^ Click here to remove ads! ^

A Schliemann for your inspection

Jump to forum:
« Previous | 1 2 | Next » | Last Post
12th April 2008, 06:04am
#1
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184

This is a Ruy Lopez: Schliemann gambit I lost recently. 

I have annotations in all three phases as there is some interesting stuff going on in my opinion -- any and all comments appreciated ...  I'm especially looking for improvement on the ending.  

 


12th April 2008, 06:55am
#2
by Ray_Brooks
Heart of Darkness England
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 1010
Starting the endgame a pawn adrift was a serious handicap.
12th April 2008, 07:15am
#3
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184
Ray_Brooks wrote: Starting the endgame a pawn adrift was a serious handicap.

 Yes. I probably shouldn't ask, "where did I go wrong?" but ask... "was there a way to draw?" 


12th April 2008, 09:14am
#4
by stormcrown
Louisville United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 214

I thought you did ok.  I wasn't too sure about 41. ... c4 as this ultimately is how White got in.  Perhaps 41. ... cxb4 followed by b5 to give him another crippled pawn mass.  Your g6 pawn is valiant.

I am not too sure about your R staying in the center where its mobility was hampered by White's pawns. 

 

He's always going to have the threat of f5 giving him a way in or if rooks are off the board, generating a passed pawn.  White will always have the ability to decide when to push the f pawn.  Even without 41. c4 you'll be fighting for a draw for a long time.

Perhaps navigating your R to f7 to protect your a and h pawns, pushing the b pawn to b5 as mentioned gives you a chance. 

I agree that it is better to be a pawn up than a pawn down. Undecided


12th April 2008, 09:26am
#5
by DimKnight
Connecticut United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 138

A couple guys in my chess club, expert-level players, use the Schliemann regularly so I feel your pain about "sweating" the moves. The one thing that jumped out at me was your 8 Nd4+. After much research of my own, I've come to prefer 8.Qe2, a quiet-seeming move that accomplishes a great deal: it supports the Bb5, it threatens the nasty pawn at e4, and it holds itself in reserve for a crushing Qh5+ in case black is rash enough to play 8...Qxg2. I might suggest that, if you adopt this line, you try to avoid grabbing the pawn with Nxa7 and the discovered check. Opening a line for that R is almost always a bad idea.


12th April 2008, 09:38am
#6
by sirfraijo
Mesa United States
Member Since: Dec 2007
Member Points: 55
9...Qe5?!, the correct continuation is 9...Bc5 10. Ng3 Bg4! 11. d4 Qg6 12. Qd2 Bd6 with the material disadvantage compensated.
12th April 2008, 02:28pm
#7
by The_Wizard
United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 22

44...Rd2 would have been better than Rd1, because after Kf3+ the rook would have prevented me from getting my king to e2 (which is ultimately how I got my king into your position: I was able to play Re4 without worrying about Rd3+.

Also, on move 48 or 49 you should have considered Re7; I spent a lot of time thinking about that, because forcing the trade of rooks would have made your defense a lot easier, especially with my backward pawns. You're right,  30. g5 was probably a mistake because it makes my extra pawn somewhat useless.

I also think 20.Qc2 might have been better than Qe2...and maybe 19.Bf4 instead of Bd4, forcing the dark-squared bishop trade. 


12th April 2008, 03:01pm
#8
by The_Wizard
United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 22

No, I guess 20.Qc2 wouldn't have been much of an improvement; Black can still play Nxf2 either way. Does anyone know what my best choice would have been for move 20?

Also JG27Pyth, why would c4 have been better than Bxf5?


12th April 2008, 04:09pm
#9
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184
The_Wizard wrote:

Also JG27Pyth, why would c4 have been better than Bxf5?


 Actually, I can kill two birds with one stone here.... That note is in error, it should have gone on move 20  --  c4 is your move for 20. (I did that annotation too quickly from memory... I remembered seeing at some point that c4 was crushing and you'd missed it but I misplaced it... it was at 20. -- your Qe2 surprised me (and certainly was effective considering how I missed Nxf2), but now my memory returns -- Qe2 shocked me because I'd been expecting 20.c4, and all I could think was... "oh god I dodged c4, if I can dodge Bc4 maybe I'll survive..." ) 20. c4 Qe6 21. Bxe4 Bxe4 22.f3 +- (Fritz 10)

I did a little digging around with Fritz 10 and it gives double ?? to my 16...Ne4, according to the computer I had the better game at that point and just blew it with my sixteenth move ... and honestly I did not realize how tied up your pieces were, your position was much more cramped than I'd realized. 

