vote seems to say nothing more than "this move is the one that most of the other voters prefer", which at best is stating the obvious, and at worst could even distort the vote if for whatever reason the current prevailing opinion changed. No offense meant; I just don't understand. On my next move vote, instead of a thorough analysis of multiple lines, my reason will be "qrs voted for it so it must be good." I think qrs might implode Something else I don't understand: why do people use "implode" instead of "explode"? It's almost never the right word. My vote was not with official protest, it was more "We are doooooomed" . And even though because of that it is hard for me to care about outcome that I think is set I put actually most thought into this move. I don't like where e5 is going, but I found nothing better Bxc6 included. Also implode and explode are both ok in the context he used it in. Unless you claim that people actually explode in such situations
We already lost the game on move 5? Wow, that really sucks. We must be incredibly bad then.
lol...
|
Picklesicle wrote:
Thank you.
For me, I recall many years ago I was studying in Hungary. At the time, I met a local who described his chess as "decent, I guess.".
"Hey!" I thought, "That's how I describe my chess!"
So I played him. He was a strong Master and he handily crushed me. That was an extremely educational moment for me and not just from a chess standpoint.
A good friend of mine who is also my regular chess discussion buddy and also works in the theater once described chess as "like lighting design; there's so many beautiful aspects to it that it's almost transcendent. Every game is a new discovery and a new puzzle."
Sadly, he doesn't have the time he really wanted (and needed) to devote to both his art and his chess and when the time came that he had to choose, he chose his art.
I say sadly only because it is sad that there isn't enough time to do it all.
Here's to beautiful things.
Cheers.
A lot of people have asked me - and keep asking - whenever they see me play, or hear me talk about chess why I do not follow it deeper.
In my understanding each game is like a day of life, or another romance. You have to approach each and every one of them with the mindset to bring out everything you can, and while you should not be afraid to lay back and have a lazy one, you have to be ready to give all your heart and passion without fear of losing it.
I always bring up different excuses about why I do not want to enroll in tournaments in the future, but the real inside of things is... As long as the most benefit I see from having a high rating or a higher title is more people willing to listen to my ramblings - I'm never going to do it. Even as a hobby it shows when I give everything I am into a game I would say.
If you can be ready to do it every day, every night, and every second. To be as enthusiastic about your next love, no matter how hard you've failed, how good memories you have or how moronic you were from the previous ones... Then you are ready to live. If you have the same for a hobby or your work, then you are doing it right. And I don't intend to do it wrong.
This is also the reason why I want to do "Chess for Noobies" on my stream. I think there are zillions of books out there, telling you how to play or what to do. But while you can learn much from a lot of them, I barely see any that would really cater for teaching the way I look at it. They are nice reading for me, kind of like history books. But there's really only a handful of thoughts in most books that really sticks to your mind. I want to write a book, or give streams where people could hear those questions that have to be asked in order to grow better.
And as such it is a lifelong experience. For me teaching and studying is that. It won't just miraculously end, when I get my title, when I become a professor, whenever. And I'm well aware that no matter what I do - I will always stay the student. I can learn some from every single person. Be it a student or professor.
And maybe one day I'll learn to play chess, too.
|
Votes
6. e5: 38 (not counting carloselcoco's post) (once again, my count is somehow off from Ng5's) (hype[NZ], Bill Murray, Raysalis, jdseemoreglass, keyStorm, Malli, chesshaha, Malinor, EnderSword, LaXerCannon, pburns, shackes, Jumbled, EvilNalu, Boozerr, enigmaticcam, tyr, aphorism, itsjustatank, zasta, Chezus, wizard1944, wuBu, Varpulis, Sandwhale, Blazinghand, Shootist, timh, Sc1pio, Empyrean, carloselcoco?, GolemMadness, SOB_Maj_Brian, imBLIND, sleepingdog, GreatestThreat, WarChimp, Misder, durza, Archers_bane, DibujEx, Babyfactory, BaronFel)
6. e5 with official protest of our choice of 5th move: 2 (mcc, gogogadgetflow)
6. Bxc6: 2 (qrs, amazingxkcd)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/StKWK.png)
Summary of Discussion
After 6. e5
+ Show Spoiler [Extended discussion] +6. e5 poses a direct threat ( 7. PxN) that Black needs to respond to, so his options at this juncture are limited. Unless he wants to sacrifice material for nothing, Black must either move his King's Knight or play 6...Qe7 (pinning the e-pawn to the King, so that 8. PxN becomes impossible). Of the 5 Knight moves available to Black, we can essentially rule out 6...Ng7, which undevelops a piece and blocks Black from castling, and 6...Nh5, which leaves the Knight no place to run after 7. g4. 6...Ng4 is technically playable, but appears very weak for Black: after 7. cxd4 our e-pawn is protected from capture by any of Black's pieces, and when the g4 Knight is driven off again by h3, he has nothing to play but ...h6, after which Bxh6 gains us a tempo (by trading an undeveloped piece for a developed one) and weakens Black's pawns (by isolating and doubling his h-pawns) and his Kingside. Therefore only three Black moves are under consideration: 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4, and 6...Qe7.
