Home
Information
Login
Register
Waiting lists
Membership
Hall of fame
Tournaments
Best game
Wikichess
Rating list
Problems
Forum
Links
Help
About
| Install FICGS apps | |
| play chess online |  |
|
Game result (chess) B. Ozen, 2269 N. Wilson, 2121 1/2-1/2 See game 152323 |
Hot news Discussions Files search Social network
Here are 0 results for White Daniel in the games.
Here are 0 results for White Steven in the games.
Here are 0 results for White Jon in the games.
Here are 0 results for White Richard in the games.
Here are 0 results for White John in the games.
Here are 0 results for White Oliva in the games.
Here are 6 results for White Jason in the games.
Game_101998 Game_101997 Game_101996 Game_101995 Game_101994 Game_101988
Here are 6 results for White Joshua in the games.
Game_123756 Game_123755 Game_123754 Game_123753 Game_123748 Game_123743
Here are 0 results for White Whilliam in the games.
There are at least 100 results for White in the forum.
George Jempty (2026-05-28 12:36:54)
Berlin Defense
I used to play the Deferred Schliemann. I used to steer for a line in which the analog without 3...a6 had been played as Black by Lasker, a line involving ...Bd6. I tried it in a US Correspondence championship qualifying round in the 90s but didn't play accurately at all in the opening after that, this was a no-engines tournament (well it was the 90s anyway). But the game score made it's way into chessbase, and a Norwegian IM drew GM Sax with the line in 2005. So I was influencing theory way before the centaur/correspondence era ;) Also, in any case, I've been drawn to ...f5 lines for quite a while, I used to play the Latvian when I was a teenager, but now I've settled on the Modern Steinitz, with it's possibility for the Siesta, but I think overall is more sound than other lines involving ...f5, but still with plenty of winning chances; e.g. the Noah's Ark trap. As Black I play for a win, as White I try not to lose LOL
Ulises Pineda (2026-05-28 09:30:16)
Berlin Defense
OTB I like the Schliemann Defense against the Spanish, after 3...f5 black is completely fine and there's no winning line for white, but there are two other things. First, you can feel it in the air, Ruy Lopez players have spent a great deal of time studying it and they want to prove their superior knowledge aiming for lines where they win if black plays a small inaccuracy, which happens often and that's why they like playing it.
You take that away which is a psychological victory.
Second, they have two options, either they play fast and will most likely abandon the advantage because white needs accurate play to keep her edge, or they will sit to think on the best continuation, but after the position settles down it's equal and you come up with a huge advantage on the clock.
My favorite line is when you have your queen on d4 and they play Nxg6 because they're used to positions where capturing back allows white's queen to capture the rook on h8, only to find out they can't do that because it's protected by the queen! So they have to play Qxg6+ but after covering or moving the king black is already better!
It's as if I saw the Spanish die before my eyes like that, even if my wins are mostly on the clock, it has forced players to avoid playing it against me, because it's easier to go into some g3 and Bb2 stuff and beat me from there than figuring out how to play against 3...f5.
My only lament is its name, it would be so cool if it was the Schliemann Gambit, or Schliemann Counter-Attack or something that gives it justice.
Ulises Pineda (2026-05-13 10:25:32)
Berlin Defense
What else is there to play, though? If black tries to play the Berlin and you try to avoid it, it would have been best to avoid it with the Italian. The Italian remains a landmine to this day, with Stockfish at Depth 30 showing a white advantage and Depth 40 switching to a black one, in some positions, I'd be happy to play the Italian and become black instead of being white in the Berlin!
Against lower rated opposition, the Berlin is a nightmare, it's as if they have found a way to force a draw against you, but you're supposed to try to win as Black to prove your superior playing strength.
This all makes me want to abandon 1.e4 entirely, but I haven't found a convincing line for 1.d4 (to me the Ragozin is d4's Berlin), though I have the most wins with Nf3, I think, against creative players (those that avoid mainlines for fun) 1.e4 remains the best option, they will not defend with the Berlin.
It's a thing about not playing the board, but the opponent, one that wants to win as black will not play the Berlin, and then the Ruy Lopez is the best option.
Ulises Pineda (2025-11-10 17:06:10)
a 2300-player tried the Budapest
Because the optimal defenses by black are so boring! And they don't offer any counter-play, specially against lower-rated opponents that could easily draw as white with those. In uncommon variations they have to think, and that's the only chance they slip.
There's also the aspect of overconfidence, chess engines have gotten so strong one thinks they can defend anything. That was a mistake I made last time I played a Benoni and lost, I thought I played the strongest defense, who knows if my opponent could also have defeated someone else in the same line, but it was a problem of evaluation, not depth, the engine was showing 1.0 scores for positions that were lost, and they were so complicated I couldn't keep up. Near the end my opponent wasn't even playing the moves I predicted and cut the game like a knife through butter.
But I'll always rather lose a game like that than playing the same boring defense that draws against anything but it's a snore fest, apparently I could just play moves from 300 million nodes blindly and draw anyway.
So I continue to play dubious lines and appreciate opponents that deviate from the norm to spice things up, I could easily be over 2300 at the cost of boring games, but I'll be getting there soon anyway and finally find out how people on that tier play against me, since I've never been able to join tournaments of that caliber.
George Jempty (2025-10-07 17:15:16)
Next thematic tournament
Yeah probably too tame for correspondence, interestingly I do intend to play 4.f3 for the most part, but I came up with the 4.Bf4 idea when investgating the Leningrad variation. After 4.Bg5 c5 now 5.d5?! which had been the standard is considered sub-optimal by the engine which prefers 5.e3, and after 5...h6, I concluded that White didn't have to play 6.Bxf6 or 6.Bh4, which is when I started investigating 4.Bf4. I actually may start playing this in FIDE tournaments where I will probably be much lower rated, exactly to get into such a tame line
Scott Ligon (2025-07-05 18:11:53)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
For anyone looking for a quick draw with black against the 17.1 @ 50 million nodes strategy, I recommend the following line:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 Ng4 7. Bc1 Nf6
A repeat of the position after move 5, and since white's strategy is deterministic it is going to keep repeating. So as long as I'm on the 17.1 @ 50 million nodes strategy, play this line as black and you'll get a draw.
Scott Ligon (2025-06-14 02:43:46)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
While analyzing the game I'm currently playing as black against Pineda, I found a winning line for white against Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes. It follows the first 41 moves of that game, and white made a different 42nd move. Which may also lead to a winning line for all I know, but I will just post the one I found. At the end of this line Stockfish found mate in 23.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 d6 6. O-O a6 7. a4 O-O 8. b4 Ba7 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Nbd2 Be6 11. Bxe6 fxe6 12. Nf1 Ng6 13. h3 h6 14. N1h2 Qe8 15. Ra2 a5 16. b5 Bc5 17. Bd2 Rd8 18. Qb3 Qf7 19. g3 d5 20. Kg2 b6 21. Bc1 Bd6 22. Rae2 Bc5 23. Rc2 Rde8 24. Ra2 Bd6 25. Ba3 Rc8 26. c4 Kh7 27. Raa1 Kg8 28. Bb2 c6 29. Rac1 Bb4 30. Re2 d4 31. h4 Qc7 32. bxc6 Bc5 33. Rg1 Rf7 34. Qd1 Qxc6 35. Bc1 Rcf8 36. Rf1 Qd6 37. Rd2 Qc7 38. Ra2 Bb4 39. Rc2 Qb7 40. Rb2 Qd7 41. Bd2 Bc5 42. Qe2 Qc6 43. Rbb1 Nd7 44. h5 Nh8 45. Rb5 Bd6 46. Qd1 Qc7 47. Nh4 Nc5 48. Ng6 Nxg6 49. hxg6 Rf6 50. Qh5 Nxd3 51. Ng4 Qc6 52. Kg1 Qxe4 53. Nxf6+ Rxf6 54. Rxb6 Bf8 55. f3 Qe2 56. Qh2 Qxh2+ 57. Kxh2 e4 58. Bxa5 e3 59. Kg2 Ne5 60. c5 Rxg6 61. c6 Bd6 62. Bb4 Bc7 63. f4 e2 64. Rb1 Bxb6 65. fxe5 d3 66. a5 Rg4 67. Be1 Bxa5 68. Bxa5 Rc4 69. Rb6 Rc5 70. Bb4 Rc4 71. Kf2 Kf7 72. Rb7+ Ke8 73. Re7+ Kd8 74. c7+ Rxc7 75. Rxc7 Kxc7 76. Ke3 Kc6 77. Kxd3 e1=Q 78. Bxe1 Kd5 79. Bc3 Kc5 80. Ke4
Therefore I will be retiring the Stockfish 17.1 @ 20 million nodes strategy. For future games I will be using Stockfish 17.1 @ 50 million nodes.
Scott Ligon (2025-05-01 04:14:23)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
After the harsh words of my previous post, I must now give Pineda some credit. He did exactly what he said he was going to do against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes so now I can't use that strategy in any of my future games, it is retired. Since none of my opponents in the games I have running now with this strategy are playing the same opening that Pineda used (the Italian Game), I can post a winning line for white immediately. Our game followed the first 43 moves of this line, and as black I had to deviate from this strategy on move 43 to avoid certain defeat. So here is a winning line for white against Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes. At the end of the line, Stockfish found mate in 22.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 a6 6. O-O d6 7. a4 O-O 8. b4 Ba7 9. Re1 Ne7 10. Nbd2 Be6 11. Bxe6 fxe6 12. Ra2 Ng6 13. h3 Qe8 14. Nf1 h6 15. N1h2 a5 16. b5 Bc5 17. Bd2 Rd8 18. Qb3 Qf7 19. g3 d5 20. Kg2 b6 21. Bc1 Rc8 22. exd5 Nxd5 23. h4 Bd6 24. h5 Nge7 25. Nxe5 Qxh5 26. Nef3 c5 27. c4 Nb4 28. Rd2 Ng6 29. Qd1 Nf4+ 30. Kh1 Rcd8 31. Re3 Qh3 32. Ne1 Ng6 33. Qe2 Ne7 34. Nf3 Bxg3 35. fxg3 Nf5 36. Qf2 Nxg3+ 37. Kg1 Nf5 38. Bb2 Rf7 39. Bc3 Nxe3 40. Qxe3 Qg3+ 41. Kh1 Qh3 42. Qe4 Qf5 43. Qxf5 exf5 44. Ne5 Rf6 45. Nhf3 g5 46. d4 cxd4 47. Rxd4 Rfd6 48. Rxd6 Rxd6 49. Bxb4 Rd1+ 50. Kg2 axb4 51. c5 b3 52. Nc4 bxc5 53. b6 g4 54. b7 gxf3+ 55. Kxf3
Scott Ligon (2025-04-23 02:27:39)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
At this point all of my games are safely past the point where they could transpose into the winning line I found against the Stockfish 17 @ 15 million nodes strategy, so I will post it now. At the end of the line Stockfish found mate in 15 for white.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 h6 8. Bh4 Be7 9. Qf3 Nbd7 10. O-O-O Qc7 11. Bd3 g5 12. fxg5 Ne5 13. Qe2 Nfg4 14. Bg3 hxg5 15. Kb1 b5 16. Rdf1 Bb7 17. a3 Nf6 18. Nf3 Nh5 19. Bxe5 dxe5 20. g3 f6 21. Na2 Bc6 22. Nc1 b4 23. axb4 Bxb4 24. c3 Be7 25. Nd2 a5 26. Bc4 Bd7 27. Rfg1 Kf7 28. Rg2 Rag8 29. Nd3 Bc5 30. Rd1 Ba7 31. Qg4 Ke7 32. Bb3 a4 33. Ba2 Ng7 34. Nc4 Be8 35. Qe2 a3 36. Nxa3 Ba4 37. Rf1 Bc6 38. Qg4 Rd8 39. Bc4 Be8 40. Qf3 Rf8 41. g4 Bg6 42. b3 Bb8 43. h4 gxh4 44. Kb2 Ne8 45. g5 f5 46. Qh3 Qc6 47. Re2 Ng7 48. Qxh4 f4 49. Nb4 Qb6 50. Bb5 Rh8 51. Nc6+ Qxc6 52. Qxh8 Qxc3+ 53. Kxc3 Rxh8 54. Rd2 Rc8+ 55. Kb2 Kf7 56. Rfd1 Bxe4 57. Rd8 Rxd8 58. Rxd8 Kg6 59. Rxb8 Kxg5 60. Nc4 Nf5 61. Nxe5 Nd6 62. Rb6 Kf6 63. Rxd6 Kxe5 64. Rd7 Bg2 65. Kc3 Be4 66. b4 Ba8 67. Bc4 f3 68. b5
Scott Ligon (2025-04-22 16:09:34)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
I have found a line for white that defeats the 15 million node strategy, so it's time for another strategy upgrade. Due to games in progress I won't specify the line now except to say that once again, it's in the Sicilian defense. Of course there may be other lines as well but one is enough.
Rather than up the node count, I will be moving on to Stockfish 17.1. Conveniently for my purposes, Stockfish 17.1 prefers to meet 1 e4 with e5 at all settings I have checked (1 million to 15 million nodes in 1 million node increments). So for now, my plan is to play Stockfish 17.1 at 10 million nodes in all upcoming games, while sticking with the strategy I started with in currently running games. Of course if I find a winning line for white against 17.1 @ 10 million I will update this.
Scott Ligon (2025-03-29 18:03:58)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
I think there's a decent chance that the 15 million node strategy is unbeatable, but I can't say what that chance is. Maybe I overestimate it. I have spent considerable time looking for a winning line for white and I haven't been able to find one. But, I had that same opinion about the 10 million node strategy before I found evidence in my games that it loses. Specifically games in the Sicilian. I haven't found any other winning lines for white.
As for my opponents, I think mostly they enter tournaments and play their usual game. I'm just another opponent. My focus is on the experiment I'm running, but I wouldn't assume everyone else is focused on it. But if anyone cares to prove that the 15 million node strategy is beatable, exploitive play is clearly the way to go about it. This most recent game shows that even a move that fails to give white an objective advantage could still merit consideration as a possible exploit against the fixed node strategy.
Scott Ligon (2025-03-29 15:42:08)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
I played one last game using the 10 million node strategy against Pineda. The game ended in a draw, but I had to deviate from the 10 million node strategy at the end to avoid losing. I thought the finish was interesting.
https://ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=viewer&game=147951
The key position came after black's 56th move, and up to that point with black I am just following the 10 million node strategy. These are the moves:
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d3 a5 7. h3 b6 8. a3 Nf6 9. Qe2 O-O 10. Nc3 Ne8 11. e5 Nc7 12. Qe4 Ne6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qh4 f6 15. Be3 h6 16. Qg3 g5 17. h4 Qd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. b3 Kh7 20. Rac1 Kg8 21. Rcd1 Ra7 22. Rb1 Ra8 23. Rbc1 Ra7 24. Rcd1 Rb7 25. Bc1 Ra7 26. a4 b4 27. Ne2 Qe8 28. Bb2 Qf7 29. Nd2 Qh5 30. hxg5 fxg5 31. Qe3 Rd7 32. Nc4 Rdd8 33. Ng3 Qg6 34. Nxa5 h5 35. Qe4 Qe8 36. Ne2 h4 37. Rf1 Nf4 38. f3 Be6 39. Nxf4 Rxf4 40. Qe2 g4 41. Bc1 gxf3 42. Rxf3 Rg4 43. Rdf1 Rg6 44. Nc4 Bg4 45. Be3 Rd5 46. a5 Bxf3 47. Rxf3 Bxe5 48. Nb6 Rd8 49. a6 Re6 50. a7 Bc7 51. a8=Q Rxa8 52. Nxa8 Qxa8 53. Rf1 Qe8 54. Qf3 Bd6 55. Bg5 Kg7 56. Bxh4 Be5
I ran a width 6 / depth 55 search with Stockfish 17 on the position after black's 56th move, and the top 5 moves for white along with their eval scores were:
57. Re1
+ (0.39)
57. Qf5
+ (0.37)
57. Qg4+
+ (0.32)
57. Bg3
+ (0.25)
57. Qh3
+ (0.01)
Based on that, you might think white should only consider the top 4 moves. But if we look at this from the point of view of exploiting the 10 million node strategy, here are the evaluations of those top 5 moves after the 10 million node strategy response:
57. Re1 Bd4+
+ (0.52)
57. Qf5 Bd4+
+ (0.54)
57. Qg4+ Qg6
+ (0.42)
57. Bg3 Bc3
+ (0.27)
57. Qh3 Rg6
+ (1.65)
So presumably using that logic, my opponent played Qh3 where the 10 million node strategy would require me to respond with Rg6, which loses the game. Qh3 doesn't stand out at all unless you're trying to exploit the 10 million node strategy. The actual game ended with 57. Qh3 Bd4+ and we agreed to a draw.
Ulises Pineda (2025-03-20 00:31:48)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
Hello, I was a Rybka Forum moderator for several years, as Uly/Vytron, and the person with most games at their Correspondence Chess section.
I've been amassing a great deal of chess analysis since 2007 in Bookup files (later named Chess Openings Wizard files) so I have all the analysis that was posted on the forum.
It was able to hold up for years, until Sotckfish NNUE appeared, that was the software that obsoleted the analysis, as so many moves were misevaluated (it said white had a big advantage when it was the opposite, and vice versa) and Stockfish NNUE was providing, at low depth, moves that were refuting entire variations and trees.
It was at that point I realized I had more than a decade of useless analysis, and it's not just the Fried Liver, it happened in all of chess. In all the positions I analyzed for my games.
Which means any recovered analysis from rybkaforum would be garbage, since I do have it but had to start new trees from scratch because nothing worthwhile could be recovered from the old ones, and it was more trouble than it was worth, Stockfish NNUE would produce variations that from scratch would be more useful to generate than wasting time refuting the old lines.
At the end of the day, getting unpublished was a fortune because people will not waste time looking at those obsolete lines.
Scott Ligon (2025-03-04 16:30:48)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
So the current state of the experiment is that white can defeat the 10 million node strategy, and so far I haven't seen a way for white to win against the 15 million node strategy. Somebody might find a win for white, it just hasn't happened yet.
I already mentioned that if this strategy leads me to a losing position and I notice this in time, I will intervene and stop playing the strategy to try to avoid losing. I will add another exception. If I reach a position that is winning or close to it, I will intervene to try to play for the win, because of course these fixed node strategies don't always find the best move. This has already happened in at least one of my games but I wanted to make my policy clear. I'm using a deterministic strategy as a sort of autopilot mode, but if I get close to winning or losing, I'll turn off the autopilot. This is rare though. Most of the time neither side gets a decisive advantage and I'll stay on autopilot and the game will end in a draw.
