Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

A Halloween bust

Actually I do not think this is a well played game, by either side (my opponent is an ICCF IM).

I will probably not repeat 9...Qd7 again. While I would be very happy to see the established line (where white stands badly) my opponent played the very bold and risky, but positionally very consistent novelty 13.bxc3! after which I feel white should be "almost" OK.

15...Nfxh4! is a brave choice, which I had to play if I wanted to win. The other option was 15...Qe6, but after 16.h5 Qxa2 17.Qb5 Nh8 (17...c6 does not change anything) 18.Qb2! Black has a knight more for just a pawn, but white has terrific positional compensation- actually I don't believe he is worse at all.

16.Rdg1?! can't be a good move- both 16.Rde1 and 16.g3 were better moves, when Black should not have more than a slight edge.

19.Kd1? is the last straw. White had some hopes to be saved after 19.Be3. The rest of the game is a tactical mop-up, with the result never being in any doubt.

The above analysis is quite brief and inconclusive, I may expand and improve it later. The Halloween might be a crap opening, but refuting it completely still needs some work to be done.

 

Comments


  • 7 weeks ago

    The_Ghostess_Lola

    I absolutely love the Hallowen Gambit my darlings !

  • 10 months ago

    The_Worstiest

    Halloween Gambit... It can easily destroy an unprepared opponent, but the logic is that should be unsound sacrifice the knight just for central domain.

    7...Bb4 in the mainline(4...Nxe5 5.d4 Ng6 6.e5 Ng8 7.Bc4) should be enough for a good defense by start to exchange some pieces. But instead, 7...d5 appears to be more popular. Is the reason for that pawn gambit just attack white's LSB with tempo?

    BTW, there are an interesting tournament about this gambit at chess.com: http://www.chess.com/tournament/halloween-gambiteer-invitational

  • 17 months ago

    DrCheckevertim

    wow, crazy game

  • 17 months ago

    steve_bute

    "white defense"

    If White is defending after his own gambit, something went wrong.

  • 17 months ago

    NM Petrosianic

    surprisingly difficult to refute these ridiculous-looking gambits beyond =/+.  but maybe black cannot do much better than that on perfect white defense.

  • 17 months ago

    Chess4001

    Much appreciated, pfren, for dispelling garbage openings. 

  • 17 months ago

    IM pfren

    @ LaskerFan: Why block the guy? Having second thoughts, the nonsense he is posting as "computer analysis" are very amusing.Every site cannot do without its resident trolls, and Master_Valek is mildly preferrable to Yereslov.

    In reality, I don't think a computer would ever suggest something even remotely relevant, even when plugged in someone's arse.

  • 17 months ago

    11qq11

  • 17 months ago

    steve_bute

    "Lasker fan: That is what the computer would do."

    Engine analysis of an opening is only useful for detecting tactical gaps (blunders). Engine analysis is not useful for assessing long-term (positional) aspects.

    'The engine tells me to do this on move N' is a valueless comment, unless the engine has exposed a blunder ... and if you don't recognize the blunder that preceded the engine's recommended move, what have you learned?

  • 17 months ago

    FB-Tails

    Thanks for taking the initiative Lasker. :)

  • 17 months ago

    LaskerFan

    @Master_Valek,

    it is very disrespectful to post your trash lines in IM Pfren's article, and continuing to do so! I showed you your mistake hoping that you would realise your mistake and would stop, but it appears that I just fed the troll! If you do not want to be reported for this, please delete your posting, and stop posting your trash blunderous lines here. Please post your stuff elsewhere - create your own thread. Do NOT soil Pfren's article.

    @Pfren,

    you can probably make the postings of Master_Valek disappear by "blocking" him (Home -> Account -> Privacy -> at the bottom "block this user" ) [However, numerous bugs are currently present in the website, and this might not work any more.]

  • 17 months ago

    MrMars

    laskerfan, couldnt you add Bxc3+ before taking Nxc4? wouldn't that just add an extra pawn?

  • 17 months ago

    IM pfren

    Thank you for spotting the ridiculous points in the previous posts, LaskerFan.

    I'm afraid Loadeddiperchess cannot hear you, since his account was closed (or he closed his account himself).

    I have TONS of analysis in that game, to my surprise it was not easy at all to refute white's audacious strategy- I have made analysis of my own, and I also have hundreds of Houdini lines, most of them being either superfluous, or borderline irrelevant. There is no point dumping it all here, but I will cherry-pick and revise the initial post with some meaningful lines.

  • 17 months ago

    LaskerFan

    You are welcome, Pfren!

  • 17 months ago

    Lodeddiperchess

    thanks for your nice comment mr pfren

  • 17 months ago

    IM pfren

    Noted, LaskerFan, thanks for it.

    To the next posters:

    Please avoid posting useless and nonsensical crap here.The game I posted has errors, but it's not a blunders parade.

    Thank you in advance.

  • 17 months ago

    Lodeddiperchess



  • 17 months ago

    LaskerFan

    Wow! I did not understand its full intricacies, so a detailed (in diagram) annotation will be highly appreciated.

    BTW my respect for the Halloween Gambit just increased!
    Also please put the diagram into the bottom of the first post, or it will be pushed down.

  • 17 months ago

    IM pfren

    [COMMENT DELETED]
Back to Top

Post your reply: