pawn
FICGS - Search results for pawn
There are 197 results for pawn in the forum.
Scott Ligon (2025-01-07 18:55:30)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
I am running an experiment where each move will be selected by Stockfish 17 in a deterministic configuration, so it will be possible to predict my response to any given move with certainty. I believe Stockfish 17 at these settings is so strong that it will be difficult if not impossible to exploit this strategy. However, if I reach a position where it looks like this strategy is going to lose, I reserve the right to deviate. If this happens, I will message my opponent to let them know that I am no longer following this system.
I'm using a python script to interact with Stockfish, but you should be able to get the same results running Stockfish 17 from the command line. I am currently running the search with the parameter nodes = 10 million (previously I tried nodes = 5 million but I found a way for white to win against Stockfish at that setting). From the command line:
go nodes 10000000
In order for Stockfish to be deterministic, it needs to be running on just 1 thread and from the command line that's the default. If for some reason Threads has a different value on your machine:
setoption name Threads value 1
I'm using the default size for the hash table, but if you run the search a second time without clearing the hash, you will get a different search result. So either close and restart Stockfish between searches or else clear the hash table:
setoption name Clear Hash
Lastly you need to be able to input the position before running the search. It is important that you enter the position via FEN string rather than by inputting the moves, because you might get different search results otherwise. Use only the first four fields of the FEN string, like this to get black's response after 1 e4:
position fen rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/4P3/8/PPPP1PPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq -
From that position if you run Stockfish with nodes = 10 million, the last two lines of text output should say:
info depth 32 seldepth 46 multipv 1 score cp -26 lowerbound nodes 10000376 nps 462252 hashfull 999 tbhits 0 time 21634 pv c7c5
bestmove c7c5 ponder g1f3
I think only the values of "nps" and "time" will vary, everything else should be identical between runs / machines. So in this case Stockfish 17 recommends the Sicilian Defense and gives an evaluation of +0.26. (cp -26 is the evaluation in centipawns from the perspective of the side to move, but usually evals are given from white's POV).
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2006-05-29 20:47:01)
Big chess
The middlegame could be a challenge, particularly if you have no board to test the consequences of your move. And what do you think about an endgame with 12 pawns and 3 rook or 5 knights on each side? What are the values of the pieces? There is much to investigate there. Perhaps I should write a computer program ... (just a joke)
Thibault de Vassal (2006-05-29 23:07:25)
Value of the pieces...
That's exactly what I was thinking about before allowing you to exchange your bishop against two pawns... Actually, I've no idea about it :)
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2006-05-29 23:44:30)
Value of the pieces...
A bishop against two pawns - never if it is not mate. You have two open lines and I lack an important piece.
David Grosdemange (2006-05-30 00:28:03)
particularities of big chess ^^
we must take care about the possible endings ^^
for instance , knight+bishop can't win in big chess ^^ whereas 2 bishops (opposite coloured) still can win ^^
about a value , i think something like :
pawn : 1
knight : 2,5
bishop : 4
rook : 6
queen : 11
Tim Bredernitz (2006-06-18 16:52:34)
Chess Openings
Hi, I'm wondering what openings other players have experienced success with. I've primarily used the Ruy Lopez, but I've grown tired of it. I haven't really explored any queen's pawn openings, and I'm wondering which ones are effective.
Thanks.
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-19 14:53:39)
1. d4
The move 1.d4 offers the same benefits to development and center control as does 1.e4, but unlike with the King Pawn openings where the e4 pawn is undefended after the first move, the d4 pawn is protected by White's queen. This slight difference has a tremendous effect on the opening. For instance, whereas the King's Gambit is rarely played today at the highest levels of chess, the Queen's Gambit remains a popular weapon at all levels of play. Also, compared with the King Pawn openings, transpositions between variations are more common and critical in the closed games.
White develops aiming for a particular formation without great concern over how Black chooses to defend. Both these systems are popular with club players because they are easy to learn, but are rarely used by professionals because a well prepared opponent playing Black can equalize fairly easily.
Amir Bagheri (2006-06-23 12:25:36)
Blindfolded Chess
THE chess-world (for there is a "world" in chess as in other matters) has lately been startled by a very extraordinary performance at one of the "divans" of the metropolis. A young American has played ten games at once, against an equal number of players, without, on his part, obtaining a single glimpse at any one of the chess-boards.
The feat is not new; but never before was it performed so triumphantly as in the present day. The writers who have ferreted out the early history of this beautiful game have found the name of one Tchelebi, who, nearly nine centuries ago, was able to play at chess without seeing the board. Many persons in the East acquired the art of playing by feeling instead of seeing pieces; but that is a very different affair, since in such a case the sense of touch comes in aid of the memory. In 1266, a Saragen, named Buzecca, came to Florence and at the Palazzo del Popolo played three games at once, looking at one board, but not at the other two. He won two of the games, and made a drawn or abandoned game of the other. As all his competitors were skilful players, his achievement caused irrepressible astonishment. At various times, in later centuries, this mode of play was exhibited by different persons--Ruy Lopez, the author of one of the earliest treatises on chess; Mangiolini of Florence, Zerone, Medrano, Leonardo da Cutri, Paolo Boi, Salvio, and others, many of whom were Spaniards. Boi is reputed to have played three games at once without seeing the board. Damiano, an Italian, who wrote a treatise on chess more than three centuries and a half ago, gave what he called the "Rules" for learning to play without seeing the board; but his rules are worth very little, amounting chiefly to a recommendation to cultivate the memory. Keysler, in his Account of Turin (1749), says: "The late Father Sacchieri, Lecturer on Mathematics at Pavia, was a remarkable instance of the strength of the human understanding, particularly that faculty of the soul we term memory. He could play at chess with three different persons at the same time, even without seeing any one of the three chess-boards. He required no more than that his substitute should tell him what piece his antagonist had moved, and Sacchieri could direct what step was to be taken on his side, holding, at the same time, conversation with the company present. If any dispute arose about the place where any piece should be, he could tell every move that had been made, not only by himself, but by his antagonist, from the beginning of the game, and in this manner incontestably decided the proper place of the piece. This uncommon dexterity at the game of chess appears to me almost the greatest instance that can be produced of a surprising memory."
The most celebrated player of the last century, however, in this peculiar achievement, was the Frenchman Andre Danican, who then, and afterwards, was generally known by the name of Philidor. In 1743, when Philidor was about eighteen years old, M. de Legalle asked him whether he had ever tried to play from memory, without seeing the board. The youth replied, that as had calculated moves, and even whole games, at night in bed, he thought he could do it. He immediately played a game with the Abbe Chenard, which he won without seeing the board. After that, a little practice enabled him to play nearly as well in this as in the ordinary fashion--sometimes two games at once. The French Cyclopedie told of a particular game in which a false move was purposely made by his antagonist; Philidor discovered it after many moves, and replaced the pieces in their proper position. Forty years afterwards, he was residing in England, where he astonished English players by his blindfold achievements at a chess-club in St. James' Street. He played three games at once, with Count Bruhl, Mr. Bowdler, and Mr. Maseres, the first two of whom were reputed the best players at that time in England. Philidor won two of the games, and drew the third, all within two hours. On another occasion, in the same year (1788), he played three games at once, blindfold as before, and giving the odds of pawn and move to one of his antagonists; again did he win two of the games, and draw the third. His demeanor during these labors surprised his visitors as much as his skill, for he kept up a lively conversation during his games.
Many eminent chess-players, including M'Donnell, La Bourdonnaye, Staunton, etc., have achieved these blindfold wonders, in greater or less degree, since the days of Philidor. M'Donnell, a famous player about thirty years ago, played his moves even more rapidly without than with the board; he did not object to any amount of conversation in the room during his play, but disliked whispers. La Bourdonnaye could play within a shade of his full strength without seeing the board; he won against good players, on some occasions two at a time; but when trying the threefold labor, his brain nearly gave way, and he wisely abandoned all such modes of playing his favorite game. Mr. Staunton, the leading English player at present (but who has almost ceased to play since he undertook the editing of an edition of Shakespeare), some years ago played many blindfold games with Harrwitz and Kieseritzky, foreign players of note.
Marc Lacrosse (2006-07-08 11:08:51)
Modifying "rapid" tournament rules ?
Hello all,
Hello Thibault
As I already said in an earlyer thread, one of the reasons why I joined FICGS was the possibility to play fewer games simultaneously at a faster pace than in other corr. chess associations.
So I enrolled in a first rapid tournament where I find two things unpleasant for a so-called "rapid" category:
1. some of my opponents (and myself also) accumulated reflection time "reserves" of 40 or even 50 days in some cases, which is not appropriate for a "rapid" tournament IMHO.
2. my last unfinished game is completely won for more than ten moves now (it's K+pawns against K+pawns with an unstoppable passed pawn for me where computers announce forced mate in ... max 40 moves). My 2200+ opponent continues to play at a very slow pace. It's pretty annoying : I bet I could win my game at blitz tempo against Kasparov analysing for three days per move but I suppose I will have to play for weeks until his king is mated!
So I propose :
1. To have an absolute limitation of the time reserve a player can accumulate in rapid tournaments (30 ?)
2. To have a procedure allowing to call for external adjudication when a player refuses to resign a forcefully lost game.
Your opinion ?
Marc
Elmer Valderrama (2006-08-25 13:08:31)
bug: en-passant captures
In the ongoing games of players Herr, Jeff v Sarihan, Sefa
FICGS_CHESS_RAPID_C_000004 and FIGCS_CHESS_CLASS_G_000003
there is an "en-passant" capture (move 10.dxc6) which is not
allowed by the chess rules (as I know them, maybe FIDE
Congress has already changed them ;)
The pawn c was first moved to c6 (3...c6) and then to c5 (9...c5)
Somehow, the player Herr managed to capture the pawn
by playing 10.dxc6 after 9...c5, which was accepted
by both the player Sarihan and the interface ..(!?!)
And the same happened in the game Ducreux, Regis v Sarihan, Sefa
FIGCS_CHESS_CLASS_F_000007, this time pawn c was moved
twice again (2...c6 and 10...c5) and captured ("of course")
by 11. dxc6.. 8()
Don Burden (2006-08-26 18:51:54)
Opening Idea
I'd say it is a fairly big advantage to black. He's a solid pawn up and threatens to win another. Found two games in my database with higher rated players:
[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Majewski, Jan"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2335"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "122"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8.
O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. Ba3 Nxd6 14. Bxd6
cxd6 15. Qxd6 Ne8 16. Qd5 Nf6 17. Qd6 Ne8 18. Qd2 d6 19. Ng5 Nf6 20. Rad1 d5
21. Bb3 h6 22. Ne4 Bg4 23. Nxf6+ Qxf6 24. f3 Qb6+ 25. Qd4 Be6 26. Bxd5 Bxd5 27.
Qxb6 axb6 28. Rxd5 Rxa2 29. f4 Rc8 30. Rd3 Rc2 31. Ree3 Ra8 32. h4 Raa2 33. Rg3
Rd2 34. Rde3 Kf8 35. Re4 b5 36. Re5 Rab2 37. Rc5 b4 38. Rc8+ Ke7 39. cxb4 Rxb4
40. Rxg7 Rxf4 41. Rh7 Rf6 42. Kh2 Ke6 43. h5 Rd5 44. g4 Rd4 45. Kg3 Rd3+ 46.
Kg2 Rd6 47. Re8+ Kd7 48. Rf8 Ke7 49. Rhh8 Ke6 50. Re8+ Kd5 51. Re7 b6 52. Rf8
Rf4 53. Kg3 Rdf6 54. Rc8 Rf3+ 55. Kg2 Rf2+ 56. Kg1 R2f4 57. Rg8 b5 58. Re3 b4
59. Kg2 Kd4 60. Rb3 Rb6 61. Kg3 Rf1 0-1
[Event "ICCF MN/12 corr"]
[Site "ICCF corr"]
[Date "1995.06.30"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mathias, Manfred"]
[Black "Chorvat, Marian"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C54"]
[WhiteElo "2370"]
[BlackElo "2305"]
[PlyCount "110"]
[EventDate "1995.??.??"]
[Source "www.chesslib.no"]
[SourceDate "2006.04.01"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 5. d4 exd4 6. cxd4 Bb4+ 7. Nc3 Nxe4 8.
O-O O-O 9. d5 Bxc3 10. bxc3 Ne7 11. Re1 Nf6 12. d6 Nf5 13. dxc7 Qxc7 14. Qb3 d5
15. Bd3 Be6 16. Rb1 b6 17. Qc2 g6 18. Bb2 Ne8 19. Re2 Neg7 20. Rbe1 Rfe8 21.
Qd2 Nd6 22. c4 dxc4 23. Qc3 f6 24. Bxg6 hxg6 25. Qxf6 Qf7 26. Rxe6 Qxf6 27.
Rxf6 Rxe1+ 28. Nxe1 Re8 29. Nf3 Re2 30. Be5 Nf7 31. Bd4 Re6 32. Kf1 Rxf6 33.
Bxf6 b5 34. Bc3 Ne6 35. h4 Nf4 36. a3 Nd5 37. Bb4 a6 38. g3 Kg7 39. Ke2 Kf6 40.
Ba5 Nd6 41. g4 Nb7 42. Bd2 a5 43. Bg5+ Kg7 44. Ne5 c3 45. Kd3 b4 46. Kc4 Nb6+
47. Kd4 Nc5 48. axb4 axb4 49. f3 Nd5 50. Nc4 Ne6+ 51. Kd3 Nxg5 52. hxg5 b3 53.
Na3 Kf7 54. f4 c2 55. Nxc2 Nxf4+ 0-1
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-08 18:10:52)
Chess tournament : Zero-sum or not ?
While discussing about Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", and the question "Is the best player always the champion ?" (of course not IMO) , I was argued that any chess tournament "was" (actually could be "reduced to") a zero-sum game :
"In 1944 John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern proved that any zero-sum game involving n players is in fact a generalised form of a zero-sum game for two persons, and that any non-zero-sum game for n players can be reduced to a zero-sum game for n + 1 players; the (n + 1) player representing the global profit or loss. This suggests that the zero-sum game for two players forms the essential core of mathematical game theory."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_sum_game
It seems to me that it's out of topic, but I couldn't say exactly why... In my opinion, a tournament is nearer life than game, at least quite far from it. Much more rules, often complex ones, and results that depend on many parameters you couldn't influence...
The word "champion" depends on accurate rules (the best player could finish 2nd, even if he wins all games ie. in an open tournament..), the "best player" depends on general opinion (most commonly through ratings), ie. Topalov vs. Kasparov ...
What do you think ? :-)
Where the discussion started from :
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060907/sirlin_01.shtml
I agree with many points about how to win, but the use of some words seems to be dubious...
I like much this quote :
"I was surprised to see that Capablanca did not initiate any active maneuvers and instead adopted a waiting game. In the end, his opponent made an imprecise move; the Cuban won a second pawn and soon the game. “Why didn’t you try to convert your material advantage straight away?” I ventured to ask the great chess virtuoso. He smiled indulgently. “It was more practical to wait.” "
—Mikhail Botvinnik, 6th World Chess Champion
Thibault de Vassal (2006-09-11 00:26:57)
1.b4
Hello Ulrich.
1.b4 is not bad enough :) The idea is to organize ie. money matches (with only 1 game) & tournaments where draws can't happen. So it's important to have about 50% chances at a high level.
Just an idea.
Maybe normal start positions with a pawn less could work...
Ilmars Cirulis (2006-09-19 16:21:14)
Thematic tournament 14
IMO - after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 white has easy win: Nxf7 and Nxh8. Exchange and pawn more.
May be it is possible to put 4.. d5 instead of 4.. Bc5?! No one is in the waiting list yet.
Cirulis
Ilmars Cirulis (2006-10-02 18:31:15)
I :D
I use Rybka. 1.2. It is my only engine. :D I don't know about other ones. I have too poor eksperience with correspodence chess. But sometimes the engine tells weak moves - especially in very sharp and difficult variations. For example, Traxler or Latvian gambit poisoned pawn. I must think, too. :D
Ilmars Cirulis (2006-10-02 20:40:30)
Hi again, Thibault!
What do you think about WC article 2689? I think - it is possible refutation of Traxler counterattack. White has slow, but sure win - piece again two pawns. Refute me if I am wrong, please! (:
Cirulis
Rodrigo Jaroszewski (2006-10-10 18:37:31)
g11
Is it my impression or Kramnik wimped out of a rook exchange by 60...Ra5 and missed a good position with a passed pawn?
Most of the people should know my low degree of skill by now, so I'm just asking for help here to understand this. Why was so important for him to keep his Rook on the board over real winning chances?
Rodrigo Jaroszewski (2006-10-10 19:18:09)
Hmmm
Even with a pawn up, Thibault? I mean, after 60...Bb6 61.Rxe5 fxe5, White being uncapable of threatening both Black pawns or moving his King towards either Black's passed pawn or his own pawn... Of course, it might come to a lock later on, but it does seem more promising than allowing the Rooks to stay.
However, you did give me the answer to my question. Thanks!
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-10 19:49:12)
Opposite color bishops
These endgames are much easier than same color bishops or rooks endings.. The bishop & king can block the opponent's pawns (1, 2, 3 or more) in most cases, and the bishop can be exchanged against one or two pawns... In most cases the bishop has only to make aleatory moves and it's a draw.
There's a famous position with 8 pawns up... It's a draw too.
With rooks, it all depends... Sometimes it's harder to get a draw with opposite color bishops than same color ones.
See the 'endgames' Wikipedia article...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endgame#Bishops_on_opposite_colors
Dinesh De Silva (2006-10-13 14:57:27)
Kram. Wins Tie Break Game No. 2
Kram. (White) strategically outplayed Top. (Black) in tie break game no. 2 in 45 moves just now. After Top. conceded the bishop pair, he was forced on the backfoot in an ending, and went down a bishop for just two pawns, at which point he resigned.
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-10-19 20:19:50)
Mate in 292 moves
Hello Thibault,
I think the pairs of double pawns on e-g-h-lines are impossible to achieve out of the normal chess start position!
Wolfgang
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-10-19 20:47:01)
Mate in 292 moves
The white pawn h4 cannot reach its position without striking the black g-pawn - but this g-pawn is still there!
Wolfgang
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-19 23:07:16)
Re: Mate in 292 moves
Can't the pawns strike other pieces, rooks, bishops... ?!
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-10-19 20:56:51)
Mate in 292 moves
More accurate: The white pawn h4 cannot reach its position without striking the black g- and h-pawns - but this g- and h-pawns are still there! In combination with the black g-double pawn an the black h5-pawn, which position need to strike the white g- and h-pawns is it unpossible to reach out of the normal chess start position!
Wolfgang
Gino Figlio (2006-10-20 07:56:02)
too many pawn captures for white
4 white pawns are still in their original post. There are however 3 doubled pawns. The minimum number of pawn captures to achieve this would be 7, but black has only lost 4 pieces(2 rooks and 2 bishops); therefore the position is illegal.
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-10-20 09:39:00)
Mate in 292 moves
Yes, Gino, you are right! All pawns on board, so the double pawns can reach their position only by striking of other figures. For this position black should have had 9 (!) other figures (h4 by 2 figures; g5 by 3; e6 by 4) - but only 4 are missing. Wolfgang
Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-20 14:09:35)
Re: Mate in 292 moves
The minimum number of pawn captures is 8, that's a funny problem :)
Now here is the solution for the mate :
http://www.chess-problem.com/classic4.htm
Elmer Valderrama (2006-10-20 21:55:18)
retrograde analysis
from math.harvard.edu
"Legal position (n.): a position that can be reached from the initial array by game consisting entirely of legal moves, however bizarre. Conventionally every chess problem should have a legal position. Naturally then, an illegal position is a position that cannot be reached by a legal game. For instance, a position in which one side has more than 8 pawns, or has both White and Black Kings in check, is illegal (why?). So is any position with a White Bishop on h1 and White pawn on g2 (why?), such as the following mutual Zugzwang (q.v.), which Lewis Stiller discovered in the course of an exhaustive computer search: White Kg6, Bh1, Pg2; Black Kg4, Pg3. The Kniest position White Kc8,Pb6; Black Ka8,Pa7 (seen above under Helpmate) is legal BTM, but not WTM since Black is in ``retro-stalemate'': Black could not have made a legal move to reach this position. [Thus this position can be set as a Helpmate in Two but not a Mate in One (or ``helpmate in 0.5'').] There are positions that can be recognized as illegal only after extensive retrograde analysis. To prove that a position is legal, one need only exhibit a single legal game reaching the position; such a game is called a proof game. Some retrograde analysis may still be needed to construct a proof game."
I bet nowadays there exist a problem solving chess engine which can give such a 'proof game' in 0.0001milisec (as the moves maybe bizarre, no need to evaluate positions, just to check them for legality)
Wolfgang Utesch (2006-11-15 16:33:53)
Nice endgame
It is another endgame, but I didn't find any clear win with Rook+Knight+2 Pawns vs. Queen. But in the other endgame 3 Pawn vs. Bishop there is a clear winning way - complicate, but clear!
Lawrence Nesko (2006-11-20 18:38:08)
En passant?
Hello again, all. Once more, I apologize if my question has been answered before, but I have searched the Help and Forum sections and can't seem to find an answer.
In one of my current games (#4602), I wish to capture my opponent's pawn en passant. I have a pawn sitting upon e4 and he has advanced his pawn from d-2 to d-4. I had always been under the impression that the proper algebraic notation for the capture would be
exd4 ep
However, this was not accepted in the notation field. I tried a couple of more variations (i.e. exd4 e.p.) to no avail.
Fortunately, I was able to execute the move via the board graphic. The move was noted as exd3. Is that the porper algebraic notation, or is that something that is necessary due to the mechanics of the notation field?
Thanks in advance for your patience and reply.
James Stripes (2006-11-22 18:16:03)
PGN standard
"En passant captures do not have any special notation; they are formed as if the captured pawn were on the capturing pawn's destination square."
http://www.saremba.de/chessgml/standards/pgn/pgn-complete.htm
Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-17 04:28:02)
Google results
Oldest sites are still best placed on some keywords, but FICGS slowly improves his rank :)
- "Correspondence chess server" :
FICGS is ranked 1st ! then SchemingMind, Chessfriend, Chessworld, ICCF, ChessHere...
- "Correspondence chess" :
Correspondencechess.com, ICCF, USCF, SchemingMind, EWCCF, Chessfriend, British federation, Scottish federation, RedHotPawn, QueenAlice... FICGS now is ranked about 20th.
- "Chess forum" : FICGS is ranked 13th
- "Chess server" : FICGS is also ranked 13th
Not bad after a few months :)
Elmer Valderrama (2007-01-13 11:23:38)
WikiEndings?
..is it feasible? (I'm sure it is, it's just a rhetorical question ;)
I believe
endgame theory (and players) would benefit from a endgame section in Wikichess
contributed by members taken from their practice, especially if
general "rules of thumb" and guidelines are outlined together with
analysis. Specially interesting I think would be many-pawn endings and other practical
endings which are given poor coverage in the books and are less investigated
(and, as it seems, there are always holes in the analysis even from very strong players,
there would be a lot of room for improvement of the articles until a
general consensus is reached)
Subsections could be created in the lines of the ECO classification for
endgames, it would then be easy to find/correct/contribute in a given
position.
Any thoughts?
Kieran Child (2007-01-13 12:05:50)
ooh
That's a very very nice idea. I would suggest an immediate split in it between "pawn-dominant endings" and "piece dominant endings" then further splits for the type of pieces on the board and the opponent's material. If you stick to an advantage rule (like, white always has the greater points value) then it doesn't sound too hard. I would very much like to see this.
Dinesh De Silva (2007-02-13 08:45:07)
Re:
What's the latest on this saga?! Does these gestures of Danailov seem to suggest certain precise moves like pawn captures, pawn pushes, piece captures etc?!
Ovidiu Baron (2007-03-01 16:12:17)
Big chess. An idea!
Interesting game, but I think the Big chess has a small(?) problem, the 16 squares on the vertical. It takes too much time to bring the pawns into the game, and the risk is that they will not participate at the "battle" at all. Wouldn't be more efficient to reduce the vertical lines a little bit, maybe not to 8 squares, because of the central knights positioning, but to 10 or 12?
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-02 11:57:24)
Big chess. An idea
I saw another chess variant with about 16 squares on the horizontal and 8 lines on the vertical... I don't feel it's interesting enough... A kind of "double-chessboard". But you're right, pawns won't participate in the opening battle... What's interesting IMO is the many ways the middle game could happen :)
Now I'm discussing "theory" with some of my opponents.. :)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-09 16:53:11)
GM Ehlvest vs. Rybka
A strange match happened between FIDE GM Jaan Ehlvest (2610) and Rybka, with White playing with 7 pawns in all games...
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=519
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=564
Hannes Rada (2007-03-10 00:20:44)
How to get an equalized game vs. Rybka
Rybka handicapped by a pawn does not seem to be a sufficient compensation.
Let's furnish the human GM with an extra knight :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-11 21:05:57)
Shredder 10 vs. Rybka 2.3.1
Quite funny, Harry Schnapp 'organized' a match with the same conditions between Shredder 10 UCI and Rybka 2.3.1 (still playing with 1 pawn less) : Shredder 10 won the match 5,5 / 2,5
Pablo Schmid (2007-03-12 00:22:02)
Haha
Notice that giving a pawn in the starting position is not necessary a big disadvantage, depending of which pawn. For example I do it "everytime" with 1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 (BDG) where after 4..exf3 5.Nxf3, it seems to be a "normal" position, but without the f pawn. And my claim is: White have a dynamical equality with best play against best play!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-30 22:34:37)
WCH rules
Thanks Sandor & Wolfgang for sharing your views.
As you said, there's no perfect rule for everyone, particularly in a correspondence chess championship, where time is a predominant factor. As for me, I like much FICGS rules so far because of these major points :
1) The best players have the best chances.
2) A new cycle can start every 6 months.
3) There's no external influence in a knockout tournament.
I think the lowest rated player has to prove he's stronger than the highest rated player or champion, so it's coherent in round-robin and knockout tournaments. I particularly like the special rule in the knockout tournament (stage 1, 2 & 3). I'm now playing an exciting quarter final against Wolfgang, that I'm to lose because of this rule - the winner is the player with the strongest TER is all games are draw, the player with the lowest TER if not all games are draw - even if it finishes with a 4-4 score. Simply because I'll lose most probably at least one game. I think it's fair ! .. I knew the rule (of course, I made it :)), I knew I had to draw all games or to win by one point at least. Rules are the game ! .. It's not more unfair than to draw a game with one or two pawns more ;)
However I agree that WCH round-robin tournaments should be 9, 11 or 13 players groups to give more place to chess. I'll take care of this in the next cycle.
Finally, not only rules are to be taken in consideration... To attract players, there must be a real challenge ! .. To take the title to the champion will be really hard for sure :)
Nick Burrows (2007-05-10 07:24:54)
surtees
He is a player from my home town rated about 2200. He plays many weird and wonderful openings that he's worked out himself (eg French 4 pawn gambit!?) should be some games on Chessbase...
Don Burden (2007-05-17 00:45:25)
Fighting against Tablebases
Needing over a terabyte of disk space, I doubt if anyone actually has the 6 piece tablebase installed on their computer, though a position can be queried at:
http://www.shredderchess.com/online-chess/online-databases/endgame-database.html
BTW, I've played endgames here where I had to play the game out to checkmate where my opponent had just a king and a few locked pawns, while I had an advantage of a queen, rook, and several extra pawns.
Robert Mueller (2007-05-29 17:46:55)
This is becoming ridiculous...
Hello Thibault,
I understand the one month rule. But this is becoming ridiculous. My opponent in game #5664 is playing on with King against King-Rook (no pawns). He has 98 days left. Still no adjudication?
Dirk Ghysens (2007-06-07 08:13:30)
Ehlvest
Rybka's GM challenger will be Ehlvest (again); in an earlier match, Ehlvest (Elo 2643) received Pawn odds and lost.
Graham Cridland (2007-06-11 18:03:56)
Pirc in Correspondence
Sounds like a good book. Still, I won't buy it, for the simple reason that the Pirc isn't much fun for Black. There are several simple ways for White to get a comfortable advantage, even without a lot of theory.
In Correspondence I'd think the problem was worse, since it's harder to arrange tactical accidents for your opponent (sort of the point of the Pirc).
I guess the point is that the Pirc isn't supertheory, so you can get dynamic positions without playing the Sicilian. But I'd rather (especially in correspondence) have an extra central pawn than a less explored position, wouldn't you?
Graham Cridland (2007-06-15 17:29:55)
Game 11393
Just finished an interesting game in the Scandinavian. Pretty level most of the way, although both sides must have missed some chances.
A couple of questions: First, in the final position, what is the evaluation of the endgame after 31 ... Qc8 32 Qe5+ Qc7 33 Qxg7 Rxg7 34 Re8+ Qc8 35 Rxc8 Kxc8 36 Rxg7 (thus far all forced) 36...Rxd4 37 Rh7 Rf4 38 Rxh6 Rxf2 39 Rg6 Rh2 40 h6 (this exact endgame can be reached by other move orders in Cridland-Khayman)?
I looked at the ending for a long time, as it seemed to be my only option other than forcing a draw (32 Qe3 Re4 33 Qd2 isn't attractive).
But I think it's drawn! White's only plan is bringing the king to g1 to release the back rank, but that gives black time to rush forward with pawns and king on the Queenside. White can get to h7 by Rg8+ Kc7, Rg7+ Kb6, h7 at some point, but then what?
It looked so attractive at first.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-18 20:50:23)
Big chess theory : "Queens opening"
The first rated Big Chess tournament started a few days ago... I like this game more and more, no theory, no databases, no chess engines, many strategies & many queens captured already ;)
Every opening seems ok, we still don't know if taking pawns with the queen during the first moves is worth something or not, the value of the pieces is quite unpredictable... Many players now play 1.Nh4 to threaten 2.Qo7 then 3.Qc7 if needed, winning a pawn. What is the best response if you want to keep the same material ? .. Anyway that's very interesting to see a side with 1 or 2 pawns more, giving some rooks activity to the opponent.. Still looks like a draw theorically.
My main line is : 1.Nh4 Nh13 2.Qo7 No14 3.Qc7 Ql13
Any other suggestion ?
See Big Chess waiting list in Chess Special Tournaments.
Ilmars Cirulis (2007-06-23 05:57:48)
Poisoned Pawn Variation
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.e5 h6 11.Bh4 dxe5 12.fxe5 Nfd7 13.Ne4 Qxa2 14.Rd1 Qd5 15.Qe3 Qxe5 16.Be2 Bc5 17.Bg3 Bxd4 18.Rxd4 Qa5+ 19.Rd2 O-O 20.Bd6.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-23 06:11:39)
Poisoned Pawn Variation
Was this line often played !?
Ilmars Cirulis (2007-06-23 06:26:21)
Poisoned Pawn Variation
Between engines:
Rybka vs Shredder in WCCC Round 11 [Re8 1-0]
Flyingfatman vs Mission control in Freestyle Final Round 1 [Re8 1-0]
Fritz vs Junior Game 3 [Re8 1-0]
Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-27 04:12:14)
Predictions ? :)
In less than two weeks, this promising 8-games match will start... Any predictions ? .. How many pawns will Peter give to his opponent to find beautiful attacks ? :) .. He'll probably have to avoid draws anyway. I think Gino has good chances in this match.
Wayne Lowrance (2007-07-14 18:37:07)
It is a clone 2.
The following is just one of many close observations. There are so many documentations I would not try to sum them up. :)
The main problem is identical or almost identical analysis both in evaluation and search.
Studying rybka's output in order to improve your evaluation(assuming rybka has better evaluation) make sense but even in that case I do not expect a program to have identical evaluation to rybka even in situations when it does not make sense to have evaluation that is different than 0 as King against king.
Rybka tries to hide her evaluation but not writing output at small depth and this is the reason that I am basically interested in analysis of fortress
positions because in fortress positions the evaluation is partially exposed.
It is logical to learn from this experience of analysing fortress position and get evaluation that is more similiar to rybka but having evaluation that is totally identical in more than one case does not make sense and it cannot be an accident and the problem is not only identical evaluation but also identical search in many positions as evidence proved and even if the evaluation is different I can find the same patterns in the score changes.
This can happen only with copying code and it cannot happen without cloning.
The programmer of strelka did not understand rybka's code otherwise he could avoid the same bugs.
Same pattern of drop in the evaluation score when you have a queen.
This pattern is also in old strelka.
Why does it happen?
Note that no other program that I know shows drop in evaluation for white by more than 3 pawns.
Strelka's score drops from
+- (12.53) in depth 6 to 8.50 in depth 7
Rybka's score drops from 12.34 pawns in depth 4 to 8.37 pawns at depth 5
I find this compelling, if you understand it
Wayne
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-05 05:04:29)
Adjudication
Thibault I understand that to some players it might be unacceptable to have the game suddenly declared lost or drawn in a Q v Q+P ending or R+P v N+p ending. In my view these players should opt for the non computer tournaments you are going to set up. To cover the point raised: yes there can remain a need for a referee which should be human. Linking to table bases does not affect the beauty of an endgame Thibault its just a small range at the moment of 6 piece endings. There is no aesthetic value in following the moves advised by the tablebase the value is in getting there. Every strong player is consulting the tablebases when analysing positions leading to 6 piece situations so automating table base adjudications in say A M and WCC tournaments seems completely logical. Yes strong tournaments are played only for the sporting result Thibault I dont think anyone would choose an inferior move for the beauty they might try it to take a risk to win by complicating the game. I have seen 30+ moves games of yours of absolute poisened pawn Najdorf theory leading to a dead draw ..... I guess what I am trying to avoid is opponents dragging out games which are table base won. In the case of reasonable strong opponents 2100+ in my view this is because they just dont want to resign. by the way how do you call for the referee?
Garvin Gray (2007-09-07 03:31:59)
entering
Well I am playing under the name pawntobewild.
Jason Repa (2007-09-08 12:26:56)
"No engines" Tournaments
I suspect you'll get a whole new breed of forum posts where accusations will be disguised as compliments such as: "Johnny So and So really played an excellent game! He was accurate like a machine against me", etc.
You'll also hear allot of twisted soapbox rants about how "morally superior" the allegedly non engine consulting players are.
This is what the forums on second rate sits such as RedHotPawn, ChessHere, etc are filled with, in addition to absurd claims of so-called "engine detection technology", which is obviously impossible. On RHP in particular, the site admin are software developers with extremely modest uscf ratings in the C-class range, yet somehow they deem themselves qualified to make such difficult judgment calls, which are at best a probability guess, even for a strong chess player.
I thought it was precisely this kind of nonsense you were trying to avoid when you decided to make it an up front policy of "freestyle" chess at will at FICGS.
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-10 21:05:48)
chess engines
Following Thibault's comments about Rybka having changed correpondence chess I purchased the rybka engine. It is a very good program but I dont see how it has affected cc anymore than Fritz.
I have used Fritz 8 and 9 extensively for analysis and have until now no experience of other engines. Although I have just downloaded Toga II which is an excellent engine (and free!!) if anyone wants a free engine this is a top program that downloads in seconds and is up there with the commercial programs.