Scott Ligon (2025-02-16 21:19:28)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
Since I only won because you made a mistake entering the last move, I will give you a return match at 10 million nodes. You can play it however you want but if we reach a position where I can see that the 10 million node strategy takes me into a losing position, I will take over at that point. Other than that one game, I'm officially retiring the 10 million node strategy since I already know that white can win against it.
Check the waiting lists. I think there's a tournament where I'm first on the list and there's one other player. If you enter third, I believe you would have white against me. I think that's how it works.
Ulises Pineda (2025-02-16 20:29:13)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
In our game I tried to apply some psychology, reach a position that is lost for black where the engine gives a low evaluation so you don't take over the defense of the position until it's too late, too bad I was incapable of making the move I intended to play.
I'd like to request that if we ever play again and I am white and you are black, that we repeat the same game and you turn on the 10 million nodes script after I play the correct move, and we see what would have happened, while I ignore the winning line found against the script.
That's the only chance I have for all the hours of analysis I spent in our game to not go to waste.
Scott Ligon (2025-02-15 22:20:35)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
What I'm calling the winning line is only winning if black is restricted to the strategy of Stockfish 17 using 10 million node searches, though by the end of the line it is also objectively winning. Some of black's responses when using this strategy are mistakes, otherwise white wouldn't have a winning line. 21... g5 might not be black's best response but the position should still be defensible at that point. It starts to get very bad after 27 Rba1 Nf7 which I think is black's fatal error or close to it. Prior to that black should still have some defense.
Scott Ligon (2025-02-09 21:47:17)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
My remaining games where I'm using the 10 million node strategy as black have gone past the point where they could transpose into white's winning lines against the 10 million node strategy (at least the two winning lines that I managed to find), so I will post them now. I found both lines while analyzing games that have now finished.
Game 147097: Kruse vs Ligon
https://ficgs.com/game_147097.html
Due to a repetition, the position after black's move 22 in the game was the same as the position after black's move 20 in the following line where white wins.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Re1 e5 6. Bxc6 dxc6 7. a4 Nh6 8. d3 O-O 9. Be3 Qd6 10. Na3 f6 11. Nc4 Qe7 12. a5 Ng4 13. Bd2 Nh6 14. Qe2 Be6 15. h4 Ng4 16. Ra4 Rf7 17. Rb1 Bf8 18. h5 Qd7 19. b3 Re8 20. Re1 Rg7 21. Rb1 g5 22. Ne1 Nh6 23. Ne3 Qc8 24. g3 Bd6 25. N1g2 Bf8 26. f3 Qb8 27. Rba1 Nf7 28. Ng4 Qd8 29. Qf2 Nd6 30. Be3 b5 31. axb6 axb6 32. b4 Bxg4 33. fxg4 cxb4 34. Rxb4 b5 35. Rbb1 Qd7 36. Qf3 Rf7 37. Kh2 Rb8 38. Ba7 Rc8 39. Bf2 b4 40. Be1 c5 41. Ne3 Nb5 42. Nd5 Qc6 43. Bd2 Nc7 44. Ra7 c4 45. Rba1 Bc5 46. Nxb4 Bxb4 47. Bxb4 cxd3 48. cxd3 Rb8 49. Be1 Rb2+ 50. Bf2 Ne6 51. Ra8+ Rf8 52. Rxf8+ Nxf8 53. h6 Kf7 54. Kh3 Rb3 55. Ra2 Ke8 56. Ra7
Game 147106: Pineda vs Ligon
https://ficgs.com/game_147106.html
First 36 moves are the same as the following line where white wins. Black got the win only because white made a mistake in entering the final move, otherwise we were headed for a draw.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. O-O Bg7 5. Bxc6 dxc6 6. d3 a5 7. h3 b6 8. a3 Nf6 9. Qe2 O-O 10. Nc3 Ne8 11. e5 Nc7 12. Qe4 Ne6 13. Re1 Qd7 14. Qh4 f6 15. Be3 h6 16. Qg3 g5 17. h4 Qd8 18. Bd2 b5 19. b3 Kh7 20. Rac1 Kg8 21. Rcd1 Ra7 22. Rb1 Ra8 23. Rbc1 Ra7 24. Rcd1 Rb7 25. Bc1 Ra7 26. a4 b4 27. Ne2 Qe8 28. Bb2 Qf7 29. Nd2 Qh5 30. hxg5 fxg5 31. Qe3 Rd7 32. Nc4 Rdd8 33. Ng3 Qg6 34. Nxa5 h5 35. Qe4 Qe8 36. Ne2 h4 37. f3 Nd4 38. Rf1 Bf5 39. Qe3 Ne6 40. Bc1 Qg6 41. Nxc6 Rd7 42. Na5 Rf7 43. Rde1 Rd8 44. Nc4 Rdf8 45. Nb6 h3 46. Rf2 hxg2 47. Rxg2 Qh5 48. Rh2 Bh3 49. f4 g4 50. Qg3 Ng5 51. Rf1 Bxe5 52. Nd7 Bc7 53. Nxf8 Kxf8 54. Kh1 Qh6 55. Rff2
Scott Ligon (2025-01-17 14:44:57)
Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings?
To be clear, I still don't know if it can be beaten at 10 million nodes. Someone might eventually find a line with white that beats Stockfish 17 at these settings. But the longer the experiment goes without anyone finding such a line, the more confident I will be that it can't be beaten.
Here is a line that beats Stockfish 17 at 5 million nodes.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 e5 6. Ndb5 d6 7. Nd5 Nxd5 8. exd5 Nb8 9. a4 Be7 10. Bd2 O-O 11. a5 f5 12. Be2 Bd7 13. O-O Be8 14. Ra2 h6 15. Kh1 Bg5 16. Be1 a6 17. Na3 Nd7 18. Nc4 Qc7 19. Bb4 Nc5 20. Ra3 Bb5 21. Nb6 Rad8 22. c4 Be8 23. Be1 Nd7 24. Nxd7 Qxd7 25. b4 Rc8 26. f3 Bh5 27. Bf2 e4 28. c5 dxc5 29. Bxc5 Rfe8 30. d6 Kh8 31. f4 Bxe2 32. Qxe2 Bf6 33. Qh5 Rf8 34. Rd1 Kh7 35. Rg3 Bd8 36. Rd5 Rf6 37. Qd1 Rf7 38. Re3 g5 39. Qh5 gxf4 40. Re1 e3 41. Rf1 Rf8 42. Rd4 Bf6 43. Rdxf4 Bg5 44. R4f3 Qf7 45. Qxf7+ Rxf7 46. Bxe3 Bxe3 47. Rxe3 Kg7 48. g3 Rc4 49. Rf4 Rc1+ 50. Kg2 Rd1 51. Re7 Rd2+ 52. Rf2 Rxd6 53. Rxf7+ Kxf7 54. Rxf5+ Kg6 55. Rc5 Rd2+ 56. Kf3 Rb2 57. Rc4
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).
Herbert Kruse (2024-10-04 07:12:28)
Chess Cup-1st Stage
The worst part is, that White cannot offer a draw, because he hast No move.
With only Kings ON Board you can move and offer it ;)
Ilmars Cirulis (2024-02-18 18:00:07)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8 22. Rd1 b6 - still don't know for sure if this is a draw or maybe white can win somehow...
When is thematic tournament(s) happening? :sweat_smile:
Scott Ligon (2024-01-16 20:31:54)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
The Fried Liver just seems like a bad choice for black when the main line (5... Na5) equalizes, and if you want something different there's 5... b5 where white gets some advantage with 6. Bf1 but more frequently plays 6. Bxb5 where black is again equal and can expect to be more familiar with the position. I had a look at your lichess study. Are you mainly just taking notes on the computer evaluations of various lines as a general reference, or is this something you actually intend to learn in detail so you can play it?
Scott Ligon (2024-01-13 20:47:35)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
In that case, I don't think white can improve on the following line (depth 49):
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Bb3 Bf5 14. Bd2 a5 15. Nxd5+ Nxd5 16. c4 Nb4 17. Rxe5+ Kd8 18. a3 Nd3 19. Bxa5+ Rxa5 20. Rxa5 Kc7
5b1r/1pk3p1/2p2q1p/R4b2/2PP4/PB1n4/1P3PPP/R2Q2K1 w - -
+ (0.45)
Ilmars Cirulis (2024-01-13 09:16:39)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
After 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ Ke6 8.Nc3 Nb4 9.O-O c6 10.d4 Qf6 11.Qd1 Ke7 12.Re1 h6 there is also 13.Bb3 with +0.64 for white (at depth 52). Something more to explore. :)
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.
Scott Ligon (2024-01-12 01:54:00)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
The Lolli (6 d4) is no better for white. Black survives in the following line, and white has no other options worth checking.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. d4 Nxd4 7. c3 b5 8. Bd3 h6 9. Nxf7 Kxf7 10. cxd4 exd4 11. O-O Rb8
1rbq1b1r/p1p2kp1/7p/1p1n4/3p4/3B4/PP3PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w - -
+ (0.51)
Scott Ligon (2024-01-11 23:22:00)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
I checked the Fried Liver with Stockfish 16, just far enough to convince myself that black can probably hold the draw. I'll post five key lines along with the eval at the end of each line, including the FEN encoding of the position being evaluated. I went through white's options and I see no way for white to improve on these lines, although 6 d4 instead of Nxf7 should also be checked. Anyway here are the line evaluations.
