^ Click here to remove ads! ^

amusing two edged game with queen sacrafice

Jump to forum:
 
6th April 2008, 05:28pm
#1
by depthshaman
United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 251

Heres a blitz game using the benko gambit. Both sides neglected development in order to launch a blood thirsty attack on the otherside. It was balls to the wall! I post it because as helpless as black looks, an attack materializes out of a pawn and a bishop after black gives up his queen. Keep in mind that when white takes the queen, each side had only 30 seconds on the clock.


8th April 2008, 03:44am
#2
by grolich
Israel Israel
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 234

Interesting. My first comment would be that on a deeper look,

13...c4! actually works! (not a mistake as you pointed out):

14. Bxc4 Ng4! (threatening Qh4, which would fork f2 and h2, but also attacking f2 immediately with knight and rook. Keep in mind that the white bishop is still threatened. White has to make some very serious concessions regarding king safety here, and it would cost black nothing).

 

 


8th April 2008, 03:57am
#3
by grolich
Israel Israel
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 234

14...Ng4 still looks interesting. Even if less forceful than in my previous post.

And you let him trade (you will just develop in the process). Black should not be afraid about white exchanging the fianchettoed bishop, because white loses his own dark squard bishop in the process (So the weakness is harder to exploit), and white would have even more problems.

 

You seem to be worried about 15.Qb4.. I think you missed the simple 15...Qxb4 16.Bxb4 Bxb5 17.Bxf8 Kxf8. And white gave two bishops for a rook! This would mean a huge advantage to black.

 

The Ng4 idea keeps surfacing now and then, and I will not mention all the places where it could have been useful. 

 

17.axb4, exchanging queens, was just as good as what you played. What you played is very interesting, and I think good too. 

 

18...ne4!? interesting position, but 18...Ng4 would proably have been just clearly better for black. 

Luckily for you, white missed that 19.f3 leads to a very complicated position in which he probably does not stand worse. After his response, you have control of the game. 

(19.f3 Bxb2 20.Bxf8 is not clear at all).

 

 


8th April 2008, 04:03am
#4
by grolich
Israel Israel
Member Since: Mar 2008
Member Points: 234

21...e5? nooo. Too bad. After a beautiful idea, you should have lost...

 

One thing many players forget is that Check is not mate. f2 is not a catastrophe in this position. 22.Nxd5! IS a catastrophe for black though. 22...Qxf2+ 23.Kf1

oops. Black is threatening to infiltrate with Queen,rook knight and bishop. e5 shut your OWN defending bishop out. 23... Nd6 looks almost forced, but then 24.Qb4. This is horrible. Black's piece coordination is ruined and he has to start losing material or allowing mate soon.

 

 Still, white could have bailed out with 24.Bxe3. Everything looks ok. No difficulties for white.

 

Good game. Cool idea.

 

A very nice finish too. 


8th April 2008, 04:04am
#5
by JF1
United Kingdom
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 130
nice finish
8th April 2008, 04:13am
#6
by 1red5a
Cainta Rizal, Philippines
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 220

 


thanks for the post

 

Laughing



8th April 2008, 02:59pm
#7
by depthshaman
United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 251
thanks for the insightful analysis grolich. I read through it all and it really helped. I've decided to start playing the dutch defense again though because i think its a lot more fun to aim for kingside attacks. I like tactical games rather than positional ones, and this was quite tactical. As you pointed out i missed some rather crucial lines. I just like the ending. On the surface it looks like black is about to be crushed.
8th April 2008, 03:55pm
#8
by werewolf
tehran Iran
Member Since: Oct 2007
Member Points: 79

sorry,but what's wrong with 13-...c4! again?

13-...c4,14-Bxc4 dxc4,15-Rxd8 cxb3 both Queens are off the board,and white is a bishop down! or am I missing somethin'?
8th April 2008, 03:57pm
#9
by depthshaman
United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 251
nothing was wrong with it. I just miscalculated during my analysis. It would have been a game ender as you point out.
 

Add your comment:

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