I noticed Rybka seems more conservative evaluating positions than Fritz. However it has blind spots. For an example taken from the current chess cafe "Yasser Annotates" (Ivanchuk Seirawan 1990)after 1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe 4 Nxe Bc5 5 Ng3 Bg6 6 h5 h6 7 Nf3 Nd7 8 h5 Bh7 9 Bd3 Bxd 10 Qxd Ngf6 11 Bf4 e6 12 0-0-0 Be7 13 c4 b5 Black offers a pawn my reaction is not to take - otb I would never take. Why open the c file for black and grabbing the pawn by Qxb5 looks risky with only 2 pawns to cover the king and open b and c files. Fritz prefers 14 c5 with 14 cxd followed by 15 Kb1 as 2nd choice after 3 minutes ply 15 depth
Rybka r chooses 14 cxb cxb then 15 Qxb5?! even after 1 hour at ply 19! In cc I would look at 14cxb and 15 Qxb5 to see if I could survive and win with the extra pawn but working with Fritz it takes but a few minutes to see black has compensation after 15 Qxb5 Nd5. When 16 Be5 gives an inferior endgame for white and 16 Bd2 Rb8 gives an attack for black. The top professionals work with a range of programs Fritz, Junior, Shredder, Hiracs and Rybka to generate ideas.
Does anyone have any views on these other program's characteristics?
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-12 07:36:30)
chess engines endgame play
Right Thibault! I am becoming more impressed with Rybka's endgame knowledge. It seems to have the extra pawn on just one side situations well understood. Is there any engine that is recognised as being the strongest at endgames? This is certainly an area where cc has helped me enormously as it has forced me to get some endgame books (and actually study them!)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-12 07:36:52)
chess engines endgame play
" It seems to have the extra pawn on just one side situations well understood." .. It is undoubtly one of the keys of its success.
As far as I know, Shredder has always been said to be the strongest engine in the endgames.
Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-12 16:51:49)
Gene
ok Gene let me give you my experience as to why you should use an engine in cc. 1) I have learnt a lot about certain openings and I remember lot more effective systems 2) finding the truth about a position is fun and instructive 3) I have acquired some endgame knowledge I never would have got. 4) Generally I wil try to understand why the engines like certain moves and drill down into the position trying altrentives until I get it. Sometimes in very wild positions its tough. Most of the the time this reinforces principles of develpoment pawn structure piece dynamism and I find it rubs off on my understanding. One proviso - if you take on too many games a lot of this wont work!
Facing a much lower rated player you have to do research and prepare something - trotting down the main line poisened pawn Najdorf may not be the way to go. A lot of top players go for catalan and english openings hoping to utilise their chess knowledge and research.
One thing is for sure always playing the best move of your engine is going to drop 1/2 points and lose some games and that includes Rybka. Finally all this stuff is done by all the top professionals in the otb chess. One example I faced the line that Kramnik got crushed with by Topalov playing b5 and f4. I looked at the game notes and databases and couldnt find a good response 45 minutes with fritz and I cracked it and in the process gained some insight into the opening. In fact its a harmless variation if you know the antidote but over the board one slip and Kram was toasted
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-09-23 16:53:41)
50 moves rule
Is the 50 moves rule effective (50 moves without striking any figure or moving a pawn) - as in FIDE or ICCF rules? I can't find a hint in our rules.
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-09-23 17:16:54)
50 moves rule (better wording)
Is the 50 moves rule effective (50 moves without striking any piece or without moving any pawn) - as in FIDE or ICCF rules (draw)? I can't find a hint in our rules.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-10-31 18:51:22)
Deep Shredder 11 available
Amsterdam 2007 blitz world champion, Mainz 2006 World Computer Chess960 Champion, Reykjavik 2005 blitz world champion, Tel Aviv 2004 blitz world champion, Graz 2003 computer chess world champion & blitz world champion and so on...
No, that is not Rybka :) .. Deep Shredder 11 is now available and said by Chessbase to have an improved strength of 100 points elo, actually about 80 according to CEGT computer chess 40/20 rating list, which is not bad at all ! .. Evaluation function (passed pawns..) seems to be the main improved part of the engine.
Congrats to Stefan Meyer-Kahlen.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4218
Did someone try the new engine ?
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-04 03:51:27)
Thematic tournaments #38, #39
Thematic tournament #38 just started, line is sicilian poisoned pawn variation (10.e5), the next thematic tournament will be about this complex line also.
Games to follow !
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-26 23:36:46)
Wilkes-Barre Furor
The next thematic tournament is a very interesting line of the Sicilian poisoned pawn variation : 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.e5
See in Waiting list >> Special chess tournaments
If you want to play a "one-game" match with Ilmars, you may try in Advanced chess tournaments >> Bronze lightning .. and play Traxler, if you don't care about your blitz chess rating :) .. or Thematic lightning but with entry fee & prize (10 E-Points) & White must win rule.
William Taylor (2007-12-18 12:28:27)
Atomic
Implement atomic ches...
Ok, so it's not very similar to classical chess, but it's great fun! When there is a capture, all pieces (but not pawns) within a 1-square radius (including the capturing and captured pieces) blow up. The aim is to blow up your opponent's king. There are very few draws, but white does seem to have an advantage.
Marc Lacrosse (2007-12-18 18:33:50)
High level performance
Marius Zubac just won tournament FICGS__CHESS__WCH_STAGE_1_GROUP_M_01__000003 with an impressive 2631 performance (6.5/8 and no loss in a 2378 tournament)
On his way to victory he cruelly refuted a knight-for-three-pawns sac that I tried in our encounter. Nice job!
Congratulations for this fine performance.
... we need more high level tournaments ...
Marc
Lincoln Tomlin (2007-12-20 07:44:37)
Chess variants
Many years ago, a friend and I made up a variant with the idea of practicing our endgame technique from a normal starting position. It worked like this:
The pieces are setup as usual and the rules are exactly the same as in the normal game with the exception that all major and minor pieces cannot move unless they are capturing.
The play then centres on pawn and king moves as if it was a K7vK7 endgame, which would be too easy to draw, but with added strategies of bringing pieces into play via sacrifices to unbalance the position. Which then cannot be moved again unless they take of course.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-01-08 08:37:49)
Lost on time
Well I think it maybe too late to save Victors participation as the game against Harry Ingersoll is already declared lost on time. Its an interesting position and game, Victor is a pawn down but has active play as compensation its not lost at all. I expect when he sees this game lost he will just resign the rest. So we will lose the participation of the highest rated player because of a rule that is not well understood and occurs without warning. The only way to save that and play chess is if Harry agrees to play on I would understand if he didnt but its a mess frankly
Marc Lacrosse (2008-05-01 18:03:17)
to Andrew
"I don't se much benefit to letting the computer think for hours frankly wants it gets to 20 + ply. There all sorts of horizons in positions that letting the computer run for a year wont sort out."
There are other ways to use engines than letting simply one of them run for hours.
You may interactively walk along the various branches of the tree going from current position with one or several engines running.
You may also have engines playing some kind of test matches against each other from the current position or from any critical position that you identify along the possible continuations.
You can use Rybka randomizer against itself or against other engines for more exhaustive evaluation through test games
And so on ...
"Marc why are you playing this c3 stuff against the sicilian with such great kit? You play the same openings all the time and I thought it was because you had not much time!!!"
1. I never played this disreputed c3 stuff against the 2..d6 sicilian (with or without the 4.Be2 pawn offer) before january 2008 in my 140+ former serious correspondence games
Indeed I did choose it because I erroneously enrolled in three new tournaments simultaneously and I feared to miss time for serious analysis due to heavy workload at that time.
Results are a bit disappointing with it : five draws so far and two unfinished games that I should win (one win is sure and the other one is probable).
This should lead to a 64% result and a 2333 elo performance. Not shining but not that bad insn't it ?
2. I like playing unorthodox openings in correspondence play.
I do not see any interest in beginning my games with 30 moves of overanalysed theory.
Most often I decide for a side variation and I do play it in as many games as possible simultaneously : I do the analysis job once for all while being fully "in the mood" of a similar set of positions.
Then I change for something else
I won't probably ever play any more game with the line I played against you.
3. An exception is the Basman-Sale Sicilian (2..e6 4..Bc5).
I like it a lot and even have a web site devoted to it (http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info/basmansale/index.html)
I am in a running series of more than twenty corr. games without a single loss with it and decided not to stop using it until defeat happens
I probably analysed it more than anybody : I have several thousands of analysed lines in my files.
I am just busy to consider switching to something more agressive for cases where I need to play for a win as Black.
Regards
Marc
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-03 09:28:38)
From??
Completely lost for black imo its madness to throw away a pawn like this at cc - I suppose there might be some way to grovel for a draw after 4..Nf6 black will probably get his pawn back unless white plays e3 and d4 when he has the hole on e4 has a kind of compensation. After 4..g5 can put up more of a fight with 5...Nc6 at least white doesnt get quite such a massive a massive centre All black has are some tactical tricks and a temporary lead in development once white avoids these and gets his pieces out of the box its dire for black. The last GM to play this as black (Kotronias) got a completely lost position although he won the game! On the other hand 1 f4 at cc seems a waste of white .... if everyone would reply with the From I would play nothing else but f4!!!
Jason Repa (2008-05-04 08:17:16)
From??
FYI,
5...Nc6 doesn't "put up more of a fight". It loses immediately to 6.Bxg5. I rarely have anyone play that badly against me in an online bullet game, let alone a cc game.
and in the line with 4...Nf6 (called the Mestel Variation), there is no clear way for Black to win his pawn back.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-05 12:50:53)
From here to eternity
Yes there might be some variations that are survivable especially OTB but at cc its tough to give up a pawn so early on. I think f4 is a perfectly ok first move (like b4) I just think it does not give any prospect of an opening advantage at cc because there is no surprise value and the black player has the time to research and find a response that equalises fairly quickly. That is why very few GM's have F4 as a main white weapon - it does not give enough prospects for an advantage - at the highest levels. Please note that qualification. I quite agree real chess is between people in real time and cc is a form of research competition. Getting experience for real world chess is a great reason to play a line at cc. There are exceptions OTB I often play the exchange french and have had good success (played by Kasparov Tal Morphy and others) I would not play it at cc though! In fact OTB I always play e4 but at cc gave it up because I see no way to get any adavantage against the caro kahn. Just relaying the moves the computer suggests does not, I think, give much chance of success against good players at cc.
As for the From I do not believe in g5 white has to avoid the tricks and develop and is a pawn up. Not so easy otb!! - but at cc not so much of a problem. As for Nc6 yes I was talking about this move after 5 g3 and you are probably right I will try to look at the game you gave and do some analysis. As for the Mestel variation I thought black would get the pawn back unless e3 and d4 are played but again that was based on a quick look. Anyway perhaps the thematic tournament wil provide some answers.
Pablo Schmid (2008-05-06 14:33:19)
Jason,
I would like to know how you refute the line which begin with 10..Bf5 instead of your opponent's move 10..Qe7. It usually continues with 10..Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 and now what? And when you say that after 4..Nf6 you don't see how Black can get the pawn back, I want to say that chess is not all about material but activity. So it might be possible that with best play, even if Black can't get the pawn back, they could reach a dynamical equality.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-06 18:04:40)
From RIP
"would like to know how you refute the line which begin with 10..Bf5 instead of your opponent's move 10..Qe7. It usually continues with 10..Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 and now what?" The answer is 13 Be3 and after Be6 14 Bf2 f5 15 Nd2 GM Kotronius tried 15..Qf7 16 0-0-0 Bxa2 when 17 e5 looks winning. Instead 16..fxe4! 17 Bxe4 Bxa2 and maybe black can hold with Na5 to come. Obviously 14 e5 is critical after 14 ..Bxe5 15 Bxc6 Rxh2 16 Rxh2 Bxg3+ 17 Rf2 black gets 2 pawns for a piece and an exposed king but white still has some winning chances. That leaves 13 ..Bd7 but the bishop is more passive and will probably end up going to e6 after f5 etc White has 14 Bf2 or 14 Kd1! intending Kc2 and Nd2 both look good. The problem for black is that his long term comp is the h file pressure which doesnt balance whites extra centre pawn. IMO
Jason Repa (2008-05-06 22:07:42)
From's Gambit
"And when you say that after 4..Nf6 you don't see how Black can get the pawn back, I want to say that chess is not all about material but activity"
I realize that Pablo, probably a lot better than you do. I didn't state, nor imply that White was up an entire pawn or that Black didn't have some compensation (albeit probably not enough) for the pawn. If you re-read both my thread and the one I was responding to, you will see that we weren't discussing the amount of dynamic compensation that Black gets for sacrificing the pawn. We were discussing whether or not Black gets his pawn back. End of story.
Pablo Schmid (2008-05-06 23:13:38)
Jason,
"I realize that Pablo, probably a lot better than you do"
What? How do you know? You know nothing about me and you say that...
"We were discussing whether or not Black gets his pawn back"
Is that question more important than "Does Black have a sufficient compensation for the pawn"?
"For example; 10...Bf5 11.e4 Qe7 12.Bg2 0-0-0 13.Be3!+/-" Easy response when I already said that I would play 13..Bd7 here and now what?
Pablo Schmid (2008-05-07 00:34:11)
...
"Actually you're wrong once again Pablo. I know that you're only a 1912 rated player on this site"
Yeah, on this site... I began here as a 1700 (the first rating here) and I lost many games on time or because I was very busy and in a hurry to play a move without checking seriously to not lose on time. And corr rating does not mean everything. I play OTB too. Do you? I would be happy to play with you, even if you seems a bit arrogant when I see the way you speak in general.
And still, when I read that: "FYI,
5...Nc6 doesn't "put up more of a fight". It loses immediately to 6.Bxg5. I rarely have anyone play that badly against me in an online bullet game, let alone a cc game.
and in the line with 4...Nf6 (called the Mestel Variation), there is no clear way for Black to win his pawn back.
" There is not discussion about material, you seems to judge the position on the fact that Black could not regain the pawn, so they are worse...
Jason Repa (2008-05-07 12:50:12)
Pablo BACKS DOWN!
And you're the one who started with the insults Pablo. You don't run around calling people "arrogant" because you're frustrated at your own inability to comprehend what
"and in the line with 4...Nf6 (called the Mestel Variation), there is no clear way for Black to win his pawn back."
means.
And challenging someone to a chess match then backing down as you have done is BEYOND PATHETIC!
Henrik Jonsson (2008-07-02 23:13:12)
Openings that leads to open games?
I have a rating of 1800 at ICC. But I don´t know very much opening theory. I like open games. So I would like to learn openings, where a lot of pawns are exchanged, that leads to open games. Any recommendations?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-07-02 23:34:50)
Open games
I just wonder what is a good definition for "open games" ? Exchange pawns is ok, but after how many moves ? It is commonly said : e4 = open game, d4 = closed game, which is very inaccurate.
Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-07-04 07:17:27)
Open Games
Try the scotch opening, the central pawns are exchanged early.
Mark Hailes (2008-07-26 18:52:52)
Descartes
@Rodolfo. Just to be pedantic - I'm pretty sure that the well known *fact* that Descartes invented the "Cartesian coordinate system" is actually a myth.
So, in Descartes day, the notation for 1.e4 might be something like this:
"The white king, for his first draught, commands his owne pawne, and places him into the fourth house before his owne place."
Phil Cook (2008-08-12 07:34:16)
Morales Vs Cook
[Event "Single game, E4EC"]
[Site "http://gameknot.com/"]
[Date "2008.04.22"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Morales, Rafael (rafafallo)"]
[Black "Cook, Phil (Kiwi)"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "1078"]
[BlackElo "1170"]
[TimeControl "10/30"]
1. d4 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 } d5
2. Nc3 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6..not
commonly played } e6 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5
2. Nc3 e6..not commonly played} 3. a3 {3.blocking ..Bb4} h6 4. e4 a6
5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 {3. ....... h6 4. e4 a6 5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 attemps
white into another exchange} 7. Bg2 {7.Bg2 defends } Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9.
c4 Be7 10. d5 {7. Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9. c4 Be7 10. d5 (white here,trying
to open the middle up) so black attacks} cxd5 11. cxd5 O-O 12. dxe6 {12.dxe6,,(black
gives up a pawn or does he)} Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6 {12. dxe6
Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6(wins the pawn back,has white in disarray
here)} 15. Nf3 Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 {15. Nf3
Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 (note whites black bishop)}
Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5 Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ {19. Bxf3 Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5
Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3(white lost contol and game from here,yet plods on)} 23.
Kxf3 Rxd2 {22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ 23. Kxf3 Rxd(loss of bishop)} 24. Rc6 Rd3+ 25.
Ke4 Rbd8 26. Rxe6 Rd3d6 27. Rxd6 Rxd6 28. Rc1 Rd4+ 29. Kf5 Rxb4 30. Kg6
Rg4+ 31. Kf5 Rc4 32. Rd1 Rc5+ 33. Ke4 b4 34. Rb1 Rb5 35. Rb3 Bc3 36. f4
Rxa5 37. f5 Ra3 0-1
Normajean Yates (2008-08-12 14:52:44)
latvian-fraser 9...d5, and the R-sac
9...d5 10.d3 Kf7 11.Bg5 Bg7 may be better.. [context: latvian fraser exchange-sac line 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f5 3. Nxe5 Nc6 4. Qh5+ g6 5. Nxg6 Nf6 6. Qh3 hxg6 7. Qxh8 Qe7 8. Nc3 {innovation?} fxe4 9. Be2]
Anyway the latvian fraser R-sac line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Nc6 4.Qh5+ g6 5.Nxg6 Nf6 6.Qh3 fxe4 7.Nxh8 d5 8.Qb3 Bd7 is still on the cards --- real serious play goes 3. Nxe5 Qf6 anyway - pity because the poisoned pawn var, the Svedenborg, 3. ef, and 3. d4 are quite elegant...
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-12 21:32:49)
No novelty
F Perez-Cruz v F Acosta 1994 correspondence Massow Memorial (1-0 32) 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 Qh5+ g6 5 Nxg6 Nf6 6 Qh3 hxg6 7 Qxh8 Qe7 8 Nc3! The game continued with Nb4 9 d4?! (9 d3 looks like an easy win) Nxe4 10 Nxe4 Qxe4+ 11 Be3 Kf7?! (had to play 11..f4 12 Bd3 Nxd3 [12 ..Qxg2 13 Qe5+ Be7 13 Be4] 13 cxd3 Qxg2 14 Rf1 d6 when he can fight on) 12 Bd3 Nxd3 13 cxd3 with a won position.
If I faced this Nc6 line I would play after 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 d4! (John Nunn's refutation) this squelches all blacks hopes for play. What now for black? 4..Nf6 5 Nxc6 dxc6 6 e5 which looks like a pawn odds game. I dont know.
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-15 18:00:45)
Nunn "refutation"
Here is a summary of the analysis after e4 e5 2 Nf3 f5 3 Nxe5 Nc6 4 d4!:
a.) 4…fxe4 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.Qh5+ Ke7
b.) 4…Nxd5 5.dxe5 d6 (5…Qe7 6.Qd4 and White is a pawn up, threatening Nc3-d5 – Nunn) 6.Bf4! “Black's position flat out sucks!”
c.) 4…Nf6 5.Nxc6 dxc6 6.e5 with a clear extra pawn.
d.) 4…Qh4!? 5.Nf3 Qxe4+ 6.Be2 Black's Queen is exposed eg 6…Nf6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Re1 with advantage 8…0-0? loses to 9.Bc4+.
e) 4...Qe7 is not analysed. 5 Nc3! (5 Nxc6 Qxe4+ 6 Be2 Qxc6 7 0-0 d5 8 Nc3 Kf7! and blacks not too bad) 5...fxe4 (5...Nxe5 6 Nb5!)6 Nb5 Kd8 7 Bf4 Nxe5 (7..Nf6 8 Nxc7!) 8 dxe5 and black cant develop eg Nh6 9 e6!d6 10 Qd5!
In line a) 4..fxe4 5 Nxc6 Black can try bxc6!?(instead of dxc6)6 Qh5+ Ke7 planning to play Kf7 and d5. This might be the best try and although I white is better the positions are a bit unclear. After 4..fxe4 white also has 5 Bc4 d5 6 Bb5 Qd6 (6..Ne7 7 0-0 is strong) 7 c4 a6 when white will probably get the e pawn but black gets the bishop pair.
So I am not now sure its a refutation!
Phil Cook (2008-08-16 10:54:51)
(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation)
Morales Vs Cook
[Event "Single game, E4EC"] [Date "2008.04.22"] [Round "-"] [White "Morales, Rafael (rafafallo)"] [Black "Cook, Phil (Kiwi)"] [Result "0-1"] [WhiteElo "1078"] [BlackElo "1170"] [TimeControl "10/30"] 1. d4 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 } d5 2. Nc3 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6..not commonly played } e6 {(D 00 Queeens Pawn,Chigorin varation) 1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 e6..not commonly played} 3. a3 {3.blocking ..Bb4} h6 4. e4 a6 5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 {3. ....... h6 4. e4 a6 5. g3 dxe4 6. Nxe4 Nf6 attemps white into another exchange} 7. Bg2 {7.Bg2 defends } Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9. c4 Be7 10. d5 {7. Nxe4 8. Bxe4 c6 9. c4 Be7 10. d5 (white here,trying to open the middle up) so black attacks} cxd5 11. cxd5 O-O 12. dxe6 {12.dxe6,,(black gives up a pawn or does he)} Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6 {12. dxe6 Qxd1+ 13. Kxd1 Rd8+ 14. Bd2 fxe6(wins the pawn back,has white in disarray here)} 15. Nf3 Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 {15. Nf3 Bf6 16. Rb1 Nd7 17. b4 Ne5 18. Ke2 Nxf3 19. Bxf3 (note whites black bishop)} Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5 Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ {19. Bxf3 Rb8 20. a4 b5 21. a5 Bb7 22. Rbc1 Bxf3(white lost contol and game from here,yet plods on)} 23. Kxf3 Rxd2 {22. Rbc1 Bxf3+ 23. Kxf3 Rxd(loss of bishop)} 24. Rc6 Rd3+ 25. Ke4 Rbd8 26. Rxe6 Rd3d6 27. Rxd6 Rxd6 28. Rc1 Rd4+ 29. Kf5 Rxb4 30. Kg6 Rg4+ 31. Kf5 Rc4 32. Rd1 Rc5+ 33. Ke4 b4 34. Rb1 Rb5 35. Rb3 Bc3 36. f4 Rxa5 37. f5 Ra3 0-1
Andrew Stephenson (2008-08-19 02:16:39)
Its a win !!!!
You must be joking!! Thibault its a definite win it will be over in a few moves!!
If anyone thinks black can survive please suggest some moves. The key to the win is that the best black can do is reach the position in a) below with Bishop and 2 pawns v R and 1 pawn. White wins becuse his king has access to e4, the Bishop is restricted by his pawns on a7 and e5 and most importantly his passed a pawn is not advanced.
It has been completely lost since move 63 ...Kxf4 Janos should have taken with the pawn 63..exf4 would have allowed him to reach a table base draw. On 66 Kd3 I had the win completely worked out and have been replying instantly since then. Adjudicating this is a draw is just plain wrong. Anyone who spends time on this position will see the win I have outlined and that there is no defence. The winning method is to force an exchange of rooks by Rc4-g4 with mating threats against the Black king - black cannot allow this and must play Rd4 allowing exchange of a pair rooks when the resulting R+P v B+P+P is won. Before playing Rc4 white checks with the other rook to cut off the f file. The only way to avoid the rook exchange is to allow the white King access to e4 - at the moment the black rook cuts off d3 and the bishop if it goes to b6 will cut off e3. If the king gets to e4 either the e5 pawn drops or the king gets to d5 and e6 either result is fatal
Here are the main lines:
a) 72..Bb6 73 Rg8+ Kf5 (73..Kh5 74 Rc1 Rd4 75 Rh1+ wins the rook) 74 Rf8+ Kg5 75 Rc4! Rd4 (see below a1 for 75..Bd4)76 Rxd4! exd4 77 Kd3 (This ending is completely won the white king penetrates through e4, the black bishop is useless - remove pawn at d4 and its a table base win) Here are the main lines 77... Bc5 78 Rc8 Bb6 79 Ke4 Kf6 80 f4 Kf7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Kf7 83 Ke5 a5 84 Rc6 Bd8 85 Bc7+ Kxd4 Table base win Or 77 ...Kg6 78 Ke4 Kg7 79 Rc8 Kf6 80 f4 (if the pawn on d4 falls eg 80 ..Ba5 81 Kxd4 its a table base win) Ke7 81 f5 Kf6 82 Rc2 Ke7 (82 ..d3 83 Rc6+ Kg5 84 Rg6+ and Kxd3 = TB win) 83 Ke5 Kf7 84 Rb2 d3 85 f6 with a simple win
a1)..75..Bd4 (instead of Rd4) 76 Kd3 Ba1+ 77 Ke4 Ra5 78 Rg8+ Kf6 79 Rc6+ Kf7 80 Rgc8 Ra4+ 81 Rc4 Rxc4+ (black cannot avoid exchanging) 82 Rxc4+ and this ending like the one above is completely won. eg 82... Ke6 (82...a5 83 Rc5 a4 84 Ra5 x a4 = TB win) 83 Rc6+ Kd7 84 Kd5 Bd4 85 Rh6 a5 (any Bishop moves loses a pawn = TB win) 86 Rh7+ Kd8 87 f4 x e5 = TB win
b) If the Bishop does not go to b6 the white king gets via e3 to e4 and then penetrates through the white squares d5 and e6 and its over. Sample lines:
b1) 72 ..Kf4/f5 73 Rf8+ Kg6 74 Ke3 Rd1 75 Ke4 Re1+ 76 Kd5 Be7 77 Re8 Bf6 78 Ke6 e4 79 Rc5+ and the bishop is lost
b2) 72..Ba5 73 Ke3 Rb5 74 Rg8+ Kf5 75 Rf8+ Kg5 76 Ke4 Rb4+ 77 Kxe5 with a simple win
b3)72 ..Rd7 73 Rxe5+ (take a pair of rooks off = TB win) Kf4 74 Rcc5 Rg7 75 Re4+ Kg3 76 Rc1 Bb6 77 Rh1 a5 78 Rhh4 - Reg4+ exchanges rooks = TB win
Ilmars Cirulis (2008-08-22 18:59:56)
WikiChess
I'm tired. Imho I completed to input almost all my "theory" of Poisoned Pawn Variation.
Imho, after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Bc4 fxe4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.d4 Qxg2 6.Qh5+ g6 7.Bf7+ Kd8 8.Bxg6 Qxh1+ 9.Ke2 both black moves - 9.-- Qxc1 and 9.-- c6 are lost for black.
Corrections and improvements are welcomed! :)
Andrew Stephenson (2008-09-24 16:03:18)
Latvian meatballs
With best play black gets into an ending and trys to grovel his way to a draw a pawn down. The main line runs: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5 3.Nxe5 Qf6 4.Nc4 fxe4 5.Nc3 Qf7 6 e3 c6 7.d3 exd3 8.Bxd3 d5 9.O-O I think any deviations from this by black give an even worse game At this point Black can try 9...Bc5 then 10 b4! Bd6 (10..Bxc4 11 Ncxd5 is crushing)11 Re1 Ne7 12 Nexd5 cxd5 13 Nb5 Bxb4 (0-0 14 Nxd6) 14 Bd2 0-0 15 Bxb4 and the d5 pawn will drop leaving white as usual a pawn up for nothing 9...Bd6 10 Re1 Ne7 11 Nexd5 cxd5 12 Nb5 0-0 13 Nxd6 Qxf2+ 14 Kh1 Nbc6 (14 ..Bg4 15 Qd2 Qh4 16 b4 is great for white)15 Rf1 Bg4 16 Bxh7+ Kh8 17 Rxf2 Bxd1 18 Be3 d4 19 Rxf8+ Rxf8 20 Bg1 Kxh7 21 Rxd1 leaving the usual technically lost ending for black!!
Scott Nichols (2008-10-09 01:54:55)
Pawn promotion
Can someone clear up just how exactly to promote a pawn to something other than a Queen here. Not knowing just cost me a frigging half a point! :(
Andrew Stephenson (2008-10-14 22:01:56)
exchange slav
Difficult to know what Kramnik was up to in this game. 8 Qb3 has been regarded as pretty harmless and is not much played at GM level - he must have had some new idea - apparently 15 Qxb7 is new but black was always going to get the pawn back. After 6 months preperation and 3 full time seconds a bit strange! I am sure Anand will go full power for the point tomorrow - I still cannot quite believe that Kramnik will play the Petroff he avoided it against Kasparov and I am sure he will avoid it in this match also.
Michel van der Kemp (2008-10-21 12:59:31)
Very weird
Very weird how Kramnik first declines Anand's pawn sacrifice on d4, when he plays Re1, but then later takes on d4 anyway. If he had thought d4 to be bad in the first place, why on earth did he decide to take it later?
I start to believe Fischer, when he said that all championships after 1972 have been pre-arranged :)
Ilmars Cirulis (2008-10-22 14:02:51)
Bc4
Next I will move d pawn as fast as it will be possible. :)
Normajean Yates (2008-10-31 03:38:44)
similarly,smallest natural *extension*-
similarly, what is the *smallest* natural *extension* of chess? [Again I am reposting this idea - i did it a few months ago]
Think about it this way, as far as way of moving is concerned, [keeping aside pawns for the moment] you have R, B, N moving in essentially different ways. Q = R + B as far as movement is concerned - i.e. a queen can move like a rook or like a bishop, as the player chooses. The movement of the Q is nothing more and nothing less.
So, to extend chess minimally and naturally [therefore extending the symmetry also] IMO the natural choice of new pice would be a piece which I call the superqueen, lets call it U [because S is knight in chess problems and in many non-english roman-script languages..]. The superqueen U moves like a R, a B, or a N, according to mover's choice. In other words, it moves like a Q or a N.
movewise, U = R + B + N = Q + N.
Now keeping symmetry and minimality in mind we get 10x10 chess with the following starting position:
rnbqukqbnr/pppppppppp/10/10/10/10/10/10/PPPPPPPPPP/RNBQUKQBNR.
In 10x10 castling O-O and O-O-O, it may be more natural for the king to move *three* squares [and the R crosses the king and goes adjacent to the new position of the king, just like in 8x8 chess.]
Actually long ago (1981-82) we tried this 10x10 a few times with some friends - we used to call *this* 10x10 thing 'big chess' :(
[we used a one-pound coin heads-up and tails-up for white and black superqueen resp.]
But the name bigchess is taken [and bigchess is nice :) ] , so I am just calling it 10x10 chess now..
Normajean Yates (2008-11-01 23:43:03)
Benjamin Block - I agree
It seems there is some HP product that offers 5x5 chess of various kinds including the one I describled - it is called 'Gardner minichess' now. English-wikipedia 'minichess' entry has a link to that - and in a discussion forum on that HP thing I found - "recent play suggests that Gardner minichess is a draw".
So the first decent engine for it would finish it, it seems, as thibault said earlier in this thread...
Someone modify crafty for 5x5 and check - yawn - I am toooo lazy --- plus crafty [and all later closed source engines I suppose] are too strongly low-level optimised for 8x8 chess --- writing an engine from scratch? Well I know the seven steps [they are/were on an internet in a nice article] --- but I have retired from writing code --- written enough for three lifetimes; no more programming for me.
*Proving* that Gardner-minichess is a draw would be more difficult -- 20-piece tablebases! (okay, in a much smaller space) - that's for the universities --- they have to do something to give out M.S.'s and Ph.D.s - so let them do it :)
[they did it with draughts <called checkers in the USA> - it is solved ie proven to be a draw -- let them try Gardner-minichess now :)]
3x3 - as I said there are complate tablebases now including for positions with pawns on first rank -- so it is very-strongly solved [i.e. given *any* position, the result and the best play for that result are known - in fact online accessible -- instant results of course... you'll find the link on eng-wikipedia -- I have accessed it [3x3 chess site] before but yesteday it seemed to be down - the old link was http://kd.lab.nig.ac.jp/3x3-chess/ but it is broken now...
Don Groves (2008-11-05 08:02:06)
8 x 8 chess variant
There is another way to foil the computers and re-energize chess: A screen is placed between the two sides of the chess board and each player places their pieces on the board in accordance with two rules: (1) one pawn on each file; (2) no piece past its own third rank. Then the screen is removed and the game begins with White's first move.
Opening books become useless (requiring the computer to begin using its clock from the first move) and the usual endgames will rarely occur (although endgame databases are obviously still useful).
Knowing your opponent's tendencies becomes even more valuable than in the normal game.
Hannes Rada (2008-11-30 20:20:20)
Good for white !?
Currently I am playing with white a decisive game at the Austria championship against the Marshall
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 O-O 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d4 Bd6 13.Re1 Qh4 14.g3 Qh3 15.Re4 g5 16.Qf1 Qh5 17.Nd2 Bf5 18.f3 Nf6
19.Qg2 Nxe4 20.Nxe4 Qg6 21.g4 Bxe4 22.fxe4 Rae8 23.Bc2 Qh6 24.e5 Bxe5 25.dxe5 Rxe5 26.Bd2 Qe6 27.Bb3 Qe7 28.Qf2 c5 29.Re1 c4 30.Rxe5 Qxe5 31.Bd1 h6 32.Qe3 Re8 33.Qxe5 Rxe5
34.Bf3 f5 35.gxf5 Rxf5 36.Bb7 *
The endgame 2 bishops vs 1 Rook + Pawn looks good for white. Black did not have any attacking changes in this game and white quite a comfortable game. However I am not quite sure if white can win it.
Philip Roe (2008-12-11 15:32:43)
Interesting for sure..
Impressive, not so much.
He seems to make a big distinction between conscious and unconscious thought with no real justification. The fact that electrical activity can be detected prior to awareness does not tell us much. Daniel Dennett's "Consciousness Explained"
is the most satisfactory account that I have read, and his "multiple drafts"
theory is not unlike Runes, except that it allows for a more sophisticated interaction. Roughly, the conscious mind sets goals "I want to attack on the k-side" and the subconscious suggests means "How about Qh5" which the conscious rejects or selects for
further review by setting a new goal " Lets see if Qh5 works". By ignoring this interplay Rune creates difficulties from which he cannot extricate himself. And Dennett also asks himself much tougher questions like "why is there consciousness at all? What evolutionary purpose could it serve?"
Interestingly, the subconscious seldom suggests really silly ideas, like Qh5 if there is a pawn on g6 and nothing else going on. Indeed, the filtering out of "non-candidates" can be quite impressive. I recall a moment from the BBC TV series The Master Game.
Bill Hartston, an IM and a psychologist, was momentarily taken aback by an unexpected move made by his (weaker) opponent. "Why didn't I see that?" A few seconds later "Oh, that's why I didn't see it!" (the move involved an unsound combination)
Hartston was about to coauthor a book on chess psychology with John Wason, and his remark was not entirely in jest.
Hartston was suggesting, by his remarks,
that he could usually trust his unconscious not to show him anything irrelevant. That, to my mind, is one of the things that characterizes a strong player. The irrelevant moves just don't
occur to them.