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8 22. Rd1 b6 23. Bc1 Qe6
r4r2/p1k3p1/1ppbq2p/3n1R2/3P4/P2Q2N1/1P3PPP/2BR2K1 w - -
+ (0.79)
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8 22. Rd1 b6 23. Qb1 Rfe8
r3r3/p1k3p1/1ppb2qp/3n1R2/3P4/P5N1/1P1B1PPP/1Q1R2K1 w - -
+ (0.80)
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8 22. Qf3 Rae8
4rr2/ppk3p1/2pb2qp/3n1R2/3P4/P4QN1/1P1B1PPP/R5K1 w - -
+ (0.70)
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Ne4 Qg6 14. a3 Bf5 15. Ng3 Bxc2 16. Qf3 Nd3 17. Re2 Ke8
r3kb1r/pp4p1/2p3qp/3np3/2BP4/P2n1QN1/1Pb1RPPP/R1B3K1 w - -
+ (0.63)
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Nb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qe2 Ke7
r1b2b1r/pp2k1pp/2p2q2/3np3/1nBP4/2N5/PPP1QPPP/R1B2RK1 w - -
+ (0.44)
Ilmars Cirulis (2024-01-06 20:27:54)
Fried Liver analysis on rybkaforum.net?
Does someone want to test this variation (to play it with white and try to win):
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Ng5 d5 5. exd5 Nxd5 6. Nxf7 Kxf7 7. Qf3+ Ke6 8. Nc3 Ncb4 9. O-O c6 10. d4 Qf6 11. Qd1 Ke7 12. Re1 h6 13. Rxe5+ Kd8 14. Ne4 Qg6 15. a3 Bf5 16. Ng3 Bxc2 17. Qf3 Nd3 18. Rf5 Bd6 19. Bxd3 Bxd3 20. Qxd3 Kc7 21. Bd2 Rhf8
I'm currently analysing it.
The 21... Rae8 seems to be losing (I lost the game against Scott Nichols convincingly).
Juri Eintalu (2023-11-18 03:57:22)
A Public Appeal to Chess Organisations
to Thibault de Vassal:
"Recently, Hamas chose to attack civilians instead of Israel (this is a war crime, no ambiguity there), Israel now does everything to destroy Hamas, making many victims among civilians. But this may not be war crimes according to definition. Nothing obvious there, we'll see."
The 07 October attack is quite recent, and I would not say that all the circumstances are clear. For example, I am not sure that Hamas "chose" to kill civilians.
The only thing that is sure is that some number of civilians were killed by Hamas. It is sure, because Israel accuses Hamas of killing the civilians, and one of Hamas leaders has publicly admitted, that during that attack, Hamas killed some civilians "accidentally".
Killing civilians may make it a war crime. Intentionally killing civilians may make it an act of terrorism.
After the 07 October attack, Israel has killed awfully many civilians in the Gaza Strip. I totally agree with those experts who say that such a bombing of the sieged territory is not self-defence and it is a war crime - at the very least.
Note that during the 07 October attack, approximately 1200 people were killed, some of them were soldiers, and the others were civilians, many of them unarmed civilians.
Under Israel's bombs, in the Gaza Strip, during one month, more than 10,000 unarmed civilians were killed. Most of them were women and children. And it has not yet ended.
As of now, no one of the participants in the present discussion has said anything at all about the content of my Public Appeal. It seems that no one has even read it, despite I inserted the link into my initial post. I did not try to present the text directly here, on the Forum, as it was perhaps too lengthy for the Forum.
I shall provide the link to my Public Appeal again:
https://medium.com/@eintalu/a-public-appeal-to-chess-organisations-on-the-bombing-of-the-gaza-strip-be56afd3f5ca
Concerning civilian causalities of the Gaza bombing, and the comparison of the Ukraine war and the Israel war, I provided the following information in my Public Appeal:
<International organisations confirm that Israel has managed to kill more children in the Gaza Strip in one month in 2023 than were killed in all the war zones on the planet in the whole of 2022. In fact, significantly more children have been killed by Israeli bombs in one month than in two years of war in Ukraine. See also, e.g.:
“GAZA: 3,195 CHILDREN KILLED IN THREE WEEKS SURPASSES ANNUAL NUMBER OF CHILDREN KILLED IN CONFLICT ZONES SINCE 2019”
Save the Children, 29 October 2023
https://www.savethechildren.net/news/gaza-3195-children-killed-three-weeks-surpasses-annual-number-children-killed-conflict-zones# >
Now, while talking about the attacks on civilians, you (as other participants of the discussion) simply ignore my Public Appeal.
Concerning your political views about the real intentions of Russia when starting a war against Ukraine, what you present dogmatically and without evidence - the only sober reply is that dogmatically and without evidence, one could as well assert whatever about the Israeli real intentions concerning the Gaza war.
However, we have direct evidence from the public speeches of Israel's leadership, that the intentions of the Gaza war are genocidal.
I conclude that you are trying to whitewash Israeli large-scale war crimes and crimes against humanity while ignoring the text of my Public Appeal.
A. T. S. Broekhuizen (2023-08-18 14:32:53)
Next thematic tournament
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 h6 5. c3 d6 6. Nbd2 g5
Two knights defence, pianissimo invitation, declined. Played by some top gm's like Caruana. Seems to give white an edge, but is it winning?
Garvin Gray (2023-08-16 14:17:48)
Next Ficgs World Championship Tournament
Thank you for starting RR 25. I think for future Wch RR's, that the RR section should be 9 players instead of 8 to ensure that each player gets 4 whites and 4 blacks.
Ilmars Cirulis (2022-11-30 01:06:20)
I did not win a game since 3 years
> I still believe that Traxler counter attack could bring really good matches, tournaments & championships :)
I'm currently using my e-points for Big Chess matches, but when I get enough of them (Big Chess matches), I would like to play white against Traxler (for e-points, draw counts as loss for white). :D
Ilmars Cirulis (2022-11-29 19:50:02)
I did not win a game since 3 years
Heh, the discussion reminds my efforts to refute Traxler (with Bxf7). :D We had some thematic games where draw counted as loss for white.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-27 22:06:35)
I did not win a game since 3 years
If you mean John Shaw's book on the King's Gambit, I have that book and he did say that the Bishop's Gambit is refuted. But he qualifies what he means: "In this context I define the term 'refutation' as Black being better in all variations, not winning by force." Not much of a refutation. If you search my game history, I have played the Bishop's Gambit several times and I haven't lost. That's why I'm confident white can hold the draw.
I'd be willing to play in that thematic tournament, and I'd be very well prepared.
Stanislas Gounant (2022-11-27 21:46:50)
I did not win a game since 3 years
I think it's better to play a position with players can't open the center. But i'm ok to play a thematic tournament with black and white on bishop's gambit. Rated if it's possible Thibault
Scott Ligon (2022-11-26 14:55:46)
I did not win a game since 3 years
I couldn't use the link but I found game number 137701. You won against the King's Gambit but your opponent played 3 d4. Which is actually the kind of position I'm talking about. Right on the edge of outright losing and I'm not sure if white is already over the edge. Anyway I haven't been brave enough to try that one. 3 Bc4 is as far as I go, at least for now.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-25 17:10:39)
I did not win a game since 3 years
What does it even mean to have an advantage? Engine analysis has changed my perspective on this issue. From a human perspective, we can say that white has an advantage at the start of the game, and the statistics support this. At the highest levels of human chess white wins more often than black, but it's more often a draw. So white has a slight advantage.
From the perspective of correspondence chess with modern engines, the advantage is shown to be an illusion. It's just a draw. The engine evaluation at the start might be +0.15 or whatever, but if both sides are using an engine and there's no severe time constraint, it doesn't mean anything. By move 20 or so of a competently played correspondence game the engine analysis will have converged to 0.00 and it will stay there for the rest of the game.
In the final analysis, there's no such thing as a slight advantage. Every position is either a forced checkmate for one side or the other, or it's a draw. Even modern engines haven't pushed things that far, but they're strong enough to obliterate our human concept of an advantage.
A. T. S. Broekhuizen (2022-11-25 16:48:19)
I did not win a game since 3 years
In case of the openings I mentioned earlier, I think there is a possibility for white to hold on to an advantage. The problem is that with the superhuman playing strength of engines nowadays, one will have to study harder than before to keep up with the engine. But now, after I studied these variations in detail, it has become clear. In practice one nowadays will have to have the right approach before the game to the played opening, otherwise I think it is not doable anymore to find the way to any white advantage during the game. This can be frustrating, but also in OTB chess more and more engine designed defences are played, so it is prudent to study these "unbeatable" defences.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-25 16:20:13)
I did not win a game since 3 years
The problem with the two opening you suggested is that they're too good. Neither side made a mistake, so the engines will hold the draw every time (barring human error). The King's Gambit is a step in the right direction for a thematic tournament (with engines), and as long as everyone has an equal number of whites and blacks that's fair enough. I still think it's too easy for white to draw in the KGA with Nf3. The KGA with Bc4 is a bit more treacherous though I've explored it enough to be confident that white holds the draw. Anyway, I do think the openings need to be somewhat dubious or it's too easy for engines to draw.