I really blame my reaction to you c3 pawn push... I panicked... if I hadn't looked at the position so "carefully" I wouldn't have freaked out the way I did. My thought process became quite bizarre ...  I definitely learned something there. 

I'll look at sirfraijo's 9.Bc5 again, but I looked at my options on move 9 a long time and I think Qe5 is just as good if not better. I got a better game out of my ninth than I realized, or played. 

Oh, Wizard, one last thing, you wrote:

Also, on move 48 or 49 you should have considered Re7; I spent a lot of time thinking about that, because forcing the trade of rooks would have made your defense a lot easier, especially with my backward pawns.

|

I did look at that... very thoroughly! I came up a tempo short in every line. You get in, and win.  


12th April 2008, 04:24pm
#10
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184

Wizard wrote: What did Fritz suggest besides Ne4? At the time, it appeared to be somewhat forced...it was definitely the move I was expecting.

Fritz likes: 16...Be4 continuing 17.Nxd4 Bxd4 18.cxd4 Qxd4 =

I honestly don't remember if I even considered Be4 or not. The big branch here  was the move before. I should have played 15...Ng4  It's strong... I would get my pawn back with initiative and better mobility.

 

 

 

 


12th April 2008, 04:25pm
#11
by The_Wizard
United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 22

What did Fritz suggest besides Ne4? At the time, it appeared to be somewhat forced...it was definitely the move I was expecting.

I think you're right, I saw no problem with Qe5, other than the fact that your queen was the only developed piece and you moved it yet again. 


12th April 2008, 05:34pm
#12
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184
sirfraijo wrote: 9...Qe5?!, the correct continuation is 9...Bc5 10. Ng3 Bg4! 11. d4 Qg6 12. Qd2 Bd6 with the material disadvantage compensated.

 I want to look at the line you are suggesting but you've messed up the notation... 10.Ng3 is obviously meant to be Nb3... and I'm not sure about 10...Bg4 or 11.d4 could you post the corrected line I'd like to look at it. 


12th April 2008, 11:56pm
#13
by The_Wizard
United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 22

You're right; when I was thinking about Re7 for you (at any of the aforementioned times) I realized in the end that I would eventually able to penetrate with my king, but it would have required a very precise move order. Especially if 48...Re7; my natural inclination would have been to advance the king with 49.Ke3, but I would have eventually needed that extra tempo to put you in zugzwang.

48...Re7

49.Ke3   Rxe4+

50.Kxe4  Ke6

Now you gain the king opposition, and if I go after the c4 pawn you can win my f- and g-pawns and your passer should promote first...I didn't analyze that out to the end.

 

48...Re7

49.Rxe7+  Kxe7

50.Ke3   Ke6 (or Kd6)

51.Ke4

Now eventually you'll run out of queenside pawn moves and be forced to move your king; then I can play the winning f4-f5. 

 


13th April 2008, 07:35am
#14
by grolich
Israel Israel
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 234

First of all, I don't know the theory on this gambit, but I'm absolutely sure white made a mistake on move 8, 8.Qe2 would have been much stronger than 8. Nd4+ (since the knight is immune anyway, and this move comes with extra threats).

 

Instead of 15...Rd8, how about 15...Ng4, forcing white to create some weaknesses in his position? (While at the same time making him forget about all Re1 ideas for now). I actually think white would have been forced to reply 16.g3, and how about 16...Nxf2 for black? after 17.Rxf2 Bxf2+ Kxf2 0-0, white seems to be in trouble.

 

After white's 16.Re1 (which I don't think should have given white THAT good a position), black must find a way to make the different pins in the position work in his favour (or use them to equalize the position), and I believe 16...Be4!? (looks a bit strange, but as I'll mention, I believe your 16...Ne4 should have lost quite quickly, so I had to look for something better really hard. This seems to hold)

 

Threatens Bxf2, and Rxd3... the position is interesting after Nd4 Bxd4.

 

After the sequence 17.Be3 Bc7 18.g3 0-0 19.Bd4 Qd5, white missed 20.c4!. I can't find a way for black to avoid heavy material losses:

the queen has to go to e6 if blcok does not want to lose a piece on e4, but after he plays it: 20...Qe6 (somehow, even after Qf7, and with the pin on the d4 bishop (after the d3 bishop takes on e4), black can't make use of the pin and the latent pressure on f2):

21.Bxe4 Bxe4 22.Nc5 Qmoves and Rxe4 (Nxe4 would be more complicated, even if it is still good for white, because after Qg6 Nxe4 Rf4, things have to be clarified a bit. Rxe4 gets rid of these problems).