So then what about blunders? Well, the system is very fallible. It IS just made of meat, and the real surprise is that blunders do not occur more often. But the blunders made by strong players
seem different from the blunders made by rabbits. They are usually relevant to something, but they have a hole in them. I dont see anything at all about Runes proposals that would eliminate blunders, except through the indirect route of making you a stronger player.
Normajean Yates (2008-12-15 23:55:15)
how about a fun thematic with foll pos
starting position:
RNBQKBNR/PPPPPPPP/8/8/8/8/pppppppp/rnbqkbnr. [this is offered on fics i.e. freechess.org as 'chess wild-5']
Note that all pawns of both sides are ready to promote, but because of self-blockade the only legal first moves are knight moves!
Engines fluctuate wildly on this because they are not designed for such positions!
Ilmars Cirulis (2008-12-16 18:02:50)
To Yates
Ok, how you will transform first position to second position?
rnbqkbnr
pppppppp
++++++++
++++++++
++++++++
++++++++
PPPPPPPP
RNBQKBNR
RNBQKBNR
PPPPPPPP
++++++++
++++++++
++++++++
++++++++
pppppppp
rnbqkbnr
Especially I am interested in pawns. :)
Normajean Yates (2008-12-16 20:17:42)
oh sorry, it is obviously impossible!
Since no captures have been made, the pawns could not have legally crossed each other. you cannot even have a white pawn on e5 and a black pawn on e4 if no captures have been made.
Since the position is unreachable, it must be considered a chess variant, not a 'thematic'.
Wolfgang Utesch (2008-12-26 08:56:58)
Game 1
Hi Hannes, I think position is after 51.Rb7 Rxb7 52.Bxb7 f4 = (i.e. 53.c5 Rf1 54.Ba6 Re1 55.a4 f3 56.a5 f2 57.Bb5 f1Q 58.Bxf1 Rxf1 59.b4 = key position!). Four pawns are not enough against the rook about the bad king position - surprising!
Also 53.a4 Rd7 or 53.b4 Rd3 are not better!
Hannes Rada (2008-12-26 11:19:40)
Game 1
Yes you are right Wolfang.
In the key position 4 extra pawns are not enough against the rook in the key position.
Quite interesting.
Normajean Yates (2009-01-14 15:00:33)
llmars' version of Tal's quote:
considering that with time llmars's opinion of gambits seems to be getting less unfavourable, it would be:
"The older I get, the less I value pawns." ;)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-14 19:59:00)
New line + Cheating
Heheh, Ilmars has been trapped by himself :)
You must use <br > html tag (see at the top of the page) to begin a new line.
As it seems not to be visible enough, I may change it in a while, finally...
BTW, this discussion on cheating or not cheating will have no end, obviously. This thread is even discussed in other forums...
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=106642
Sophie Leclerc (2009-01-19 21:51:23)
Big chess pieces values
Hello,
I have just how terrible the board in Big chess are for the pieces, so, I would presume the pieces values are much differant than in normal chess.
I wonder, If a pawn worth 1, how much the knight, bishop, rook and queen would worth ? Forget the king as hs is alone and too slow to participate in the action.
Normajean Yates (2009-01-20 07:19:07)
nicola [nicola lupinacci ansered it]
nicola lupinacci posted in the international chat in june last year that:
In bigchess, P=1, N=3, B=5, R=8, Q=11.
One of the points is, bigchess is a bigger board, so compared to chess, long-range pieces (B, N, Q)are much more powerful than short-range ones - specially, B is significantly more powerful than N.
I followed nicola's implicit advice, and as you can check, I've won all 6 of my games in one of the two only bigchess tournaments I am playing: FICGS__BIG_CHESS__TOURNAMENT__000025.
And I have won all 4 of my completed games in the other one.
[ FICGS__BIG_CHESS__TOURNAMENT__000030:
all games are in early stages by bigchess standards ]
my two incomplete bigchess games are keenly contested.
In one of them, opp has exchanged two Bs for my two Ns and 2-Pawns: so, that game puts Nicola's idea to test.
Waiting for the top bigchess players to comment on Sophie's and my posts...
Nicola was so good at chess and bigchess, but she stopped playing.
I have pasted her reason (her profile) below: (so why did she stop playing bigchess is what I do not understand. I mean no one has bigchess engine!)
Lupinacci, Nicola (ITA) [member # 1307]
Nicola Lupinacci
I am a chess amateur, playing only for fun! I do not have any chess engine. Good game to everyone!
Thibault de Vassal (2009-01-20 20:07:44)
Big chess pieces values
It has been discussed in this forum also :
David Grosdemange suggested :
"pawn : 1 knight : 2,5 bishop : 4 rook : 6 queen : 11"
I quite agree with this.
Anthony Jones (2009-03-06 13:06:37)
Perverse poker
Its certainly gripping to watch, but the level of aggression he displays is borderline unethical due to the intimidation of his opponents.
As tournament director i'd offer him a single warning before booting him out.
Imagine the same actions in chess after winning a pawn! Although i do remember Nigel Short saying that in a world Junior champs when he was 15 he played a move and Kasparov laughed in his face before crushing him....
Denis Ivanchenkov (2009-03-22 23:28:11)
captured pieces
Thibault, maybe it is just my personal drawbacks but when I set up board I usually look at captured pieces (on letsplaychess.com or chess-online.ru) and see how many of pieces are out - and just count with those on the board to be 16 in total - and become confident that I didn't miss anything. here on Ficgs it usually takes more time to get confident that all pieces on their places. and from the other side it will be easily seeing which player is getting upper hand - just looking at captured pieces (especially when difference is small - like pawn or two or pawn for a piece)
and yes notation
White: 2B, 2N, 3P
Black: Q,4R
would solve the problem
Denis Ivanchenkov (2009-03-22 23:34:58)
notation
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff, would you be so kind to tell me what 4R means? 4 rooks captured? though it is possible I'd prefer if site engine would make reverse engineering of those 2 extra rooks to the original pawns and write in the following manner - 2R 2P -
well that's just my point of view
William Taylor (2009-04-15 15:24:11)
shortest possible bigchess checkmates
I like the 13 half-move mate where black pushes an edge pawn or something while white hops his knight all the way over to l15. :) May have a lookk for other ones later.
Normajean Yates (2009-04-24 00:33:24)
me too: I just ignore the draw offer..
It has happened three times here in *one* game: an ongoing chess game of mine here on ficgs. :)
[The first time *I* offered the draw. Opponent moved, thereby automatically declining and cancelling the draw offer. The other two times *opponent* offered the draw and I moved.]
(btw I declined the offers not out of spite but because I have a win: all lines I tried give me a win. It is a most interesting game: since the annotations will not appear on the record; I'll just say that opponent returned my early exchange-sacrifice setting a trap: I could have reached Q and 3 pawns v Q, but opponent would then draw by perpetual! The [probable] winning line has Q and 2 pawns v Q and P, but my centralised Q and promotion threats win!)
It does look to me like a mountain is being made out of less than a molehill.. (not by me - I didn't start this.)
This post was to illustrate how there is *no* problem at all[1]; and neither me nor my opponent (both were playing their first games when the game began) saw any problem at all.
this is my last post on this topic.
[1] If there is at all a problem here, it is of the same level as the 'problem' that the following rule is not mentioned in ficgs-rules:
. 'gn is not allowed in chess unless n is an integer between 1 and 8 inclusive, where 1 and 8 are to interpreted as the standard numerals standing for integers in the ordered real-closed field R, with the *canonical* ordering. (As opposed to, say, an integer in the domain Z[2+i*sqrt(5)] or an integer in some exotic Grothendieck topos).
;)
Normajean Yates (2009-04-26 18:11:42)
I think Thib's IS the shortest...
To spell it out, white moves Nh2-j4-h6-j8-h10-j12, while black helps by g15-g14,Nj15-h13-g15,Ng16-j15, (and one irrelevant move e.g. moving an edge pawn). That is 5 moves ['half-moves'] by each side, and the 11th half-move is white's Nj12xh14 mate (the black K is smothered and the h14-pawn is unprotected).
You need five [half-]moves for a N to reach the opposite king; so: black can mate white (helpmate ie white co-operates) in 10 half-moves.
Sophie Leclerc (2009-05-01 01:23:07)
Thanks
While I thanks for the credits, I'll tell you that I am not a woman, ( why i have that name, you doN,t want to know kay. I got a wrong name, but I like it. )
I saw to real way for black to check mate white. But to get a queen take the weak pawn. And white does it faster.
1 e4 j13 2.Ba6 h14 3. Nh4 m14 4. Qk3 Bm15 5. Qxk5 mate. was the lines I poster in the internationnal chat. ( I am not a girl. )
Dinesh De Silva (2009-05-04 12:09:54)
I have some new names for teams
1.Pickled Pawns.
2.Boasty Bishops.
2.Wicked Kings.
4.Dancing Doughnuts.
5.Terrible Losers.
6.Cheesy Nuts.
7.SquareOnTheHypotenus Rooks.
Hehe!
Scott Nichols (2009-05-05 04:09:49)
The "Theme"
You are missing the theme, it's not Batman, Darth Vader, or even Monty Python. It is how you will feel when trying to "see" into this teams strategy. You will see shadows of Bishops sliding in front of you, you will see Knights suddenly appearing behind you, you will see pawns at every turn wielding their swords of death. You will only feel the Queen's presence, something all powerful hidden behind the veils of darkness. You pray for some sort of light, but all you can see is a brief reflection before the axe ends your existence.
Normajean Yates (2009-05-11 02:07:31)
thoughts on Big Chess... and tips...
I find bigchess more and more fascinating.. I Think it is a wonderful creation of Thibault's (I presume it is Thib. who created it: any way he offers it seriously on this site...) - the starting position is very well-concieved..
I think Bigchess needs more publicity. This is about the only place one can play it - and here there are 2-3 top-class players; less than 20 middle-standard players (including me); others try it once or twice and for some reason get scared or overwhelmed and give up - I see no reason why..
Bigchess gives no advantage on account of huge memorisation of theory, or of better engines: there are *no* theory books; and there are no known engines in existence (probably there isnt one - too little demand, and writing a *good* engine is somewhat laborious, coming up with a *good* static-eval function is tricky, fast board-implementation issues...), so it is all wits...
In fact last week I spend part of two days writing down whatever theory I could discover [with help from top games], it comes to half a page..
Tips for people who want to try bigchess:
1. Bishops are much more powerful than Knights. (because of much longer range compared to 8x8 chess).
The consensus on the values of bigchess pieces is David Grosdemange's valuation:
pawn=1
knight=2.5 (written 2,5 in the continent, of course)
bishop=4
rook=6
queen=11
2. In the opening position, the c,f,L and o-pawns are unprotected.
So, if white's opening move is with the j2-Knight ( freeing the queen), then on move 2 white can move the Queen and threaten to pick up a pawn by forks.. Similarly for black.
*However*, such pawn gambits are quite playable because the Queen can be forced to make many moves to capture a pawn, while the gambitting side develops their pieces.
3. Most Important For Many People: board for offline analysis.
Best of course, is to take time to draw a 16x16 board on paper and stick it on cardboard. And get hold of four sets of chess pieces.
Another way: print a position, and after a move is made - just update the position using correction fluid (typewriter/printer-ink erasing fluid) or something. That way you don't have to keep printng a lot of positions.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-11 21:27:26)
Bigchess pieces values
Actually the value of the knight seems to change a lot during a game, according to the left pawns positions.
200 or 300 moves is not so much compared to a poker game (that can be over 1000), but some games may be really time consuming when the position gets really complex... Well, we play for this kind of fun after all ;)
Normajean Yates (2009-05-12 01:15:30)
bigchess thoughts+tips, #3: R v B
[re Daniel Parmet's valuation in his post] - both are longrange pieces but:
1. a Bishop can reach only 128 squares, a Rook can reach all 256. (and all the other standard reasons why the R is [in general] much more powerful than the B, they carry over to bigchess eg a R can confine the opp's K to an edge; K+R v K is standard easy mate, etc.)
2. In 8x8 chess, once you have a semi-open file, one tries to 'boost' a rook up that file (even if one cannot reach the 7th file). This is much more common, and much more commonly advantageous, in bigchess, because one easily creates a 'quasi-semi-open' file by pushing a pawn 4-5 squares ahead, and boosts a Rook up this 'quasi-semi-open' file.
Hence, I feel that just as in 8x8 chess, the Rook is nearly twice as powerful as the Bishop in bigchess.
Daniel Parmet (2009-05-14 18:52:24)
Happy Pawn
Ilmar suggested Happy Pawn. I like this name. So
Team Happy Pawn:
Stephane Legrand 2209
Garvin Gray 2125
Daniel Parmet 1961
Ilmar Cirulis 1805
Normajean Yates (2009-05-15 20:39:11)
happy pawn - very nice name!
Why can't *I* think of beautiful names like that? :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-17 23:11:38)
Complete teams !
The team tournament should start very soon, complete teams are :
>> Yellow-Blue Warriors
Iouri Basiliev
Dmytro Romaniuk
Ostap Hladky
Yura Lemehov
>> Happy Pawn
Stephane Legrand 2209
Garvin Gray 2125
Daniel Parmet 1961
Ilmar Cirulis 1805
>> FSF En Passant
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)
>> The Ghost Knights
Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden
>> The knights who say "Ni"
Michael Aigner - 2602
Xavier Pichelin - 2577
Hannes Rada - 2559
Thibault de Vassal - 2473
>> The Dark Knights
William Taylor - 2140
Scott Nichols - 2089
Don Groves - 1991
Josef Riha - 1989
Players without a team yet (one team is possible, with 3 more players, we could build one more) :
1. Ranganathan Raman
2. Alexander Blinchevsky
3. Stanimir Denchev
4. Benjamin Block
5. Murray Findlay
Did I forget someone ? So we have 6 complete teams + 5 players without a team.
We should be able to start the tournament in a few days ! :)
Thibault de Vassal (2009-05-23 00:31:31)
1st team tournament : games & results !
A new thread to comment the games & results in the 1st FICGS team tournament that just started ! The teams are :
>> The knights who say "Ni"
Michael Aigner - 2602
Xavier Pichelin - 2577
Hannes Rada - 2559
Thibault de Vassal - 2473
>> FSF En Passant
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)
>> The Dark Knights
William Taylor - 2140
Scott Nichols - 2089
Don Groves - 1991
Josef Riha - 1989
>> Happy Pawn
Stephane Legrand 2209
Garvin Gray 2125
Daniel Parmet 1961
Ilmar Cirulis 1805
>> Yellow-Blue Warriors
Iouri Basiliev
Dmytro Romaniuk
Ostap Hladky
Yura Lemehov
>> The Ghost Knights
Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden
>> The Knights with no name (yet)
Alexander Blinchevsky
Stanimir Denchev
Benjamin Block
Ranganathan Raman
You can follow the games here :
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_1__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_2__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_3__000001
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__TEAM_EVENT_TABLE_4__000001
Note : The first player displayed in each tournament table is not always the player of the first team because when the 1st & 3rd players of a team play White against another team, the 2nd & 4th play Black against the same team, this is not obvious to read (sorry).
I'm really sorry to the 2 players that were not included in a team, but we had to start the tournament now... The last team may still announce their name (provisional : "The knights with no name")
Have nice games :)
Scott Nichols (2009-06-03 03:09:30)
Chess is dead? Not hardly.
In his book "The world of chess" by Anthony Saidy the following paragraph appears. "Later in his (Capablanca) career, his play became ever more technical and drawish. He expressed the idea that with the perfection of modern knowledge it would soon be impossible to win a game against a master. Chess would soon reach a "draw death". He even proposed interchanging the initial positions of the Bishops and Knights to inject new life into the game."
An exact quote found earlier in this same book exemplifies more of what this thread is about---In reply to a Steinitz comment Tchigorin replied "Chess is a limitless forum for the human imagination. Each position is a fresh challenge. Rules and book openings, to the creative player, are no more than guidelines to be transcended. Individualize. Each position is new--terra incognita that may contain the seed of a beautiful combination. Gladly give up a pawn in return for the attack. Play chess with joy."
Normajean Yates (2009-06-03 04:18:03)
I agree, heartily - chess is alive!
any number of specific eight-piece endings [in tablebase language; i.e. total of 6 pieces (pawn counted as piece) apart from the 2 Kings] - including KPPP v KPPP .. (King and 3 pawns v K and 3 pawns) no one knows the objective result!
So, rumours of chess's death have been greatly exaggerated. :)
Hannes Rada (2009-06-04 21:56:51)
Dead Endgames
Thibault, you are talking about endgames in this connection.
Do you mean for instance the famous rook endgames, which are always a draw according to Tarrasch :-)
And it is true, there are so many rook endings which cannot be won, with extra material. Even with 2 extra pawns ....
I had 2 times a position with K + R + f+h Pawn, against K + R which is a theoretical draw. Sometimes chess can be really unfair. You are playing much better than your opponent, you manage to to achieve material advantage of 1 or 2 pawns, but the rook endgame is still a draw ...
Here is a proposal against the broad draw corridor
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/reformedchess.htm
http://www.iccf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3618&page=5
Thibault de Vassal (2009-06-05 13:13:41)
"reformed chess", "improved chess"
Speaking of rook endings, of course some -maybe most- are dead or at least understood positions, some are very complex for the human brain... I don't think chess is so unfair even with 2 pawns more, every good player has to know the endgames theory, that's the most important part of the game IMO (at least when learning), such draws only show that one didn't manage to complexify the game enough.
Nice ideas in these links Hannes, and there are many others even without changing the way the pieces move (e.g. time handicap..) but it is harder in correspondence chess. Actually we may regret that chess is chess in this current version. As chess rules are everything but "natural", it could have been different, maybe it should have been. It is too late to change anything now because most people want to play the same game than Fischer and Spassky :) .. History prevails, even very intelligent recent games like Blokus will never be the king of the game.
By the way does anyone know about the drawish problem in Xiangqi and Shogi ?
Sophie Leclerc (2009-06-09 22:56:31)
the opening
actually, I did not, Yugi played that system to me to me with black piece and I let him build a big pawn,, it was too late for me.
This opening is the same thing as his but with one extra tempo..
White can go in a number of way..
I am waiting to see plenty of thingss, will you play a bird or an enlish ?
Thanks thibeault
Scott Nichols (2009-09-26 03:34:48)
One more javascript
One I would love to see is a box opening up after a pawn reaches the eighth rank giving you a choice of Q-R-N-B. The current way is confusing for beginners like when it happened to me and cost me a berth in the second round of the WCH.
Lazaro Munoz (2009-10-28 03:07:17)
Crazyhouse
There is a website of chess variant database at http://wildchess.org/. The interesting thing is that popular openings are very similar to bughouse but that should be no wonder: avoid fianchetto's (weakness in g7,b7) to a drop pawn is deadly and avoiding pawn conflicts since pawns are lot more valuable off the board then on, etc.
John Smith (2009-11-13 02:56:53)
Introduction to Centaur Chess
Hi all,
While I have played allot of chess, so far I only used my computer for an occasional analysis and mostly for the database features.
I am assuming it takes to know engines quite well to become good at advanced/centaur chess, so any advice would be really helpful.
1) Which engines are better at what type of positions? Is Deep Junior best at unclear sacrifices?, Rybka best for positional play?, Schredder best for endgames?
2) Which engines understand different pawn structures better, e.g. which is the best engine to study a stonewall-structure game and which is best for a King's Indian Mar de Plata game?
3) How to interpret the engine value for the position? e.g. if I, say as White, sac a pawn and the evaluation is -0.1, that is less that 1 pawn, does this mean I have enough positional compensation for the pawn?
4) Which engines take long-term weaknesses into their evaluations, even if they can't see anything concrete within their horizon?
5) Which free engines are worth consulting? toga? stockfish? Glaurung? thinker? Which of these are good for complex positions, which for quiet ones?
6) Are there any engines which improve their play during time, that is they learn? e.g. if in a position guiding the engine by hand proves that another move than its preferred one is best, will it be able to spot the move again, if the same position is re-entered?
7) Which is the best interface for analysis?
8) Is there a page with statistics of how each engine performs in every opening?
Thanks!
Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-16 22:28:27)
Results !
Finally, according to my calculations :
- Finished matches [Team (Points)]
Knights who say Ni (1) - Dark knights (1)
Knights who say Ni (2) - Happy pawn (0)
Knights who say Ni (2) - Ghost knights (0)
Dark knights (2) - Happy pawn (0)
Dark knights (0) - Yellow blue warriors (2)
Dark knights (2) - Ghost knights (0)
Happy pawn (2) - Ghost knights (0)
Yellow blue warriors (2) - Ghost knights (0)
- Unfinished matches
Knights who say Ni vs. FSF : 1-1
Knights who say Ni vs Yellow blue warriors : 2-1
Knights who say Ni vs. Our team king : 2-0
FSF vs. Dark knights : 1.5-1.5
FSF vs. Happy pawn : 1-0
FSF vs. Yellow blue warriors : 3-0
FSF vs. Our team king : 2-0
Dark knights vs. Our team king : 2.5-0.5
Happy pawn vs. Yellow blue warriors : 1-2
Happy pawn vs. Our team king : 1-0
Yellow blue warriors vs. Our team king : 1.5-1.5
Ghost knights vs. Our team king : 0.5-2.5
I hope I didn't make mistakes for the unfinished matches. Nice victory by Yellow blue warriors against The dark knights !
So Garvin, in your match against FSF (Koslowski), FSF leads by 1-0
Pavel Hase (2009-11-30 23:56:42)
Value
Value is higher, my guess.
N - all fields, but horde moves for displacement, very slow piece.
B - only 128 fields, but only 2 moves for displacement (if clear board)
R - all fields, only 2 moves for displacement
Q - only 2 moves for displacement, but over one move, than Rook.
Guess
N - 3 (2-4) (From two pawns other sides any chance, but if pawns nearly, anyway 8x8 chess. Board 8x8 Notin, needed max. 4 moves, here?) Other tip? Mutually support afore own pawns.
B - 6(!) Very higher movement, than Notin. Other tip? Between own pawns, menace opponent piece.
R - 11 (10-12) Anyway 8x8 chess, pieces for middle game and endings. Interplay here is heavy work.
Q - 23 (20-30!) If interplay Rooks is heavy work, then Queen probably better, than two Rooks. Anyway 8x8, attention, traps and time for raven.
Sorry, my english language is weak.
Thibault de Vassal (2009-12-01 09:08:38)
Notin movement
What what ? What is this Notin movement ? Can anyone explain ?
About big chess pieces values, I agree that the pawn value is most probably less than considered before... Now I would say something like Q = 15.
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (2009-12-31 21:13:10)
Happy new year 2010
Happy new year 2010
And may your pawns promote
Thibault de Vassal (2010-01-27 09:18:36)
Wijk aan Zee 2010
Finally, the tournament is now open again in Wijk aan Zee group A, after that Alexei Shirov won consecutively his first 5 games with a comfortable lead, Vladimir Kramnik finally catched him at 6.5/9 after a win over Magnus Carlsen with Black pieces.
Here is the game :
In group B, A. Giri leads by 6.5/9, in group C, Li Chao leads by 6.5/9 as well.
Lazaro Munoz (2010-01-29 06:05:09)
Piece Values in Big Chess
I am amazed at the number of opponents that are still applying piece value from regular chess in big chess.
I made some regression analysis based on what we value in regular chess in terms of mobility and applied to big chess. Using the pawn and knight as the standard since in both games 3 pawns will probably beat a knight (if they are separated far enough). I assigned the pawn the value of 1 and and knight a value of 3 and extrapolated variables that we seem to use in valuing the other pieces such as number of squares it can reach, and penalty for being stuck on the same color.
I got the following values:
Pawn=1
Knight=3
Bishop=7 **
Rook=9
Queen=16
** The bishop value changes by pairs available, for example 4 white square bishops don't even come close to value 2 white squares and 2 black squares bishops so this is best value but it can go down to 6 or even 5 as pairs are lost.
Interesting, just like in chess a rook+bishop almost equals a queen and two rooks beat a queen. And a queen equals the value of the pawns (ok similar).
I still find opponents who exchange bishops for knights with impunity, not knowing the true values of the pieces.
I notice that nobody has ever mentioned this. I hope I did not give out some deep secret.
Of course you mileage may vary.
--laz
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (2010-01-29 07:10:50)
Piece Values in Big Chess
well. Some ending may really hard.
just like bishop versus knight, I don't think it would be easy to win.
of curse, do it if you got your queen trapped. man,
I love this game, we all start with four weak pawns. and lose at least 1.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-16 10:37:01)
Interview with E. Kotlyanskiy
Congrats again to Edward Kotlyanskiy, new FICGS chess champion after beating Xavier Pichelin (2577) in the 12 games final match of the 3rd cycle.
Edward kindly accepted to answer a few questions on his match and correspondence chess in general :
_________________________
> Hi Edward, first of all congratulations for winning this 12 games match against the former FICGS chess champion, Xavier Pichelin. You had to score at least one point more than your opponent, what was your strategy when the games started?
Knowing that I had to score at least +1 against Xavier, I had to try to get the games into complex positions where there are many options to play for both sides. At the point when the games started, I was the underdog to Xavier (mainly due to the face that I was rated about 200 points lower). In part, I think that one of the reasons why Xavier allowed the games to reach such complex positions is due to the fact that his rating was undoubtedly higher than mine and therefore he probably assumed that he could “outplay” me. Although this was simultaneously a brave and admirable choice, I think an option that many other players would have pursued would have been to play “drawish” lines with the hope of having all of the games ending in draws. I have great respect for Xavier due to the fact that he didn't choose such a path and allowed us to put on a hard fought show that was worth watching.
> What could you say on the hot moments of the match?
The first game in which I thought I had very good chances to win was game 34739. In this game (particularly on move 18) Xavier played the move Nb8?? Looking back at the move, I realized that the game was lost for him. I assumed that Xavier probably underestimated the threat of f5. There were no good responses and/or countermeasures for the move f5. For example, if 19) gxf5, I have 20) Nxh5 Nc6 21) Rc3! Bxh4 (Qd8 was also possible) 22) Qf4 Be7 23) g4! His king is just clearly caught in the attack! 19) exf5 also fails to 20) e6 f6 (trying to keep the king safe) 21) Bxh5!! gxh5 22) Nc6 Rc3 and therefore it’s easy to see that it is just a matter of time. Xavier did try something better although even that failed due to some nice moves. I believe that 21) g7 came as a surprise to Xavier (or that at least he hadn't seen this move when playing Nb8). After Nxh5 (another neat move), another line that I thought Xavier would enter (which is also losing) is 22) Qxc2 23) Qxc2 Rxc2 24) Nf6+! Bxf6 25) exf6. Clearly my pawns are just too strong! Knowing that I am winning after the mentioned alternatives, the other games (although I won three others) were just necessary to hold without falling for any tactics/tricks.
A second game I want to briefly comment on is game 34729. I played a very nice (although I am not sure if it is winning just yet) move known as 17.a4! It was a very nice way to open the position on both of our kings. In all honesty, the move that I think was winning in this situation 25) Rd3, I did not even consider too highly until the position reached that very move. After a relatively short analysis, I was indeed pleasantly surprised to see that; overall, it was completely winning for me.
> What could you say on the advantages and inconveniences of this 12 games match format played at a quite fast time control?
From the days when I first starting playing correspondence chess, I have always been accustomed to making moves rather quickly. In fact, when I first started playing, in some games I made moves within 10 minutes of looking at the position. Although I take a lot more time to analyze now-a-days, I still consider the speed of my play to be relatively faster compared to most other correspondence players. Playing 12 games simultaneously can have drawbacks as not having enough time to properly analyze; however, I didn't have such a problem. With the exception of a few games that I was playing on IECG at the start of the FICGS Championship, the 12 game series was my main concern.
> Without revealing your secrets, how would you define modern correspondence chess as a centaur (playing with chess engines)?
These days, it is impossible to play correspondence chess on a high level without consulting the engine. It is also unlikely that one can achieve a lot of success just by following the engine blindly (even after a long analysis). Personally, I know that some of my friends believe that in correspondence chess you are just following the engine but I believe that most “high level” correspondence players know that it just doesn't work that way.
In my opinion, one of the most important skills that a correspondence player should have is having some sense of where the engine he is analyzing with is faulty. To give a well known example, many people know that there are certain endgame positions that an engine alone can't be trusted in (a simple case is the wrong color bishop). In essence, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of whatever engine you are analyzing with is critical to playing correspondence chess at a “high level”.
> Why did you choose to play correspondence chess, do you play OTB (over the board) chess as well?
Before starting correspondence chess, I played OTB chess for quite a few years. When my schedule became busy, I realized that I wouldn't have much time to play OTB in clubs. I came across correspondence chess and got hooked on it very quickly. Also, I began to enjoy more of the subtleties of the game; something that is just lacking in OTB blitz games. I imagine that some people prefer to play practical chess (OTB) in which a move order wouldn't make much of a difference; however, I guess I am a perfectionist and believe the game should be played on as high of a level as possible.
> How many correspondence games do you usually play at the same time (on different chess servers or by email)? Would you say that it is an addiction?
Usually, I played about 5 to 10 games on average on all different sites. I did play via email on IECC but wasn't fond of playing by email therefore I went back to server only sites (IECG, FICGS, Schemingmind).
I can definitely say that correspondence chess is an addiction. All too often, I catch myself analyzing games when I really should be doing something much more time sensitive. Well, at least I can say that this addiction paid off in that I am the new FICGS champion!
> Are you interested in other games?
As far as board games go, chess is primarily the only game I play. At times I do play games like monopoly and scrabble with my friends. Another interest that I have is billiards.
> The next challenger for the FICGS chess champion title is SM Eros Riccio (winner of several PlayChess PAL freestyle tournaments). Do you think that you'll play him? What does this perspective inspire in you?
I can't wait to play Eros! I believe that he would be my toughest opponent yet (although I have played GM Leitão, Rafael (fide elo: 2619) and managed to draw). Eros is like an unstoppable juggernaut in corr chess. That said, I look forward to our games and I am certain that they will simultaneously be challenging and entertaining.
> Thanks and best of luck in your future games!
Thibault de Vassal (2010-03-17 14:42:57)
1st team tournament : games & results !
Hi Iouri... Well, my old computer can't even see it (just realized that modern computers are about 40x faster :/) , but I just checked the shredder bases online, this is checkmate in 21 moves indeed. It was predictable anyway :) .. I just resigned.
Table 1 : 4 unfinished games remaining (Iouri leading)
Table 2 : 0 unfinished games remaining (Volker won)
Table 3 : 2 unfinished games remaining (Ostap leading)
Table 4 : 0 unfinished games remaining (Yura won)
One thing is sure already, our yellow-blue chessfriends did it very well !
So...
"Team 1" - "Team 2" : points (score)
"Ni" - "FSF" : FSF leads by 1 point
"Ni" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Ni" - "YB" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Ni" - "No" : 2-0 (leads by 2 points)
"FSF" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"FSF" - "Happy" : FSF leads by 1 point
"FSF" - "YB" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"FSF" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (leads by 3 points)
"FSF" - "No" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "Happy" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Dark" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Dark" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "No" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Happy" - "YB" : YB leads by 1 point
"Happy" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Happy" - "No" : 2-0 (3-1)
"YB" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (2.5-0.5)
"YB" - "No : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Ghost" - "No" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
Total :
Knights who say Ni : 8 points (-)
FSF en passant : 7 points (++)
Dark knights : 8 points
Happy pawn : 4 pawns (--)
Yellow Blue warriors : 7 points (+)
Ghost knights : 0 points
Our team king (knights with no name) : 2 points
(+) meaning : leads in a match yet, (-) meaning : is leaded in a match yet
Nothing is decided yet... but it looks like Yellow-Blue have good chances, which is particularly impressive with a player who made 0/6 !
Mircea Hrubaru (2010-04-28 22:14:49)
Anand vs. Topalov, world championship
I think we should put aside the first game. In my view black played allright until the blunder 23...Kf7? which gave white the chance to blow away black's position with 23. Nxf6!! (Anand saw the pawn in f6 under the threat Nxf6 and that's why he defended with the king, but I think he didn't consider the immediate capture).
In games 2 and 4 Anand showed a superb preparation in an opening that haunts Topalov since his match against Kramnik. Game 2 showed a Topalov looking for deadly attacks and ignoring the lack of sufficient force in the attack. Until now the game with the highest quality is surely game 4, where 10. Na3!? caught Topalov offguard. Between them Anand showed in game 3 that he can chill out and play for safety.
Arno Bezemer (2010-05-20 14:57:17)
Late resignation
Normally I don't mind to play out a winning position, but my opponent in game 32535 keeps on playing for ever, with just a pawn vs my rook and 2 pawns. On the lowest level i can maybe understand this but not in a class M 2200+ tournament. Is there anything i can do about it?
Richard Doughty (2010-05-21 08:09:13)
pawn promotions
is there an option to change pawn promotions from automatic queen while in touch move
Thibault de Vassal (2010-05-21 14:04:18)
pawn promotions
Hello Richard, you may use the PGN notation to do an under-promotion (e.g. c8N or c8=N), see the Help section.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-06-28 20:44:06)
Encyclopedia of gambits
I guess that many of you read the interesting Chessbase article by Kavalek :
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6460
The link to the encyclopedia of gambits by Marco Saba was a surprise to me... really interesting, and a huge work!
http://studimonetari.org/edg/
I picked up a few ideas for the next chess thematic tournaments, so there may be the next ones in the future :
Aasum [Van Geet: Hector Gambit] 1.Nc3 d5 2.e4 de4 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.f3
Abonyi-Tennison [Reti: Tennison Gambit Accepted] 1.Nf3 d5 2.e4 de4 3.Ng5
[KGA: Allgaier Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Nf3 g5 4.h4 g4 5.Ng5 h6 6.Nf7
"Anti-Stonewall" [Dutch: Alapin] 1.d4 f5 2.Qd3 d5 3.g4
[Budapest: Alekhine, Balogh Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.de5 Ng4 4.e4 d6
Banzai-Leong [French] 1.e4 e6 2.b4
Batavo [Bird: Batavo Gambit] 1.f4 d5 2.Nf3 c5 3.e4
Beyer c.g. [Blackmar-Diemer: Beyer Countergambit] 1.e4 e5 2.d4 d5
Birmingham [Polish: Birmingham Gambit] 1.b4 c5
Blackburne - I [Scandinavian: 2.exd5] 1.e4 d5 2.ed5 c6
Böhnke [Scandinavian: Böhnke Gambit] 1.e4 d5 2.ed5 e5
Breyer [KGA: Breyer Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.Qf3
De Smet [Nimzowitsch Defence: 2.d4 e5 3.dxe5] 1.e4 Nc6 2.d4 e5 3.de5 d6
[Diemer-Duhm Gambit (DDG) vs. Slav/Caro-Kann] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.e4
Gaga [King's Gambit Accepted (KGA)] 1.e4 e5 2.f4 ef4 3.g3
Halasz - II [Sicilian: Halasz Gambit] 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cd4 3.f4
Hickmann [English: Anglo-Dutch] 1.c4 f5 2.e4 fe4 3.d3
Hjoerring c.g. [Benko Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.e4
Jerome [Giuoco Piano: Jerome Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.Bf7
Krejcik [Dutch: Krejcik Gambit] 1.d4 f5 2.g4
Lasa [Open Game: Lopez/Mcleod, Lasa Gambit] 1.e4 e5 2.c3 f5
Lasker - III [Bird: From Gambit Accepted] 1.f4 e5 2.fe5 f6
Omega [Indian: Omega Gambit] 1.d4 Nf6 2.e4
Vector [English: Vector] 1.c4 d5 2.cd5 c6
Wheeler [Nimzowitsch Defence: Wheeler Gambit] 1.e4 Nc6 2.b4
Zilbermints - III [Queen's Gambit] 1.d4 d5 2.c4 b5
"Zurigo" [Queen's Pawn Game] 1.d4 d5 2.g4
If you notice more interesting openings, do not hesitate to suggest it here...