A. T. S. Broekhuizen (2022-11-25 10:20:51)
I did not win a game since 3 years
I think you don't have to go as far as to play dubious variations, as long as the chosen variations (for a thematic tournament) still have some 'music' left in them. I also have two suggestions: the Rio gambit against the Berlin wall and the following transposition into the Rubinstein variation of the French defence: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 dxe4 5.Nxe4. Besides, lately I still have won a game against the King's gambit with black. But this is much harder than holding a draw with white, so I would not define success for white as a draw and for black as a win in this case.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-23 21:22:50)
I did not win a game since 3 years
Surely there are some positions where it's difficult to determine, even with engine assistance, whether the position is a game theoretic win or a draw. And then playing that position out would be interesting. That's all my proposed variant would depend on. The first player looks for a position that would be interesting to play, and if they've done their job well, the second player has a difficult task in deciding whether they want to play the side with advantage for a win or the other side for a draw. I think this would work up until the point that chess is actually solved.
The starting position could be as simple as 1. g4 (a terrible first move of course). Maybe black has a forced win and maybe with careful play white can hold the draw. If I did a lot of Stockfish analysis the answer might become clear but with a quick analysis I'm not sure. But if I knew the answer either way for 1. g4, I could always look at other positions. At least this would be a game where the outcome isn't immediately obvious.
Stanislas Gounant (2022-11-23 20:17:39)
I did not win a game since 3 years
The problem with the starting positions in FICGS thematic tournaments, one of the player can open the position and it will be draw. Some years ago, someone show me a youtube video about a game played on TCEC between leela chess zero and Stockfish.
https://tcec-chess.com/#div=sf&game=61&season=15
The engines start to play at move 7, white had more space and black can't open the position
Scott Ligon (2022-11-22 16:25:45)
I did not win a game since 3 years
Yet another amendment. From the previous post, we can eliminate the FICGS server evaluation and let the first player stipulate which side is playing for the win. If they assign the advantage incorrectly, this only helps their opponent, so the first player has no reason to lie. Example: First player picks the King's Bishop Gambit as the starting position (1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4) but erroneously claims that white has the advantage, so the second player has to choose between playing white for the win or black for the draw. Second player happily chooses to play black for the draw and should have no trouble holding the draw.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-22 15:22:57)
I did not win a game since 3 years
Here's another idea. We start with two pools of starting positions. One pool where white has an advantage that may or may not be winning. Another pool where black has the advantage. First player picks a position from either pool. Let's say the first player picks from the white advantage pool (on the border between winning advantage for white and draw). Second player gets to choose which side of that position they want to play. They can either play white but then they have to win, or black but then all they need to do is draw. So no matter the outcome, each match will be decisive. We'd just have to populate the pool of opening positions first.
Scott Ligon (2022-11-22 14:53:59)
I did not win a game since 3 years
As for ways to address this, if engines are allowed you could have tournaments from a starting position where the game theoretic value isn't clear. Where maybe it's a win for one side or the other, or maybe it's a draw, but it's right on the border and it's not obvious which side we're on. Then you play two games from that position against each opponent, once as white and once as black.
Ilmars Cirulis (2022-10-28 01:45:20)
What about this position?
If white to move, it's win for them.
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!
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.
Don Groves (2021-07-26 02:18:24)
Another error.
In game 129344 the last move for White is Kg2, but the King is still on G1!
Garvin Gray (2021-07-05 08:37:02)
Next Ficgs World Championship Tournament
I added the possibility only of double round robin in Wch because I was not sure it was necessary in every stages (obviously it finds more sense in a round robin final than in stage 1), but anyway I could make it more accurate."
So, in all ways, it sounds like I didn't specify that all 5 players groups in WCH should be double round robin.
Garvin - Are you now specifying that ALL 5 player groups will now be double round robins?
As for the first part, I think actually a DRR (double round robin) in stage 1 is just as important, if not more so.
Here is why.
Players are seeded from 1 to the last player across the groups, going back and forth across the groups to seed the second seeds, third seeds and so forth.
This then can produce large differences in ratings between the players in some groups, and in others, very small differences between the top two seeds.
And it is for this fact, and then that players 3, 4 and 5 are then going to be very far rated below seeds 1 and 2, that a double round robin is necessary.
Otherwise, the number 1 seed gains a rather large advantage by being white against the number two seed.
A double round robin in all groups that are 5 player avoids all these issues. It is only 8 games total.
Wilhelm Schuett (2021-04-06 07:26:38)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?
there are too many good answers for black. White is fighting not to lose.
Thibault de Vassal (2021-04-06 01:19:10)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?
Yes, of course I understand that... that's another topic though.
Wilhelm, what did you mean exactly by "But i see no chance for white"?
Tim Harding (2021-04-02 23:02:25)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?
But you said yourself you are not stopping anyone cheating, so I won't be entering another of these events I think. (Also because 90% of my games with Black I win very easily against weak opponents.) It's possible for White to avoid defeat in the KG if he chooses the safest lines but Black has a wide choice of playable defences. In some of these if White wants to have a real chance to win then he also increases the prospect of losing. I had some failed experiments in these tournaments.
Wilhelm Schuett (2021-04-02 14:23:39)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?
But i see no chance for white
Wilhelm Schuett (2021-04-02 13:46:48)
Berlin Defense
i don't know. White could also play 4. Nc3 or 4. Qe2
Garvin Gray (2021-04-02 06:08:44)
Berlin Defense
Before giving my thoughts on why white is still playing the Ruy Lopez given the drawing odds of the Berlin in correspondence chess, how many games and out of how many has black won with the Berlin?
Thibault de Vassal (2021-03-19 23:53:22)
Berlin Defense
Hmmm, it could be a nice thematic tournament soon :)
You're right actually! I searched games at FICGS, when white elo & black elo > 2300 there is no win for White since 2012 ! (and Black won regularly since then)
That's a good score for Berlin defense. To be continued.
Thibault de Vassal (2020-06-04 13:04:11)
chess archives in pgn
Hello Roberto,
Thanks for detailing your question here.
Yes, the "Go" function below the menu is very general and does not help much for what you would like to do.
The "Search games" option in the menu (below "Waiting lists" and "Tournaments") brings more specific ways:
Years ago, I considered that the complete PGN database was enough to build easily specific databases (player or any criteria, combinations of it, etc.) by using a database software.
Then I added a few search options, per player & per game (chess or Go), per opening, per rating (black or white) and per material for endgames... Of course, this will not replace a serious database like Chessbase.
I hope I was clear too... Does this help?
Wilhelm Schuett (2020-05-24 14:04:07)
Pointless To Play The Kings Gambit ?
I fear that for white playing the Kings Gambit the Kings Gambit itself could be the problem. Our King Supertournament is a place to analyse a chance for white.
Ilmars Cirulis (2020-05-08 01:01:32)
Thematic Suggestion: Traxler
When I was younger I was embarrassingly enthusiastic about refuting this opening. :D
Remembering youth, still believing that white wins (with Bxf7) and having 11.16 epoints, I challenge those who disagree to the Silver thematic game. :)
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.
Wilhelm Schuett (2020-02-28 05:30:47)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
my brainstorming:
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.Nf3 d5 4.cd5 Nxd5 5.e4 Nb4
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.g3 d5 (e6 4.Nf3 b6 5.Bg2 Bb7) 4.cd5 Nxd5 5.Bg2 Nc7
1.c4 b6!?
1.c4 c5 2.g3 Nf6 3.Bg2 d5 4.cd5 Nxd5 5.Qb3
Ilmars Cirulis (2020-02-21 08:16:57)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
Another find was 1.c4 c5 2.g3
Ilmars Cirulis (2020-02-20 11:49:43)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
One option which I found googling is 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 c5 3.Nf3 e6 4.d4
Charles Bovary (2020-02-19 17:20:02)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
But you can't go wrong in the opening:-)Heaven is wide open.
Ilmars Cirulis (2020-02-19 14:22:19)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
It's solid enough to be annoying. :D I dislike playing against it. It's personal/subjective, of course.
Charles Bovary (2020-02-19 14:03:23)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
Why should I? I like to play against!
Ilmars Cirulis (2020-02-18 01:25:27)
Avoiding Hedgehog with white
What are your favorite ways of avoiding it after 1.c4 c5?
George Jempty (2019-01-19 22:33:44)
Thematic tournaments?
I propose Bishop's Gambit. If you play 1.e4 e5 as Black you probably need to know it. And if you play the same as White, it could be a good surprise weapon.
Paul Larwinski (2018-11-17 00:09:46)
World Championship Tie-breaks
there are different ways
possible to play 6 different own openings whith white and with black
longer time control would be better for thinking
Zack Stephen (2018-10-30 13:14:19)
World Championship Tie-breaks
agree with William, eros can draw these matches with his eyes closed at this point, he can easily be champion for the foreseeable future unless a format change is made.
Some other ideas for consideration: Force specific opening thematics in the final (ie each has to play black/white of a kings gambit, or other speculative openings
Don't provide the +1 day for each move. Make the games a set amount of time say 45 days for 60 moves
Make each side play BIG, random, or other variants as tie breaker until a winner is determined
Thibault de Vassal (2018-09-24 00:15:43)
Some questions to H. Kruse, WCH finalist
After that the last FICGS chess WCH final match finished, the choice was made again to ask a few questions to Eros Riccio's challenger: Herbert Kruse, for the 2nd time. He kindly accepted to answer it so let's learn a bit more on our top-ranked correspondence chess player.
______________________________
Hello Herbert, you're not really a player to introduce as you're very active here and at several chess websites for years, with outstanding ratings in each one (as far as I know), you're the 1st FICGS CUP winner & several times FICGS WCH challenger, each time facing "the wall" Eros Riccio, what could you tell us about yourself particularly as a chess & correspondence chess player?
- i began late with 16 to play my first tournament game, but with 18 i already was kicked out of a night club in company with tony miles ;) (dresscode) had vlastimil hort as trainer for a short time and played in teams with gutman, michalchisin, klovans, gipslis and some other GMs. corr chess i began, because i love to find the truth and because of freestyle, where i began to build very strong computers
What kind of computers do you build? Is it all dedicated to chess?
- i have several dual xeon e5 computers with 64gb ddr3 and 16 to 20 real cores and they all play chess ;)
Once again, GM Eros Riccio managed to draw the 12 games of the match. What are your feelings on these games? How did you estimate your chances to destabilize your opponent in the openings and to create complications enough with White (or Black)?
- this time my feelings were neutral. 1% chances to win, but i hoped he would lose his concentration if i began more games with him (we played 6 other games at the same time)
Doesn't "1% chances to win (the match)" mean about 0.17% to win only one game with White, even when losing one with Black? Isn't it a bit pessimistic after all, or is it the new so called Riccio-effect? :)
- if the strongest players face each other there is no win possible, except some has a mouse slep or forgot something during human interfacing
When did you start playing correspondence chess and what changed since that time? What attracted you most in the game?
- 2004 and evaluation of the position is the key point of improvement since then. attractive was to be better than actual world class players :)
Could you tell us anything on the way you work chess and play your correspondence games? Any tip or secret? (nothing to lose to ask :))
- with black i play for fastest way to 0.00 and with white i try every promising way to make a game for a longer time complicated
Do you use several ones at the same time when analyzing a game? (still grabbing some tips)
- i only use the newest stockfish versions of brainfish and corchess because the other engines are not so good. because i have many games i decide which one gets the most cores and time and let them run in infinity mode until i am happy that can be after 1 week or more sometimes.
You're not far to rank 2nd as a poker player at FICGS, you obviously started to take on Big Chess as well. What other games do you play? Did you consider to play Go already?
- i played go against the german champion and lost so i quit :)) played backgammon money game and internet (in fibs with kit woolsey i played over 100 matches) in bridge i was best bidder in germany 1994 to 1995, but dont play much nowadays
Do you have specific goals to achieve as a player?
- 2 goals, since a long time: be ficgs world champion and win one german bridge championship
How do you imagine correspondence chess evolution within a decade? What kind of engines/computers do you expect to use and what will look like centaur chess according to you? (in other words, what part will remain to the human player in the decision?)
- i think the engines today are already unbeatable, so in 20 years the would still not lose and chess is dead since about 4 years
What did you think about Google Deepmind's Alpha Zero performance vs. Stockfish?
- it was a joke because they let a bad version of stockfish play. i would not have lost one game against az0 and maybe won 2 til 5 out of 100
Conditions of this AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match were very specific (opening books, unbalanced hardware...) What weaknesses did you detect in AlphaZero play?
- it was the lack of precision, what would let it lose against stockfish in its tuned newest version but i look from a view of a player who is used to play with deep 60 :)
It seems that computers did not completely take on Bridge yet, what do you expect within a decade?
- i have not seen bridge programms, but the game is so easy that it must be already mastered by computers
Aniruddha Duttagupta (2018-04-09 16:36:15)
unable to play my move!
Dear Mr Thibault, I am sure I played 7...0-0 as the game showed.Ng4 was my intended move after White played 11.f4.But my move was not permitted by the server.I am sure I used the text field.But now I click the pieces as I play my moves on my mobile.I wonder if my 7th move was wrong how the game continued upto 11th move of White!
William Taylor (2018-04-01 19:36:39)
Poll: renaming the Queen as Dragon
Black and White is at least the other way round in Go. Perhaps you should switch chess to Black moving first, and Go to White moving first, for the benefit of those of us who don't play both games.
The problem with cats, of course, is that we would be leaving out dogs.
Thibault de Vassal (2018-04-01 19:28:15)
Poll: renaming the Queen as Dragon
Ah. Interesting point... or maybe by replacing Kings by God & Evil? Hmm, no... or maybe cats.
And what about this Black & White thing? So many questions :)
Thibault de Vassal (2018-03-30 20:19:27)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Hello Herbert,
I think you may misunderstand what Garvin said there: "The simple explanation is that I had the white rook on h3 instead of h2" ... probably meaning that the analysis was based on the wrong position at one time or another / since one or several moves.
Let's wait the end of the tournament. Of course, losses on time are always bad in such tournaments, but it can happen for many reasons.
Thibault de Vassal (2017-12-07 16:44:05)
AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish
It looks like there's no more month without news from Google Deepmind... This time again, this is quite stunning!
AlphaZero would have been able to beat (crush) the most recent version of Stockfish, that is also the world champion program and of course the free engine well known by correspondence chess players.
But most important is that actually AlphaZero would have outperformed Stockfish after only 4 hours of training (if I understood well), while it took 8 hours to outperform AlphaGo Lee and only 120 minutes to outperform Elmo at Shogi! However it seems much much harder for the neural program to improve at chess after this stunningly fast auto-learning.
100 games played (25 wins & 25 draws with white! 3 wins with black... no loss, either with white or black, which is an incredible performance)
All details available (must read) here: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815.pdf
http://www.sciencealert.com/it-took-4-hours-google-s-ai-world-s-best-chess-player-deepmind-alphazero
A few games played by AlphaZero against Stockfish are included in the arxiv article.
Ilmars Cirulis (2017-11-21 08:29:46)
7 pieces tablebases
[kqrb4/8/8/8/8/8/8/KQQ5 w - - 0 1] - for example, this is won for the white. :D
Steven DuCharme (2017-05-30 13:18:24)
Most Embarrassing Loss Ever...
White(me)g3 h3 Rb4 Rd4 Qb8 Kg4 Black g5 h6 Qa5 Kf6 Last move of game was B8(Q).
Resignation immediately followed. Ego crushing for me and a lesson for all.
Ilmars Cirulis (2017-04-23 13:52:47)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw
What about 1.g4? (At the moment I believe that white loses.)
Peter W. Anderson (2017-04-19 08:46:20)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw
One possibility would be to take a selection of openings from the last TCEC final. These were deliberately unbalanced to reduce the drawing chances. They were a superb set of openings. To make it fair people would have to play both sides of an opening.
I could also provide you with some hard to hold positions from the modern defence (I won't be playing, so there will no unfair advantage).
Re the previous suggestions:
- benoni with early Bf4 is a good choice
- czech benoni is definitely overscored by engines but will be a tough hold nonethless; I would watch these games with interest
- Hennig Schara is great fun and I have never lost with it on FICGS, but it really is awful if white plays the best line (but I am not going to say what that is!).
- KID would depend on which line was chosen; some lines have been analysed almost to death, others have plenty of scope left.
One other possibility - a Breyer Lopez. Quite a tough hold IMO and therefore a good choice if everyone plays both sides.
Pablo Schmid (2017-01-22 20:29:46)
Thematic with lowest chances of draw
King's gambit accepted. Probably most of White's gambit too, Schara-Hennig gambit as Black.
Pablo Schmid (2017-01-20 18:05:27)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Why would a thematic disfavour Black? That's not logical, it just depends of the thematic! If we take the King's gambit accepred as example, Black is not worse and may be the opposite! Even if you lose as Black because of the thematuc, you have chance to win the game where you have White against it... At least the idea would be interesting to play very interesting lines and games that fear does not allow in normal time and to contribue to chess theory in wild opening.
Pablo Schmid (2017-01-19 22:32:57)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
How to choose the opening, maybe random in a pre select list, or the whole small selected list, or the choice of the players like 4 choices each. For example I could ask 'I want this subline of the king's gambit" and I should not ask a too risky one because the idea is to try to win the Black(or even White) side while surviving when the color is reversed.
George Jempty (2017-01-19 20:19:53)
Defeating Draw Death
I don't understand the reasoning. If White is only going to score 0.4 for a draw, it behooves him to play more riskily for the win and a full point.
Jan Ohlin (2017-01-19 05:12:15)
Defeating Draw Death
And people will play even more safely as white...
George Jempty (2017-01-19 00:02:36)
Defeating Draw Death
Make draws with White only count 0.4 but draws with Black count 0.6
Jan Ohlin (2017-01-18 20:28:39)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Is there a need to distinguish between black and white? When you win a game in CC it depends first and foremost on blunders, weak play or finally you playing a position where the computer takes long time to come up with something sensible, for example in closed variation in spanish (C97, 12. d5) and therefore best player will win. Ok, winning as black requires a lot of energy for study theory, but ...?
Scott Nichols (2017-01-18 19:44:24)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
I too am bored with CC. IDK what to do either, maybe change scoring system--.9 for white win, 1.1 for black win, same with draws, 5.5 & 4.5 or something...
Thibault de Vassal (2017-01-18 03:32:56)
GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess
Finally, here is a new interview with FICGS correspondence chess champion GM Eros Riccio, who gives us his (surprising?) impressions on his latest win in the championship, his current match and correspondence chess nowadays... A good matter to think about!
http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000012
____________
- Hi again Eros... Once more, congratulations for winning this final match in the 12th FICGS correspondence chess championship. This time, it seems that things went quite differently than in your previous matches (you scored 9 out of 12, which is a huge performance at this level), could you tell us what happened in these games?
