Hi people. I've been analysing some of my games.

I haven't annontated this one, but here are some quick comments from me: This was all in all a nice game to play, I felt satisfied with my play at the end. However, let me call to your attention the position before white's 19th move. What do you think about the plan to play c5, b5 and e5 to disrupt black's pieces? I loved it while playing (thought it must be winning) and it worked out nicely enough, but I can't seem to make it work against the computer.

First, I take on a8. The move order really doesn't matter here, as black could take afterwards anyway, and the same position would be the result, e.g. 19.c5 Rxa1 20.Rxa1. But with this line, 19.Rxa8 Qxa8 20.Ra1 Qd8, I give my opponent a chance to misplace his queen, as I think d8 is its best square. I quickly dismissed b8 and e8 as bad, and in the position before white's 24th move, you'll see that 24.Nd5! while stoppable by ...Be6 in the game, would be very good if the Q was on c8. Right?

This is among the things I just don't seem to get with this position. Rybka doesn't think white's pressure on the black position is worth all that much, and I tend to trust that in this kind of open position. What I don't get is why.

 

 

Same goes for the text moves. I feel I had excellent pressure and all the pracical chances, but Rybka insists I squandered a comfortable edge with c5 and b5. I can't be bothered to analyse this in depth (my computer is very slow), and try to refute the computer's defense. So I try coming here for feedback. What do you think? Is white's pawn sacrifice sound?

Oh, I forgot to add: I'm analysing and looking for weaknesses in my chess understanding here. Input on the whole game, not just the position in question, is also appreciated, obviously.

Two thoughts -- looking at the position I didn't understand 21.c5 -- (I seem to be quite chess blind this morning, though ) I thought an immediate 21.b5 was better with the idea of an eventual b6 and Ra7... but analyzing this further, although I like White's game in my line I actually think you end up better with your moves -- what are Rybka's improvements for Black in that line of yours?

Hi, thanks for taking an interest in the topic.

The point of c5, is that it takes the black pawn away from the center and opens up an important file that I can make use of and my opponent can not (strong rook on d1, pinning the bishop, or if ...Be8, with tempo). With these pawn moves, I open up the position and disrupt black's pieces so that I am completely in control of the center (black's pawn and both pieces were contesting control of the center), and the open file.

I don't remember exactly how rybka played, I checked several variations. I'll get back to it, but right now I have to eat something and then I'm going out for the evening.

OK, so I canceled my OTB game since my sister is coming to visit.

Rybka gives me 22...Bd7 23. e5 Nh5 24. Rd1 Nf4 25. Bc4 Qc7 26. Qc1 Ne6 27. Nd5 Qd8 28. Qa3 Kg7 29.f4 Be8 30. f5 gxf5 31. Ne3 Qc7 32. Nxf5+ Kh8 33. Qe3 Rg8 34. Qe4 b6 35. g3 Ng5 36. Qe2 Ne6 with 0.00 all the way, I tried moving down this line a bit, but eval stays at 0 flat.

 

I guess it's all very tactical and in this case it simply doesn't work out with best defense. But no human can realistically calculate all the possibilities here (maybe in CC but would take forever). What I'm looking for is some clue in the position, like a feature of the position that makes the sacrifice unsound. In other words, what I should look for to not make the same mistake again.

---

Well, frankly it looks like White has all the play in Rybka's line too, and ok the silicon genius calculates that at the end of the day black survives but in practical terms I just don't think you can say "not make that same mistake again" -- it turns out to have been an interesting rather good bit of aggressive chess -- a positional pawn sac... it wasn't a mistake unless you're going to hold yourself to the standards of a 3200+ elo calculating engine. I think thats a mistake.  You can't play chess like that! Buuuut... what does Rybka like there? What is Rybka's play in that position -- does it push the b pawn, or what?

You mention that Rybka thinks you gave away a comfortable advantage...well, how does Rybka prosecute that advantage? There may be something to learn from the machine there.

In rybkas mainline here even stronger continuations can be found if you go searching a bit further down the line. Seems to be some pretty precise and subtle play going on there, Qa2 threatening god knows what, and then going to the more natural d2 a few moves later. This whole g4 thing was my plan also, before I looked into c5, and is what I would play if black had moved 20.Ra1 Qb8 (c5 now doesn't work because the Q covers e5). Often this kind of thing is playable when your own king is safe without his pawn shield, and here I control a lot of the board and there's just no way for black to get through.

There must be a lesson to be learned somewhere in all this.

 

EDIT: I don't know... inserting Qd2 in place of Qa2 seems to be even stronger, and is not refuted in any way. Goes to show you can't trust these monsters blindly (and I let this run while I was out for sushi, so it reached depth 22).

Your question is a tough one. All I could tell you is to try your best to see if your positions lead to anything concrete. Sometimes your pieces may look good or even be good, but it doesn't necessarily mean they will always break through. I think there is a big difference between just having pieces on advanced, good squares, and pieces that literally slice through your opponents position like butter. I dunno, it's hard to explain. I'll post a link to a game that shows what I'm talking about. I play b4 as a pawn sac (as it turns out I was worse in every case according to the computer, and the move didn't help), and it seems my pieces are really nice. They're on advanced squares, yet are still pinned to each other and they get so tangled I end up dropping a piece (I'm sure bad play was also a big requirement). And remember giving up a pawn for compensation gives them more defensive resources, being able to give back the pawn at any favorable moment at all.

http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=31796645

I have to agree with what others have said: 21.c5 was an interesting, aggressive try that doesn't seem to quite work out. But no reason for you to hang your head, it had some good ideas behind it.

But what's wrong with it? I think it might fall under the heading of "rushing things." You have achieved a good position, but 21.c5 is a very committal move, so you would want to be really sure that it leads to something really good before you permanently alter the position. I think this is one of those positions where the experienced master knows how to keep improving his position and torturing his opponent. When you pushed c5. you allowed black's pieces to become more active. If he'd played 24...Nf4, all ypur advantage would have been gone. Perhaps you should have continued to restrict Black with something like 21.g4 followed by a possible invasion on the a-file. It's a tough position: you have a nice advantage, but too many choices!

Thanks for all of your insightful comments. I will think about this.