Thibault de Vassal (2010-08-03 12:46:54)
Congratulations to "FSF en passant"
Finally here are the final results !!!
"FSF En passant" won this very interesting tournament by 1 point ahead of 2 teams !! The suspense was until the very last games to know the final team ranks.
The fact to note: Yellow Blue warriors finish second while they were actually 3 players in the team, Yura Lemekhov played an amazing tournament (5.5/6 , perf 2456) ... (the last player stopped to play :/)
Thanks to all players, it was lots of fun! I'll try to make the things clearer in the tournaments pages for the next edition...
10 points for : FSF En Passant
Heinz-Georg Lehnhoff (2270)
Volker Koslowski (2264)
Sebastian Boehme (2175)
Roland Markus (2096)
9 (tot: 15.5) points for : The knights who say "Ni"
Michael Aigner (2602)
Xavier Pichelin (2577)
Hannes Rada (2559)
Thibault de Vassal (2473)
9 (tot: 13.5) points for : Yellow-Blue Warriors
Iouri Basiliev (2173)
Dmytro Romaniuk (1937)
Ostap Hladky (2176)
Yura Lemehov (2171)
8 points for : The Dark Knights
William Taylor (2140)
Scott Nichols (2089)
Don Groves (1991)
Josef Riha (1989)
4 points for : Happy Pawn
Stephane Legrand (2209)
Garvin Gray (2125)
Daniel Parmet (1961)
Ilmar Cirulis (1805)
2 points for : Our team King
Alexander Blinchevsky
Stanimir Denchev
Benjamin Block
Ranganathan Raman
0 point for : The Ghost Knights
Vadim Khachaturov
Yugi Inving
Sophie Leclerc
Jorge Orden
Ni FSF Dark Happy Blue Ghost King
Aigner 1 = = = = =
Pich 0 = = 1 1 1
Rada = = 1 = 1 =
DeVas = = 1 0 1 1
0 Lehnh = = = = =
1 Koslo = = 1 1 1
= Boehm = 1 = 1 1
= Marku = 1 = 1 1
= = Taylo = = = =
= = Nicho = 1 1 1
= = Grove = 0 1 =
= = Riha 1 0 1 1
= = = Legra = = =
= = = Gray 1 1 1
0 0 = Parmet 0 1 =
0 0 0 Ciruli 0 1 1
= = = = Basili = 1
0 0 0 0 Romani 0 0
= = 1 1 Hladky 1 =
1 = 1 1 Lemekh 1 1
= 1 = = = Khacha =
0 0 0 0 1 Inving 0
0 0 0 0 0 Lecler 0
0 0 0 0 0 Orden 1
= = = = 0 = Blinch
0 0 0 0 1 1 Denchev
= 0 = = = 1 Block
0 0 0 0 0 0 Raman
"Team 1" - "Team 2" : points (score)
"Ni" - "FSF" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Ni" - "YB" : 1-1 (2-2)
"Ni" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Ni" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"FSF" - "Dark" : 1-1 (2-2)
"FSF" - "Happy" : 2-0 (3-1)
"FSF" - "YB" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"FSF" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"FSF" - "King" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "Happy" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Dark" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Dark" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Dark" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"Happy" - "YB" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
"Happy" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (3.5-0.5)
"Happy" - "King" : 2-0 (3-1)
"YB" - "Ghost" : 2-0 (2.5-0.5)
"YB" - "King" : 2-0 (2.5-1.5)
"Ghost" - "King" : 0-2 (1.5-2.5)
Definitely, even if the "Knights who say Ni" team decided before the match to play unusual openings in most games, this tournament shows again that the strength gap between top players and players rated 2150-2300 is not big at all as many of these players tend to reach the 2400 barrier...
Daniel Parmet (2010-09-14 00:15:47)
Quote festival, part 6
Modern chess is too concerned with things like pawn structure. Forget it, checkmate ends the game. - Nigel Short
Scott Nichols (2010-12-15 23:20:40)
Chess positions too complex for engines
Hi Thib. This is one of the main games I had in mind when I responded to your quote.
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__BLITZ_SILVER__000019
Or Game #40749
After 50. ...Be2 Rybka could only think of lines keeping the King close to the g4 pawn. Try it yourself anybody, the engine just didn't get it. It was a blitz game, but even at that time control I could see that my black Bishop could guard against the pawn advance from afar. So the winning strategy was to march the King to the other side of the board and escort the a-pawn to the queening square. This idea obviously was far beyond the engines horizon. After that game, my respect for Rybka's endgame play went down considerably.
Philip Roe (2010-12-16 03:31:35)
Chess positions too complex for engines
This ending is taken from Nunn's Chess Endings (Om. Garcia-Otero,Cuba 2002).
ChessPosition (see diagram)
White, to play, can force a Queen and Pawns ending that would be a long slow win, but he can also make a very profound triangulation that leads much more forcefully to the win. Nunn was very impressed that White found this at the board.
I would be interested to know how the engines do on this position.
Thibault de Vassal (2010-12-16 09:30:34)
Chess positions too complex for engines
Pawn's endgame?! I would be surprised if recent engines don't get it yet.
Jimmy Huggins (2011-02-12 04:18:32)
WBCCC Round 1 Update
This is the first update for the WBCCC, I guess some of you have been following some of the games there. There have been a lot of interesting games and some surprises a lot the way. As I'm reporting on the FICGS forum I will make most of this about the FICGS side. Here are some results so far and starting at the top boards.
B2 Uly(Vytron) vs Gino Figlio- Gino does a good job of defending a ..2.e6 line of the Sicilian. And both players agree to a draw after 34 moves.
B4 Daniel Parmet vs Sebastian Boehme- This was a Poison Pawn line of the Sicilian. The game ended before it even got out of book. A short draw, I think both people agreed that it was a good result for each player.
B6- Matt O'Brein vs Omprakash- A surprise if only for how short the game was. Matt shows his tactual muscles when his higher rated opponent much of had and oversight in this defense. As 23.g6! h6 24.Bxh6! and it looks like black has burned his bridges in this game.
B8-Stephanie vs Ruben Comes- This maybe the biggest surprise in round at least in terms of the bigger name on the FICGS side. Stephanie what looks to be a prefect opening all of the B90 lines and everyone agrees 32.Bc3! to be a new novelty and a very good one at that. Stephanie went on to grind Ruben down to a lost endgame. I very interesting game that has be to be seen to believe, I guess this going to show, that not all B90 lines lend to draws.
B13-Scott Nichols vs indrajit_sg- This was a long fought draw. When looking at the game early I thought white may have some chance to take advantage of his open g-file. But not a lot materialize later in the endgame(form the engines point of view).
B14-donkasand vs David Evans- David enter into dangerous territory with this B90 line. At move 19 he played ..Rb8 which looks to be a move to get out of book, because the other moves didn't look so good. Credit to David for finding a draw line in this game. Its another game with a look.
Kamesh Nookala vs Jimmy Huggins- What can I say I played an experimental opening and it backfired :) A well played game by Kamesh. Thanks for the chance to have a good fight with you.
Now on the 2nd set of games(Each player has 2 games in each round)
B3 Ramil Germanes vs Moz- Ramil here played a safe line in the B90 form the white side. So this looked like and easy draw.
B4 Sebastian Boehme vs Uly(Vytron)- Vytron plays and interesting side line of the Crao-Kann and play was very shape, but I got the feeling black played to ambitiously and had the worse of the position. He found a good defensive sacrifice and the good was hold to a draw. I think Sebi had winning chances, but I will have to look over the game to come up with an idea on that one. Anyway a great game to look over.
Ruben Comes vs Matthew O'Berin- Maybe the sharpest and most ambitious game in round 1. This goes in the the B97 lines, but Ruben goes for the Qf3 side line and produces a complex position after Rd3. I love this game so much I want to post the link again for everyone to please watch this game and post a comment about it.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=20213
B13 Fulcrum2000 vs Scott Nichols- Scott tries his luck to be ambitious and backfires with his Bh4 idea. Even when looking at the game. I was thinking it to be a good idea, but as it turns out. It goes as just losing a tempo. I thought this was one of the more instructive games of the round. I liked the way white played the endgame.
And the last result I have for the round for the FICGS players is
B17-indrajit_sg vs Kamesh Nookala- This was an interesting draw were white plays and early sideline in the Sicilian that tends to be drawish unless black forces the play. Another well played game by both sides.
I just want to say there are a lot of games one should look at. As more results come in on the FICGS side I will posted. In my opinion one should follow Wayne's games I have enjoyed his play so far. He had to comeback some in his wild game with black vs deka, but I get the feeling this game will ended in a draw. I would also follow the underrated Matt O'Berin in games to come. He has proven to be a great player so far.
Jimmy Huggins (2011-04-29 14:45:26)
WBCCC-New stuff and Round 2 Update
The last round was very exciting! And this round has had some great games as well. To speak of there is just 4 games left. Here is the report of the most important games this round.
Starting at the top boards. We have have...
B1-Loboestepario (Gino Figilo) vs CumnorChessClub (Kevin E.Plant)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21163-
This game followed a Catalan. Gino makes ambitious choice to go with 5.Nbd2! I gave this move a ! Not because of its theoretical standing. But because it will lead to a position were white will give up a whole pawn for rapid development. Never the less, black is equal to the task and managers to hold on to the pawn for most of the game and keep the game balanced. With my human eyes, I thought for sure white had an advantage! After move 20.Be4, It looks like white has 2 racking bishops. While black has one black locked in! But in depth analysis shows, that black can hold on. And shows great defensive technique. Down the stretch. Well played by Gino and Kevin. On of my favorite games to follow.
B3-Mark Eldridge vs David Evans
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21165-
David has gotten tested in both his black games in this tournament. And this game was no different. We had another B90 line in this game. And ...8.h5 was used. This is becoming a common line in this tournament. Mark's treatment on the white side was great! I think his future opponents will think twice before trying this line again. At move 22, the game reaches the sharpest point. After move 22.fxe5! I thought that Mark had a chance vs David. But David founds some good moves to exchanges pieces and hold for a draw. The best of which was the combo of ...33.Rf3 and ...36.Rxg3! This was a nice find by him. Great job to David and Mark! I look forward to seeing both these players again.
B4-Stephanie vs Fulcrum2000
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21166-
I would normally just post FICGS member games here. But this maybe one of the top 2 or 3 most important games of this round. In what turns out to be the most exciting game of the round IMO. White has shown that they are quite good in the opening phase. At move 18 they choose 18.b3 which was suggested as being the novelty move. White gets a very strong game and after a king tour to capture the pawn. It looked like a win for sure!, but it seems a mistake was made at move 38. Instead of 38.Qc1!? the move 38.Qe8! seems to be a near winner. I thoughts on why this move was missed is because, White was in time trouble in both games. I have to believe this was a favor. As we speak Stephanie is close to defeat in the other game that I will talk about shortly. I would watch her for the reminded of the tournament. I think they will learn form this experience and be even stronger going future. Well done by both players.
B5-NATIONAL12 vs Kamesh
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21167
Two of my good friends battling here. This was a B90 battle. The novelty move was the straight forward looking 27.h4, but after some exchanges. White has to settled for equality. A good match to follow, the one other note made was this was a line pioneered by Eros Riccio.
B7-Wayne Lowrance vs tomski1981
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21169-
Wayne plays a good line vs the french vs tomski. In fact by the database expert, it was in a 100% win line!! But after the queens come off the board. It burns out to a quiet draw. Wayne has had good opening results, but has yet to get in the winners column. I have faith that Wayne will win a game very soon. Good game to both in this one.
B8-Uly vs indrajit_sg
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21170-
This was a nice game to follow. A french defense was chosen. The point in which it gets interest is the choice to play 19.bxc3!? Which leads to 21.Nh6+!? I loves this sires of moves! 27.Rh3! was also a good move here. But its seems black has just enough resources to hold the balance. ..54.Bxg6! was a good finally touch. Well played by both players.
B9-Balabachi(William Fuller) vs Sebastian Boehme
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21171
What was talked about as a drawish Ruy position. I found to be quite a game with all the early fireworks. I also liked the material imbalance in this game. Sebi has a rep of being very difficult to beat with the black pieces. This helps when you have the Ruy and the Posion pawn line of the Sicilian. As two of your best weapons. ;)
B10-Schachmatt (Matt O'Brein) vs Weirwindle
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21172-
This was an interesting Richter-Rauzer game. 15.Qf4 was the novelty move, Form there it got crazy. 21.Nb3 seems to invite a pawn race. Which in the end white loses. This was a tough game for white. I think he should have been able to hold it. But it was still a good game to follow.
B11-donkasand vs Ruben Comes
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21173
This was a nice positional game by Mike (Donkasand), This was a 6.h3 Sicilian. And we get the usually good defense here. ..7.h5 White gets great positional pressure for the whole game and even gets a pawn, but Ruben wholes for a draw.
B12-natmaku vs ralunger (Ramil Germanes)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21174
This game was a Petroff with 5.Nc3. This kind of move gives white rapid development. Its seems black equalize pretty quickly. And on move 21 a draw was agreed on.
B13-Scott Nichols vs Omprakash
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21175
This was an interesting King's Gambit game. I think Scott didn't study his opponents rep. :) The King's Gambit is Om's specialty. So this was an easy draw for black.
B14-Keoki010 (George Clement) vs deka
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21176-
In this game black returns to his pet line of the Sicilian with 2.a6(Which he played in the last round) I believe this is called the O'Kelly variation. This time around he goes for ..7.Qb6 which looks a little better than ..7.Bb5!? A draw probably should have been possible, but George was able to grid out a win. Well played by both players.
B15-parmetd (Daniel Parmet)vs SpiderG (Peter Marriott)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21177
This was a King Indian by black. And white does a good job of out playing his opponent in this game. Unfortunately it seems Peter has gotten busy in his life. This game was decide by time.
B16-Banned for Life vs TheHug(Jimmy Huggins)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21178
I face off against Alan who has the white pieces. And is consider to be one of the best players when playing 1.b3. It was a difficult game for me as I decide before hand to play a dangerous line. Needless to say I lose this game after a few small mistakes on my part. I am founding that all the players in the WBCCC are good, I maybe better off being a commentator lol, but no one would have that.
This was the first set of games.
Here is the 2nd game of the 2nd round in the next post.
Jimmy Huggins (2011-04-29 18:36:20)
WBCCC-New stuff and Round 2 Update
B1-CumnorChessClub (Kevin E.Plant) vs Moz
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21180
Kevin makes an interesting choice here with 2.a4!? vs the Silicon Defense. Not exactly sure what he wanted out of the opening. I can only guess he wanted to mix it up here. Anyway, black equalizes fairly quickly and is better. But after 18.a5! He finds the best way to equalize and both agree to a draw.
B2-jitan vs Loboestepario (Gino Figilo)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21181-
The somewhat unknown Jitan has had a good tournament. And is given his ICCF SM opponent all he can handle. In a game that is still going. Gino is down a pawn, but it appears to be a draw and I would guess the game is about to finish. This was an interesting approach by Gino who gets in b5 and h5 very early in this game. And Jitan plays the most naturally looking sac. 13.Nbxd5! it looked like for a long time Gino was in trouble, but he has found enough resources IMO. A well played game by both players.
B3-Fulcrum2000 vs Mark Eldridge
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21182
This was a nice French game to watch. The novelty move was ..11.Na5, OTB I would like white in this game and I had a feeling that white possibly could have risked an attack, but this game came down to endgame play and White was able to outplay black in the end.
B4-Kamesh vs Stephanie
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21183-
In my opinion this is the most important game the round and it is reaching its fianlly stages. I believe Stephanie to be one of the top players in this event. She has been doing well, but Kam has played the near perfect opening and got her in trouble. If you remember my previous post you remember I talk about Stephanie was in time trouble. Which has not help the cause. The one move I enjoyed the most so far in this game was 36.Ra5!, this was a nice exchange sac. And its given Kam nice pass pawns on the Queen-side. I would guess this game will be over soon. It has been a nice game to watch.
B5-David Evans vs National12
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21184
A battle of the English Countryman here. :) This was the Open Defense of the Ruy. Form the comments I got, it seems that the opening was played about as perfectly as you can get. David posed some problems to Paul(National12), but it ends in a fairly easy draw. One finally note ..10.d4 IMO is a very difficult move to beat.
B6-ppipper vs jitan
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21168-
This is one of the finally 4 games still playing. What looks like to be a draw here. The white black has been dancing for a few moves now, but blacks back rank is weak. That equals a drawish game. :)
This game started out form B90 and so has a ton of theory.
B7-indrajit_sg vs Wayne Lowrance
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21186
I fairly quiet B90 game. I don't think white got much out of the opening. Well played by Wayne here.
B8-tomski1981 vs Uly
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21187
A battle of good friends here. IMO I thought white played the this Queens pawn opening passively. And so we had an early draw at move 26.
B9-Sebastian Boehme vs Schachmatt (Matt O'Brein)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21188-
This is one of the 4 last games. And I have to say its been a good game. We had an interesting Sicilian position. I had thought black was in trouble. But after he tripled up on the d-file. Then got massive exchanges. He looks like its headed toward a draw.
B10-Weirwindle vs donkasand
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21189-
This was a nice positional Sicilian game. Although it ends in a draw. Its a must see game! Watching the drawing combo at the end is very beautiful. It starts with ..27.e4! and you can watch it form there.
B11-Ruben Comes vs Balabachi(William Fuller)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21190
Ruben opened up this rep with 3.h3!? and we ended up with a closed type of Sicilian. But his opponent stayed strong. Though out the game. Even if it looked like Ruben had some pressure. In the finally position.
B12-ralunger (Ramil Germanes) vs keoki010 (George Clement)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21191-
This game saw the Exchange variation in the Queen's gambit. It has a high rate rate. But to Ramil credit he manage to give George a couple of weak pawns in the endgame, but not enough for any real advantage.
B13-Omparakash vs natmaku
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21193-
I would have hoped for more in this game. As I'm a lover of the 6.Bc4 (Sozin) Sicilian. After 14.e5!? this forces unneeded exchanges. After which, the game looked like a draw. And that is how it ended.
B14-deka vs Scott Nichols
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21194
Usually the Exchange Slav is pretty drawish. And this game was no different. But both players did try to mount some kind of advance. Both had good posts on each others side of the board. But a drawish opening is a drawish opening.
B15-TheHug (Jimmy Huggins) vs parmentd
(Daniel Parmet)
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21195
I tried my luck in an opening that was not something with e4. And it didn't go as well I had hoped, Daniel was able to get a equal position fairly quickly. In my try at making new theory in a very uncommon line vs the King's Indian Defense.
And finally we have this last game.
B16-SpiderG (Peter Marriott) vs Banned for Life
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=21196
This would have promised to be a nice Larson Attack game. By alas Peter timed out in this game as well. I would have loved to seen this attacking game with both sides castled on opposite sides.
Well that would do it for my reports for this round. This was a great round, and the next promises to be great as well. I will post info for the next round after the last game is over with.
Any feedback is welcome!
Thibault de Vassal (2011-08-19 11:43:45)
Rybka banned from ICGA
Clone or not clone, I'm not sure if this question is worth something in computer chess but ICGA did it: Rybka was banned and stripped of titles...
I just partly read RybkaInvestigation document, a few points are particularly ridiculous (like 2.2 "Sudden Strength Increase"), I have no idea on the other ones and I'm not sure if this is really important in the real world.
Finally, the punishment:
- to strip Rajlich of all ICGA Tournament Titles and,
- force the return of trophies and prize funds to the ICGA and,
- ban his programs from future competitions until he can satisfy the ICGA that they are no longer derivatives and that he has satisfied the conditions of any other penalties the ICGA imposes.
- encourage other tournaments (Leiden, Paderborn, CCT, TACCL, etc.) to disallow the entry of Rybka until it is proven “clean”.
ICGA Panel Members
The Secretariat members:
Robert Hyatt - (Crafty, Cray Blitz, World Computer Chess Champion in 1983 and 1986)
Mark Lefler (author of Now)
Harvey Williamson (part of Hiarcs Team)
Panel members:
Albert Silver (software designer for Chess Assistant (1999-2002); currently editor of
Chessbase News (2010-present))
Amir Ban (author of Junior: World Champion 2002, 2004, 2006, World microcomputer
Champion 1997, 2001)
Charles Roberson (author of NoonianChess)
Christophe Theron (author of Chess Tiger)
Dariusz Czechowski (author of Darmenios)
Don Dailey (author of Cilkchess, Star Socrates, Rex, Komodo)
Eric Hallsworth (part of Hiarcs Team, Publisher of Selective Search magazine)
Fabien Letousky (author of Fruit)
Frederic Friedel (Chessbase.com)
Gerd Isenberg (author of IsiChess)
Gyula Horvath (author of Pandix, Brainstorm)
Ingo Bauer (Shredder team)
Jan Krabbenbos (Tournament Director of Leiden tournaments)
Kai Himstedt (author of Gridchess and Cluster Toga)
Ken Thompson (creator of Belle Chess Machine, World Computer Chess Champion
1980, Turing Award winner 1983, creator of B and C programming languages,
Unix and Plan 9 developer).
Marcel van Kervinck (author of Rookie)
Maciej Szmit (assistant professor at Technical University of Lodz)
Mark Watkins (MAGMA Computer Algebra Group, School of Mathematics and
Statistics, University of Sydney)
Mark Uniacke (Hiarcs, World Microcomputer Champion 1993)
Mincho Georgiev (Pawny)
Olivier Deville (Tournament Director of ChessWars)
Omid David (author of Falcon)
Peter Skinner (Tournament Director of CCT--the major annual online computer chess
tournament)
Ralf Schäfer (author of Spike)
Richard Vida (author of Critter)
Richard Pijl (author of The Baron)
Stefan Meyer-Kahlen (author of Shredder, multiple world champions from 1996-2007)
Thomas Mayer (author of Quark)
Tord Romstad (author of Stockfish, Glaurung)
Tom Pronk (ProChess, Much)
Vladan Vuckovic (Axon, Achilles)
Wylie Garvin (game Programmer at Ubisoft Montreal)
Yngvi Björnsson (The Turk)
Zach Wegner (author of ZCT and Rondo, an upgraded version of Anthony Cozzie’s
Zappa program, which was world champion in 2005)
ICGA Board
President - David N.L. Levy
Vice-President: Yngvi Björnsson
Secretary-Treasurer: Hiroyuki Iida
Programmers Representative: Rémi Coulom
WCCC Tournament Director
Jaap van den Herik
http://www.chessvibes.com/plaatjes/rybkaevidence/RybkaInvestigation.pdf
http://www.chess.com/news/rybka-banned-and-stripped-of-titles-3798
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQshTNJ4pSM
Dmitriy Malish (2013-01-16 19:22:36)
Progressive Chess
Progressive chess is a chess variant in which players, rather than just making one move per turn, play progressively longer series of moves. The game starts with White making one move, then Black makes two consecutive moves, White replies with three, Black makes four and so on.
A check must be escaped from on the first move of a series--if this cannot be done, it is checkmate and the game is lost.
En passant captures of pawns are allowed if the pawn in question moved two squares in one move, but no further, at some point during the last turn, but the capture must be made on the first move of a series.
If ten consecutive turns are played with no captures and no pawn moves, then the game is declared a draw unless one of the players can force a checkmate (this is the progressive chess equivalent of the fifty-move rule in orthodox chess).
If at any stage a player has no legal moves but is not in check, the game is a draw by progressive stalemate.
Thibault de Vassal (2013-05-07 13:17:57)
Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH
As you may know, Eros Riccio won the 8th FICGS chess championship by beating Jeroen Van Assche (who remains undeafeated though, he did not lose a single chess game at FICGS yet) in the candidates final, preventing him to play Eros again in the final.
Eros kindly accepted to answer a few questions:
- Hello Eros. First of all, congratulations for winning this 8th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, you did not even have to play the 12 games match to defend your title as you won the qualifying tournament. In these conditions, the challenge was really tough for Jeroen Van Assche, in despite of his prodigious chess. He had to beat you consecutively in the candidates final (8 games match), then in the final (12 games match). How did things go in this candidates final?
Eros: Hi Thibault, thanks again! I was also worried to have to play a very strong player like Van Assche, but fortunately I had again the advantage that all draws were enough to win, and so my strategy was again not to take risks in all my games. As White it was easy... and surprisingly also as Black. The only game where I had to be more careful than others was this one: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qf3 h6 8.Be3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.Qg3 b5 11.a3 Rb8. Here Jeroen surprised me with an interesting novelty, 12.Kb1. The two times I had played this position I was White against Gueci and Kruse, and in both games I continued with 12.Bxb5 but couldn't get more than a draw. The idea of 12.Kb1 is to sacrifice a Pawn for the initiative after 12...b4 13.axb4 Rxb4 14.Nb3 Nxe4. The White Bishops are very strong after 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Bd3 Ra4 17.Bd4 and fully compensate the Pawn less. Anyway I managed to defend, and when I was finally able to trade the Queens we agreed for the Draw.
- You also won the ICCF Umansky Memorial a few weeks ago, the italian correspondence chess championship (again) as well, obviously you played numerous games last year, what do you plan for the next months? By the way, Jeroen already qualified for the candidates final of the 9th cycle, meaning that he may play you in the final match next year if you defend your title again, is there a chance that we can see a revenge?
Eros: Yes, like in the past, also last year I have played a lot of games... anyway for the future I am planning to reduce my games a lot. At the moment, except a few games in minor tournaments, I am only playing for the italian colors at the Olympiads and European Championship, for ICCF. I didn't register for the new Italian Championship this time... I prefer to wait that another individual top ICCF Tournament starts. And of course I am also waiting to meet my next challenger for the FICGS Final! Maybe it will be Van Assche again, we have to see if he beats his opponent in the semifinal (actually next candidates final).
- It looks like a few chess engines reached a certain maturity, I mean algorithms. As a consequence, the computer speed may become the major evolution factor during the next years, that is generally slower than the program's improvements (but the future may have surprises, of course). What do you expect from the computer chess world in the next few years and its impact on correspondence chess?
Eros: As I have already said in a previous interview, being chess probably a draw with perfect play, the more engines get stronger, the more draws we will see. That's quite obvious.
- You probably do not play chess over the board so often, yet you have a quite good ELO! (about 2200, while many correspondence chess masters are rated below 2000 or not rated at all) By the way, I can certify that you are a strong blitz player after we met a few years ago. Do you still play tournaments?
Eros: I am not playing otb chess for a few years, my peak was 22... and a few points, I don't remember exactly. One of the main reasons why I stopped is because later, when analyzing my games with an engine... every time I got frustrated a lot seeing all the blunders I was making.
- Do you estimate that playing OTB chess is good to improve at correspondence chess?
Eros: Yes, it's useful especially if you develop a strategical style, then also in your corr. games you can see more easily "long-term-strategy" plans, which is still the "weakest strenght" in all engines.
- Do you feel that you're still improving at correspondence chess? If yes, is it mainly a question of opening book or something else?
Eros: Improving at corr. chess... hmm... I will surprise you with my thought about this matter! I think I can evaluate my strenght according to the speed of the computer I am analyzing my games with. When I bought this computer, 3 years ago, I felt like I could beat the corr. World Champion. Now... as my computer is becoming older and older, I feel like my play is getting weaker each day it passes. So my answer is that I am still getting worse at corr. chess, not improving.
Attila Ba (2013-05-15 17:41:52)
Deep analysis - can it be improved?
The idea behind deep analysis is to store engine evaluations of chess positions in a permanent way and build an analysis tree out of them. Deep analysis is an improvement over simple engine analysis in two ways:
1) Permanent storage of analysis results makes them reusable. You don't have to analyse the same position from scratch over and over again (which is a waste of valuable CPU resources) rather you can build and improve upon your earlier results.
2) The search is configurable. You have control over which positions are examined and in what way. This gives you freedom to tailor the analyis to your own needs not having to rely on the defaults provided by your engine.
This idea is presented in a revolutionary way in the Deep Rybka Aquarium GUI. However using this framework I have encountered some problems. The lesser one and non lethal one is that draws by repetition are not handled correctly. This is for a reason: moves in the transposition table should be valued in an absolute way (regardless of the line which lead to them) in order to preserve the integrity of the tree. Since Aquarium has no means to incorporate lines, it simply ignores them
My other problem is that though the search is configurable I'm not absolutely certain about what is going on. It is not entirely clear to me exactly which nodes are selected for analysis.
These problems made me to try to come up with a deep analyis program of my own. After several failed attempts finally I have on my hand a solution which is not only capable of performing deep analysis but overcomes some of the difficulties of Interactive Deep Analyis (IDeA) provided by the Aquarium framework.
First I introduced a mechanism that can handle repetitions. In order to achieve this I attribute not one but two scores to each move and re-define the concept of root position already present in IdeA. The first score which I call 'idea' score is the same as presented in IdeA. The second is what I call 'alpha' score is calculated by minimaxing the tree from the root position taking into account repetitions.
Consider the following game:
1. Nf3 Nf6 2. Ng1 Nf8
The value of move 2. ... Nf8 at depth 18 by Houdini 3.0 is -19 centipawns. So the idea score of this move at depth 0 should be -19. Yet 2. ... Nf8 repeats the starting position. Therefore its alpha score with respect to a root equaling the starting position should be 0 centipawn which is exactly what my program calculates for it. ( For the sake of simplicity I don't require threefold repetition, since you would never allow your opponent to repeat a position if you have better ideas. )
So when my programs lists the tree it will present both scores for every move (which in most of the cases are equal of course - therefore this is mostly an aesthetic improvement rather than being a substantial one).
The improvement which I'm most interested in is that having full control of node selection now I have freedom to shape the tree search.
In order to keeps things simple I have only three parameters characterising the search:
1) engine depth
2) move distance (centipawns)
3) search depth
Engine depth means a fixed depth at which each move is analyzed. After long experimenting I have arrived at depth 18 as a good default for Houdini 3.0.
Move distance is a tolerance up to which moves are allowed into the analyis. For each position first the best move is determined. The search for alternative moves is continued until a move is found that has a valuation less than the valuation of the best move by 'move distance' centipawns (it is this 'distance' away from being the best move). The tree is then expanded for moves within 'move distance'.
To compensate for exponential growth of analyzed nodes I use a simple technique: at each ply after ply 1 the move distance is halved. So if the move distance at ply 0 and ply 1 is 20 centipawns, it will be 10 centipawns for ply 2, 5 centipawns for ply 3 and so on. This means that at greater depth less and less moves are allowed per position. So the analysis with greater depth slowly evolves into 'autoplay' rather than 'tree search'.
The other method to reduce exponential growth is the well known beta cut provided by alphabeta search. In order that all candidate moves in the root position and all candidate responses to them get proper values, I only allow beta cuts with ply 2 and deeper.
Once an alphabeta search of certain depth is carried out, the whole tree is mimimaxed out for the root. Now the initial evaluations of the root moves may change. This may make moves which initially fall out of the 'move distance' to become viable. So the search has to be repeated for those moves as well. This has to be done at every ply level.
My iterative search at a certain depth only ends when no new nodes are added by the alphabeta search (the tree is 'settled' for this depth). Only then the program is allowed to deepen the search (this I call 'refined' search).
With engine depth of 18 and move distance of 10 centipawns an average position can be analyzed to depth 10 within a matter of hours. This means a couple of hundred (possibly a couple of thousand) positions are analyzed to depth 18. Depth 10 deep analyis means an ultimate depth of 28 if you take into account that the engine depth is 18.
Whether this method has added ELO value over simple engine search is yet to be tested.
Ilmars Cirulis (2013-08-01 17:00:15)
Gossip about Evans gambit
So about the thematic tournament:
with black I am going to play 4... Bxb4 5.c3 Ba5 and hope to get to this position/variation:
With white I plan to play or check my skill/luck against other retreats of bishop from b4.
Jonathan Gresham (2013-10-25 01:42:21)
Najdorf Poisoned Pawn
After the pawn is taken how does the game continue?
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2013-10-25 17:13:00)
Najdorf Poisoned Pawn
Rb1 Qa3 etc.
Jonathan Gresham (2013-10-25 20:40:07)
Najdorf Poisoned Pawn
Ok cool. Thanks :)
Garvin Gray (2014-11-01 22:51:23)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
There was no context other than a very simple request. With the new rules now in operation, I was asking where do we find a copy or further information on what changes have taken place for this event that flow on from the changes to the laws.
The areas I was mainly concerned with are in relation to:
5 consecutive repetition of moves and 75 moves without a pawn move or capture. The arbiter can now step and force the draw, there does not need to be a player claim.
So will the server be updated to match this? There are quite a few other changes as well where current server practices do not match the new rules.
But as I said, it is your responsibility to make sure that the competition complies with the new rules if you advertise that your tournament follows the fide laws of chess where possible.
The reason for my stance is a very simple one. Over the years, on almost every single occassion, when I have made suggestions or recommendations to you, you have gone in the opposite direction in pretty much 100 percent of cases. Or even when you have claimed to 'agree' with my recommendation, you have then given the trial period such a short time to make it practically worthless.
The last saga in relation with Nick Burrows said to me that, except for the wch, I will no longer be playing on this site.
I can tell you directly, your handling of that issue lost you a long time member.
On the format of the wch, if I actually thought this format was fair and even gave me a shot of winning it, rather than being so heavily biased in favour of Eros Riccio winning it every time, to the point of being fixed, then I would use that as sole motivation to win it.
Thibault de Vassal (2014-11-02 14:19:06)
July 1 2014 Fide laws of chess
About repetition and number of moves without a pawn move or capture, FICGS rules already specify that it does not apply here so there is no change to make.
The rest of your message explains the context I was talking about. But we don't have to agree on anything: As I explained when FICGS started and many times after that, I wanted to make it (particularly the championship cycle) different from what already exists (and closer to previous FIDE cycle). Obviously, you prefer the other way, that's not a big deal, and there is ICCF or LSS. I would have been ok to make a cup cycle if we had players enough but that's definitely not the case. What to add? There are many reasons why FICGS has quite few members (real names to start...) but there are well known advantages to this. Otherwise there are chess.com, gameknot, so many sites full of players. Finally, complaining players are probably the most important ones here because they constantly bring ideas. There was many many improvements in the first years and it did not go against the coherence of the site. Your cup cycle idea does not even go against the coherence of the original idea of the site, only the context is wrong here. Changing the WCH cycle for a ICCF-like one would be the worst thing to do in this point of view. But that's only a point of view.