--> Hi, yes, finally we have seen some wins after a very long series of draws. I was surprised too, I didn't risk to lose any game and I could even win one as Black... What to say, my opponent was simply not as challenging as the previous ones.
- It's a long time since you won the previous match, would you like to tell us about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you now rank #9 with an outstanding 2643 rating?
--> My latest final on FICGS were my only games of 2016. On ICCF I have taken some rest, the too high draw rate didn't incentive me to start new tournaments, also because drawing all games with a high rating means losing points.
- In the next final match (13th cycle), you play Peter W. Anderson for the 3rd time... so you probably know each other's opening book quite well. What do you expect for in this match?
--> Anderson is a very tough opponent, it's not a coincidence that he reached the final for the third time. I tried to win at least one game as White, but he's incredibly hard to beat. I experimented with almost anything possible against his modern defence, but I could never find a single weakness in his repertoire. I will see what to invent this time against his terrific 1...g6.
- As you probably know, another Go champion (Lee Sedol) lost a 5-games match to AlphaGo this year, while chess engines (now Stockfish 8, Houdini 5 Komodo 10...) slowly but surely continue to improve... Still waiting for the quantum computers. How do you feel things should go in the next years? Did your way of playing advanced chess or correspondence chess change these last years?
--> I have said a lot already about the very high draw rate of the recent years... I am surprised that some changes haven't been done already, like switching to chess 960, even modifying some chess rules, or at least giving 1,5 points for one win. Otherwise a lot of players will lose interest in seeing a series of all draws in the tournaments they play. I am one of those players who lost interest in correspondence chess, and even in blitz chess, engine vs engine, as we can see the extremely high draw rate situation there too.
- Finally, what can we wish for you for the next year? :)
--> Wish me to lose the match with Anderson :-) even I got bored of seeing myself there over and over in the final! That will bring some new air and that way I can take some total rest in corr. chess.
- Many thanks for your time, have a great match!
--> Welcome, and thanks.
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.
Scott Nichols (2017-01-06 01:11:10)
Future penalties for games lost on time
In a fairly short game #93472 it looks like black just gave the game to white. Usually this would go unnoticed. But, the white player and I have a gentelmanly bet on the outcome. he got four free points. I think they should be taken away and the black player should suffer a penalty for collusion.
Ilmars Cirulis (2016-03-28 13:51:48)
3 catches on the "river"
It's still possible.
I had ten games in a row as white against the same opponent once (probability = 1/1024, only ~80 times more probable than your situation). :D
George Jempty (2016-02-20 14:34:47)
Thematic tournaments?
OK I will have to search for those O'Kelly games. 3.d4 is not as bad as everybody thinks, if White follows up 3...cxd4 with 4.Bc4. Probably drawish in correspondence but better for OTB
George Jempty (2016-02-12 13:12:38)
Thematic tournaments?
Actually Anand was White in that O'Kelly game -- Morozevich was Black. And anyway it transposed into a Paulsen by move 6.
Thibault de Vassal (2016-01-26 21:40:10)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
One more concern while writing these cup rules: Are norms fair while having one game more with white or black in tournaments? There never was the case before here.
Thibault de Vassal (2016-01-19 00:25:30)
FICGS chess cup : proposal
Yes, correct. Thanks for this answer!
Isn't it a problem that in a few groups, half players take White one time more than Black? ... and some to have one game/opponent less than in other groups? (by the way, a bit harder to code/launch the games)
These points (equity) were always of first importance to me in all tournaments and I don't remember having seen this elsewhere (but I can be wrong, I'm not used to ICCF tournaments, for example). What do you think? Why is it such a problem for you to wait a few more days to "complete" a waiting list? Please note that I'm not really opposed to this idea, I just want to be sure that not all players disagree with this.
Dann Corbit (2016-01-07 23:52:11)
Thematic tournaments?
Analysis for BDG:
rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/3p4/3PP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - acd 37; acs 2548; bm dxe4; cce 35; ce 30; id "gentest-5125"; pm dxe4 {2629} e6 {408} c6 {293} Nc6 {16} c5 {16} Nf6 {14} a6 {1} e5 {1}; pv dxe4 Nc3 Nf6 Bg5 c6 Nge2 h6 Bxf6 exf6 Nxe4 f5 Nd2 Bd6 g3 O-O Bg2 Be6 O-O Nd7 c4 Nf6 Qb3 Rb8 Qc3 Re8 Rfe1 Qd7 Rac1 Rbd8 Nf3 Ne4 Qe3 b5 cxb5 cxb5 Ne5 Bxe5 dxe5 Bxa2 Bxe4 fxe4 Qxe4; white_wins 1092; black_wins 1345; draws 800; Opening Blackmar-Diemer Gambit: Fritz Attack. ; CaxtonID: 197 ECO: D00;
Stephane Legrand (2015-11-26 18:48:38)
repetition wrong in ficgs
Wrong draw in Game 82598. Last position white to play... ??
There are 100 results for White in wikichess.
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
Florian Cafiero (1519)
Nh3 d5 g3 e5 f4 Bxh3 Bxh3 exf4
End of the Paris Gambit, considered extremely dubious for the white, as it gives up both position and material.
============
Contributors : Paul Valle, Florian Cafiero
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
By delaying d6 black is able to develop his dark-squared bishop to this more active square, and his two bishops now exert a lot of pressure on the centre and towards the white kingside.
============
Contributors : William Taylor
William Taylor (2110)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Ba4 Nf6 O-O b5 Bb3 Bb7 Re1
The traditional main line, though d3 has gained in popularity recently. White defends e4 and prepares to follow up with c3 and d4, a typical plan in the Ruy Lopez.
============
Contributors : William Taylor
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
Gregory Kohut (1592)
e4 Nc6 d4 e5 dxe5
This is now a line of the Nimzowitsch, though why white would be comfortable with the Nimzowitsch and start with d4 is unknown.
============
Contributors : Kieran Child
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
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 cxb4 a3 e6 Bb2 Nc6 axb4 Bxb4 e3 Bc5 Qa4 Bd7 Qb3
the queen slide, at a4 and b3 is promising.
black has nearly no way to keep his extra, had bot d3 and dxe3 run into Bxg7. and Bd7 run into Qb5, and of crouse, e5 is just a bolt sacrifice, it fail since after Nxe5 Nxe5. White will go with a exd4 !!!, notice the poor fxe5 lose. to Qh4 +
============after Nxe5n
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 Nf6 e3 Bg4 h3
Lead to white advantage, witjh the idea of an early g4.
============
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)
e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bc4 Nf6 Ng5 d5 exd5 Nxd5 Nxf7 Kxf7 Qf3 Ke6 Nc3 Ncb4 a3 Nxc2+ Kd1 Nxa1 Nxd5 Kd7 d4 a6 Re1 Bd6 Rxe5 Kc6 Bb5+
To have perpetual check white give his bishop.
============
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
Now the game consist of a lot of rook move, in the goal of exchanging the black rook, after white, black's game is gone.
============
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
the only move.
After Nf2, White should go for Kg2. as other move as poor.
============
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
And now , white process, to replace his bishop on g2, as on e2, it was useless , right now, it will be better on g2.
============
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
Do not help white.
============
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
Sure , Rc1 would be good, but, now, white has time....
============
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
A correct decision... when white lack in developpement, he exchange piece, but he make black, pay the price of those exchange. Whitout that, white would fall behind for the entire game.
============
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
The only way to develop a bishop, the white's square bishop.
============
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 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2 e6 Na3
In case an unpleasant Qf6, white allow himself to have the move Rb1.
============
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
there is little to do now. white is too active for any serious move, black lack any counter play.
============
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
Now white is fully developped and only need to destroy black's last queenside guard.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
Luc-Olivier Leclerc (1800)
f4 d5 Nf3 c5 c4 d4 b4 b6 g3 Bb7 bxc5 bxc5 Bg2
Natural play. one should not worry, should castle and maybe after he could play an Ne5, which is naturel, in the bird, even at the cost, of exchanging the white,s square bishop.
============
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
Curions opening, a curious gambit, in which white attack black's centre,
Black has no reason to accept it, but he can just take b4 and not on a3.
This^ opening should called the AudreySophie gambit. Or by my name, if your prefer to be not imaginative...
For now, black does not seem to have any way to bust it. And white trie for a big play everyside of the board.
============
Contributors : Luc-Olivier Leclerc
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
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nf6
Interesting alternative without much theory behind it. d3, Nc3 and e3 might be most playable here. Nc3 has been most tried by white in history.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2 d5 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe5 g3
Now white is in risk of becoming underdeveloped after black Nf6 or Bc5.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2 d5 cxd5 Qxd5 Nc3 Qe5
Black queen has found secure spot where it cramps whole lot of whites game.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4 Nd4 Nc6 Nc2
This is good spot for white knight. One could look at the position as being sicilian defence reversed where "black" had played "Nf6" after "Nc3". Of course in reversed positiont white always has extra tempo.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3 e4
This is called King's english: Nimzowitsch-Flohr variation.
This is Alekhine defense reversed where position differs in that white has played c5.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
Lauri Lahnasalo (1600)
c4 e5 Nf3
Gives yet another twist to this position which was english - sicilian reversed and now has the flavour of Alekhine defense reversed.
Maybe not white's best move but very interesting.There is lot of a chess game ahead.
