Chess Forum
uskidscompute.com << online chess - < chess - chess > - chess online >>
| From | Message |
| Posted by taoistlunatic uskidscompute.com 9/02/2002 16:50:45 |  Subject: I think white is winning.Message: board #271161 My opponent offered a draw in this game and I refused for now. I was winning this game very strongly until I blundered away material, even after losing a piece, I was still compensated by having extra pawns. Inthe curent endgame I have five pawns and rook vs. twp pawns, rook and knight. I know that knight is worth roughly three pawns, but since the pawns are on both sides of the board, and I have two connected passed pawns, I feel that whit will win this endgame with proper play... Of course you cannot give me advice as this is unsportsmanlike since it is an ongoing game, I just wanted to know what you endgame analysts think, is white winning, or black, or is it a draw? |
| Posted by atrifix uskidscompute.com 9/02/2002 17:52:34 | Message: You will become a much better player when you stop focusing on whether white is winning, has a clear advantage, compensation, etc; whether the position is += or +/- (or whether it was = all along) and simply focus on making good moves. At any rate I will not comment as the game is still in progress. |
| Posted by bafverfeldt1981 uskidscompute.com 9/02/2002 20:19:11 | taoist Message: I agree with Atrifix- after the game I can comment all you want- but not now. ——— Playoff Will Decide Women's World Chess Championship — History will have to wait one more day. Ruan Lufei won the last regulation game of the Women’s World Chess Championship final to force the match into overtime. Ruan had trailed the best-of-four match against Hou Yifan by one point and needed to win to stay alive. She did just that in a tension-filled game in which both chess players, unsurprisingly given the stakes, made some mistakes. Ruan won all her previous matches in the championship in tie-breakers, so she feels right at home in the format. But Hou is the higher-ranked chess player, so she has the edge, at least on paper. Of course that was true in the regulation portion of the match also, and she was unable to win. The tie-breaker will ... |
| Posted by taoistlunatic uskidscompute.com 9/02/2002 21:02:33 | I respect your opinion Atrifix Message: You seem to be a very wise player...and I admire your deep understanding of the game that you have shown in these forums. You say I should focus on making good moves and forget about which side has the better position, but how am I to make 'good' moves without evaluating the position? There must be some evaluation of the postion in order to make good moves. All calcuation is based on this evaluation, without evaluation all calculation would be meaningless, because you would have no basis to judge the different lines of play and so they would all seem exactly the same, none being 'good', or 'bad'. I am not being sarcastic, I really want to know how I am supposed to know which moves are 'good'. Thanks in advance- Carl ——— Nepomniachtchi Wins Russian Chess Championship — The Russian Chess Championship came down to a battle of 20-year-old players and the less celebrated one won. Ian Nepomniachtchi edged Sergey Karjakin in a playoff on Wednesday after Karjakin lost in the last round of regulation, allowing Nepomniachtchi to overtake him. In the playoff, the first two games were drawn, so an Armageddon game was used to break the tie. In an Armageddon game, one player, in this case Karjakin, has White and one more minute of time on his clock, but he must win the game to clinch the title. The game ended in a draw (a video of the game is below), so Nepomniachtchi became chess champion. Karjakin is the better-known of the two chess players. He holds ... |
| Posted by atrifix uskidscompute.com 9/02/2002 21:25:22 | Evaluation Message: Of course some evaluation is necessary in order to distinguish 'good' lines from 'bad' ones. However, the main problem I notice among amateurs--and even among very strong players--is that they evaluate positions with the mentality "I am winning" or "this position is drawn", etc. In recent times some people will actually assign numeric values (like a computer) to positional elements "I am 0.85 pawns ahead"..which is simply absurd. For example (taken from The Seven Deadly Chess Sins by IM Rowson, one of the best books I've read in quite awhile): de Firmian-Hillarp Persson, 1996 WKg2, Nc3, Bc1, Ra1, Pa7, b2, d3, g3; BKf7, Ne5, Bd4, Rg1, Pf5, h6. White to move. The time control has just been reached. White possibly missed a win just before the time control and also outranks his opponent by about 200 rating points. After 43. Kh3 Rh1+ 44. Kg2 Rg1+ the game would now be drawn. However, as Tisdall pointed out: "Now, Nick used some deductive reasoning. He should win this game, and so perpetual check must be avoided...": 43. Kh2?? Nf3+ 44. Kh3 Rh1+ 45. Kg2 Rh2+ 0-1 as Black mates next move. De Firmian couldn't possibly have overlooked this if he had been fighting for a draw earlier. Even in a blitz or lightning game, the same player shown this position in a different context would have seen in about a second that 43. Kh2 allows checkmate. However, de Firmian was so concerned about winning--'white's position must be won'--that he lost any sense of objectivity. The point is that you should not concern yourself with whether you must win or draw, or try to evaluate each position as either +-, +/-, +=, =, =+, etc. (or even worse, as 0.6324 pawns ahead) But simply look for ways to improve your position, prevent your opponent from improving his, and other ideas. One must maintain his objectivity and practicality in any situation. This is all IMHO. Some people have good results with evaluating positions as 0.3284 pawns ahead, but personally I cannot possibly see any practical application. Regards, Atrifix ——— A Chess Set Fit for a King or an Emperor — Chess pieces depicting Napoleon Bonaparte and two of his marshalls, Louis Nicolas Davout and Michel Ney. The Russian Museum of Ethnography in St. Petersburg, Russia, is displaying a remarkable chess set as part of an exhibition of the Jewelry House Anna Nova. Called “The Chess. 