Thibault de Vassal (2015-01-09 20:46:20)
Eros Riccio on his win in 9th chess WCH
Eros Riccio kindly accepted to answer a few questions after his win in the 9th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, his answers are worth to read... including probably a few surprises and valuable informations for most of us!
_____________________________
- Hello again Eros. Congratulations for this new win! So you played Jeroen for the second time in a row, this time in the 12 games format. There were 12 draws but it does not mean a lot. How did things go?
--> Hi Thibault! Nice to answer your questions again :-) I managed to resist again Van Assche's assaults, this time he was well-determined to win, as he made me really suffer in a couple of games. The first game was a semislav, me as Black. He played a rare variation (starting with 14.Be2 followed by 15.Qd3) that was new to me. At first the engines were giving 0.00 evaluations, but after the move 22.Qg3 they started to realize that Black's position was difficult, and they kept increasing their evaluation in White's favor move after move. That was quite a scary thing to see, and I really thought that I could have lost the game. I had to use all the thinking time (leave included) to be able to resist. This new variation impressed me so much that I decided to use it as White myself as a surprise weapon, and in fact it allowed my engine on autoplay on my old I7 980x to win a lot of games as White and a 500 dollars prize getting first place in a strong tournament on Infinity Chess. The second game was a Spanish, me as White. After his 7...0-0 I decided to avoid the Marshall (that would have probably happened if I had played 8.c3) trying the AntiMarshall variation 8.d4. I am now convinced that this variation gives nothing good to White, but I didn't know that yet when I played it! Already after the rare strong move 11...c5! things were starting to get difficult for me. He simply continued with c4 and d5, getting space advantage with his Pawns on the Queenside, while I could find no attack at all on the Kingside. Again I had to be very careful to escape with a draw.
- What can you tell about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you're now ranked #9 with an outstanding rating of 2639 ?
--> My ICCF elo in the past few years has raised. Slowly, but it has raised. I had no defeats and a couple of wins in the Olympiads and European team tournaments started in 2012. I am satisfied of that, as winning nowadays in top correspondence tournaments is very difficult. Important is to remain undefeated.
- Last year, you said that you felt like your play was getting weaker each day because your machine was getting older, did you finally upgrade it? But maybe this is a secret...
--> No. As I wrote earlier, I haven't updated my machine. Fortunately cpu's general speed has kept increasing not as quickly as in the past, so my I7 980x can still compete.
- Did your vision of computer chess evolve after these last 18 months? What do you expect for the next years? Do you plan to become a chess cyborg? ^^
--> Fortunately for our hobby, computer chess isn't rushing towards the "all draws" situation that I talked about a couple of years ago. That's because, fortunately, increasing cpu's power and engine's strenght is getting more and more difficult. Yes, some main lines already lead to all draws often, but chess gives so many openings options that to avoid that, you can simply play subvariations. When played a lot, also subvariations will become main variations. Then again, when the draws rate gets too high, you just pick another less played opening. It will take many years to cover every opening to a high draws rate.
- Your next challenger is Peter W. Anderson, who made a convincingly path through the round-robin cycle before to defeat SM Igor Dolgov 5-3 in the 10th candidates final (by the way he's also playing the 11th candidates final). It seems that you never played him before. How do you feel this match? Do you have any words for your opponent before that the games start?
--> I am happy to play a new player! We have just started our match, again, all my first moves as White were 1.e4. What to say... it's up to him to avoid main lines as Black (he already did it answering with 1...g6 in three games) if he wants to try to win with the black pieces. But the real challenge for him of course will be to try to win with the White pieces. It will be interesting to see if he can find holes in my Black repertoire like Van Assche was able to do. Let's wait and see!
Pablo Schmid (2015-07-06 00:03:04)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
If we think about the stalemate logic, 2 knight vs 1 knight would be a draw by repetition or move limit if there is no stalemate or knight exchange. But can one bishop or one knight + king force a stalemate vs king alone? Anyway this is not chess anymore, many endings would be artificially become lost, for example king vs king + pawn, pawn a c f h vs queen, and many 1 piece vs 1 piece + pawn.
Peter W. Anderson (2015-07-09 09:35:12)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
I have avoided commenting further on this idea because I wanted to see what other people had to say. But now I will reply to the points made.
“Giving a bonus for stalemate is almost like playing for stalemating your opponent, which is not the aim of the game and this would change the game deeply.”
As I said I am against a points bonus, but am in favour of using stalemates for tie breaks. The real question is would someone start a game aiming for stalemate as opposed to start the game trying to win? I am not sure how you would do that – either way you have to try to build up an advantage and if it gets big enough it will lead to mate and if it is not quite big enough it might lead to stalemate. Anyone who gets the choice between a win and stalemate will presumably always take the win.
The one way I think this will really affect the game is by discouraging some very deeply analysed defences that are known to drawn or close to drawn but will almost certainly lead to stalemate. Personally I think this is a good thing, but I accept that the opposite view could be taken :)
“I think you overlooking a little that a good defense leading to stalemate means showing great skill. It´s not all about luck.”
Reaching stalemate as the defending side can be very simple (e.g. king and pawn vs king) or can indeed show great skill. It is almost never down to luck. In the case where great skill is shown that skill earns you half a point instead of no points. Nonetheless, the very fact that you needed great skill to save the game shows how close you came to losing, so I see no reason not to use this as a tiebreak rule.
“And stalemating gamepoints definitely will favour stupid engine playing and not human thinking with endgame skill”.
Like Pablo, I think quite the opposite is true. In fact one of my motivations for suggesting the change was to increase the human element in the game.
“According to me, stalemating an opponent (or having King + Bishop vs. King) reflects who played better ONLY IF rules say it before the game. In some cases, it actually reflects a better play, but in some others, it only shows that the stalemated player (or naked king) found a clever way to draw the game by giving the opponent the illusion of an advantage. Isn't it quite subjective after all?”
I have some sympathy for this viewpoint. If we could play perfect chess and at the start of the game someone decided to take the draw by allowing themselves to be stalemated then that would be a very good example supporting that view. However, I think the reality is different. In most cases when someone gets stalemated (or would be stalemated if the game was played through to its conclusion) it is because they have got a worse position and have little choice if they want to save the game.
If the defending side could achieve a draw by stalemate or by other means, then under today’s rules they could choose either way. Under my proposed rules they might be wise to choose the other method, unless of course they were confident of achieving more wins in the match.
“Maybe the games become more interesting if instead give small extra score for win with black!? Encourage black to play for a better score, just as UEFA do in football.”
This might be helpful for tournaments but I don’t think it helps at all for match play. In reality, if you can win just one game in a match you will most likely win the match. Therefore you don’t need a bonus to play for a win with black in a match situation.
However, I think this point indirectly touches on an issue with match play and how hard people try to win, and I do think the stalemate tiebreak rules would help a little with this.
The problem as it stands is that the higher rated player (or the champion in the case of the tile match) knows that if all games are drawn he will win the match. The higher rated player (or champion) can therefore take a low risk approach to the match, with both black and white (actually I think the low risk approach with white is just as much a problem).
If the higher rated player (or champion) was not certain that all draws would win them the match then they would probably try harder to win. This would give a better chance of decisive games in matches.
One way of a achieving this would be through a toss of a coin if the match is tied with all draws. Personally I would not find this satisfactory.
Whilst the likelihood of stalemate is quite low, it will nonetheless be there, so this rule might encourage the higher rated player or champion to try harder for a win.
I will speak from personal experience on this matter. In most of my recent matches I have been the higher rated player. I still play some relatively risky defences as black (e.g. the modern against 1.e4) and I always try to win with white. However, I have to be honest, if I am the higher rated player, I do not always play the very sharpest lines as white and I do not often play some of my riskier defences to 1.d4. If the stalemate tiebreak rule was in place, I would be taking more chances with both white and black.
So whilst I accept that it is not perfect, I still think the stalemate tie-break rule is a good idea. However, as nobody else has spoken out in favour of it I accept that it is very unlikely to be implemented and I won’t write any more on this matter unless someone asks me a direct question. It is time to concentrate on my matches under the existing rules! :)
Alvin Alcala (2015-07-10 14:46:26)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Hi everyone. GM Arno wants to post in this thread as he has trouble logging in.
Introducing a 3/4-1/4 score for stalemate does not mean changing the whole game. Lasker and Réti, the fathers of this idea, knew quite well what they did, when they said, it's only a minor change (btw following the ancient chess, when mates were rare and a stalemated player had to pay half of his stake).
Some people on ChessBase argued and feared that the game might become bloodless as players would fear to sacrify material. But that's a wrong assessment.
Here is a "normal" classical GM game with a Morra Gambit, that could have happened the same way under the new rule:
E.Berg - S. Rocha (POR 2013)
1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3 Nc6 5.Nf3 d6 6.Bc4 a6 7.0–0 Nf6 8.Bf4 Bg4 9.h3 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 e6 11.Rfd1 Qc7 12.Rac1 Be7 13.Bb3 Rc8 14.Nd5 exd5 15.exd5 Ne5 16.Qe3 Qd7 17.Rxc8+ Qxc8 18.Bxe5 0–0 19.Bf4 Qd7 20.Rc1 Bd8 21.Qd4 Re8 22.Qb4 Be7 23.Ba4 b5 24.Bb3 Rc8 25.Rxc8+ Qxc8 26.a4 Qc5 27.Qe1 Kf8 28.Be3 Qc7 29.axb5 axb5 30.Qb4 Qb7 31.g4 h6 32.Qd4 Nd7 33.Qe4 Bf6 34.Qb4 Qa6 35.Bc2 Ne5 36.Kg2 Nc4 37.Bc1 g5 38.Bd3 Qa1 39.Bxc4 bxc4 40.Qxc4 Bxb2 41.Be3 Bf6 42.Qc8+ Kg7 43.Qf5 Qc3 44.Qe4 Qb2 45.Qf5 Qc3 46.Qe4 Qb2 47.h4 gxh4 48.Qf4 Qe5 49.Qxh6+ Kg8 50.Kg1 h3 51.Qxh3 ½–½
Follow the comments in the MegaBase.
White sacrifies a pawn at move 3. He regains it at move 18 by a typical piece sacrifice. Later White, who is pressing a lot, while Black defends quite well, could have won a pawn by 38.b3 (instead of 38.Bd3?): e.g. 38...Qa1 39.Bxg5 hxg5 40.bxc4 bxc4 41.Qxc4.
Berg argues he might have had practical winning chances. Either 1-0 or 1/2. So what is the big difference, if we would say: either 1-0, 3/4 or 1/2? It's just making the game more exciting, more fair and a bit less drawish, what is badly needed for correspondence chess.
The basic wrong assessment is that it might be significantly easier to achieve a stalemate advantage. But it isn't (and that's why only a small percentage of games will end like that). Last but not least, players who achieve a clear endgame advantage deserve a 3/4 point instead of 1/2. K+P, K+B, K+N vs. K should be a difference to K vs. K."
Thanks again, Arno
Thibault de Vassal (2015-07-11 02:18:11)
E. Riccio on his win in the 10th CC WCH
Once again, Eros kindly answered a few questions after his win in the 10th FICGS correspondence chess championship. His answer on tie break rules meets the discussion in this thread:
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=forum_read&id=11773
____________________________
- Hello Eros and congrats again for this new win in the FICGS correspondence chess championship! This time, your opponent was Peter W. Anderson and you're playing him once again in the next final match. Actually, all games finished in less than 3 months, which looks like superfast, how did it happen?
Hello once again Thibault! Yes, the match with Anderson was very quick. The reasons are that he moves very fast, and like me, I don't seem to remember that he took any day of leave.
Also, our games were not played until the very end; many draws were agreed with many pieces on the board, as soon as we thought that none of us had winning chances.
- For many players, it is quite impossible to beat you in such a 12 games match (probably because of the tie rule). After all these won matches do you start to think that the advantage is too big?
It's a fact that a very high percentage of correspondence games played at the top level ends up in a draw... (and that percentage is even higher in my case, as my strategy is to avoid taking risks) so yes, talking against my interests, I think that something in the rules should be changed.
- By the way, your opponent suggested an interesting tie rule in the forum ( Chess, Poker & Go forum - Topic 11773 ), in the context of more general new ideas for correspondence chess rules (e.g. article by GM Arno Nickel - Correspondence Chess – the draw problem ) in order to increase the interest of the game. Do you have any opinion on all this?
The idea GM Nickel launched could be interesting, even if before we can say for sure if it can be applied in serious tournaments, it needs to be tested.
If I understood correctly, having a piece more in a draw endgame, after the game is over, a little plus on the score would be given to the player who had the small advantage.
I always thought like: How unfair! That player had King and two Knights against a lone King of his opponent... still he only got a half point anyway! Or even worse, in theory, one player could have this position: King in e1, Bishop in h1 and 6 Pawns from h2 to h7. (Black King in h8) Counting the value of pieces that would be a a +9 advantage, like a Queen more, but still it would be a draw. Another crazy scenario, more common, are those blocked positions were 16 pawns block the center (or more simply any fortress position) and not rarely it happens that a color has a huge material advantage but can't break through in any way. In this last case the player with material disadvantage could have found a genial idea to reach that blocked position, should his opponent with extra pieces still be given an advantage after the game?
Another important consideration is that this rule could discourage attacking players to play gambits or make sacrifices, as if the attack fails, their efforts to try to win would be punished! This last case would even increase the draw rate.
Probably Nickel didn't talk about giving a plus after games finished with advantage but still many pieces on board, anyway those positions (except the 16 Pawns one) could very well be played on until only one piece would be left.
After these examples we can see that there are so many different ways that a position with material advantage can be reached... but it's not always fair that the player with the advantage should be given a plus after the game. As a paradox, an advantage should be given to the opponent if he smartly managed to sacrifice one or more pieces in order to reach a draw endgame which he would have lost if he didn't give away material.
- Of course, the level of chess programs is for much in it. Do you feel that high level correspondence chess and centaur chess evolved much this year, or did it reach a kind of peak?
The level of correspondence chess increases in a parallel way as computers, databases and chess programs improve. Slowly everything keeps improving. Of course, due to the more thinking time, correspondence chess will always have a higher draw percentage than blitz games played by computers.
- Finally, what can you tell us about your correspondence chess path this year, particularly at ICCF where you're currently ranked #13?
On ICCF I am fighting with the Italian Team (I am playing in second board behind the World Champion Finocchiaro) in the 9th European Team Championship.
---> https://www.iccf.com/event?id=44123
Pablo Schmid (2015-07-12 02:09:18)
Wch Match Tie Break Rules
Here is most examples of my ficgs practice (corr and Advanced chess). This represent a low percentage of my games. These games are food for thought from my own assisted experience against that rule that I call "+1 decisive advantage chess". I believe you could already burn a lot of chapters in ending's book. Most of my games show balanced games until the end, sometime, the "punished guy" could have played another drawing defense, sometimes not, unfairly to me. The game would be more safe, with less sacrifices of piece vs 2 or 3 pawns and things like that because of fearing an ending with king vs king + piece or king vs king + pawn even if the sacrifice was sound and well played.
Game 22895 and 84758 I would probably have been punished by the rule in the ending of game 22895 (and my opponent in the other game), and that type of ending in general (piece + pawn up vs piece when the king cannot block the pawn).
Game 37122 Shame on me, my advantage in that ending was not sufficient to force my opponent to sacrifice his bishop for my last pawn. This is why I only deserve 0,5!
Game 37920 That king of pawns vs piece + pawn would become lost for the player without the piece, what a way of punish some balanced sacrifices for pawns!
Game 54907 and 20704 That kind of opposite bishop ending would be "lost" for the guy pawnless even if the transition into an inferior but drawn ending was the intention of the "inferior guy".
Game 74870 The ending is perfectly balanced but my opponent couldn't finish the game the way he did because of the rule.
Game 74875 I would have been half-losing in the pawn ending after a nice defense in an interesting unbalanced material line.
Game 74880 the ending knight + h pawn would have been "half losing" for me even if we can't say that I was clearly worse overall.
Game 76734 and 76764 Technichally this game is not directly concerned by the rule but it is very close. I was on the verge of defeat but I have managed to defend stubornely. If he have played well to get a winning position and then the win disapear because of bad play but still finish with a draw, he would get a bonus because he played better overall? The way I managed to defend would not be rewarded?
Game 77809 In this game the whole deep opening line would probably be "half losing" for Black in the ending because of the new rule.
Game 80954 Suddenly it seems that I would have been punished for my defense in the final position.
Game 85106 I did not play specially badly but... I would have been punished for my way of finishing the game!
Thibault de Vassal (2016-08-30 22:46:23)
underpromotion possible?
Hello Herbert,
The answer is in the Help section, see question : "How do I promote a pawn during a chess game ?"
Basically, you may use the PGN notation, e.g. e8N to get a knight.
Scott Nichols (2017-01-07 15:20:42)
Defeating Draw Death
Maybe some new ideas can be shared here. Here is one, 2 players play a 2 game or even more game match where Black gives up the f7 Pawn. Or a set of the first 6 moves very wild in nature and then each player will have to play the same first six moves. They alternate colors of course, :)
Scott Nichols (2017-01-07 15:31:58)
Defeating Draw Death
#2. Black gives up f7 Pawn, but only has to pay 2 e-points to enter, White will have to pay 10 e-points. We would have the ability to enter the tournament as White or Black.
Thibault de Vassal (2017-01-11 15:38:14)
Defeating Draw Death
The wild 6 first moves idea should be possible with thematic tournaments... Maybe the f7 pawn is possible this way as well. Why not... Scott's 2nd idea reminds me the silver thematic chess (now Traxler).
Jan, I did not miss your ideas in the chat on wins / draws... It may be very interesting and funny to try but it changes really everything, the game is not the same according to me, and the code should be rewritten in good part. And well, isn't it a question of taste before everything? As for me, I'm quite sure I would play it like atomic chess, then would come back to the original game.
Jan Ohlin (2017-01-20 19:46:00)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw
Benoni without 7.f4, Kingsindian (especially variations where both players attacking on different wings (computers are not so good at calculating when all pieces are behind pawns), Spanish with d5 closing center. 1.Nf3 d5 2.c4 d4 3.b4 and 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.c4 c6 4.Nc3 e6 5.g3
Aniruddha Duttagupta (2017-05-06 19:55:27)
adjudication of FICGS Games
Can any game of FICGS send for adjudication? If so, to whom the game will be send? Who is thw adjudicator? If my opponent wants to continue a dead drawn game with opposite color Bishops and one pawn in the board only, can I send the game for adjudication ?
Steven DuCharme (2018-01-06 03:46:12)
My New Chess Rule
You may not move a non-pawn onto your foe's side of the board until all your non-pawns have moved.
Garvin Gray (2018-01-22 01:08:34)
Conditional chess moves (again)
The rules of the site already permit players to claim 6 man tablebase positions, when they appear on the board, as either a win or draw, even if the position is above 50 moves.
That rule is standard across all webserver sites.
Also, even though a position might say mate in 75 and the claim is granted, this does not mean it is outside of the 50 move rule as there maybe a capture or pawn move between the initial position and mate.
Kym Farnik (2018-02-16 09:21:20)
Stockfish 9 released
FYI Development builds now have dynamic contempt.
Author: Stefano Cardanobile
Date: Fri Feb 9 19:07:19 2018 +0100
Timestamp: 1518199639
Introduce dynamic contempt
Make contempt dependent on the current score of the root position.
The idea is that we now use a linear formula like the following to decide
on the contempt to use during a search :
contempt = x + y * eval
where x is the base contempt set by the user in the "Contempt" UCI option,
and y * eval is the dynamic part which adapts itself to the estimation of
the evaluation of the root position returned by the search. In this patch,
we use x = 18 centipawns by default, and the y * eval correction can go
from -20 centipawns if the root eval is less than -2.0 pawns, up to +20
centipawns when the root eval is more than 2.0 pawns.
To summarize, the new contempt goes from -0.02 to 0.38 pawns, depending if
Stockfish is losing or winning, with an average value of 0.18 pawns by default.
Stanislas Gounant (2018-04-02 00:10:33)
Poll: renaming the Queen as Dragon
During french Revolution, there was some propositions to rename pieces:
King = Flag
Queen = Adjutant
Rook = Cannon
Knight = Rider
Pawn = Trooper
only male terms
http://www.mjae.com/revolution.html
Rolf Staggat (2018-04-02 15:00:31)
Poll: renaming the Queen as Dragon
We have enough dragons in real life - Angela Merkel, Theresa May and many others.....
Don´t need dragons on the chess-board. And the king is called Donald (Trump) then?
Or this North-Korean joke of a man is a pawn, better a double-pawn?
In a few years, when the Chinese rule the whole world, the king will be called Mao. :)
Ilmars Cirulis (2019-01-24 10:19:24)
Thematic tournaments?
Najdorf Poisoned pawn - did we have that already?
Daniel Parmet (2020-04-28 22:59:06)
The State of correspondence chess
I have played correspondence chess now for 13 years. During that time, I have played 983 correspondence games. These days I mostly play at ICCF and some of these issues may be ICCF specific... but since ICCF has no forum and I want to get a sense of the health of correspondence chess in general... I posit my thoughts here.
First of all, I think the number of correspondence players and the number of correspondence games are decreasing across the board on all correspondence websites due to the things I want to talk about.
Second, I primarily shifted my playing to ICCF years ago for two reasons: 1) The higher level of competition available; 2) The norms available. Although I was concerned with their fees which are usually minor but, in many cases, certain organizers do construct outlandish tournaments that you need to be wary of (looking at you Venezuela).
On the first point, I think ICCF is a little more open to high caliber players competing up until a point (they really try to prevent you from playing a 2450+ player until you are 2450+ yourself). And the rating protections get tougher and tougher the further you go but they make it easy to play 2300 players. While most websites outside of ICCF, usually have one annual Cup / WCH or Thematics, these other websites usually make it impossible to play anyone more than a few hundred points above you no matter your rating outside of these few events.
On the second point, I think ICCF norms are somewhat of an illusion. They’ve always been hard and much harder to achieve than OTB norms which received a watering down of requirements of decades ago. In fact, ICCF norms are so much harder than FIDE norms that one actually needs to achieve two norms to receive the prerequisite title in ICCF vs the standard three norms required by FIDE. In the US, for example, there are 116 ICCF Titled players in history (13 GMs, 25 SIM, 78 IMs) vs 828 FIDE Titled players in present (101 GMs 166 IM 561 FMs) [https://ratings.fide.com/topfed.phtml]. Now however, there is a proposal, for the ICCF GM Title only, proposed by Dennis Doren, ICCF Rules Commissioner who really does a lot for correspondence chess, and SIM Uwe Staroske, ICCF Qualifications and Ratings Commissioner, to remove the requirement to have to play GMs to get the GM Title [leaving IM and SIM untouched] [https://www.iccf.com/Proposal.aspx?id=1280]. This proposal states, “A search of the ICCF data indicates that 21 players obtained at least 2 GM norms across 24 games but failed to get the GM title because of the requirement of "5 GM" opponents. (Only 5 of those players are currently active).†Leaving aside the fact that this proposal violates the very definition of the GM Title, one must beat the club in order to join it, the proposal further outlines the real problems without addressing them, “The GM Title has already become far harder to earn than it used to be, due to the rating suppression caused by the increase in draws.†Wow, let’s unpack that one line because it is a doozy!
Really, this one line, that is easily overlooked, is two huge problems that correspondence is facing: 1) death by one thousand draw paper cuts and 2) rating deflation. I will argue later that there is a third huge problem but let’s start with the ones acknowledged by ICCF itself. Every correspondence player knows the draw rate is going up. As engines and hardware get stronger, players are able to save positions that in the past would have been lost and we are finding ever easier ways to head straight towards 0.00 as Black. I would love to see a detailed analysis that describes how much harder it has become to win as Black against a decent correspondence player (let’s say someone 2300+). In the last five years, I have beaten three 2300+ players as Black without counting mouseslips (one in 2015, one in 2016 and one any day now in 2020) despite playing extremely aggressive openings like the KID (for the record that’s three Black wins out 103 Black draws or 2.91% Win rate). That may be part of the draw problem, but I have witnessed my own draw rate skyrocket 2014: 82.4% 2015: 86.7% 2016: 90.2% 2017: 90.6% 2018: 91% 2019 is still in progress. Often for these norms, you need to score +2, +3, +4 or +5 despite the fact that +1 usually wins the event… and with the draw rate North of 90% in a 12-13 game event that means you are likely to win 1 game on average… but in many events the entire cross table often sees one to three entire wins (look at a recently completed tournament here where I scored my first IM norm that required +0 and I scored +1). My win was one of five wins in the entire tournament 100/105 = 95.2% draw rate! [https://www.iccf.com/event?id=73482]. People love to tell me that’s fine because we are talking about such a weak event as Category 8 [2449 was the rating average]. Fine, I do not accept your argument but let’s look at the World Championship then shall we? Let’s look at the most recently concluded World Championship 30 which finished on 10/2/2019, Category 13 [2562 was the rating average]. This event was won by the new World Champion SIM Kochemasov, Andrey Leonidovich 2540 [https://www.iccf.com/event?id=66745]. Congrats to the new World Champion on his two wins! The event had 8 decisive games out 136 or a draw rate of 91.2% (not far off my own). But wait did I say SIM? I did. In fact, congratulations to the World Champion on scoring his final GM norm as well! This World Championship saw 5 SIMs compete in a field with 12 GMs. While 3 of the SIMs finished 1st 2nd and 3rd, only our new World Champion scored a GM norm. The problem is with all the draws that norms are not just becoming hard, but maintaining or increasing one’s rating is becoming hard. And one’s rating is how one receives any decent invites to have a chance at a norm in the first place.
The draws are a death by one thousand cuts as I recently played one of the ICCF’s proposal’s outlined “21 players that could have obtained a GM norm.†My rating is 2389 and his rating is 2504 (although SIM, he is recognized by all his peers as a GM caliber player). As Black, I obtained an easy draw without ever being in any trouble at all. The player had a rather angry initial discussion with me post mortem about how he felt it was wrong that a 2504 should have to play a player as weak as 2389 where the draw would kill his rating. He felt that his rating was being destroyed by these draws with weaker players and that ICCF should protect him from us. He felt I have it easier as a lower rated player because I can gain rating from these draws. Let’s look at his argument that one is causing the other and it is only happening to those 2500+. At the time that draw occurred, I gained exactly 1.17915 rating points from it (and he lost the same); however, this was the first draw in over 40 games in which I *gained* rating points (this statement is no longer true as a few higher rated players have since given me draws but at the time of the game’s conclusion this was the case). Yes, that’s right, ICCF already does such a good job of protecting higher rated players that it actively hands out advice to new players to be very particular about what invites and events they play because the draws could kill their initial rating. I too have experienced a net negative loss of rating points from draws and still seen my rating going up only due to the fact that wins are easier and ever so slightly more common to come by at my level. However, it means I am not exempt from the draw problem. It is patently false that this problem is limited to those 2500+ as in my last 43 draws, I lost rating in 42 of them and gained rating from 1 of them. Therefore, it appears draws are causing rating deflation and this is the real problem in both norms and correspondence in general. With the exception of matches, perhaps there is a way to have draws not count against one’s rating since there are so many of them? It kind of blends the Chess rating concept with that of Bridge where one cannot lose rating points once earned. What we can see is that the player’s argument that draws are causing rating deflation is probably true. One problem is at least partly causing the other one.
There is a third more devious problem worse than the two outlined above in my opinion. While rating deflation, draws, less players and norms are real issues… they are dwarfed by the change in behavior caused by these issues. I know it is a bit overdramatic to talk about such issues in a time of COVID, but there has been a great increase in the number of players playing Dead Man Defense (often shortened by correspondence players to DMD+ and DMD=). It is important to note that the death rate in COVID for those in the elderly category is markedly higher and the correspondence community in general is also markedly higher. I have heard estimates of the average age of correspondence player being 70-75 range though I haven’t seen any data. Back to DMD, what is DMD and why is it such awful behavior? The players are hoping you die before you win so they can claim either a win on time or if it goes to adjudication then at least claim a draw. The other hope is that you might mouse slip by being forced to play more moves which while that would never happen over the board does surprisingly account for a large portion of wins in ICCF correspondence high-level play. One of the main problems this issue causes is that if someone takes an early draw against a player who then goes on to die, the entire rest of the field gets a free half point and you are punished for playing your game quicker than your peers. Often, players over the board resign once mate is unstoppable or a simple endgame is reached in which the result is known to players of all levels. In correspondence, often even sooner than these players will resign or offer draws, knowing that perpetual check is unavoidable should we play another 10 moves past the piece sac against a bare king? How about when the engine reads +25 +30 or +40? So, for the most, correspondence players draw or resign much earlier than one might over the board due to engine and tablebase assistance. On that note, depending on the tournament, players can outright claim wins and draws either on the 6-piece tablebase (always allowed) or the sometimes allowed on an event by event basis the 7-piece tablebase. It is considered out right rude to make a player play all the way to the 6-piece tablebase to claim. I recently claimed one win in a six piece tablebase up an entire piece where my jolly opponent wanted to discuss the game in a post mortem (rarely done in correspondence in general anyways). I declined to even respond to him even though I was already having a very lively and fun post mortem with a Venezuelan on our extremely interesting draw. A worse example is the 92 move game I played with opposite colored bishops where I had two extra pawns. I offered a draw as white and the higher rated player to my lower rated opponent who declined it, forcing me to play to a 7-piece tablebase claim to end the game. This kind of behavior used to be quite rare. In the past, I would say it happened in 1 out of every 100 games… these days it seems to happen in every other game (1/2!). I have seven different opponents right now that are DMD+ against me where the engine reads +148 (or in some cases even sees mate! The 2504 player that complained about my rating earlier also complained someone was DMD+ him… I remarked that I have no less than 7 players DMD+ me and if they would resign? My rating would be about 2450 right which sort of eliminates his claim about our “giant†rating difference). The issue is that due to rating deflation these players need to artificially keep their rating high as long as they can because that’s how they will get their next invite. With the new terrible time control that is not yet Official (although there is a proposal to make it Official: https://www.iccf.com/Proposal.aspx?id=1282), players only need to make a move once every 50 days to pointlessly extend the game. I have a DMD= draw currently going on 16 months now where the player is just moving Kg1 Kf1 Kg1 every 50 days. This time control exasperates the DMD problem. When I contacted ICCF Officials to point out the severity of this problem, I was told that I should report it to the TD on a case by case basis only if it is DMD+ as they will not look at DMD= at all. However, it is usually the TDs that are the biggest offenders (6 of the 7 players described above were TDs). In fact, it is usually the same general casts of characters which allows for an easy black list to be created that bars these players from play until they can fix their atrocious behavior. This behavior needs to be punished. These players need to be reprimanded. In the end, lack of norms, rating deflation and the draw death will not make me quit correspondence chess. It is DMD+/DMD= that will make me quit. This experience is my personal experience with high level correspondence over thirteen years and I would love to hear from other correspondence players concerning these problems.
Vadrya Pokshtya (2022-02-17 08:52:23)
Grand Dice Chess
Hello,
I am the author and inventor of chess variants. My chess variants are published on chessvariants.com and some of them can be played on Game Courier.
I would like to present to you a variant of chess with dice that I invented relatively recently and which can already be played on two sites on the Internet.
Grand Dice Chess
The Rules
The game uses a 12x12 board.
Each player has:
4 Kings
24 Pawns
8 Knights
8 Bishops
8 Rooks
4 Queens
White and black occupy the 1st-6th and 7th-12th ranks, respectively, as shown in the diagram.
Unfortunately I can't post an image here, but you can always find it here:
https://granddicechess.blogspot.com/2022/01/grand-dice-chess.html
https://www.chess.com/blog/Pokshtya/grand-dice-chess-battle
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-variants/grand-dice-chess
White starts the game first.
The game uses four dice.
Opponents make moves alternately, throwing 4 dice. The piece to move is determined by a die:
1 = pawn, 2 = knight, 3 = bishop, 4 = rook, 5 = queen and 6 = king.
The player makes four moves at the same time based on the indications of the dice and has the right to refuse (pass) any move that does not suit him, unless it is a pawn move. Unlike in regular dice chess it's allowable to pass moves. And this rule was already applied about a thousand years ago in old variant of Shatranj (Shatranj al-Mustatîla or Oblong Chess), the Arabic pre-decessor of modern chess. However it's not allowed to pass on pawn-moves, except when they are blocked.
Chess pieces move across the board as they do in ordinary chess - according to the standard rules of move and capture.
The only minor exception is for a pawn that is not allowed to move forward two squares from its starting position.
Upon reaching the last rank, the pawn can be promoted to any piece except the king and itself.
There is no castling, check and checkmate in the game.
The goal of the game is to capture four enemy kings.
The first test tournament was held on the site http://abstractgames.ru/index.php
The tournament is attended by 10 people and I received the most positive feedback from them.
The game has proven itself so well that regular tournaments have already been launched.
Yesterday the game was added to Dagaz server https://games.dtco.ru/map
And it's a great place to test the game in person, as registering on the site is very easy and doesn't require any personal information.
The game turned out to be extremely interesting and exciting, replete with puzzling combinations. Surprisingly, with this size of the board and the number of pieces, the average game lasts no more than 30 turns.
Yeturu Aahlad (2021-04-12 19:10:42)
Poker Rating
At big chess, it is fairly common for one side - typically Black - to be down a pawn early in the game. I have had at least one opponent immediately resign. At Go, a player may blunder in a corner and immediately resign.
On the other hand, I have won many games on time and in many of those cases, the opponent didn't make any moves at all.
Perhaps a subjective challenge deserves a subjective response - I am seeing sound arguments on both sides. Suggestion - if a game concludes under 10 moves, and the winner thinks she has a genuine grievance, she can appeal for the ELO grant and a referee will adjudicate. Herbert's case is very strong. If the losing side didn't make any moves, adjudication need not be allowed, or may be automatically denied. Too many frivolous appeals from a player can lead to disciplinary action including a loss of this privilege. (I don't expect that to happen in this community)
Wilhelm Schuett (2021-04-21 19:26:07)
Thematic tournaments?
Systems of the Alekhine like Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 or 4 Pawns
Herbert Kruse (2021-07-08 19:26:19)
Big Chess theory?
for now i think:
pawn 1
knight 4
bishop 8
rook 12
queen 30
Ilmars Cirulis (2021-10-28 19:09:22)
Big Chess theory?
Maximum amount of pawns to sacrifice for better development is one pawn. :D
Ilmars Cirulis (2021-10-28 19:46:59)
Big Chess theory?
Context: I resigned game with five pawns given away, soon after queen exchange happened. :)
Vadrya Pokshtya (2022-02-19 06:11:11)
Grand Dice Chess
Thank you, Mr. Thibault!
This was facilitated by reducing the distance between the two armies to zero. Each move is a roll of 4 dice or a movement of four pieces. As soon as the pawn chain is opened, events develop at lightning speed. It is also interesting that the right of the first move is not an advantage here for the beginning side. The first games in the test tournament on one of the Russian gaming sites showed this. The balance of white and black victories is kept strictly around 50%. The game turned out to be one of the most strategic among all dice chess variants.