============
Contributors : Lauri Lahnasalo
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
Sophie Leclerc (1573)
e4 e5 f4 exf4 Nf3 Be7 Bc4 Bh4+ Kf1
By far the best move, as the bishop is attacked, black has to spend another tiempo to developpe the king knight.
While with g3, white take enerous risk for nothing.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1573)
e4 e5 f4 Qf6 Nf3 Qxf4 Nc3 Bb4 Bc4 Bxc3 O-O
the only possible monve, it give white compensation for the lost piece, Taking on c3 let black carrie out his treat. (Qxe4 check )
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Ray Downs (1575)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 a3 Qxb2 Na4
Traps the black Queen. Black will have to trade his queen for white's rook now.
============
Contributors : Ray Downs
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
Benjamin Block (1660)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Be3 e5 Nb3 Be6 Nd5 Nbd7 f3 Be7
?! Not recomdenderad but there is some nice analys by some good players+fast computers that even make white win but in the moment black fix a draw.
============
Contributors : Benjamin Block
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
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
Normajean Yates (1967)
d4 f5 Nc3 d5 e4 dxe4
Transposes to a Blackmar-Gambit variation which is somewhat favourable to white.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
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
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 Rf7 Rg3+ Kh8 Ng5 Rg7 Nxe6 Rf7 Rf1 e4 Bxe4 fxe4 Rxf7 Rd1+ Rf1 Rxf1+ Kxf1 Qb1+ Kf2 Qxc2+ Kf1 Qb1+ Ke2 Qb2+ Kf1 Bb4
Wins! Now it is Black -not White- who is looking for mate, so White will be forced to swap queens, but-
============
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 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 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
Typical Anand, this is in practice a strong move, as now 29.Bxf5 meets the sardonic 29...e4! with an unsavory pin. White could anyway enter that line, as 30.Rb3 with the idea of R3-b1 seems to be OK. In time trouble, Grischuk couldnt possibly see that escape.
============
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 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 Qxc6
White is winning.
============
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 Qxa2 Rd1 Be7 Be2 O-O O-O Ra7 Rf3 Rd7 Bd3 f5 Qh6 Kh8 Ng5 Bc5+ Kh1 Qa5 Rh3
It is noteworthy that (compared with the correct defence 21...Rf7! 22.Rg3+ Kh8) White has won a move here.
============
Contributors : Telmo Escobar
Normajean Yates (1975)
d4 d5 c4 c6 Nf3 Nf6 Nc3 dxc4 a4 Na6 e3 Bg4 Bxc4 e6 h3 Bh5 O-O Nb4 Qe2 Be7 Rd1 O-O g4 Bg6 e4 Nd7
Black is at least equal, and white's c1-Bishop is still hemmed in. All because of the weak 6.e3 in this line.
============
Contributors : Normajean Yates
Sandor Porkolab (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 Nf3 Ba6
5...Ba6 not the best move here. The f1 white Bishop not moved yet - white can capture directly the a6 Bishop and losing a potential tempo. Black move ...Ba6 should commence only after the f1 Bishop moved to e2 or d3.
============
Contributors : Sandor Porkolab
Sandor Porkolab (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 Nf3 Ne7 Bd3 Ba6 Bxa6 Nxa6
7.Nxa6 - the white square bishops removed from the table. Now black having a safe/defendable position.
============
Contributors : Sandor Porkolab
Sandor Porkolab (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 Nf3 Ne7 Bd3 Ba6
6...Ba6 Here is the meaning of the earlier 4...b6 move - giving way to the c8 Bishop to a6 to go for the Bishop exchange. It is a good plan for black to remove the light square Bishops from the table - deactivating an active white bishop for a passive black bishop.
Options for white:
A, 7.0-0 castling
B, 7.Bxa6 go for the Bishop exchange
============
Contributors : Sandor Porkolab
Sandor Porkolab (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 a4 a5
5...a5 stopping white's plan 6.a5. 5...Nc6!?
============
Contributors : Sandor Porkolab
Sandor Porkolab (1476)
e4 e6 d4 d5 e5 b6 c3 Qd7 Nf3
5.Nf3 Standard build up from white
============
Contributors : Sandor Porkolab
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 Bh3 Nxd4 Rg4+ Kh2 Rh8
White surrender since he can't stop Bf1 checkmate, he can only slow his death .
0-1.
============
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 Bh3 Nxd4 Rg4+ Kh2
Bg2 doesn't help white at all.
============
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 Bh3 Nxd4
His last error. Rg4 and Rh8 will be fatal for white.
============
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 Bh3
This cut away white retreat and instore a new mate treat.
============
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
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
This block both the great diagonal, the bishop and white's knight from causing queen side problem.
============
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
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
The queen take a fine semi-open file.
This prevent Nxd4 as the move in question will cost white a rook.
============
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
This cleary reveal that white wants to castle queen side since the h-file is half-open.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5 Nf3
White is ready to castle knigside.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2 Nc6 Nc3 Nf5
Whit this move, black has now an important treath. the knight manaver f5-d4 and c6-b4 and taking on c2, the classical forks to take a rook.
Of course, White can do something to this treath right away.
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
Sophie Leclerc (1242)
e4 f5 exf5 Nf6 g4 g6 g5 Ne4 d3 Nd6 fxg6 hxg6 Bg2
This take the h1-a8 diagonal. A good control. White will this bishop to defend the white king.
============
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
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
Sebastian Boehme (2062)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 f4 Qb6 Qd2 Qxb2 Rb1 Qa3 e5 h6 Bh4 dxe5 fxe5 Nd5 Nxd5 exd5 Bc4
Another interesting try for white here!
============
Contributors : Sebastian Boehme
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
Kostis Megalios (1400)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 h4
A really aggressive move which is quite popular in club play and especially in blitz games as white now is not able to play e6.
============
Contributors : Kostis Megalios
Kostis Megalios (1400)
e4 c6 d4 d5 e5 Bf5 Nf3
this is along with c3 the quiet way to play for white.
============
Contributors : Kostis Megalios
Normajean Yates (1946)
e4 c5 Nf3 d6 d4 cxd4 Nxd4 Nf6 Nc3 a6 Bg5 e6 Qf3 h6
chessgames.com gives 27-33-40% resp. for white win-draw-loss in this position.
Similarly, chesslab.com gives 27-19-54% for post-1990 games and 30-34-36% for the period 1485(!)-1990. (Chesslab.com (generally, and here too) covers more games 33+75=108 games with this position, but its statistics include games between weaker players or old games - also.)
============
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 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
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
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
This protect the white queen from being taked, because black is mate is he take, he king doesn't have enough space to live freely.
============
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
Because the king can't move and Ng6 fails to Nxg6, We must and we should play g6. it attacks the queen. Black should still carefull, White as a trap for you
============
Contributors : Sophie Leclerc
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
Alexis Marcel (1047)
f4 f5 e4
idea it's play from gambit with white
============
Contributors : Alexis Marcel
Ilmars Cirulis (1632)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 c6 Nc3 Kc7 Bxe4 Nf6 Qh4 Nxe4 Bg5 Ng3+ Kd3 b6 Bd8+ Kb7 Rxh1 Nxh1 Qf6
Total domination of white. :)
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Ilmars Cirulis (1632)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 c6 Nc3 Kc7 Bf4 hxg6 Qxh8 Qg2 Rg1 Qxg1 Nf3+ d6 Nxg1 Be6
White has serious advantage in development. :D
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Ilmars Cirulis (1632)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 c6 Nc3 Kc7 Bf4 hxg6 Qxh8 Qxa1 Qxg8 d6 Qxf8 Qxb2 Kd2
White wins.
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Ilmars Cirulis (1632)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 c6 Nc3 Kc7 Bf4 hxg6 Qg5 Be7 Nxc6+ d6 Bxd6+ Kxd6 Qc5+ Ke6 Qe5+ Kf7 Rxh1 Nxc6 Qxh8 Nf6
White queen trapped. =
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
Ilmars Cirulis (1632)
e4 e5 Nf3 f5 Bc4 fxe4 Nxe5 Qg5 d4 Qxg2 Qh5+ g6 Bf7+ Kd8 Bxg6 Qxh1+ Ke2 c6 Nc3 Kc7 Bf4 hxg6 Qg5 Be7 Nf7+ Kb6 Na4+ Ka6 Nc5+ Kb6 Rxh1 Bxg5 Bxg5
White has serious advantage.
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
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
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
25.-- Qa1+ 26.Ke2 Bg4+ 27.Ke3 Qg1+ 28.Kf4 Qxh2+ 29.Kxg4 and white king is King! :D
============
Contributors : Ilmars Cirulis
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
[Chess forum]
[Rating lists]
[Countries]
[Chess openings]
[Legal informations]
[Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory]
Social network : create your photo albums, discuss with your friends...
Hot news & buzz : discover the latest news and buzz on the internet...
Discussions : questions and answers, forums on almost everything...
Seo forums : search engines optimisation forums, web directory...
Play the strongest international correspondence chess players !
|
Tsenkov, Ljubomir (BGR) [member # 57] Correspondence chess : 2521 Ranked # 13 in the rating list. Rating history : No change this year. Big chess : 1686  This member may have a profile in the social network. |
| | Correspondence chess World championship Play chess games Go (weiqi, baduk) Advanced chess Play big chess Chess trainer apk Rated tournaments Poker texas hold'em Fischer random chess |  |