1812,” the set depicts military leaders of the Russian and French armies from the French invasion of Russia in 1812. The White king is Napoleon Bonaparte. The Web site of the museum identifies the Black king as Alexander II, but that is probably a typo and should be Alexander I, the tsar at the time. Alexander II was not born until 1818. The chess pieces are made of white and black jade with gold and ... |
| Posted by atrifix uskidscompute.com 9/02/2002 21:42:45 | P.S. Message: One more example, and a more personal one: board #339486 Now, acne is a fairly strong player. At least he has more than a basic understanding of the positional and tactical elements of chess. So it's peculiar that he should lose a game in this manner, and as White. My guess is that my move 4... Ne7 threw him a bit, when the normal move is 4... c5, and he immediately looked for a refutation. In fact White has nothing better than 5. a3 Bxc3+ 6. bxc3 c5 transposing back to the main line. However, 5. g4?! is extremely premature--perhaps the idea is to keep the knight out of f5. After the further mistakes 6. Nf3? (6. a3 was natural and good), 7. Nxd4?! (7. Qxd4), and 8. f4? White was lost. The problem is again that White expected too much out of his position--he regarded 4... Ne7 as 'bad'--and completely lost his objectivity. ——— Chess: Short shrift — How Magnus Carlsen overcame Nigel Short to win the London Chess Classic. In spite of losing to the world chess champion Vishy Anand, Magnus Carlsen finished on top at the London Chess Classic with this last round victory over Nigel Short. The queens have just been exchanged but the Norwegian still managed to build up a powerful initiative. How? RB: This is a tough one. Nothing – nothing! – suggests itself. At first I wondered if a bank-rank mate was a possibility, then if there was something in a knight sacrifice on f7. But the answer is an emphatic no in both cases. Perhaps 1. Bf4 to support the nicely-posted knight on e5? But what's so good about that? 1. Nd3 with the idea of chasing ... |
| Posted by taoistlunatic uskidscompute.com 9/03/2002 14:22:17 | Thanks Atrifix Message: THat is very good advice, which I will put to use.... I too have seen players, who insist that their position is winning and make over-aggressive moves which actually are bad. I have also seen this mistake (myself included) when a player thinks he is superior to his opponent and when if he is not easily winning, lashes out for an advantage prematurely and ends up losing....this one I am particularly guilty of, I seem to lose to lower rated players even more so than to higher rated players. ——— Two Chinese Players Are Finalists at Women’s World Chess Championship — The next women’s world chess champion will be Chinese, only her identity is not known. Humpy Koneru of India, the last non-Chinese player in the Women’s World Chess Championship tournament, was defeated by Hou Yifan of China in one semifinal on Friday. It was exactly the same result between the same two players as in a semifinal of the 2008 women’s championship. Alexandra Kosteniuk of Russia won the chess championship that year, beating Hou in the final. Now Hou, who is only 16, will get another shot at becoming the youngest world chess champion in history. She will have to beat Ruan Lufei, her countrywomen, to do it. Ruan got to the final by beating Zhao Xue, another ... |
| Posted by taoistlunatic uskidscompute.com 9/22/2002 08:34:16 | by the way... Message: The game ended in a draw.... |
| Posted by peppe_l uskidscompute.com 9/22/2002 10:53:23 | Patzers view Message: Ok Im not a strong player but heres my 2 cents anyway... IMO evaluation has meaning only if one knows WHY one has an advantage. In almost symmetric positions, say B+5P vs B+5P for example, if you have more better bishop and more active king, you have advantage. And since you know why you have advantage, its easier to find the correct strategy and best moves. In that point it isnt necessary to know is the position won or drawn - all you can do is play to win as well as you can. Of course if you are about to exchange rooks, leading to abovementioed position, then its a different thing, because you must choose the option that maximizes your winning chances. Things get more difficult in unbalanced positions of course, for example if you have weakened your pawn formation for an attack, you can deduct that unless you can push your attack trough, mating, winning material or gaining positional advantages (or disadvantages for your opponent!), your opponent is better. So, the question is can you? IMO these are psychologically difficult situations, because sometimes one has to admit the failure of chosen plan. So, if its clear the attack wont be succesful, one has to choose - stopping the attack means disadvantage, but is the weakened position hopeless then? If it is, perhaps best practical decision is to continue the attack in the hope of opponent playing carelessly? If it isnt completely lost, why help the opponent further by weakening your position even more? Etc |
| Posted by acne uskidscompute.com 9/22/2002 22:18:12 | atrifix Message: sorry for the bad game. |