"...a Chessmaster should be a combination of a beast of prey and a monk."

Wednesday, April 15, 2015

A satisfying attacking win

In this game basically I played for an attack on his king.  Maybe because the queens got traded off early, I played in a more calm way and took precautions and built my position slowly.  Basically my mindset was like, "this is what I am shooting for and basically as long as I don't do anything crazy it will be ok if I don't get an amazing attack.  I will just play to build pressure against his king and see what happens."  This approach worked in this game. I feel satisfied with it because, while of course the computer sees big mistakes by both I feel my opponent played reasonably but I was still able to pull off an attack which wound up winning me a piece.  I also feel satisfied because I feel I was really working on a long-term strategic plan and that I made conscious choices about how to evolve my part of the game.  I kind of went crazy with the commentary, but oh well, sometimes I feel it.

eco_ (1495) - JabotScrob (1454)

Result: 0-1
Site: Chess.com
Date: 2015.04.15
Game analysis
Processor: AMD A10-5700 APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphics (@3.39GHz)
Engine(s): Houdini_4_Pro_CA_x64A
Analysis time: 0:59:22
[...] 1.f4 Birds opening. I've faced it a couple of times before but never in a more serious game. I also haven't studied any lines. My goal was just to play a very solid opening according to principles and not try anything fancy. Very quickly I started thinking about which way I wanted to castle. On the other hand, I also wanted to delay doing it as long as possible to get a read on whether opposite sides would be good or not. 1...d5 2.♘f3 ♘f6 3.d3N
3.b3 g6 4.♗b2 ♗g7 5.g3 O-O 6.♗g2 c5 7.e3 ♘c6 ...1-0, Fischer Robert J 2780 - Smyslov Vassily 2494 , Herceg Novi 1970 Blitz
3.e3 ♗g4 4.b3 ♘bd7 5.♗b2 c6 6.♗e2 ♕c7 7.O-O ♗xf3 ...0-1, Romanishin Oleg M 2485 - Kasparov Garry 2812 , Leningrad 1975 Tournament
3...♘c6 4.g3 ♕d6 5.♗g2 h6 May be a wasted move. My idea is that I want to put the light squared bishop on f5 but I am worried about him advancing pawns and forcing me to retreat the bishop to an incovenient spot. h3 gives the bishop a retreat square and it won't interfere with the rest of my development. (5...g6 6.♘a3 ♗g7 7.c3 O-O 8.O-O ♖e8 9.♕b3 a5 10.♘c2 a4 11.♕a3 -0.24) 6.O-O It seems strange to me to castle kingside like this. I half expected him to castle queenside. 6...♗f5 It's interesting that the Bobby Fischer game quoted and the engine both suggest kingside fianchetto and castle. Like I say I didn't have anything prepared and am thinking it out as I go. The point is I want to to play e6 and get a simple French type pawn structure ( I definitely don't want to play e5 let him trade off a central pawn for a wing pawn, and open the f-file for free) but I want to develop the bishop outside the pawn chain. Again, my goal was to give myself the option to castle either way. 7.♕e1 Here I saw that I could win the c-pawn, but I was very hesitant as the situation looked quite trappy to me. If he plays Nc3 it seems my queen is stuck. I think I can break it out by playing e6, Bb4 in time. But I also looked at him playing b3 and then it seems I just don't have much of an escape route again, though maybe I can move my knight. But then there could be problems in the center. Overall, I just thought it just wasn't worth it. We get warned against pawn grabbing in the opening. I feel I am playing solidly and that I am not going to lose if I don't grab this pawn but if I do I might. 7...♕c5 I figured there was no harm in giving the check and just seeing how he responded. I decided while he was thinking that Qf2 was the most dangerous reply, (because it frees his rook to get over to hit the queen if it is trapped) and if he played that I wasn't going to grab the pawn. 8.♕f2 ♕xf2 I kind of realized that if I'm not going to grab the pawn though that my options are limited. I just decided there was nothing wrong with trading queens. I feel his king is somewhat weak, and if I castle queenside then I should be able to have my rooks lined up easily against it, so losing the queens doesn't mean there's no attacking chances. This may have influenced how I played the attack. If the queens had been on I may have felt more impetus to go for a quick kill. 9.♖xf2 e6 10.e3 ♗c5
10...g5 The computer seems to think I should leap to the attack right away and that I can win the exchange. I don't really follow it's thinking. 11.♘c3 gxf4 12.♘h4 (12.gxf4 ♖g8 13.♘e5 ♘g4 14.♘xg4 ♗xg4) 12...fxe3 13.♗xe3 ♘g4 14.♘xf5 ♘xf2 15.♔xf2 exf5 16.♖f1 -0.17
11.♖e2 O-O-O Basically I'm willing to commit to an overall game plan. I'm going to castle opposite sides and go for an attack. Some factors that influenced me: 1) His king seems weak, maybe not so bad but enough to give me something to work with. 2) His queenside pieces are all still undeveloped. It doesn't seem likely that he's going to be able to organize an attack against my king as quickly as I am. 3) My back rank is clear so my rook is now ready to go to g8 instantly. 12.♘c3 a6 Another slow move, but I do have an idea here. Basically my bishop on c5 is undefended. I was worried he would play d4, then where will I put the bishop? d6 seemed like the spot where it would be prepared to do the most damage on his kingside. I'm a bit loathe to give up the pin but if he plays d4 there seems to be no sense in staying on that the diagonal despite the fact that it leads to his king. Anyway, he can then play Nb5 if he wants hitting the bishop again. This move means if he does play d4 then I can put the bishop on d6 and it won't be disturbed. 13.♘e5?!
13.a3!?13...d4 14.♘d1 ♗a7 15.♘f2 dxe3 16.♗xe3 ♗xe3 17.♖xe3 ♔b8 18.♖ee1 ♖hf8 +0.00
13...♘xe5 14.fxe5
An interesting option I thought he might choose was ... 14.d4 but it looks like I can win a pawn... 14...♗xd4 15.exd4 ♘g6
14...♘h7?! I wanted to keep it on the kingside but not on the backrank. This seemed like an ok solution, and it worked out ok in the end as ultimately it gave me a discovered attack with the rook that won a piece. (14...♘d7!?15.d4 ♗a7 -0.42) 15.♔h1 ♗g4 I was very unsure at this juncture. I felt that I had played slowly and cautiously in a good way and had built up a situation where an attack has been properly prepared. From a count the pieces approach I feel I am ready to bring more forces to bear on his king than he has defenders. On the other hand, I am quite uncertain as to what the best approach here is. It was obvious he would play Rf2 and bring the rook to the open file hitting my undefended f-pawn. I have Ng5 but then maybe he plays h4 and what will I do then? I thought about Rg8 but I was a bit worried it was too slow. Also thought about Ng5 directly. I think this would be an interesting juncture to use the IDeA analysis to see if some of the different possibilities would be interesting. On the other hand, maybe there's not too much difference between them. 16.♖f2 ♗h5 17.d4 ♗e7 18.h3 (18.♘e2 g5 19.e4 dxe4 20.♗xe4 -0.23) 18...g5?! I definitely did consider the computer recommended option of playing f6 or even f5. I considered it all through the following steps but just never felt it gave me anything special.
18...f6!?19.exf6 ♘xf6 20.♗f1 ♖hf8 21.♗d3 c5 22.b3 b5 23.dxc5 ♗xc5 24.g4 -0.51
19.e4!?19...c6 20.exd5 exd5 21.♗f1 ♗g6 22.♗d3 ♗xd3 23.cxd3 -0.11
19...♗g6 20.♗d2 h5 21.gxh5 ♗xh5 22.♖af1? I'm surprised the computer doesn't like this. I thought it was a good idea for him to get his other rook involved in the defense.
22.♔g1!22...♖hg8 23.♗f3 ♗xf3 24.♖xf3 f5 25.exf6 g4 26.hxg4 ♘xf6 27.♔f2 ♘xg4 -0.35
22...g4 23.♘e2?! I guess the computer sees this as the game loser for him. (23.e4!?23...dxe4 24.♗xe4 ♘g5 25.♗xg5 ♗xg5 26.♘e2 ♗e3 -1.23) 23...gxh3 24.♗xh3 This seems to be the real blunder though, dropping a piece to a tactic. 24...♗xe2 25.♖xe2 ♘g5 I had been eyeing this discovered attack for awhile, particularly while evaluating what would happen if he played Rxf7. Now it finds its place. 26.♖h2 The computer prefers taking with the knight by a couple of pawns. 26...♖xh3 27.♖xh3 ♘xh3 28.♖xf7 ♖e8
28...♘g5 I very briefly considered this option, thinking maybe there would be a rook and knight mate or something but I gave up the idea very quickly and just decided to focus on remaining a piece up. Surprisingly the computer actually likes this a bit better, seemingly because I am able to win back the bishop almost immediately so I stay a piece up. Anyway, I'm satisfied with how I played it. 29.♖xe7 ♘f3 30.♔g2 (30.♗c1 ♖g8 31.♖e8 ♖xe8) 30...♘xd2 31.♔f2 ♖g8 32.♖xe6 ♘e4 33.♔f1 ♖f8 34.♔e1 ♖f2
29.♗e1 ♘g5 30.♖g7 ♖h8 31.♔g2 ♔d7 32.♗b4 ♖h7 33.♖xh7 ♘xh7 34.♗a5 b6 35.♗e1 ♘g5 36.♔g3 ♘e4 37.♔g4 b5 38.♗a5 c5 39.♗e1 cxd4 40.exd4 ♔c6 41.♔f3 ♘g5 42.♔e3 ♘f7 43.b3 b4 44.♔d3 a5 45.♔e3 ♗g5 46.♔f3 ♘h6 47.♗f2 ♘f5 48.♔e2 ♗c1 49.♔d3 ♗b2 50.♗e1 ♗xd4He tried to hold on with the bishop and it took me a bit to find a good plan to win a pawn. He probably could have made it a bit more difficult but when I get the bishop to b2 then he is lost. I was thinking about a basically bringing my king the super long way around and getting him involved that way. it seems white is basically locked up so I will have the time to do it. At one point I was thinking he might succeed in trading pawns and then sac his bishop for a last pawn or something and I would be called on to utilize the N+B ending I had studied before but it didn't happen.
Powered by Aquarium

No comments:

Post a Comment