 

So I thought, ok, I just go a few moves backwards and find a better route for black to take. But the amazing thing is, after Ne4 Be3, I can find nothing for black that escapes the pin without losing material. If there is a way, it's beyond me. Back to the game.

 

27.h4 - That's really pushing it by white. Weakening. In fact - 27...Bh4 exploits it immediately - simultaneously disrupting white's control of the e file by attacking the rook, and discovering an attack on the f4 pawn. White needs to play 28.Rf1, but then 28...Re8 and later ...Qe6 and black has nice counterplay.

 

After that mistake, it's just smooth sailing for white. I can't find a clear draw. I thought thats if black wants ANY chances to draw he has to stay active and behind the white pawns (instead of 47...Rd7), because otherwise I KNOW he's lost... I looked at it for an extra minute or two, and reached the conclusion that black is probably lost anyway already in that position.

 

Not sure if there were any places during the endgame with better drawing chances. Sometimes you just have to be alert enough to not miss the one or two chances you get... (you need to be lucky to get 3,4,5 or more chances in my opinion, but pretty much everyone will give you a chance or two to get back into the game).

 


13th April 2008, 09:06am
#15
by Darthstapler8
United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 124
I'd play the Schliemann myself if I knew more of the theory. I like tactical openings. As for the game, I kept thinking that one side or the other must have had a knockout blow in the middlegame somewhere, but missed it
13th April 2008, 11:41am
#16
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184
Grolich: Thanks for the thorough analysis.  I've had the chance to look at this game with Fritz 10 and I must say you and the silicon beast are in 100% complete agreement. Thanks for the analysis because with the computer often I'm not sure I've interpreted it correctly... but with the help of your text it all seems clear.  As I understand it, Yes. 8.Qe2 for white is clearly best and when he missed it he gave me some opportunities. Be4 was the correct 16th move (I don't think I calculate well enough to find that one OTB.) ... and my Ne4 should have lost quickly to c4 (I _did_ see c4 OTB, and was so relieved white had missed it I missed my last chance to equalize on the next move with Nxf2) ...after this middlegame dust-up where black got some chances and missed them, it was all white, black's endgame was hopeless. I'm surprised it was that cut and dry and ending with so many pawns and pieces still on the board -- but White managed to prevent me from getting even a breath of counterplay.
13th April 2008, 11:55am
#17
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184
Darthstapler8 wrote: I'd play the Schliemann myself if I knew more of the theory. I like tactical openings. 

 Well, the turn-based chess here is modified correspondence chess rules... so you can play your opening with 'open book', -- you can use all the theory you can find... I'm taking full advantage of this (I'm rather sure some of my lower-rated opponents are NOT doing this, and I'm wondering if I should point out to them that they have the book-option... with correspondence chess one should never or almost never win or lose a game in the opening, but I'm finding it happens rather often.) This is a great way to learn opening theory IMO. I've never found studying opening lines to be very effective -- I'm just too forgetful -- but playing slowly and very carefully choosing my opening with reference to a database as I go seems to really cement the line in my mind and makes the "ideas" of the opening more accessible. The key for me is using the databases _intensively_ really trying to research the best line to go down, rather than just blindly trusting whatever Master I'm copying to make sound moves. Just copying doesn't teach me anything, but the reseach helps make it stick... of course all this probably means I'll retain the information for a week, instead of just a day. C'est la vie.  


13th April 2008, 01:39pm
#18
by pvmike
wilmington, nc United States
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 327
Have you played the 5...Nf6 line at all I like that one a little better than d5
13th April 2008, 04:01pm
#19
by JG27Pyth
NYC United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 184
pvmike wrote: Have you played the 5...Nf6 line at all I like that one a little better than d5

 I really like the Schliemann in OTB play because it seems to be a line that opponents at my level find a bit startling and uncomfortable... I'm still learning the opening... I've tried 5...Nf6 and I've run into trouble (but I wasn't playing correspondence style) ... I think Nf6 is more intuitive than fxe4, but fxe4 is quite playable and rather forcing, which IMO is good.   I'm going to look at Nf6 some more, but although I lost the game here I feel good about what I've learned about this line of the Schliemann, I feel like the next time I go down this path I'm going to have a _much_ better idea of what I'm doing. I think my 9...Qe5 is correct, and I think I have a sense of what white's most accurate play is from that point and how to proceed.

The opening manuals I've looked at all seem to not very subtly suggest that the Schliemann deferred is the best Ruy Lopez + f5 Defense so maybe I should concentrate there. 


13th April 2008, 04:36pm
#20
by Darthstapler8
United States
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 124
I never play correspondence. It just doesn't suit me. I don't make use of that feature on this site.
« Previous | 1 2 | Next » | Last Post

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.