You can try playing against the AI ​​here
https://glukkazan.github.io/checkmate/grand-dice-chess.htm?fbclid=IwAR1Tt6sFmrK8KYRxwPPZJnrGujGss7to2jzdV8GxSons7Pmjdk7udHoJ0PA
This is a direct link to the game with the bot. Registration is not required. The bot is very weak but perfect for understanding the game.
Mr. Thibault, I would be glad if you would consider the possibility of holding a test tournament on your site. It would be interesting to see how many people would take part and what would be their opinion about the game. In any case, everyone would get an unforgettable experience.
Since I am doing this for the game and not for the money, you are free to dispose of Grand Dice Chess as you see fit on your site.
Thank you!
Herbert Kruse (2023-11-17 08:00:18)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
btw, the palestinian have rich friends, who could use their money to make their lifes better, but the use it for weapons and make the people their pawn sacrifice to destroy israel und jews at all
and i must say, that in my opinion netanyahu should be in prison for his corruption and try to weaken the democraty, which obvioulsly a lot of israelis think too as u could see in the big protest month ago.
Vadrya Pokshtya (2023-11-17 21:36:46)
Battle of Kings
On average, a game lasts 70-80 moves. This is provided that the players understand what they are doing. Otherwise the game may end quickly.
Since, unlike ordinary chess, the board does not become empty as events develop on the board, but on the contrary, the evolution of chess pieces pushes towards the collapse of the entire system, its finitude is obvious. The spawning process cannot last forever - everything is limited by the 8x8 chessboard.
Scott Ligon (2024-01-12 22:51:02)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
For the 6 lines I posted, those eval depths are, in order:
46, 47, 45, 46, 45, 43.
For the line with the highest eval of +0.80, the win percentage for white is given as 27.4%, so further analysis might be warranted but that's where I left it. My understanding is that Stockfish 16 changed the semantics of the numeric evaluations. An eval of +1.0 used to mean white had a one pawn advantage (in some very abstract sense), but now +1.0 is supposed to correlate with a 50% probability that white has an objectively winning position.
Ilmars Cirulis (2024-07-09 20:13:02)
Big Chess theory?
Big Chess endgames with pawns and knights are from outer space, imho. :) I can't say that I understand them.
There are 340 results for pawn in wikichess.
Francisco Pessoa (2528)
e4
King's Pawn Game refers to any chess opening where White opens with 1.e4, the most popular of the twenty possible opening moves. Since nearly all of these openings have names of their own, the term "King's Pawn Game", unlike Queen's Pawn Game is rarely used to describe the opening of the game.
King's Pawn Games are further classified by whether Black responds with 1...e5 or not.
Openings beginning with 1.e4 e5 are called Double King's Pawn Games (or Openings), Symmetrical King's Pawn Games (or Openings), or Open Games—these terms are equivalent. Openings where Black responds to 1.e4 with a move other than 1...e5 are called Asymmetrical King's Pawn Games (or Openings) or Semi-open Games.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Mark Noble, Francisco Pessoa
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
d4
Queen's Pawn Game refer to any chess opening which starts with 1.d4, the second most popular opening move, but is now usually used to describe openings where White opens with 1.d4 but does not follow through with an early pawn advance to c4. Some of these openings have individual names as well.
In the 1800s and early 1900s, 1.e4 was by far the most common opening move by White, while the different openings starting with 1.d4 were considered somewhat unusual and therefore classed together as "Queen's Pawn Game".
As the merits of 1.d4 started to be explored it was the Queen's Gambit which was played most often; more popular than all other 1.d4 openings combined. The term "Queen's Pawn Game" was then narrowed down to any opening with 1.d4 which was not a Queen's Gambit. Eventually, through the efforts of the hypermodernists, the various Indian Defences, such as the King's Indian, Nimzo-Indian and Queen's Indian, became more popular, and as these openings were named, the term "Queen's Pawn Game" narrowed further.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
e4 c5
The Sicilian Defence is a chess opening which begins with 1.e4 c5
This is the most popular response to 1.e4 at the master level. Black immediately fights for the centre, but by attacking from the c-file (instead of mirroring White's move) he creates an asymmetrical position that leads to complicated situations. Typically, White has the initiative on the kingside while Black obtains counterplay on the queenside, particularly on the c-file after the exchange of Black's c-pawn for White's d-pawn.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
Nf3
The Réti Opening (also called the King's Knight Opening) is a chess opening characterized by the opening move 1.Nf3
It is named after Richard Réti, a Czechoslovakian chess player who used it to defeat the world champion José Raúl Capablanca in 1924.
According to ChessBase, out of the twenty possible opening moves, 1.Nf3 ranks third in popularity. It develops the knight to a good square and prepares for a quick castling. White maintains flexibility by not committing to a particular central pawn structure, while waiting to see what Black will do. The slight drawback to the move is that it blocks the f-pawn. This is not a problem if White does not intend to move it in the near future, but it rules out the possibility of playing systems with f3 and Nge2, which is a fairly popular setup against the King's Indian.
Usually 1.Nf3 will transpose into an opening with 1.d4, such as the King's Indian or the Queen's Gambit. If White follows up with an early c4 a transposition to the English Opening may be reached. Even the Sicilian Defense may be reached if the game opens 1.Nf3 c5 2.e4.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 57%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 Nf3
The main line, which leads to all popular variants such as Najdorf, Dragon, Sveshnikov, Scheveningen, Richter-Rauzer... The aim is to support d4 pawn advance as a third move. After 3. ... cxd4 white could play 4.Nxd4, giving a good square to the knight and avoiding to the queen to be exposed too early at the center of the board.
According to Chessbase, 2.Nf3 is played at nearly 85% cases, giving 57% white chances.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3
King's knight opening is prefered at 90% cases.
The knight simply attacks black's e5 pawn, that is not protected yet and controls d4 and e5 squares.
By far the most played continuation is the King's Pawn Game 2...Nc6, and it is sub-divided into many familiar opening names like Ruy Lopez. Petrov's Defense, 2...Nf6, and the Philidor Defense, 2...d6, are also familiar opening names.
Some less familiar continuations of the King's Knight Opening include:
- Gunderam Defense 2...Qe7
- Greco Defense 2...Qf6
- Damiano Defense 2...f6 ?
- Elephant Gambit 2...d5
- Latvian Gambit 2...f5
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Bc4
The Bishop's Opening is one of the oldest openings to be analyzed; it was studied by Lucena and Ruy Lopez. Later it was played by Philidor. Larsen was one of the few grandmasters to play it often, after first using it at the 1964 Interzonal Tournament. Although the Bishop's Opening is uncommon today, it has been used occasionally as a surprise by players such as Kasparov and Nunn.
White attacks Black's f7-square and prevents Black from advancing his d-pawn to d5. By ignoring the beginner's rule, "develop knights before bishops", White leaves his f-pawn unblocked allowing the possibility of playing f4. This gives the Bishop's Opening an affinity to the King's Gambit and the Vienna Game, two openings that share this characteristic. In fact, the Bishop's Opening can transpose into the King's Gambit or the Vienna Game, and transpositions into Giuoco Piano and Two Knights Defense and other openings are also possible. In particular, White should remain alert for any chance to transpose into a favorable variation of the King's Gambit, but with careful play Black can avoid this danger.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4
King's gambit was the most popular opening in the 19th century. White offers a pawn to divert Black's e-pawn and build a full center with d2-d4. In order to hold the extra pawn, Black will have to spend time weakening his kingside with moves like g7-g5. It is now rarely seen at the master level, it being generally thought that Black can obtain a reasonable position either by giving back the gambitted pawn at a later time or holding on to it and consolidating defensively.
Black must decide whether or not to accept the gambit. Since White cannot easily regain the pawn if Black accepts, the King's Gambit Accepted is the most common.
According to Chessbase and correspondence chess statistics, white chances are about 54%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2512)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6
2. ... Nc6 is by far the most common and logical response to 2.Nf3, played at about 85% cases. The knight protects black's e5 pawn and controls center squares.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5
The Ruy Lopez, generally called the Spanish Game outside of English speaking countries, is named after the 16th century Spanish priest Rúy López de Segura. He made a systematic study of this and other openings in the 150-page book on chess Libro del Ajedrez written in 1561 (which also included some more esoteric and what some would consider unfair suggestions, such as setting up the board so the sun shines in one's opponent's eyes).
However, although it is named after him, this particular opening was known earlier; it is included in the Göttingen manuscript, which dates from 1490. Popular use of the Ruy Lopez opening did not develop, however, until the mid-1800s when Jaenisch, a Russian theoretician, "rediscovered" its potential.
The opening is still in active use as the double king's pawn opening most commonly used in master play; it has been adopted by almost all players at some point in their careers and many play it from both the white and black sides.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 d5
Queen's pawn opening is the symmetrical response to 1.d4, leading to a more passive play than 1. ... Nf6, particularly after second white move 2.c4 named as Queen's gambit.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 42%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 d5 c4
The Queen's Gambit is one of the oldest known chess openings, as Lucena wrote about it in 1497 and it is mentioned in an earlier manuscript in Göttingen. During the early period of modern chess queen pawn openings were not in fashion, and the Queen's Gambit did not become common until the 1873 tournament in Vienna.
As Steinitz and Tarrasch developed chess theory and increased the appreciation of positional play, the Queen's Gambit grew more popular. It reached its peak popularity in the 1920s and 1930s, and was played in 32 out of 34 games in the 1934 World Chess Championship.
Since then Black has increasingly moved away from symmetrical openings, tending to use the Indian defences to combat queen pawn openings. The Queen's Gambit is still frequently played, however, and it remains an important part of many grandmasters' opening repertoires.
With 2.c4, White threatens to exchange a wing pawn (the c-pawn) for a center pawn (Black's d-pawn) and dominate the center with e2-e4. This is not a true gambit since if Black accepts the pawn he cannot expect to keep it.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Sebastien Marez (2377)
d4 d5 c4 c6
The Slav is one of the primary defenses to the Queen's Gambit. Although it was analyzed as early as 1590, it wasn't until the 1920s that it started to be explored extensively. Many masters of Slavic descent helped develop the theory of this opening, including Alapin, Alekhine, Bogoljubov, and Vidmar.
The Slav received an exhaustive test during the two Alekhine–Euwe World Championship matches in 1935 and 1937. Played by 11 of the first 13 world champions, this defense was particularly favored by Euwe, Botvinnik, and Smyslov. More recently the Slav has been adopted by Anand, Ivanchuk, Lautier, Short, and other top grandmasters. Today the theory of the Slav is very extensive and well developed.
Black faces three major problems in many variations of the Queen's Gambit Declined (QGD).
- Development of the Black queen bishop is difficult, as it is often blocked by ...e6.
- The pawn structure offers White targets, especially the possibility of a minority attack on the queenside in the Exchange variation of the QGD.
- White often plays Bg5 to pin the black king knight on f6 against the black queen, and unpinning it is awkward for Black.
The Slav addresses all of these problems. Black's queen bishop is unblocked, the pawn structure remains balanced, and the move Bg5 is not yet threatening as the unmoved black pawn on e7 prevents the pin. Also, if Black later takes the gambit pawn with ...dxc4, the support provided by the pawn on c6 allows ...b5 which may threaten to keep the gambit pawn or to drive away a white piece that has captured it, gaining Black a tempo for queenside expansion.
On the other side, Black usually won't be able to develop the queen bishop without first giving up the center with ...dxc4, and moving this bishop may leave the Black queenside weak. White will try to dominate the center with e2-e4.
According to Chessbase, Black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Sebastien Marez
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4
The acceptation of the king's gambit seems to be the best move. It is now rarely seen at the master level, it being generally thought that Black can obtain a reasonable position either by giving back the gambitted pawn at a later time or holding on to it and consolidating defensively.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 51%
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange, Thibault de Vassal
Tryfon Gavriel (2164)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4
By far the most popular move, in order to take the control of the d4-square.
The change in pawn structure after cxd4 has a profound effect on the plans for both sides. Black in the Siclian defence will often aim to exploit the semi-open c file.
============
Contributors : Julien Coll, Tryfon Gavriel
Julien Coll (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4
Black permits the free installation of a knight in d4 but in return he can use the semi-open c-file and he has more pawns to use than white for a possible fight for centre control.
============
Contributors : Julien Coll
Benjamin Block (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6
simultaneously, it develops the knight and threatens the e-pawn.
============
Contributors : Julien Coll, Benjamin Block
Alan Vera (1454)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3
a natural move, defending the e-pawn and developing one knight.
============
Contributors : Julien Coll, Alan Vera
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
c4
The English Opening is the fourth most popular opening move in chess. White begins the fight for the center by staking a claim to the d5 square. Common responses are 1...e5 (which can lead to positions similar to the Sicilian Defence but with opposite colors), 1...c5 (the Symmetrical Variation), and 1...Nf6. Also perfectly playable are 1...e6 (often leading to a Queen's Gambit Declined after 2.d4 d5) and 1...c6 (often leading to a Slav Defence after 2.d4 d5, a Caro-Kann Defence after 2.e4 d5, or a Reti Opening after 2.Nf3 d5 3.b3).
The English is a very flexible opening. Although many lines of the English have a distinct character, it often transposes into other openings. If White plays an early d4, the game will usually transpose into either the Queen's Gambit or an Indian defence.
The English derives its name from the English (unofficial) world champion, Howard Staunton, who played it during his 1843 match with Amant. It fell out of favor (the opening was notably disdained by Morphy), but is now recognized as a solid opening that may be used to reach both classical and hypermodern positions. Botvinnik, Karpov, and Kasparov all employed it during their world championship matches. Bobby Fischer created a stir when he switched to it from the King's Pawn against Boris Spassky in 1972.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Daniel Barrish (2000)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6
Here we've reached the initial position of the famous Sicilian Dragon. For those who are interested in astronomy, its name refers to the black pawn structure d6-e7-f7-g6-h7, which has resemblance with the Dragon Constellation.
Usually White has (generally speaking, of course) two ways at his disposal:
-quiet positional play by castling short, in order to put some positional pressure thanks to his slight space advantage.
-sharp play by castling long, and simultaneous king's attack for both sides, which often leads to real bloodbaths.
============
There are 2 main ways for white to play here: The "passive" classical and minor variations and the aggresive yugoslav attack. the yugoslav has been proven much better
Contributors : Julien Coll, Daniel Barrish
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 Nf6
Alekhine's Defence is named after Alexander Alekhine who first used it in two games in the 1921 Budapest tournament: one against Andre Steiner (which he won) and the other against Fritz Sämisch (which he drew). Another early exponent of the defence was Ernst Grünfeld. The opening is considered hypermodern because Black provokes White to attack Black's knight and occupy the centre with his pawns, hoping to prove that White's imposing mass of pawns in the centre (which often includes pawns on c4, d4, e5, and f4) is in fact weak.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 39%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4
The Nimzo-Indian Defence is a hypermodern opening, developed by Grandmaster Aaron Nimzowitsch who introduced it to master-level chess in the early 20th century. Unlike most Indian openings the Nimzo-Indian does not involve an immediate fianchetto, although Black often follows up with ...b6 and ...Bb7. By pinning White's knight Black prevents the threatened 4.e4 and seeks to inflict doubled pawns on White. White will attempt to create a pawn centre and develop his pieces to prepare for an assault on the Black position.
According to Chessbase, black chances are about 43%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nf3 b6
Since White's third move 3.Nf3, a move commonly played to avoid the Nimzo-Indian Defence, does not threaten to occupy the centre with 4.e4, Black has the option of playing 3...b6, called Queen's Indian Defense.
The play in the Queen's Indian is similar to that of the Nimzo-Indian. The opening is considered a hypermodern one, since Black does not strive to occupy the centre with his pawns immediately. Instead he intends to fianchetto his queen's bishop and put pressure on the e4-square in order to prevent White from occupying that square. With the White centre restrained Black intends to attack it. As in most other hypermodern openings, White will attempt to solidify his centre, prove that it is strong, not weak, and use his advantage in space to crush Black.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
g3
The King's Indian Attack (KIA) can be reached by different routes (usually by 1.e4, 1.Nf3 or 1.g3). Often the KIA is reached via 1.e4 followed by d3, Nd2, Ngf3, g3, Bg2, and 0-0, an example being 1.e4 e6 2.d3 (this is possible against almost any opening move -- 1...c6, 1...c5, etc.) d5 3.Nd2 followed by Ngf3, etc.
Since the KIA is a closed, strategic opening choice, many 1.e4 players prefer to play sharper, more open variations. When played after 1.e4, the KIA is most often used against the semi-open defences where Black responds asymmetrically to e4, such as the French Defence, Sicilian Defence, Caro-Kann Defence, etc. The KIA is less often played against 1.e4 e5, where most White players prefer to play more aggressive lines such as the Ruy Lopez.
The King's Indian attack is considered to be one of the most solid opening choices for White, but not very aggressive. It is similar to the King's Indian Defense with colors reversed. White's plan is usually to either push the d and e pawns up a rank as the game progresses in order to bind the opponent. If Black castles king-side, White often follows up with h4 and a king-side pawn storm, placing his king at h1 if needed. If Black castles queen-side, White can move his knight to c4 and attack on the queen-side.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5
The Giuoco Piano (Italian: "quiet game"), is the oldest recorded opening. The Portuguese Damiano played it at the beginning of the 15th century and the Italian Greco played it at the beginning of the 16th century. Because of Greco's work on the opening, it is sometimes called the Italian Game, although that term is also used more generally to describe the position after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4. The Giuoco Piano was popular through the 19th century, but modern refinements in defensive play have led most chess masters towards openings like the Ruy Lopez that offer White greater chances for long term initiative.
White's "Italian bishop" at c4 prevents Black from advancing in the center with ...d5 and attacks the vulnerable f7 square. White plans to dominate the center with d2-d4 and to attack the Black king. Black aims to free his game by exchanging pieces and playing the pawn break ...d5, or to hold his center pawn at e5.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 46%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 b4
The gambit is named after Captain William Davies Evans, the first player known to have employed it. The first game with the opening is considered to be Evans - McDonnell, London 1827, although in that game a slightly different move order was tried (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O d6 and only now 5. b4). The gambit became very popular shortly after that, being employed a number of times in the series of games between McDonnell and Louis de la Bourdonnais in 1834. Players such as Adolf Anderssen, Paul Morphy and Mikhail Chigorin subsequently took it up. It was out of favour for much of the 20th century, although John Nunn and Jan Timman played some games with it in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and in the 1990s Garry Kasparov used it in a few of his games (notably a famous 25-move win against Viswanathan Anand in Riga, 1995), which prompted a brief revival of interest in it.
The Evans Gambit is basically an aggressive variant of the Giuoco Piano, which normally continues with the positional moves 4. c3 or 4. d3. The idea behind the move 4. b4 is to give up a pawn in order to secure a strong centre and bear down on Black's weak-point, f7. Ideas based on Ba3, preventing black from castling, are also often in the air. The most obvious and most usual way for Black to meet the gambit is to accept it with 4... Bxb4, after which White plays 5. c3 and Black usually follows up with 5... Ba5 (5... Be7 and, less often 5... Bc5 and 5... Bd6 are also played). White usually follows up with 6. d4.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Julien Coll (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3
Here begins the Yugoslav Attack, a very rich way of fighting against the big dragon. Usually White castles queenside and launches a strong attack by pushing his g (g4) and h-pawns (h4-h5) and exchanging the dark-squared bishops (Qd2-Bh6), whereas Black has counterplay with an attack against White's long castle thanks to the c-file, manoeuvres like ...Nc6-e5-c4, pawn pushes like ...b5-b4, ...a5-a4. This kind of game is rarely annoying and very often plenty of sacrifices (ex. sacrifices of the quality in c3 (for Black) and in h5 (for White) are both typical) White should be careful with the g4-square if he plans to castle queenside quickly for an exciting game. Move order is quite important here.
============
Contributors : Julien Coll
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 d5
The Abbazia Defense has much the same idea as the Falkbeer Counter-Gambit, and can in fact be reached by transposition from it, e.g. 2.f4 d5 3.exd5 exf4. Black's forward pawn is less well placed on f4 than on e4, but material is even.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7
The Cunningham Defense is black's most aggressive option; it can permanently prevent white from castling after 4.Bc4 Bh4+ 5.Kf1 (else the wild Bertin Gambit, or Three Pawns' Gambit 5.g3 fxg3 6.0-0 gxh2+ 7.Kh1.) However, nowadays it is more common for black to simply play 4. ..Nf6 5.e5 Ng4, the Modern Cunningham.
The first "best game" (Game 156 : Hrubaru [1400] - Berthelot [1420]) voted by FICGS players, followed this opening, not played anymore at a master level.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
David Grosdemange (1912)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nf6 Nxe5
this is the most played move on this position . black don't protect his e5 pawn , so white take it .
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 d4
This move usually leads to the Smith-Morra Gambit (or simply Morra Gambit). After 2. ... cxd4, White can develop his pieces quickly, but have to choose between giving a pawn more (3.c3) for activity, or taking back with the queen (3.Qxd4), exposing early the queen at the center of the board.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 d4 cxd4 c3
The Morra Gambit is an interesting opening against the Sicilian Defence. It is not common in Grandmaster games or correspondence chess, but at club level chess it is an excellent weapon.
White sacrifices a pawn to develop quickly and create attacking chances. In exchange for the gambit pawn, White has a piece developed and a pawn in the center, while Black has nothing but an empty space on c7.
If black wants to refuse the gambit, he can do so with 3... d5 or 3... Nf6, both of which transpose to the Alapin variation of the Sicilian (usually introduced by the move order 1.e4 c5 2.c3). Alternatively, 3... d6 is the Smith-Morra declined proper, and leads to unique lines.
Some interesting games played on FICGS by David Angeli : Game 563, Game 565 (accepted gambit) or Game 555 (declined, with 3. ... d5).
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
David Grosdemange (1912)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5
here begins the benoni defense . c5 can also be played at first .
black attacks the white d4-pawn , and "force" d5 , then this pawn is the black's target ( with Cf6 , e6 for example ) .
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Larry Wolfley (2133)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c4
White plays for a Maroczy bind. White will play d4 if possible in the next few moves, and after ..cxd4 Nxd4 the so-called Maroczy bind pawn structure will have arisen.
============
Contributors : Larry Wolfley
David Grosdemange (1912)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 g6 c4 Nf6
the normal move .
black attacks the white e4 pawn .
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 d5 Nf3
Queen's pawn game with 2.Nf3
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
Nf3 d5
Now White can choose to transpose to a Queen's pawn game or to play hypermodern (not to fight for the center in the opening).
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 Nf3
The queen's pawn game.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 55%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3
The most common move. The knight comes to his best square and prepares e4 pawn advance.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 58%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5
The Grünfeld Defence is named after Ernst Grünfeld, the player who first employed the defence in the 1920s. The defence was later adopted by a number of prominent players, including Vasily Smyslov, Viktor Korchnoi and Bobby Fischer. Garry Kasparov has often used the defence, including in his World Championship matches against Anatoly Karpov in 1986, 1987 and 1990, and Vladimir Kramnik in 2000. In more recent years it has been regularly employed by Loek Van Wely, Peter Svidler and Luke McShane among others.
The opening relies on one of the main principles of the hypermodern school, which was coming to the fore in the 1920s - that a large pawn centre could be a liability rather than an asset. This idea is seen most clearly in the Exchange Variation of the defence: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.e4. Now White has an imposing looking centre - and the main continuation 5...Nxc3 bxc3 strengthens it still further. Black generally attack's White's centre with ...c5 and ...Bg7, often followed by moves like ...cxd4, ...Bg4, and ...Nc6. White often uses his big centre to launch an attack against Black's king, which generally ends up on g8 after Black castles king-side.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 Bg7 e4 d6 f4
The four pawns attack is a sharp line in which White tries to overrun Black with his center pawns. Such a strategy entails considerable risk, and analysis constantly shifts back and forth as to its validity. The pawn on f4 prevents Black's usual e5 break, but Black can get counterplay with a c5 break instead. The main line four pawns position can also be reached from a Sicilian move order.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 61% , but correspondence chess statistics give no more than 51%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 b4
Wing Gambit is the name given to the branches of several openings in which one player gambits a wing pawn, usually the b pawn).
Most common is the Wing Gambit in the Sicilian Defence. After Black takes with 2...cxb4, the usual continuation is 3.a3 bxa3 (3...d5 is also possible). It is also possible to decline (or at least delay acceptance of) the gambit with 2...d5.
For his pawn, White gets quicker development and a central advantage, but it is not generally considered one of White's better choices against the Sicilian, and is virtually never seen at the professional level (amongst amateurs it is more common, though still not so popular as other systems).
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
d4 Nf6 Bg5
The Trompowski attack is named after the one-time Brazilian champion Octavio Siqueiro F. Trompowski (1897–1984) who played it in the 1930s and 1940s.
With the second move, White is intending to exchange his bishop for Black's knight inflicting doubled pawns upon Black in the process. This is not a lethal threat, Black can choose to fall in with White's plan.
After 1.d4 Nf6, the Trompowski is a popular alternative to the more common 2.c4 and 2.Nf3 lines. By playing 2.Bg5, White avoids the immense opening theory of various Indian Defences like the Queen's Indian and the King's Indian. Some of the grandmasters who often play the Trompowski are Julian Hodgson and Antoaneta Stefanova.
According to Chessbase, white chances are about 56%
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
David Grosdemange (1912)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 cxb5 a6 Nc3 axb5 e4 b4 Nb5 Nxe4
the Nb5 protects the e-pawn :)
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Larry Wolfley (2133)
e4 c5 Nf3 a6 c4 e6
Now, when White plays d4, Black will often respond with cxd4 Nxd4 followed by Bb4, with some pressure on the e4 pawn, and the potential positional threat of Bxc3.
============
Contributors : Larry Wolfley
David Grosdemange (1912)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 c5
black attack the d4 pawn .
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Thibault de Vassal (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6
The main move. Black doesn't fear the "loss" of the e5 pawn : 3.Bxc6 dxc6! 4.Nxe5?! because of ..Qd4! with equallity at worst.
Morphy Defence, by far the most commonly played Black third move which "puts the question" to the white bishop. White has only two good options, 4.Bxc6 or 4.Ba4. The main point to 3...a6 is that after the common retreat 4.Ba4, Black will have the possibility of breaking the pin on his queen knight by playing ...b5. In fact, White must take some care to not fall into the Noah's Ark Trap in which Black traps White's king bishop on the b3-square with a ...a6, ...b5, and ...c4 pawn advance on the queenside.
============
Contributors : Pablo Schmid, Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 Bg5
Richter-Rauzer opening, caracterized by last move 6.Bg5, was introduced by the German Master, Kurt Richter. The idea was to force an immediate 6....e6 or risk doubled king-pawns. At this point, Vsevolod Rauzer contributed the move, 7.Qd2. Here, White has an advantage in space and development is nearly complete while Black has a better pawn structure.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Larry Wolfley (2133)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 cxb5 a6 b6
White declines the gambit pawn. One strategy for White against routine development by Black (i.e. d6/g6/Bg7); is to maneuver the King knight to c4, bishop to f4 and prepare e5.
============
Contributors : Larry Wolfley
David Grosdemange (1912)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 cxb5 a6 b6 e6
black counter-attacks on the white central pawn .
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Thibault de Vassal (2425)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 Nf6
The Berlin Defence is logical and solid, although it can be hard for Black to generate winning chances. Arthur Bisguier played this line for decades, and it was later taken up by Alexei Shirov and other young grandmasters. Vladimir Kramnik used the Berlin Defence as a drawing variation against Garry Kasparov in their 2000 World Championship match.
After 4.0-0, Black can play either the solid 4...Nxe4 or the more combative 4...Bc5. After 4...Nxe4 5.d4 (5.Re1 Nd6 6.Nxe5 is also reasonable) Nd6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.dxe5 Nf5 8.Qxd8+ (8.Qe2?! Nd4! 9.Nxd4 Qxd4 favors Black. After 10.Rd1, Bg4!? 11.Rxd4 Bxe2 gives Black a pleasant endgame.) Kxd8 White is usually considered to have a small advantage in light of his somewhat better pawn structure and Black's awkwardly placed king, but Black, with a solid position and the bishop pair, has excellent drawing chances.
============
Contributors : Julien Baudement, Tim Bredernitz, Thibault de Vassal
Rémi Marois (1500)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6
This variation is know as the Sicilian poisonned pawn and has been popularized by the World Chess Champion Bobby Fischer.
============
Contributors : Rémi Marois
Rémi Marois (1500)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2
The most popular move. The object is to challenge black's idea to take the b2 pawn.
============
Contributors : Rémi Marois
Premraj Natarajan (1800)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2
When black captures b2 pawn with the queen its called the poisoned pawn and hence white is supposed to win because of this early sacrifice.
This stage its still I believe is unclear.
============
Contributors : Rémi Marois, Premraj Natarajan
Tim Bredernitz (1100)
e4 e5 Qh5
This is called the Parham Attack. It's used commonly in lower scholastic tournaments. If used against a player who has the ability to see multiple moves ahead, however, the early over-development of the Queen will result in either the loss of the white Queen, or the loss of a tempo. The move is deceiving, because white is actually putting the e5 pawn under attack. If black counters by attacking the queen with 2. ... g6?, they lose a rook a rook to 3.Qxe5+. The most effective way to counter against this attack is to protect the e5 pawn. After the King pawn is protected, white's queen is left overdeveloped and subject to attack. Overall, the Parham Attack is only effective against beginning chess players.
============
Contributors : Tim Bredernitz
Tim Bredernitz (1100)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 d6
A great way to combat the Ruy Lopez. It takes the punch out of it, because it protects the king pawn. There would now be no advantage to trading the bishop for the black knight, because the e pawn is still protected.
============
Contributors : Tim Bredernitz
Adrian Tan (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6
The Ruy Lopez exchange, White gives up the advantage of the bishop pair, but gains compensation by damaging black's pawn structure.
White has a long range plan of creating an endgame where he is able to profit from a king side majority while Black is unable to due to the doubled pawn on the Queen's side.
Traditionally, this opening has not being very popular at the top level, but Fischer had some success with it in the 60s.
Note: White doesn't actually win the e pawn with this move because dxc6 Nxe5 Qd4 recovers the pawn.
============
Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, Adrian Tan
David Grosdemange (1912)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6
There is a question as to which pawn you should take the bishop with. Let me clear this up. White will now take the e pawn.
* white won't take the e-pawn (because of Qd4!-/+) , but white has a majority on the king-site (4 against 3) , when black's majority on queen-side isn't really effective , because of the doubled pawns .
============
Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, David Grosdemange
David Grosdemange (1912)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 Nxe5
It now looks like white has succeeded in trading a bishop for a knight and a pawn, along with control of the center. There is, however, a great equalizer for this attack. Qd4.
* taking the e-pawn is a good black move . white will lose the pawn , and there no more compensation for the pair of bishops .
============
Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, David Grosdemange
Adrian Tan (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 Nxe5 Qd4
White is now forced to return the pawn.
After Nf3 Qxe4+ Qe2 Qxe2+ Kxe2, White has no compensation for the bishop pair. Black is at least equal or better.
There are more promising lines for White.
============
Contributors : Tim Bredernitz, Adrian Tan
David Grosdemange (1912)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 O-O
the favourite move of fischer .
here , white really threatens the e5-pawn . (Nxe5 Qd4 Nf3 Qxe4 Te1 +-)
============
Contributors : David Grosdemange
Sandor Porkolab (2269)
e4 d5
One of the oldest recorded openings, first recorded as being played between Francesco di Castellvi and Narciso Vinyoles in Valencia in 1475, and being mentioned by Lucena in 1497. It and the French Defense are the oldest asymmetric defenses to 1.e4.
It is a playable, underrated defence that can lead to equality for black. White almost always takes the pawn. Other alternatives are 2. Nc3!?, leading to the Dunst opening, 2. d4!?, leading to the Blackmar-Deimer gambit, and 2. e5?!, leading to unique positions where black can easily equalise. After 2. exd5, there are two very different ways of playing the defence, 2...Nf6 and 2...Qxd5.
1.e4 d5 2.e5!? is also an option - going to French/CaroCann Lines - preventing the skandinawian...
============
Contributors : Adam Domurad, Sandor Porkolab
Max Rau-Chaplin (1600)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6
The idea behind Nf6 is that black can take back the pawn the next turn with the knight and not lose tempo by having his queen attacked. If white tries to hold onto the pawn with 3. c4, black has 3...c6! offering a pawn for a significant lead in development (Panov-Botvinnik atack). Best for white is to decline the pawn and transpose to the Caro-Kann defence with 4.d4.
============
Contributors : Adam Domurad, Max Rau-Chaplin
Amir Bagheri (2513)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5
White plays an early Bb5, usually with the intention of trading it for the c6-knight and giving Black doubled pawns. Blacks most usual continuation is to quickly developed by 3...g6, although moves like 3...Qc7, 3...Qb6 and 3...e6 are also possible.
============
Contributors : Amir Bagheri
Roger Weber (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 d6 d4 Bg4
A good move to keep control of the center and counter white's advancement of the queen's pawn.
============
Contributors : Roger Weber
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 d6
The Pirc Defence, sometimes known as the Ufimtsev Defence.
Amir agheri : When it comes to chess openings, I prefer to play less popular, less traveled lines. For almost two decades, I have mostly played the Queen pawn Opening, the Dutch Defense, and the French Defense, which are all well known, solid openings sane opening choices. However, I must confess I have a passion for opening study and experimenting. Recently I have been experimenting with the Balogh Counter Gambit against 1.e4.
Did he say the Balogh Counter Gambit?? What is that?
Well, play starts out like a Pirc Defense, 1.e4 d6 2.d4 and now instead of 2…Nf6, Black plays the shocking 2…f5!?
============
Contributors : Amir Bagheri, Thibault de Vassal
Mike Hoogland (1760)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 d4
An old move, played before Fischer's 0-0. After the pawn exchange, White creates a favourable endgame pawn structure, given his 4-3 pawn majority on the Kingside. Black is unable to exploit his Queenside majority because of the doubled pawn. However in practise, Black is able to to create sufficient counterplay with his bishop pair to hold the balance.
============
Actually, I think this is a bad move. After 0-0 black will have to defend the pawn on e5. 6. Nxe5, Qd4. 7. Nf3, Qxe4 does not work anymore for black, because white can play his rook to e1 and win the queen (the queen is pinned).
Therefore, black usually defends the pawn with f6. f6 is not very useful however, and black would rather have made another move, if he could have done so. Qd6 and Qf6 are also good moves that defend the pawn on e5. However, after 6. d4, exd4 7. Qxd4, Qxd4 black will have lost a tempo in comparison to this variant.
Contributors : Adrian Tan, Mike Hoogland
Adrian Tan (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 c3 Nf6
A logical response, black strikes back at the center, now that the natural Nc3 isn't available to defend the e pawn.
============
Contributors : Adrian Tan
Richard Hendricks (1459)
e4 c5 Nc3 e6
Black pushes his King's Pawn out to e6, planning 3...d5.