- 6...Nd5:
General
This is perhaps the solidest move for Black: it answers the threat by moving the Knight to a strong central square where it is active yet has places to retreat to, and cannot easily be driven away with tempo.
Possible responses
Our best response according to current consensus is 7. 0-0. The point of this move is that it takes advantage of the temporary pin on Black's d-pawn resulting from ...Nd5: if Black now plays 7...PxP? then 8. QxN. We use the time to move our King to safety before recapturing the pawn. This eliminates all possible Black tactics resulting from PxP Bb4+. (While these tactics do not threaten us, they do create threats that limit our possibilities and allow Black to partially dictate the direction of the game. 7. 0-0 denies Black this chance.
In this post, jdseemoreglass offers two lines following 6. e5 Nd5, one a book line and one the result of his own analysis. There has been no further discussion of this line yet.
- 6...Ne4:
General
This aggressive move has both pros and cons for Black. On the pro side, it exerts substantial pressure on us in the short term. On the con side, it commits Black to a position that he cannot maintain for long.
6...Ne4 exerts more pressure on us than 6...Nd5 for two reasons: - Unlike after 6...Nd5, after 6...Ne4, the d4 pawn is not pinned. This means that 7...dxc3 (consolidating Black's pawn advantage) becomes an immediate threat that we must take into account.
- Unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 controls the d2 square. This has immediate ramifications for the line 7. PxP Bb4+ 8. Bd2/Nd2 (8. Nc3? loses a piece). For instance, the move Bd2, which in other variations is our best response to ...Bb4+, becomes far less attractive in this line, as it allows Black to play 8...NxB (9. NbxN), exchanging Knight for Bishop (on such open boards as this one, Bishops are generally better, especially when one possesses the pair, as Black does), temporarily pinning our Knight on d2, and generally, strengthening the power of Black's dark-squared Bishop along the important a5-e1 diagonal.
On the other hand, unlike 6...Nd5, 6...Ne4 leaves Black with no place to retreat if attacked. This limits Black's options for when the Knight is attacked.
Possible responses
As mentioned, with 6...Ne4, Black threatens to capture a pawn. Our reply must take this into account. Three possible moves have been suggested:- 7. PxP is the most direct response, eliminating the threat to our pawn by capturing first.
In other lines where we play PxP, Black has a choice of moves with his Bishop, including ...Bb6, ...Bb4+, and a variety of other, playable but less promising-looking moves with his Bishop. In this case, the vulnerability of the e4 Knight makes it less clear whether Black is free to play any of these moves in response to ...PxP. The lines where White attacks the Knight directly with 7. Qe2 (see below) are relevant here, but I haven't spent much time looking at those yet, so I don't have an informed opinion as to whether or not 7. PxP Bb6 (or some other Bishop move) is viable for Black.
- In any case, the only Black response that has been discussed to 7. PxP is 7...Bb4+. As mentioned above, this is a more aggressive variation of ...Bb4+ than other scenarios because the Knight on e4 exerts pressure on d2.
- Here the best continuation is reasonably clear: we certainly don't want to sacrifice material or lose the ability to castle, we most likely do not want to play 8. Bd2 for reasons mentioned above, and 8. Nfd2 slows our development, so we presumably will play 8. Nbd2.
The continuation from here has been discussed to some extent: briefly, although Black is exerting a bit of short-term pressure on our position, he cannot keep it up: once we castle, the pin on our Knight is gone, and Black's e4 Knight is threatened (and has no especially good place to retreat to). Black can force a couple of exchanges in this line if he wishes, but the has no way (that we've found) to cash in on his short-term pressure. Exchanges benefit us more than Black here, as Black will be exchanging strong, developed pieces for undeveloped ones.