============
Contributors : Richard Hendricks
Pablo Schmid (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bd5 Rf8
Threatening to regain the pawn with 9..Bxf2 10.Kxf2 Nxd5, or with 9..Nxd5 first.
============
Contributors : Pablo Schmid
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6
This poor looking defense is know as damiano defense. It is far from being refuted, if played correctly, hoverer, this defense is very sharp and lack attacking chance, black doesn't have very good compensation for a pawn.
If played to perfection, it is know as draw, but player avoids it as it is very sharp, one mistake for black and it is over.
2 F6 as many disvatage, is open the a2-68 diagonal, it breaks black short castle. It takes ways the f6 square for the knight and the queen. It also open the very dengerous h5-e8 diagonal, all this to protect a pawn, this is a very dangerous opening. It should called Damiano Gambit. Should be a draw, even if your opponent take the e5 pawn, as 2... f6 isn't an instant protection.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4
A coorect move, Likein the king gambit, White make it difficult for black to regain the pawn and treath to push g5.
Blakc must do something about it very soon.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Thibault de Vassal (2424)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 c3
The Göring Gambit is a relative of the Danish Gambit that starts with 4.c3. Now transposing into the Danish with 4...d5 equalizes for Black, but he can also accept the pawn with 4...dxc3. White can then transpose into the Danish by offering a second pawn with 5.Bc4. If Black accepts the second pawn with 5...cxb2 6.Bxb2 d6, he can defend successfully after either 7.Qb3 Qd7 or 7.0-0 Be6 8.Bxe6 fxe6 9.Qb3 Qd7. To remain in the Göring proper, White recaptures with his knight with 5.Nxc3 and Black can defend with 5...Bb4 6.Bc4 d6.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2407)
e4 Nc6
The Nimzowitsch or Fischer Defense.
This is a somewhat unusual chess opening and an example of hypermodern chess where Black invites White to occupy the centre of the board at an early stage with pawns. Black's intent is to block or otherwise restrain White's central pawns and, if allowed to do so by inaccurate play by White, eventually undermine the White pawn center by well-timed pawn advances of his own or by attacking the White pieces defending the centre.
============
Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Thibault de Vassal
Adam Goodwin (1225)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1
Protects the e4-pawn and forces black's next move.
============
Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Adam Goodwin
Bruno Bragato (1500)
e4 e6 d4 d5 Nd2
The Tarrasch Variation is named after Siegbert Tarrasch. This move was particularly popular during the late 1970s and early 1980s when Anatoly Karpov used it to great effect. It is still played today by players seeking a small, safe advantage.
The move differs from 3.Nc3 in several respects: it doesn't block the path of White's c pawn, which means he can play c3 at some stage to support the d4 pawn; and it avoids the Winawer Variation because 3...Bb4 can be met with 4.c3 when Black has wasted a move (he has to retreat his bishop).
============
Contributors : Dirk Jan Van Dijl, Bruno Bragato
Peter Marriott (1816)
g4
Grob's Attack named after Swiss IM Henri Grob (1904-74).
White intends to put pressure along the h1-a8 diagonal while also threatening to launch a Kingside pawn storm.
The opening is considered inferior for White (-0.32 at this stage of analysis 29/06/2008), but it avoids endless theoretical discussions and cannot be avoided by Black. The positions are often highly tactical and natural play by Black may lead him into several traps.
Evaluation notes from Kjetil Prestesaeter:
I have added all known named lines plus other lines favored by Rybka (Rybka 2.3 mp 32-bit, 17ply). Many of the named lines seem to be more romantic than strong. Please extend the analysis if you have spare time and computer power.
Notes by Peter Marriott:
I used to use the Grob in many blitz games I have played against humans. I actually had good success, not because it is a good move, but because it confused many players. On a chess server, I actually achieved a rating from 16-1700 by playing it. Many, many players simply responded by ...d5 and after I played Bg2, they took the g4 pawn, which led me to win a whole bunch of games by playing 3.c4, with an eye on b7. Maybe the right way to play this for black is simply to play 1.g4 d5 2.Bg2 then c6. Then white wonders what he's gonna do (At least I did!)
============
Contributors : Benjamin Aldag, Gary Gruwé, Kjetil Prestesaeter, Peter Marriott
Pablo Schmid (1736)
e4 c5 f4 d5 exd5 Nf6
It's better to try regaining the pawn with the knight. White can try to hold the pawn with c4 or Bb5+ followed by c4, but Black should not fear that.
============
Contributors : Pablo Schmid
Thibault de Vassal (2424)
d4 Nf6 c4 Nc6 Nf3
Black wants to play hypermodern style and destruct White's pawns center later. White develops quietly.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Mark Carroll (1700)
g3 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 O-O Be7 d3 c5 Nbd2 Nc6 e4 b6 e5 Nd7 Re1 Qc7 Qe2 Bb7 h4 O-O-O a3 h6 h5 Rdg8 c4 d4 b4
White offers black a pawn in order to speed up the attack.
============
Contributors : Mark Carroll
Mark Carroll (1700)
g3 d5 Nf3 Nf6 Bg2 e6 O-O Be7 d3 c5 Nbd2 Nc6 e4 b6 e5 Nd7 Re1 Qc7 Qe2 Bb7 h4 O-O-O a3 h6 h5 Rdg8 c4 d4 b4 g6
Black wisely decides not to accept the pawn sacrafice.
============
Contributors : Mark Carroll
Mark Carroll (1700)
c4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 e4 d5 e5 Ne4 Nf3 Be7 Qc2 Ng5 Nxg5 Bxg5 cxd5 exd5 d4 Be7 Be3 O-O O-O-O Nc6 a3 Na5 Bd3 h6 Qe2
This is not the best move for white. In this position, both sides should attempt a pawn storm and all out attack on the other side's king. For white, f4 would be a better alternative as it gives him an advantage in his attack. Qe2 wastes time and allows black to go ahead with his counterattack.
============
Contributors : Mark Carroll
Benjamin Aldag (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 Nxe4
Nxe4?:
This move is not really bad, but d2-d3 is better. Black has for his pawn-sacrafice a long initiative. And that's why, i prefer d2-d3 instead of Nxe4.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag
Benjamin Aldag (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 Nxe4 d5 Ng5
How can i describe the past moves of this game with one word ? Hmmm....it's GAMING ! White is playing with his opponent like a cat with a mice. Just count the queenmoves of black, and you will understand me. Let us remember some opening rules:
1. Don't move to early the queen.
2. Don't move with the same figure in the opening twice or more times.
3. Don't open the pawnshield of your king (f-pawn etc.).
4. Develope your figures fast and with one move.
Now......we can see,- Black did in the opening all wrong, what a chessplayer can do wrong in the opening. In the Latvian Gambit, White will kill Black with a headshot !
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag
Benjamin Aldag (1822)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Qf6 Nc4 fxe4 Nc3 Qf7 Ne3 c6 d3
d3:
White wants to exchange the strong e4-pawn and will have a very good development. The d3-Line is known as the Budowskys-Line.
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal, Benjamin Aldag
Tim Hansell (0932)
h4 e5 Rh3
============
Contributors : Terry Godat
White's first two moves are usually played only by beginners and those who are too drunk to move a center pawn without knocking all the pieces over. Black already has a clear advantage
Tim Hansell (0932)
h4 e5 Rh3 d5 Re3 Nc6 d4 e4
============
Contributors : Terry Godat
Now the position is a sort of Reverse Advance French with a rook instead of a pawn on e3. Already this opening has received a bit more attention than it deserves.
Peter Marriott (1816)
g4 d5 Bg2
Grob's Gambit
White aims to tear open the centre for an early material advantage on the queenside.
Notes by Peter Marriott:
The main gambit. White threatens to play 3.c4 if black takes the g4 pawn.
============
Contributors : Ron Keyston, Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter, Peter Marriott
Ron Keyston (1522)
e4 d5 exd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qd6 d4 Nf6 Nf3 a6
While normally a prophylactic move such as a6 is considered to be an "amateurish" type move, it is very thematic in the Qd6 line of the Scandinavian. This move prepares Nc6 while preventing the bishop pin at b5 and also prepares for an advance of the b-pawn in the case of Bc4.
============
Contributors : Ron Keyston
Ron Keyston (1522)
d4 d5 c4 e5 dxe5 d4 e3 Bb4+ Bd2 dxe3 fxe3
While the isolated, doubled pawns look very weak and ugly, this is likely White's best move at this point.
============
Contributors : Ron Keyston
Ron Keyston (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5
The best way to "de-fang" the Danish...returning one of the pawns in order to gain the time to catch up in development.
============
Contributors : Ron Keyston
Ron Keyston (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6
And now returning the other pawn.
============
Contributors : Ron Keyston
Ron Keyston (1522)
e4 e5 d4 exd4 c3 dxc3 Bc4 cxb2 Bxb2 d5 Bxd5 Nf6 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Qxd8 Bb4+ Qd2 Bxd2+ Nxd2
Considered drawish at the top-levels, but interesting at the club level. White has a 4-2 pawn majority on the kingside, while Black has a 3-1 majority on the queenside. Also the two-sides have opposite-colored bishops.
============
Contributors : Ron Keyston
Ilmars Cirulis (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5
Poisoned pawn variation
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Yra Detchin (1881)
Nf3 d5 c4
White uses a flank pawn to prevent the development of black's center.
============
Contributors : James Stripes, Yra Detchin [Событие " FICGS__CHESS__RAPID_C__000287 "]
[Сайт "FICGS"]
[Дата "2022.08.14 "]
[Раунд "1"]
[Белые " Дизер,Григорий "]
[Черные " Детчин,Юра "]
[Результат "*"]
[БелыеÐло "1500"]
[ЧерныеÐло "1881"]
1. Кf3 d5 2. c4 d4 3. e3 Кc6 4. Кxd4 Кxd4 5. exd4 Фxd4 6.Сe2 e5 7.OO Ne7 8.*
Ingo Schwarz (1824)
e4 c5 Bc4 Nf6 e5 d5 Bb5+ Nfd7 e6 fxe6 Qh5+ g6 Qe5 Rg8 Qxe6 Rg7 Qxd5
And white is a pawn up.
============
Contributors : Ingo Schwarz
Ingo Schwarz (1824)
e4 c5 Bc4 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 e5 Ng4 Bxf7+ Kxf7 Ng5+ Kg8 Qxg4 Nxe5 Qe4 d6 Qd5+ e6 Nxe6
And white is a pawn up.
============
Contributors : Ingo Schwarz
Nicolas Vedovotto (2039)
Nc3
1.Nc3 is not even nearly as popular as Nf3 cause Nf3 stops the pawn advance e7-e5 while Nc3 doesn't prevent the pawn push d7-d5 as the queen protects the d pawn.
============
Contributors : Gregory Kohut, Kostis Megalios, Nicolas Vedovotto
Telmo Escobar (2086)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 Nc3 e6 Nh4 Bg6 Nxg6 hxg6 a3 Nbd7 g3 Be7 f4 dxc4 Bxc4 O-O e4 c5 e5 Ne8 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nb6 Nxe7+ Qxe7 Be2 Nc7
Despite having 2 knights vs 2 bishops, Black has slightly better chances because of his superior development, good coordination of pieces, control of the "d" file, and pawn majority in the queenside.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Carlos da Costa (1400)
e4 e5 d4 d6
By moving to d6, black is neither doubling his pawns nor having unprotected pawns. Also, black defends his pawn at e5 from attack
============
Contributors : Carlos da Costa
Gregory Kohut (1700)
Nc3 d5 d4 Nf6
Defending the pawn and attack on e4 square.
============
Contributors : June Lorena
Kaan Kara (1588)
d4 d5 c4 e6 cxd5
in order to use central pawn advantage , giving up some mobility for black
============
Contributors : Kaan Kara
Max Rau-Chaplin (1600)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 d4
3 d4. is the standard move in this position. Rather than attempting to hold its over-extended doubled pawn White plays for a strong center and easy development. From here there are two popular variations, 3 NxF6(main line) and the sharper portugese variation 3 BG4
============
Contributors : Max Rau-Chaplin
Telmo Escobar (2048)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 O-O Qd2 Nc6 Bc4 Bd7 O-O-O Rc8 Bb3 Ne5 Kb1 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g4 b5
This pawn sacrifice, regarded as best for about twenty years, today appears as being refuted
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2048)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 O-O Qd2 Nc6 Bc4 Bd7 O-O-O Rc8 Bb3 Ne5 Kb1 Nc4 Bxc4 Rxc4 g4 b5 b3 Rc8 Ndxb5 a6 Nd4 Qc7 Nde2
with the idea of Be3-d4 and eventually h2-h4 or even g4-g5. Black has not any compensation for the pawn and the probable result is an easily won endgame for White.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2107)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 O-O c3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Rxe5 c6 d4 Bd6 Re1 Qh4 g3 Qh3 Be3 Bg4 Qd3 Rae8 Nd2 Re6 a4 f5 axb5 f4 Bxf4 Bxf4 Rxe6 Bxe6 bxa6
This passed pawn gives more than enough compensation for the sacrificed piece.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
e4 e6 d4 f5
The 'Kingston Defence' is characterised by the opening moves:
1.e4 e6
2.d4 f5
It can also be reached after the transposition of moves 1.d4 f5 2.e4 e6 — a form of Staunton Gambit Declined.
The first record of the defence being played is Schiffers-Chigorin, 1880. The first record of a win by Black is the 1892 victory of Elson over Emanuel Lasker. It remains obscure, but has considerable surprise value.
The Kingston Defence shares a weakness with the French Defence — in the form of the constrained queen's bishop -- and a strength with the Dutch Defence — namely the early thrust of the f-pawn, which often supports a knight on e4. (These French and Dutch similarities led to the first, uncomfortable name for the defence: Frutch.) White's decision at move three tends to define the nature of the game that follows.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
The obvious freeing move, but it will disturb very weak players of White. If 5.dc then 5.. Ng6 and Black can target both of White's advanced pawns with natural moves such as ..Nc6, ..Qa5+ and ..Qc7.
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
White needs to ensure that the e5 pawn is supported by another pawn.
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Black has more space on the queenside, and will fianchetto his queen bishop to bear down on White's kingside and deter a pawn thrust to d5.
Black's rook will contest the c-file.
With the centre almost blocked, Black may decide to put his King on e7 or f7, creating the opportunity for a kingside pawn storm, which might catch out a White who is unfamiliar with the defence.
Thibault de Vassal (2514)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5
So how does Black propose to defend the f5 pawn?
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson, Thibault de Vassal
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6
5. Nf3 is now safer, but who can blame White for taking the f5 pawn?
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson, Thibault de Vassal
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5 Qf6
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
White cannot hang on to the extra pawn without compromising his position. Play becomes very sharp now.
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5 Qf6 Qd3 Nxd4
Black takes back the pawn and threatens the Bishop.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nc3
Good move, but not the best, as White may want to place pressure on Black's d5-pawn (yes, it will get there!), via c4 and then Nc3 and then Qb3. This formation is particularly powerful for White if Black castles kingside and leaves his King on g8.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar, Gavin Wilson
Miguel Pires (2143)
e4 e5 Bb5 c6 Ba4 Nf6
Atacking the "e4" pawn
============
Contributors : Miguel Pires
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
This variation in the 'Advance' variation of the Kingston Defence has the merit of strengthening White's extended pawn centre. It also prevents ..Nd5, but Black wasn't intending that.
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5
Black now contests the centre, forcing White to decide immediately whether to advance or exchange the e-pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Nc3 d5 exd5 exd5 Nf3 Be7 Ne5 Nf6 Bg5 O-O Bd3 c6 O-O Ne4
White should not take on e4 because Black gets a strong pawn centre. Black's knight is destined for d6, from where it can defend the f5 pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4
Zucketort gambit (/tennison gambit/chicago gambit)
Essentially the Budapest gambit for white, but without the pawn on the c file having moved (this could be seen as an advantage or a disadvantage.) White looks for early attacks on f7 in typically tactical lines.
Chessbase considers this a 47% win for white
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4
Zucketort gambit accepted.
Black's usual reply to an unorthodox opening. It is sound, but only if black recognises he shouldn't try and hold on to the pawn forever.
Chessbase considers this 54% win for white
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5
The obvious continuation perceived from the moment white played e4. White aims for early attacks on f7, and this move also threatens to regain the pawn. If black defends the pawn, the attack on f7 will look to be exploited, if black aims for natural development and prevention of an early tactical trick, he will be ok.
Chessbase considers this 49% win for white
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 f5
A seemingly harmless move, but one that significantly weakens e6, allowing for an early f7 tactic. If white doesn't take the opportunity immedietly, e5 is possible, kicking back the white knight and giving black a good game a pawn up.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 f5 Bc4 Nh6
The only move which seeks to directly protect f7, but a blunder, and a move that shows black's reluctance to gambit a pawn back.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 d4 c3
A typical way to counter blacks plans. White aims for development of the c3 knight, and for a weak black pawn structure.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 d4 Bc4
An aggressive reply to black's premature pawn push. White prepares for quick castling and hits the f7 square. By controlling d5, this move also makes the d4 pawn look vulnerable.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 Nf6 Nc3
Reti - Van Geet
A hypermodern move and one that refuses to confirm central pawn structure. However, after blocking the f pawn, this block of the c pawn can be considered weak and restrictive. If black plays d5 and c5, he can often get a good game.
ChessBase considers this a 49% win for white - lower than the average opening.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Nxe5 Nc6 Qh5+ g6 Nxg6 Nf6 Qh4
Equal popularity with the superior Qh3, but a blunder, as the queen is now set up for the rook to fork it with the e4 pawn.
ChessBase considers this a 60% win for black, and furthermore, 64% if he finds the correct reply.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kjetil Prestesaeter (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 Nf6
Black defends the weak d5 square, and also possibly has intentions of this knight moving to e4 at some point. If white wants any reconciliation for the gambitted pawn, he needs to continue the attack.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Kjetil Prestesaeter
Kieran Child (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 Nf6 Qb3
The move which keeps white momentum, looking at d5 and b7. They cannot both be defended and so black will need to concede a pawn, leading to equal material, but black has a very slight edge on position.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
g4 d5 Bg2 Bxg4 c4 Nf6 cxd5
Wins back the pawn, but probably not the best move. White completely loses any momentum, which is the key feature of the fritz gambit.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
d4 d5 c4 dxc4 Nc3
Less common than Nf3, but just as good. This move gives white total central domination, and hits the b5 square, weakening the c4 pawn for the inevitable bishop re-capture.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 d4
Norwald variation - Electric eel attack
Possibly the least played opening to still have a name. On bigbase9, only 4 games played d4 in response to the Norwald and thus it is hard to analyse. Black doesn't have any immediete wins though, and after the pawn takes on d or e, white will play e5 and Nf3 for an OK game.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6
Stormtrooper gambit accepted
This is a blunder, but almost nobody will be aware of that. Accepting the pawn in this way significantly weakens black's queenside.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Nf6
The best move. White will recapture the pawn on h6, but black won't lose any more material than that.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 f6
The most common move, and yet another blunder. Often played by those who were confused by white's opening, and think they can hog the pawn advantage.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
h4 d5 h5 e5 h6 gxh6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 f6 Nc3
And white will get a good game through Bf4, e4 and castling queenside. It is unclear why, being a pawn up, black is so often loses these games.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6
The most common reply. Black develops naturally and defends the e4 pawn. White still has the initiative though.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6 Bc4
Blocking the c8 bishop and letting the queen get to e2 to win back the pawn.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6 Nc3 Bf5 Bc4 e6 f3
White appears to give away a further pawn, but accepting will allow an attack on b7 and f5.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 d5 e4 dxe4 Ng5 Nf6 Nc3 Bf5 Bc4 e6 f3 exf3
Probably not the best option, white will soon damage black's position by taking on f7, thus pinning the e6 pawn, and taking on f5.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 d6
Hartlaub variation
The initial idea of Henry Charlick when playing the Englund. It's more respectable than the modern trap, but is unsound. Black aims for early development and castling. White will aim to not stray too far behind development-wise, and win a pawn-up endgame.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 f6
Soller's gambit
Similar idea to the Hartlaub gambit but black chooses not to sacrifice his centre pawn.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6
An understandable move. Black attacks the e5 pawn and stakes a claim for the centre.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 Nf3 Qe7 Bf4
Defends the pawn, and lures black into going for the win.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 Nf3 Qe7 Bf4 Qb4+ Bd2 Qxb2
Regains the pawn, and the trap is set. Black's queen is in an awkward position though.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 Bc4 b5
Andersson gambit
Black gambits a pawn for some central control. This is unsound though, as even if white accepts the pawn, black will still have trouble playing d5 effectively.
Chessbase considers this 23% win for black.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Nicolas Vedovotto (2039)
Na3
The Durkin
Named after American master, Robert Dirkin, who probably would have known better than to play it anyway. This is a very strange place to develop the knight. If white wanted the knight to exert central control, Nc3 is better. If his aim is to keep the c pawn flexible, the English, or even the Saragossa is preferable. White's aim will be to move this knight yet again, probably to c4. Black is fine developing normally.
Chessbase considers this a 54% win for white.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Peter Marriott, Nicolas Vedovotto
Kieran Child (1600)
Na3 e5
Stakes a claim in the centre and threatens to damage white's pawn structure with Bxa3.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Roberto Migliorini (2058)
c4 b5
Jaenisch gamnbit
Never been an especially popular opening, the Jaenisch gambit is a theoretically unsound attempt at getting an interesting game out of the English. Black aims to quickly develop the bishop to b7 and gain central control, though he is not without some tactical traps on the queenside. White can easily fight for a solid centre, and start some counterplay while black is trying to regain the pawn.
Chessbase considers this a 34% win for black, 32% if white accepts the pawn.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Roberto Migliorini
Kieran Child (1600)
Nf3 Nf6 b4 e5
I'll call this idea the "Rebaudo variation" because, in all my time playing this opening, he's the first person to play it against me, and I actually think it looks quite good. Black threatens to stop any hope white had of queenside space by capturing the pawn on b4. This move is also more forceful than the common e6 as b5 now falls foul to e4 and black has the advantage.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 Be3
Not recommended. Puts pressure on Black to decide about the c-pawn, but Black wants to play ..cd here anyway.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 N8c6 c3
Trying to re-establish a supported pawn centre, but at the cost of losing a key Bishop.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 N8c6 c3 Nd5 Bc4 Nxd4 cxd4
The e5 pawn is now supported.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Paul König (2287)
d4 d5 e4 dxe4 Nc3 Nf6
Usually accepted by black. The pawn is still defended by the knight on f6.
============
Contributors : June Lorena
Kieran Child (1600)
d4 f5 e4 fxe4
Staunton gambit accepted.
White has now opened up both bishops and will look to attack the awkward-looking e4 pawn in the process. Black may try and hold on to the pawn but probably shouldn't, as white has some tactical ideas around Qh5+ Instead, attempts at castling kingside safely should be preferred.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5
Black continues his usual counterattack against the base of the White pawn chain.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5
Perhaps White is hoping to exploit Black's backward d-pawn. Presumably he does not believe he can hang on to this one-pawn advantage.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5 Ng6
Black attacks two pawns at once!
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5 Ng6 Nf3
White decides to concede the c-pawn straight away. But will he be able to defend the e-pawn sufficiently, now that he can no longer play f4?
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5 Ng6 Nf3 Bxc5 O-O Nc6 Bg5 Qc7 Re1
White decides that if Black is going to take the e-pawn, the Bishop may be able to pin the Knight against the Queen. But 9.Nc3, threatening 10.Nb5 might have been more active.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 c5 dxc5 Ng6 Nf3 Bxc5 O-O Nc6 Bg5 Qc7 Re1 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Bf4
The natural step in his plan, but sadly it does not work. The position is now -+. Black is at least a pawn ahead.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nc6
Probably the most "correct" move. Depending on white's response, black either clutches on to his pawn advantage or gains a good position.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nc6 Nxg4
If white wanted to get back the pawn, why gambit it in the first place? This is pretty poor positionally.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nc6 Nxc6
White will push d4 and get central control. Black could make those f and g pawns an annoyance though.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Kieran Child (1600)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 c3 Nf6 d4 exd4
Most common move at club level. Black assumes he has won a pawn after an exchange on d4. While he can sometimes be confronted with a lack of spacial allowance after e5, this isn't too bad for black.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
Ilmar Ambos (1741)
d4 Nf6 g4
As far as I'm aware, this is an unnamed gambit. But definitely one that deserves some attention. It seeks to forcefully take charge of the centre by gambitting a pawn.
PS! This gambit named Gibbins-Weigenhaggen gambit.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child, Ilmar Ambos
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3
White is unaware of Black's plan to attack the e5 pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4
The logical continuation. Black has a backward d-pawn, but it counts for little here.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6
Black continues the plan to attack the e5 pawn, a task White has made easier by making it impossible to play f4 quickly.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6 a3 Qc7 Nc3
White decides to concede the e-pawn, in exchange for whatever Nb5 will bring.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6 a3 Qc7 Nc3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Nb5 Qb8 Qh5+ g6 Qe2 Bg7 f4
The 'refutation' to Black's capture of the e-pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 c4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4 Nbc6 Nf3 Ng6 a3 Qc7 Nc3 Ngxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Nb5 Qb8 Qh5+ g6 Qe2 Bg7 f4 a6 Nc3 Nf3+ Qxf3 Bxd4 Rd1 Bg7 g3 b5 Bg2 Ra7 Qd3 bxc4 Qxc4 Rc7
White resigned here. The b-pawn is about to be lost, and his position has no redeeming features.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 a6 Nf3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bg5 c5 dxc5
Abandoning the support of the e-pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 a6 Nf3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Bxf3
Killing off the defender of the e-pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 a6 Nf3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Bxf3 Qxf3
Avoiding the break-up of the kingside pawns.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 a6 Nf3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Bxf3 Qxf3 Nbc6 O-O
White abandons the e-pawn, for no good reason.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bc4 a6 Nf3 b5 Bb3 Bb7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Bxf3 Qxf3 Nbc6 O-O Nxe5
Black is materially ahead, and White has no compensation for the pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5 d6 Nf3 O-O Nc3 Nc6 Bd3
How will Black keep the f5 pawn protected?
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5 d6 Nf3 O-O Nc3 Nc6 Bd3 Nb4 Bb1 c6
Deciding to put the d-pawn on d5 and the Knight supporting the d5-pawn from c7, via Na6.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 Nf6 Ne5 d6 Nf3 O-O Nc3 Nc6 Bd3 Nb4 Bb1 c6 a3 Na6 O-O d5 Ne5 Nc7 c5 Ne4 Ne2 Ne6 f3 N4g5
The alternative ...Nf6 simply loses the f-pawn without compensation.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 c4 c6 Ne5 Nf6 Nc3 O-O Bd3 d6 Nf3 Na6
Nbd7 loses the f5 pawn immediately.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 c3
Preserving the pawn chain.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 c3 cxd4 cxd4
Preserving the pawn chain.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4
Appears to be conceding the pawn centre, but ...
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5 d5
Black appears to be getting a backward e-pawn, but his game becomes very fluid now.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 Bd3 fxe4 Bxe4 Nf6 Bg5 d5 Bd3 c5
Now Black has the better pawn centre.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 Nf6 fxe6
White decides to ensure he remains a pawn ahead.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 Nf6 fxe6 Bd6
Exciting if you like quick development at the expense of a pawn or two and a blocked d-pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 Nf6 fxe6 Bd6 exd7+
White does not have to take this final pawn. It serves only to help Black complete his development.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 Nf6 fxe6 Bd6 exd7+ Bxd7
Black is ahead in development, at the cost of a two-pawn disadvantage. It's certainly worth trying as a surprise against a White who thought they were going to have a dull French game.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bc4 cxd4 cxd4 Ng6 O-O a6 a3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Be3 Be7 Nc3 Rc8 d5
This just loses a pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bc4 cxd4 cxd4 Ng6 O-O a6 a3 b5 Be2 Bb7 Be3 Be7 Nc3 Rc8 d5 Ncxe5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Bf4 Ng6 Be3
White has no compensation for the pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bc4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Bb3 Qe7+ Ne5 Nc6 Bf4 Be6 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 O-O-O Re1 Qf7 Nc3 c6 Ba4 Ng4
Preparing to capture on e5, then set up a kingside pawn roller with ..g5 etc. Black's King attack will break through before White's.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Ilmars Cirulis (1299)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Bxf5 Qf6 Bd3
I'm ready to give back pawn. :)
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Thibault de Vassal (2522)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nf6
A really critical line.
Is the tempo enough for the pawn ? .. Very interesting :)
============
Contributors : Thibault de Vassal
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 g4 fxg4
Fritz advises ..Nbc6 instead, but thismove allows Black to stick to the thematic moves and pawn structure of the Kingston Defence.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 g4 fxg4 Qxg4 c5 Be3 cxd4 Bxd4
Naturally, but is now blocked on the a1-h8 diagonal by its own pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nc3 d5 Qh5+ g6 Qe2+ Be7 Bg5 Kf7 Qe5
Bearing down on the unprotected rook, and putting pressure on the d5 pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nc3 d5 Qh5+ g6 Qe2+ Be7 Bg5 Kf7 Qe5 Nf6 Bxf6 Bxf6 Qxd5+
The only move. Will White be able to hang onto the pawn advantage?
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4
Clarifying the centre, but weakening the White pawn chain a little, and preparing b4 for the dark-squared Bishop, if required.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nf3 c5 c3 Nbc6 Bd3 Ng6 Be3 cxd4 cxd4 Bb4+ Nc3 O-O O-O a6 a3 Bxc3 bxc3 b5 Ng5 h6 Nh3 Qh4 Qf3 Bb7 Qe2 Rac8 a4 Nce7
Enabling the rook to capture the c3 pawn, which would enable a knight to lodge on d5.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4
White's move gives Black the chance to get his queenside pawn structure sorted out with a later ..c6. Fritz says +0.34.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7
Despite the pawn advantage, Fritz rates this as just +0.37.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O
Does White have a queenside attack? Will Black recover the pawn?
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O a4 a6 Rfe1 Bd6 Qc4
The queen's position on d3 was blocked by his own pawns.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O a4 a6 Rfe1 Bd6 Qc4 Rde8 b4 Kd8 b5 a5 Rac1 Re7 Qb3 f4
Black (still a pawn down) ignores the threat. The position is worth just +0.16, says Fritz.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Bd3 Nc6 Ne2 d5 c4 Nb4 O-O Nf6 Bg5 Nxd3 Qxd3 h6 Bxf6 Qxf6 cxd5 Bd7 Nbc3 O-O-O a4 a6 Rfe1 Bd6 Qc4 Rde8 b4 Kd8 b5 a5 Rac1 Re7 Qb3 f4 b6 f3 bxc7+ Bxc7
The only way to capture. Black now has equality. The white rook will capture on e1, and then the black queen will recover the lost pawn by Qxd4.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nh3
Slightly mysterious, but does create the option of putting the knight on f4, which might put useful pressure on g6 if the White queen comes out to h5+.
One reason why we are advised not to develop knights onto rook-3 is in case they are captured by an enemy bishop and you have to re-capture with the pawn. But in this opening, there are currently three of the opponent's own pawns preventing this capture.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nh3 c5 Nf4
White continues immediately with his plan, almost ignoring the attack on the d-pawn. Fritz says the position is worth +0.72 after dxc5.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nh3 c5 Nf4 cxd4 Bd3 Nbc6
The position is worth -0.91, says Fritz. White has gained nothing for the pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Yugi Inving (0980)
h4 g6 h5
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
let's attack the pawn, this was what i talked about,the diagonale is open and the bishop will be attack soon.
Yugi Inving (0980)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nc6 Bc4 g6 Qf3 Nf6 Qb3
why does white has the idea of eating pawn
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Yugi Inving (0980)
h4 e5 h5
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Black will not understand, but they may see your pawn coming and play h6 before you do, be carefull. a real good player will play h6.
Yugi Inving (0980)
h4 e5 h5 h6 e4
============
the game is like a normal again. a few differance. which are to white advantage even if he lose time, black cannot push the pawn on g5 or g6 if the game is player well.
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Yugi Inving (0980)
h4 c5 h5 e5
Ok now, before i was losing one pawn but now i lose two.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 exf5 exf5 Nf3 Be7 Bd3 d5
Black needs to protect the f-pawn.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Collin Bleak (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bg5
In this line, Black allows his pawn structure to be damaged, and cannot retain his two bishop advantage, but the resulting position is very solid and Black gets counterplay in the center.
============
Contributors : Collin Bleak
Collin Bleak (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bg5 Be6 O-O-O+ Nbd7 Nf3 Bd6 Nb5 Ke7
This position is +/=. In many lines, computers suggest Bxa2, winning three pawns for the bishop, with an unclear postion, but Black needs exceptional care to see those lines through. Working on the center typically leads to equality.
============
Contributors : Collin Bleak
Collin Bleak (1700)
e4 d6 d4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 dxe5 dxe5 Qxd8+ Kxd8 Bc4 Be6
This leads to a very passive endgame for Black, where it seems White needs great patience to accomplish anything against the weak Black pawn structure.
============
Contributors : Collin Bleak
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Nc3 a6 Nf3 c5 Bg5 cxd4 Nxd4 Qa5 Bd2 Qxe5+ Nde2 N8c6 g3 b5 Bg2 Bb7 O-O Ng6 Re1 Qc7 Nf4 Bc5 Nxg6 hxg6 a3
White may think he will be nudging the black bishop soon, or preparing a queenside pawn assault, but ...
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5
Black can win back the pawn right away, as he does here. Fritz rates this +1.06, badly overestimating the White position.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Qa5+ c3 Qxc5
Black must take the c5-pawn immediately, also threatening e5.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Gavin Wilson (1400)
e4 e6 d4 f5 e5 Ne7 Bg5 c5 dxc5 Qa5+ c3 Qxc5 Nf3 Nbc6 Be3 Qa5 Ng5 Nxe5 Bd2 N7c6 c4 Bb4 Bxb4 Qxb4+ Qd2 h6
Now an endgame is in sight, Black tries to wreck White's pawn structure.
============
Contributors : Gavin Wilson
Yugi Inving (0980)
h4 h6 h5
So you got first to start and you refuse to play?. you got, have a pawn into the opponent zone is an advantage and a disavantage.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Kostis Megalios (1400)
d4 d5 Nc3
Developing a knight and defending e4-square.
This move is not very good, because it blocks the c pawn and white can't fight for the center by playing c4.
============
Contributors : June Lorena, Kostis Megalios
Telmo Escobar (2048)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 Bc5 Bxf7 Ke7 Bb3 Qe8 O-O Rf8 Nc3 d6 Nd5+ Kd8 c3 h6 d4 exd4 Nxf6 Rxf6 e5 Rf5 Nf3 Nxe5 Nh4 Rh5 cxd4 Rxh4 dxc5 Qh5 h3 Rxh3 Qxh5 Rxh5 cxd6 cxd6
With equality. White has full compensation for the pawn minus, as he has two bishops and the passed pawn at d6 is weak.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Adam Goodwin (1500)
d4 Nf6 c4 g6 Nc3 d5 cxd5 Nxd5 e4 Nxc3 bxc3
This position gives us a real battle of philosophies! White will give his center all the support it needs, since if he succeeds, then Black will be without space and counterplay.