- See the second spoiler of this post by jdseemoreglass again for some further analysis on this line. Note, however, that his "example of a solid continuation" has been called into question: this post, which jdseemoreglass has not responded to, suggests that it drops a pawn for Black.
- 7. 0-0 ignores the threat to our pawn in favour of continuing our development. This line has received quite a lot of discussion.
- The most challenging response that Black can play (in terms of challenging the correctness of our move) is 7...dxc3, grabbing the material offered him, and betting that we do not get sufficient compensation for it. A couple of White responses have been suggested for this move, although neither has been analyzed to a clear conclusion. In all of the lines analyzed, Black retains a material advantage of one pawn, sometimes two, in exchange for which White gets a substantial lead in development. jdseemoreglass and Raysalis (though they advocate different lines) are each optimistic about White's chances in these lines, whereas qrs (I) is more pessimistic about White's ability to prevent Black from holding on until he has reached a winning endgame.
- The more aggressive of the two White responses is 8. Qd5, first recommended by Raysalis, and endorsed by our esteemed opponent himself as "a nice find for a few reasons in that line".
8. Qd5 forks Black's Knight and Bishop, and since the Knight is protecting the Bishop and nothing is protecting the Knight, threatens to capture one of them. This touches off a flurry of tactics, but at the end of the day Black retains his one-pawn lead. 8...Nd2 counter-attacks White's Rook. 9. B/NxN PxB/N 10. N/BxP Bishop moves allows black to simply retain his single pawn advantage.
The alternative preferred by Raysalis was 9. QxB NxR, after which either 10. KxN PxP 11. BxP or 10. NxP NxP 11. KxN. In either case, the result is unclear: Raysalis feels it to be advantageous for white, jdseemoreglass is noncommittal, qrs (I) favors black, and no one else has expressed an opinion.
- jdseemoreglass suggested the alternative 8. Qc2, attacking Black's e4 Knight (who has nowhere safe to move) and pinning Black's c-pawn to his Bishop. This post contains jdseemoreglass's suggested continuation: he analyzes it to a point where White is down by two pawns-worth of material, but has a substantial mobility advantage. Again, there is no consensus as to who is ahead in this line.
Note that this line has not seen much discussion and some points about it are not clear. For instance, in the linked post, jdseemoreglass says that "defending [the Knight] with a pawn will lead to en passant". In fact Black does defend his e4 Knight with a pawn and White captures this pawn en passant (with the pawn that had been guarding d6 and f6), then Black will be free to retake the pawn with his e4 Knight. It is not clear why this should not be an option for Black.
- 7. Qe2 addresses the threat to the pawn by counter-attacking the e4 Knight. This move leads to some very sharp and interesting lines. See the original lines given by jdseemoreglass, in the post linked above, and the more recent post by picklesickle. I have not looked at these lines enough myself yet to give a summary of them.
- 6...Qe7 temporarily addresses our threat to Black's Knight by pinning our e-pawn to our King. Furthermore, it threatens the e-pawn by adding a second attacker, where we currently have only one defender. The consensus is that our best response to this is 7. 0-0. This allows Black to (at least temporarily) win a pawn with 7...NxP, but the consensus is that this would be a mistake for Black, although the details of the following lines are still under discussion.
- The simplest and best way to refute 7...NxP, as shown by Raysalis, seems to be 8. Re1, pinning the Knight to both the King and the Queen and threatening to win the Knight outright. None of Black's defenses seem to hold up:
- 8...NxN+ is met simply by 9. PxN, winning the Black Queen for a Rook.
- 8...Be6, defending the Knight, is met by 9. NxN BxN 10. PxP, winning the Bishop.
- jdseemoreglass has suggested that 8. ...Ng4 leads to a complicated game, but it seems that it can be met in similar fashion by 9. NxN NxN 10. f4, winning the Knight. In this line, Black can win one extra pawn back by playing 10...PxP+, but beyond that he doesn't seem to have anything.
In short, 7... NxP does not seem to be a tenable option for Black. That being the case, 6... Qe7 does not seem to be useful for him either. After 7. 0-0, Black is facing the same threats as on the previous move, but with fewer tactical resources, now that our King has been moved to safety. For some more detailed analysis of how the game might proceed, see jdseemoreglass's post here
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/IaANK.png)