Black, however, labels White's center as a target and decides to attack it with everything he's got. Black would like to force the advance of a pawn, when the squares the pawns vacate will become available to Black's army.
============
Contributors : Adam Goodwin
Graham Cridland (1406)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Be7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5
Each side carries out their thematic pawn advance. Now White forces the issue; if now Bh4? Nxe4!
============
Contributors : Graham Cridland
Graham Cridland (1406)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Be7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 Bxf6 Nxf6 g5 Nd7
This pawn offer is the only way to effectively follow up on the kingside. After other moves, Black gets time to pressure the e4-pawn.
============
Contributors : Graham Cridland
Graham Cridland (1406)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Be7 Qf3 Qc7 O-O-O Nbd7 g4 b5 Bxf6 Nxf6 g5 Nd7 f5
This pawn offer is the only way to effectively follow up on the kingside. After other moves, Black gets time to pressure the e4-pawn.
============
Contributors : Graham Cridland
Gabriel Lewertowski (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Qh4
A very tricky move, and if White is unprepared, it can come as a bit of a shock. White needs to sacrifice a pawn to reach a better position.
============
Contributors : Gabriel Lewertowski
Gabriel Lewertowski (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Qh4 Nc3
Nc3 intends to sacrifice a pawn to reach a complex position.
============
Contributors : Gabriel Lewertowski
Gabriel Lewertowski (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Qh4 Nc3 Bb4
The only consistent follow-up. Black reinstates the threat to the e4-pawn.
============
Contributors : Gabriel Lewertowski
Gabriel Lewertowski (1700)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 exd4 Nxd4 Qh4 Nc3 Bb4 Be2
Protecting the e4 pawn by 6. Qd3 is an awkward move, so sacrificing the pawn is the most logical step.
============
Contributors : Gabriel Lewertowski
Sebastiano Paulesu (1969)
e4 d5 exd5 Nf6 c4 e6 dxe6 Nc6 exf7+ Kxf7
Black position seem very unhappy: the king exposed, two pawns less, but the lead in developement can give some important chances to attack...
============
Contributors : Sebastiano Paulesu
Telmo Escobar (2055)
h4 e5 h5 d5 h6 g6
Now white is strategically lost as, after spending three tempi with his "h" pawn, he has no chances to eventually open the "h" file. Now the probable continuation of the game might be both players castling long, after which Black has the upper hand both in the middlegame (due to his superiority in space and centre control) and the endgame (when White pawn at h6 will be a painful weakness).
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Mike Hoogland (1760)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bf5 cxd5
White exchanges the pawn on c4 for the pawn on c6 (black should take it back with this pawn if black doesn't want to lose any influence in the centre).
As a result, Qb6 after Qb3 on the next move is no longer a strong option. Qxb6 then doubles blacks queenside pawns, leaving them and the b5 square weak. Therefore, after Qb3 black will have to find another way to defend the pawn.
After this, white will try to develop and increase presure on b7 and d5 at the same time.
============
Contributors : Mike Hoogland
Mike Hoogland (1760)
d4 f5 g3 Nf6 Bg2 g6 c3
White, having not played c4 as in a typical Dutch opening, choses to put the pawn on c3. This has two advantages:
-It reinforces the d4 pawn, so that Bg7 is not putting real pressure on the d4 pawn. Subsequently, the chance of a succesful counterattack by black in the centre has become significantly lower.
-It opens the d1-a4 diagonal for the queen. From b3 the queen can attack the b7 pawn, together with the bishop on g2. Also, because f5 has weakened the black's king position, the queen can give a check on b3 or make castling for black more difficult.
============
Contributors : Mike Hoogland
Mike Hoogland (1760)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bxc6 dxc6 d4 exd4 Qxd4 Qxd4 Nxd4 Bd7
A very useful move. Black prepares castling long and retains the possibility of playing c5. The immidiate c5 chases away the white knight, but weakens the d5 square. White can then develop accordingly and try to take advantage of this weakness.
They say develop knights before bishops, because the bishop often does not know yet where to go. In this case the bishop knows better where to go than the knight. It only has one good square, because on g4 it can be chased away by the useful move f3. The knight on the other hand could go to d7, f6 or even h6.
Black's bishop pair, his control over d5, the fact that his pawn structure has no weaknesses and the weakness of the white pawn on e4 give black an edge.
============
Contributors : Mike Hoogland
Yugi Inving (0914)
b3 g6 Bb2 Nf6 e4 d6 g3 Bg7 Bg2 O-O Nf3 Nc6 Ng5 e5 O-O Nh5 h4 Bf6 d3 Bxg5 hxg5
============
i never played a game like for a while. and look everyone how i won a pawn. it is my lucky day.
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Normajean Yates (1946)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 c5 Nf3
============
Contributors : Simon Lemay
white need to protect the d4 pawn or get out the queen dangerously.
Or to play d5 instead, to transpose into a Benoni finchetto line.
les blancs doivent défendre le pion d4 ou sortir la dame dangereusement.
, Normajean Yates
Simon Lemay (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d5 Ne7 Nc3
============
Contributors : Simon Lemay
A GREAT SHOT!!!! force white to accept the benko gambit because the d5 pawn is under attak.
UN EXELENT COUP!!! force les blancs a accepter le gambit benko car le pion d5 est attaqué
Simon Lemay (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 g3 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d5 Ne7 Nc3 d6 Bg2 b5
============
Contributors : Simon Lemay
A GREAT SHOT!!!! force white to accept the benko gambit because the d5 pawn is under attak.
UN EXELENT COUP!!! force les blancs a accepter le gambit benko car le pion d5 est attaqué
Telmo Escobar (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 fxg7 Bxg7 b3 Qb6+ Kh1 O-O Ba3 Nc5 Bxc5 Qxc5 Qd3
White has slightly better chances because of his absolute control of light squares and his better pawn structure- but a draw is the probable outcome provided Black defend accurately his inferior position. Advice for Black: play 18...h6 (Nf3-g5 is the current threat) and then "do nothing".
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 f5 Qb6+ Kh1 cxb2 Bxb2 Qxb2 fxe6 Nxf6 exf7+ Kd7 Rb1 Qc3 Nd4
This is Walker-Bowen, England 1967 (see Chess Informant 4/544). More than merely having compensation for the piece, White is winning because he has four good attacking pieces with plenty of files, rows and diagonals to enjoy, while Black king has no pawn wall to hide behind and his pieces have trouble to play because of the much disturbing f7 pawn.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2055)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Be2 a6 O-O Nbd7 f4 b5 Bf3 Bb7 e5 Bxf3 Nxf3 b4 exf6 bxc3 f5 Qb6+ Kh1 cxb2 Bxb2 Qxb2 fxe6 fxe6 f7+ Kd8 Nd4 Nc5 Rb1 Qxa2 Qf3 d5 c4 Qxc4 Qe3 Rc8 Rbc1 Qb4 Nxe6+ Kd7 Nf4 Qe4 Qh3+ Kc7 Ne6+ Kb8 Rb1+ Nb7 Qb3 d4 Rf4 Qc6 Rxd4 Be7 Rc4 Qd7 Qg3+ Ka7 Qe3+ Kb8 Qf4+ Ka7 Qf2+ Kb8 Rxc8+ Rxc8 f8 Bf8 Nf8 Qd3 Qb2 Qb5 Qa1
Better than 41.Qxb5 axb5 42.Nxh7 after which White still has to neutralize the dangerous "b" passsed pawn.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2076)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 e5 Ndb5 d6 Bg5 a6 Na3 b5 Bxf6 gxf6 Nd5 f5 Bd3 Be6 Qh5 Rg8 g3 Nd4 c3 fxe4 Bxe4 Bg4 Qxh7 Nf3+ Bxf3 Bxf3 Qxg8 Bxh1 O-O-O Bxd5 Rxd5 Qf6 Rd2 b4
With some compensation for the pawn. Reindermann-Degraeve, Oakham 1992
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Kostis Megalios (1400)
d4 d5 e3
This move is quite a passive one for white. Usually it's played by players who are afraid of gambiting the c pawn right away and they try to support the c4 pawn push.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving, Kostis Megalios
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3
Benko Gambit Declinded
If white isn't happy about accepting the gambit he can always decline it and hope to capture the pawn under better cicumstances. (Yasser Seirawan: Winning Chess Openings p.161)
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 b4
Black releases the tension against b5 pawn.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 g6 cxb5 a6 Nc3
There is nice spot for knight in b5 in case white wants to get the pawn back.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
d4 Nf6 c4 c5 d5 b5 Nf3 g6 cxb5 a6 Nc3 axb5 e4 b4
Black is not willing to give his b pawn for nothing.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Telmo Escobar (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 f3 h4 Bf2 Bb7 Be3 Nfd7 Nxd7 Nxd7 Qd2 Be7 d5 Ne5 Bd4 Qc7 Qe3 a6
Black has the better prospects. White has insufficient compensation for the pawn, as Black knight at e5 is terrific and exchanging it for a White bishop is not advisable (too weak dark squares).
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Bg3 Qxd4 Rad1 Qb6 b3 cxb3 axb3 Nd7 e5
Conquering the square e4 for his knight, so White has a dangerous attacking position, with more than enough compensation for the sacrificed pawns.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2076)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 e6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 dxc4 e4 g5 Bg3 b5 Ne5 h5 h4 g4 Be2 Bb7 O-O Nbd7 Qc2 Nxe5 Bxe5 Bg7 Bg3 Qxd4 Rad1 Qb6 b3 cxb3 axb3 a6 Rd2 c5 Rd6 Qa5 e5 Nd5 Ne4 Nb4 Qb1
Suggested by Shipov as giving good compensation for the pawns.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2076)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Na5 Bc2 d5 exd5 e4 Bxe4 Nxe4 Rxe4 Bb7 Qe2 Bf6 d3 Bxd5 Re3 c5 Nbd2
White is slightly better- while there is some compensation for the pawn sacrificed by Black, it does not suffice.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2076)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 b5 Bb3 d6 c3 O-O h3 Na5 Bc2 d5 exd5 e4 Bxe4 Nxe4 Rxe4 Bb7 d4 Re8 Bf4 Nc4 Re2 Qxd5
Black has not a reasonable compensation for the pawn.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Julien Coll (1672)
c4 e5 Nc3 Nf6 Nf3 Nc6 g3 Bb4 Nd5
In order to keep intact his pawn structure, and to threat Nxb4 Nxb4 Nxe5.
============
Contributors : Julien Coll
Roger Whitman (1971)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nf6 Qxe5 Be7 Qf4 O-O
============
Contributors : Roger Whitman
Black already has more than enough for the pawn.
Roger Whitman (1971)
e4 e5 Qh5 Nf6 Qxe5 Be7 Qf4 O-O Nc3 d5 e5 Ng4
============
Contributors : Roger Whitman
The only thing Black has done "wrong" is that he could have gotten an even better game by not sacrificing a pawn.
Yugi Inving (0914)
e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 Nf3 Nf6 d3 d5 e5 d4 Nb5 Qa5+ Bd2 Qxb5 Rb1 Ng4 c4 Qa6 Be2 Ngxe5 O-O Nxf3+ Bxf3 Qa3 bxa3 Kd7 Re1 f6 h3 Kd6 Bf4+ e5 Bd2 g5 Qe2 Bg7 Qe4 Ne7 a4 Rb8 a5 h6 a6 b6
I can,t take the pawn right now.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Yugi Inving (0914)
e3 g6 b3 Bg7 Nc3
This is not so bad for white.
if the bishop take the knight, then the black have lost a very valuable piece, the good bishop and has made a fianchetto for nothing except to double some pawn... Bxc3 is very bad for black.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Arne Sigvald Engø (1800)
Nf3 Nf6 g3 g6 Bg2 Bg7 O-O O-O c4
============
Contributors : Arne Sigvald Engø
A very active move aimed at blocking black in his attempts to establish a pawn center.
Telmo Escobar (2043)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O Be7 Re1 O-O Bxc6
Winning a pawn
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 f3 Qb6 Be3
The refutation of 6...Qb6?! Now Black should lost some tempo as his queen is in danger.
Let us see why the pawn at b2 is not to be taken.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3
Black is positionally brilliant as he has two bishops and his adversary has weakened his pawn structure. Yet now Black has to stand alert, as his next move, if based only upon "general considerations", could be his last move as well...
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nd7 Ne6+
And, naturally, Black resigns. This was Giorgi-Escobar, Buenos Aires (Club tournament) 1976. Please not make it into a "famous game"! It was the only game I lost at that tournament- and the only game my adversary won! In fact I finished 1st, my adversary finished last :)
It's true that i was playing the game after a (memorable) night without sleeping, so I was not precisely awake while playing. But the position is not as easy to play with Black, otherwise I would be able to outplay my adversary anyway. I'm sure that this blunder 10...Nd7?? has been played by other people as well- alas even now I find difficult to renounce to such a natural move...
As you see, both moves I suggest in this position
(10...Nc6!? that sacrifices a pawn, 10...e6!? that sacrifices the square d6) are not trivial.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6 Ba6 Bxa8 Bxf1 Qxf1 Qxa8
Black is a pawn down but this is of no importance in this position. Indeed, Black has "threatening" 15...Bxc3 16.bxc3 Qxe4 or (even!) 16...Kg7 when White, if any, has to play accurately not to going into serious trouble. Remember that pawn weaknesses are particularly serious when there are rooks.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (2043)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 Bc4 Ng4 Bb5+ Kf8 O-O Nxe3 fxe3 Nc6 Nxc6 bxc6 Bxc6 Rb8 Bd5 e6 Bb3 Be5 Qf3 Qe7
Again, Black has more than enough compensation for the pawn minus. Indeed he's "threatening" Kf8-g7 and White has to play very carefully in order to hold a draw.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Mark Hailes (1800)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 b6 Nge2
Now If black takes the knight on c3 white can recapture with the other knight avoiding doubled c pawns. However, black will most likely avoid this exchange and then the e2 knight will have to move again before the white light squared bishop can get out.
============
Contributors : Mark Hailes
Mark Hailes (1800)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7
Black controls the long diagonal and attacks the pawn on g2. White would have liked to play Nge2 on the next move, but now that is a pawn sacrifice.
============
Contributors : Mark Hailes
Mark Hailes (1800)
d4 Nf6 c4 e6 Nc3 Bb4 e3 b6 Bd3 Bb7 Nf3
White develops the knight and at the same time blocks the attack of black's bishop on the g2 pawn
============
Contributors : Mark Hailes
Yugi Inving (1280)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Nc3
Devlopping the knight, white start to get a good game. and attack the pawn d5
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Yugi Inving (1280)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e3 g6
Black prepare a fiancetto and since the diagonal c1-h6 is blocked by the pawn on e3, white won't be able to profite of black weakness.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Yugi Inving (1280)
d4 Nf6 Nf3 d5 Nc3 Nc6 e3 g6 Bd3 Bg7 Bd2 O-O O-O a6 Re1 Nb4 a3
Chasing black out of the way, making them exchange and then profite from doubled pawn to push e4
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Terry Godat (2088)
e4 f5 exf5 Kf7
The real inving gambit or the Inving gambit of the king, can also be called the drunked king opening, Kf7 does somewhat something to prevent White plan
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving, Terry Godat
This has been dubbed (allegedly by some Russian players) the Mao Zedong Attack, as it sacrifices pawns for no reason. Black is already completely lost.
Yugi Inving (1280)
e4 f5 exf5 Kf7 Qh5+ g6
Will you try Kf6?, if yes then the king will take the place of you knight which really not got for your developpement, sure you give away a second pawn by this.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Yugi Inving (1280)
e4 f5 exf5 Kf7 Qh5+ g6 fxg6+ Kg7 Bd3 Nf6 Qg5
preparing gxh7 and prevening black from taking the g6 pawn.
============
Contributors : Yugi Inving
Terry Godat (2088)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 g5 h4 g4 Ne5 Nf6 Bc4 d5 exd5 Bd6 d4 Nh5 O-O O-O Rxf4 Nxf4 Bxf4
============
Contributors : Terry Godat
Here Black can either play 11...Bf5 or grab the h-pawn. In either case, White has excellent compensation for the exchange. In the game, Black fought an uphill battle for a draw.
Sebastian Boehme (1836)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd3
A new sort of Poisoned Pawn. White offers a pawn like after 8. Qd2, but weakens a little bit its light squared bishop.
============
Contributors : Sebastian Boehme
Sebastian Boehme (1836)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd3 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5
White is down a pawn, but surely a creative attacking player will have his fun here.
============
Contributors : Sebastian Boehme
Ilmars Cirulis (1503)
d4 d5 c4 Nc6 cxd5 Qxd5 Nf3 e5 Nc3 Bb4 Bd2 Bxc3 Bxc3 e4 Ne5 e3 fxe3 Nxe5 dxe5 Ne7 Rg1
White has nice trio of pawns. :)
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Wilhelm Schuett (1800)
a4
============
Contributors : Benjamin Block, Ruddy Franco, Kostis Megalios, Paul Brand Lyard
This opening is the Ware" opening A4
Mr. Ware, US champion in his time, had
won very much games in tournaments with his
rarely,amazing opening....
What do you play after one a opening a4?
Best move isn' t it to play pawn e5 for blacks?
Blacks to play.
Nota bene
Mr.Paul-emmanuel Brand FRA, Aka
"The Sandra LyardVers13061975",
Inventor Annapurna' chess séries variants said
about this Non- orthodoxe, rarely uses in tournaments by players,afer a long time to try and studied this,that was a precious opening because she can create an big surprise attack on column A,for the oponnent after only twelve moves....
Thé " Meadow Hay" Ware opening' is most strongest than WE believe...2021 July 20th.
Paul,Emma&Sandra Brand-Lyard., Wilhelm Schuett
Kostis Megalios (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 Qb6
Attacking the b2 pawn.
============
Contributors : Kostis Megalios
Kostis Megalios (1400)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 Qb6 Qd2
The very famous poisoned pawn variation. Black will get the b2 pawn, but white will have the initiative.
============
Contributors : Kostis Megalios
Ilmars Cirulis (1632)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 Qxc1 Nf7+ Ke8 Nxh8+ hxg6 Qxg6+ Kd8 Nf7+ Ke7 Nc3 Qxc2+ Ke1 d6 Nd5+ Kd7 Qxg8 e3 fxe3 Be7 Ng5 Qxb2 Rd1 Bxg5 Qxg5 Kc6 e4 b5 Rc1+ Kb7 Rxc7+ Ka6 Qd8 Bb7 Qxd6+ Ka5 Rxb7 Qc1+ Ke2 Nc6 Qc5 Qxc5 dxc5 Rh8
Imho, two pawns more - it is enough for win of white here.
[edit]
Ok, one pawn. :)
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Terry Godat (2117)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Bc5 b4 Bxb4 c3 Ba5 d4 exd4 O-O dxc3 Qb3 Qf6 e5 Qg6 Nxc3 Nge7
============
Contributors : Terry Godat
This is the main position of the Compromised Defense. Although theory says White has more than enough for the two pawns sacrificed, Black may well be able to survive. White should play either Ne2 or Ba3 next.
Normajean Yates (1858)
e4 g5
The Borg or the Grob reversed. The idea is the Grob idea - pressure along the a1-h8 diagonal and K-side pawn storm; but it is even worse than the Grob is for white.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7
This move is simple too. Ne7 take control of both d5 and f5 sqaure, it also control g6 square which just save from a little Qh5+
As for, Qh5+ g6, The queen is attacked, and you lose the knight
Refuting this is not an easy task. And blakc does have well hidden compensation for the pawn. this opening is gived the rating as the halloween gambit.
Black can not come up with many plans, depending where the knight woulg go, Nf3 just mean you have lost a tempo, Nd3 prevent d4, and Nc4 will cause black to play d5 right away, since they don't want a knight on e3.
the f6 pawn can serve later, in attack, with the moves, g5, -h5 g4- h4.
Black has a little initiative, he must not lose to win the game.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ Ng6 Nxg6
White is up a pawn and a knight and preparing a dsicoory check to gain material, taking the knight result in losing the rook. This shown was a mistake does to black in damiano defense.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7
The best move, is very easy to miss, but the best choice for black. here, the knight is lost for a poor pawn, we should at least take a pawn. But by doing so, we give compension for black, while we should be the ones to have the compensation, ours attacks is note finished, but we must move our queen. Or we could be even more mean, for a poor player.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 fxe5 Bxg6+
Forcing black to give back the knight and to endure the lost of a second pawn.
As Kg8 fails to Qf7 Mate
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 fxe5 Bxg6+ Nf5 Bxf5
Treatning another discovery check, on d7 then exange the white bishop for black's. White lack developpement, But Nc3, d3, and Be3 are played faster then excepted. White is up two pawn now.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1200)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Qh5+ g6 Bc4 Bg7 Bf7+ Kf8 Qf3 d6
The great counter attack, Shall the knight leave, Black king take the bishop then the would move the rook on the open file, secure his king, push the a f pawn, develop queen side then bring the a rook on e8, so he take advantage of the tow open files, the f files is bond to open, White as no more light square bishop. From a passive and poor defense, Black would gain a very offensive play.
Bb3 is the best variation.
Leaving white whit a little attack, but after black take the knight with the d pawn, black should stand well.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Normajean Yates (1946)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 fxe5 Qh5 Ke7 Qxe5 Kf7 Bc4 d5 Bxd5+ Kg6 h4 h5 Bxb7 Bd6 Qa5 Nc6 Bxc6 Rb8 Qxa7
and white is five pawns up. +-. Alternatively, white can continue development, remaining four pawns ahead.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Normajean Yates (1946)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Qe7
The best under the circumstances, but not good enough... :-(
Still, at least it regains the pawn.
+=.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Normajean Yates (1946)
e4 e5 Nf3 f6 Nxe5 Ne7 Nf3
simple! White is a pawn up, and black has no compensation worth the name.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Normajean Yates (1946)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qf3
Yet another attempt in Najdorf, these lines are more solid than the Poison Pawn ones after 7. f4 Qb6 8. Qd2.
But Qf3 seems to allow black to equalise by h6.
============
Contributors : Sebastian Boehme, Normajean Yates
Ulrich Imbeck (1342)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qf3 Be7
Avoiding the double pawn
============
Contributors : Ulrich Imbeck
Normajean Yates (1975)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 Nd5
Rybka 3 opening book line. According to the author Jeroen Noomen:
"In 2007 the Poisoned Pawn variation of the Sicilian Najdorf was experiencing a crisis. White players found out that after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 the old move 10.e5!? was not so easy for black and they scored a few impressive victories. The Poisoned Pawn finally refuted? Not really! After 10.e5!? h6 11.Bh4 dxe5 12.fxe5 black has a move that gives him full equality: 12... Nd5!
"
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 e5 f4 f6 fxe5
Acceptingn the pawn has no real consequance.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 e5 f4 f6 fxe5 Nc6
The only Good move, as taking the pawn back will result in losing a rook for pawn.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 e5 f4 f6 fxe5 Nc6 exf6 Nxf6
Black has now the lead in developpement.
We need to see if he has enough compensation for the pawn he gave up.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6
Covering the check and accepting an isoled pawn.
This position should be correct for white.
Black must find an attack at all cost. A real attack.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7 Qe2 Ncd4 Qd1 Qe6+ Kf1 Qf7 Nxd4
Whiten will now get hit by a fork with Ng3+, the f pawn will be pined! so he'll have to move the king.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7 Qe2 Ncd4 Qd1 Qe6+ Kf1 Qf7 Nxd4 Ng3+ Ke1 Bxd4
Black mate treath force white fo exchange queens, lose the rook for the knight and to have a bad pawn structure.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7 Qe2 Ncd4 Qd1 Qe6+ Kf1 Qf7 Nxd4 Ng3+ Kg1 Bxd4 Qf3 Nxh1 Qxf7+ Kxf7 Bxh1
If this is done now. The knight will take the f2-pawn and black will do some discovery check.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3 d6 Bd2 Bg7 h4 Qd7 Qe2 Ncd4 Qd1 Qe6+ Kf1 Qf7 Nxd4 Ng3+ Kg1 Bxd4 Qf3 Nxh1 Qxf7+ Kxf7 Bxh1 c6 Rb1 Rxh4 Ne2
it seen like white wants to exchange pieces where he should note exchange pieces but pawns.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Telmo Escobar (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Kh8 Ng5 Bc5+ Kh1 Qa5 Rh3 Qc7 Nxe6 Qd6 Nxf8 Qxf8 Rf1 Rf7 Qh5 Qe7 Rhf3 f4 Be4 Rg7 Rb3 Ba7 Rd3 Bg4 Qh6
Incredibly White saves the skin, as after 33...Be2 34.Rc1! Bxd3 35.cxd3 White regains at least a pawn and his King is absolutely safe thanks to his unassailable control of light squares.
This game was decisive for the result of the tournament, as should Anand win it, Vassily Ivanchuk would be the winner of the contest. After this lucky escape -take into account that White had to make several difficult moves in one minute- Grischuk shared first position as was even declared the winner because of an absurd rule.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Telmo Escobar (1929)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 f5 Nc6 fxe6 fxe6 Nxc6 bxc6 e5 dxe5 Bxf6 gxf6 Ne4 Be7 Be2 h5 Rb3 Qa4 Nxf6+ Bxf6 c4 Bh4+
Probably best as White is forced to put a pawn at g3, an ugly move (in certain cases he would be happy to use the square h3 for future attacking purposes) and also a weakness.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Sophie Leclerc (1573)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 g6 Be3 Bg7 f3 h5
A new variation, Yugi variation, ( no, I don,t who got the idea), but black decide to delay castle and make this usefull move as this move gain even more control over the g4 square, it will be harder for white to continue with his pawn storm.
Black may want to play Bd7 and Nc6 before this move,
Can this be a good dragon variation. of course black may not castle at all.
right after making this strange, the play will normaly continue by white playing on kingside and black on the queen side. His king may go to the d7 square in order to find safety and connect his rook.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1573)
f4 d6 Nf3 Nc6 c4 Nf6 Nc3
This opening can be call the phantom system, as it can not virtually die and if black is not carefull, white will be tired and can build faster then you can think a big pawn center.
No joke, the pawn center must not happen.
If white continue in a hyper-modern style, he will want to fianchetto his bishops.
From Yugi_inving.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Normajean Yates (1967)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3
White sets a little trap. It is specially recommended against players who merely memorise 'book' lines: such players (as black) might play Qxb2? thinking it is the 'book' poisoned pawn variation; and Even if they do not, they are out of their 'book' :)
============
Contributors : Ray Downs, Normajean Yates
Sophie Leclerc (1573)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7 Bc4 Bh4+ g3
This usally lead to the three pawns gambit.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates, Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1573)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7 Bc4 Bh4+ g3 fxg3 Kf1 Qe7 Kg2 Qg5 Rf1 Qd8 Kg1 gxh2+ Kh1
The three pawns gambit, white take enermous risk and hide behind the black pawn.
White king would really exposed if he would take that pawn.
There is no real raison to play that.
I could not enter 0-0, sorry.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Alex Savu (1350)
d4 e5 d5 Bc5
Gains space and targets the f2 pawn; also aims for a speedy castling.
============
Contributors : Alex Savu
Alex Savu (1350)
d4 e5 d5 Nf6
Pressures the d-pawn, also aims to castle early. Looks less threatening than ...Bc5.
============
Contributors : Alex Savu
Alex Savu (1350)
d4 e5 dxe5 Nc6 Nf3 Nge7
Zilbermints variation. Black aims to post the knight at g6 and recapture the pawn on e5. Not as bad as it might seem. White has tried a number of different moves at this point.
============
Contributors : Alex Savu
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4
It may feel appriopriate to move a pawn like this. not on both wings.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3
White should not hurry on the c5-pawn.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 Nc6 O-O e6 Na3 a6 Qa4 Qa5 Qxa5 Nxa5 d3 Nf6 Bd2 Nc6 Ne5 Rc8 Rab1 Ba8 Nxc6 Bxc6 Bxc6+ Rxc6 Rb8+ Kd7 Rfb1 Rg8 Ba5 Bd6 R1b7+ Bc7 Rxg8 Nxg8 Nb5
A coorect sacrifice, only a rook can take care of a bishop and a knight, nlack lose too many pawns.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5
A logical move, now white will continue his plan of undermining the black's centre, who is now, only made of the d4-pawn.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5
A correct move, Who only reason is to recover the pawn and gsin better developpement.
White will look bad if he do nothing about it.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4
taking a free pawn, but not developping. hoverer. black is not that great.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5
This open a line for the bishop, but give a pawn.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5 fxe5 Ng4 Rc1
The pawn is lost, developping is better better then keeping it, white already has material advantage.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5 fxe5 Ng4 Rc1 Nxe5 Be2 Bh3 Kf2 Rd6 Ne4 Rd7 Rc2 Re7 Rb1 Ba5 Rbc1 Rd8 Kg1 Bb6 Nc5 Rd6 Bf1 Bg4 Bg2 h5 h3 Bd7 Be4 Bxh3 Nxb7 Rxd4 exd4 Bxd4+ Kh2 Ng4+ Kxh3 Rxe4 Nd6 Re2 d3 Re3
this just bring black a pawn
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5 fxe5 Ng4 Rc1 Nxe5 Be2 Bh3 Kf2 Rd6 Ne4 Rd7 Rc2 Re7 Rb1 Ba5 Rbc1 Rd8 Kg1 Bb6 Nc5 Rd6 Bf1 Bg4 Bg2 h5 h3 Bd7 Be4 Bxh3 Nxb7 Rxd4 exd4 Bxd4+ Kh2 Ng4+ Kxh3 Rxe4 Nd6 Re2 d3 Re3 Nf5 Rxd3 Nxd4 Rxd4 Rc8+ Kh7 R8c7 Ra4 R1c2 f6 R7c4 Ra5 Rb4 Ra3 Rb3 Ra4 a3
¨Placing all the burden of the pawn, on one rook.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 Nf6 bxc5 e6 Ba3 Nc6 g3 Qa5 Qb3 Bxc5 Qb5 Qxb5 cxb5 Nb4 Bxb4 Bxb4 Nxd4 O-O Nc3 Rd8 e3 e5 fxe5 Ng4 Rc1 Nxe5 Be2 Bh3 Kf2 Rd6 Ne4 Rd7 Rc2 Re7 Rb1 Ba5 Rbc1 Rd8 Kg1 Bb6 Nc5 Rd6 Bf1 Bg4 Bg2 h5 h3 Bd7 Be4 Bxh3 Nxb7 Rxd4 exd4 Bxd4+ Kh2 Ng4+ Kxh3 Rxe4 Nd6 Re2 d3 Re3 Nf5 Rxd3 Nxd4 Rxd4 Rc8+ Kh7 R8c7 Ra4 R1c2 f6 R7c4 Ra5 Rb4 Ra3 Rb3 Ra4 a3 g5 Rc6 Kg6 Kg2 h4 gxh4 gxh4 Ra6 Rxa6 bxa6 Ne5 Rb7 Nc6
And black resign, while making this move, as he tought, after, Rc7, the a-pawn was failing.
The end of a game. AudreyxSophie-Zsiracki on Redhotpawn
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 e3
the normal continuation..
White plan include the exchange of the white square bishop for black's queen knight, b3 Bb2, d3, Ne5 + Nd2-f3-g5....
Altought, this is white's dream, it do not always happen.
lasker had the habit of playing Bd3 when black take long to develop the queen knight and let black scrap his pawn structure. In fact here, white became black and fight for equality.
============
Contributors : Gerard Gonet, Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 cxb4 a3 e6 Bb2 Nc6 axb4 Bxb4 e3 e5 Nxe5 Nxe5 Bxd4
Thye only good move, as the knight is pinned on the g7-pawn, moving it, cost a rook. so, basicly, black lost a pawn, but retain some compensation.
Maybe not all of them.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Gregory Kohut (1574)
e4 c5 Nf3 Nc6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 e6
This inaugurates the Taimanov/Paulsen lines of the Sicilian Defense. Black's main idea is to play Qc7 and a6 in some order (although the "pure" Taimanov, with ...a6 and Nge7, is also possible), controlling the dark squares with pieces and the light squares with pawns. The d5 and e6 points are generally less vulnerable than in many variations, leaving white with fewer obvious attacking possibilities. The game therefore can take on an oddly positional character for the Open Sicilian, with White seeking to prove dark squared weaknesses or obtain favorable piece exchanges.
============
Contributors : Graham Cridland
Gregory Kohut (1592)
d4 Nf6 Nc3 d5 e4 dxe4 f3
The Blackmar Diemer Gambit (BDG).
With intention of rapid development and to open-up f-file.
If the gambitted pawn is accepted (it is usually does) there are two ways to recapture it.
Nxf3 - The Blackmar Diemer Gambit Setup
Qxf3 - The Ryder Gambit Setup
============
Contributors : June Lorena
Peter Marriott (1982)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e6 f3 b5 a3
This move is calmer than g4. White has many options now, he can play Qd2 and castle queenside, and still has the option of a pawn storm on the kingside with g4 h4 etc.
============
Contributors : Peter Marriott
William Taylor (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4
Continuing with his plan. White now has a nice pawn centre, but the black bishops exert plenty of pressure on it.
============
Contributors : William Taylor
William Taylor (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1 Bc5 c3 d6 d4 Bb6 Bg5 h6 Bh4 g5 Bg3 O-O
Although black's kingside pawn structure looks a little weakened, practice has shown that black gets excellent play in this position. His two bishops look strong, he has a solid foothold in the centre, and he is ready to commence active operations on the kingside with moves like Nh5.
============
Contributors : William Taylor
Riani Kiiari (1800)
e4 h5 d4
usually blacks plan is Rh6?? and semmetry on the other side viz: ...a6 (Nf3) Ra6?? taking the rooks for bishops is not bad with the centeral contol already established by the pawns.
============
Contributors : Riani Kiiari
Paul Brand Lyard (1777)
c4 c5 Nc3 d6 Nf3 Bd7 d4 a6 dxc5 Nc6
============
Contributors : Piotr Wiaderek, Paul Brand Lyard
Play knight on c6 is it really the best move to play here,
or to capture the white pawn c5 with the black pawn d6 now is the better and stongest attack,
to get the control of cells b4 and d4, ans qu'on the advantage opening position?
Ilmars Cirulis (2241)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Bc4 Nf6 Nc3 Nc6 d4 Bb4 Nge2 f3 gxf3 d5 exd5 Nxd5 O-O Nxc3 bxc3 Bd6
Black has better pawn structure (two pawn islands versus four pawn islands). White will suffer, even if they reach a draw.
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
FICGS : pawn , Wikipedia : pawn , Dmoz : pawn , Google : pawn , Yahoo : pawn
All that matters on the Chessboard is good moves. (Bobby Fischer)
Chess is not like life... it has rules ! (Mark Pasternak)
Openings teach you openings. Endgames teach you chess ! (Stephan Gerzadowicz)
Back to FICGS , Wikichess