• 17 months ago

it was an very instructive video thnx roman

• 3 years ago

@CharlieJohnson

I think You are missing very important thing. Of course these days computers can show that 50% of instructional games from chess literature are quite wrong, but only really if played against the Computer. Very often there is for example 0.2 or more difference between moves where the "stronger" is passive one gives You better position if You can calculate 50 moves ahead, and can change dramatically because of any inaccuracy. Whereas the other move, weaker in theory is acitve, and it's the opponent who will have to be more accurate to avoid getting crushed. I have even seen a video by one IM where he showed Tal's game with great sacrifice which wasn't shown in best moves by engines, but was really a forced win, even against those engines. Besides even if there was some defence, like You showed it doesn't mean the plan is wrong. It means there is an obstacle, and even if white would lose than he could have come up with imroved version of this plan for next game. If You watch Kasparov-Karpov matches there is a lot of similliar games which change theory because of constantly improving plans

• 3 years ago

Great game Roman! Inspirational stuff

• 3 years ago

Thank you Roman! You're currently my favorite GM, so it's always nice to see a new video from you. I enjoy your member analysis videos, but I wouldn't mind seeing more of your own games.  I don't always pick up every idea in these intermediate/advanced videos due to me still being a beginner-level player, but sometimes I pick up useful information (ex. Sacrificing a rook without seeing a mate is a bad idea most of the time). Thank you again!

• 3 years ago

Nice video. Thanks.

• 3 years ago

But actually when you look at engine analysis with houdini 1.5, 20. 0-0-0 is given as + 0.04, and the move played in the game 20. b5 is given as + 0.08.

Applying general rules about a centralized king when queens are still on the board may not be so valid in high level games such as this. There are nuances that we could never percieve without having similar knowledge of top level players.   edit, now it looks like i'm talking to myself... : )

• 3 years ago

Charlie, are you trying to say Dzindzi didn't form a good plan? My understanding is that Dzindzi had a good idea of what he was aiming for and understood the compensation of both the pawn sac and the exchange sac and black needed to find the most accurate moves to avoid being positionally crushed.

Of course you can provide computer analysis that shows where black can equalise as with most chess games, but of course players don't play computer accurate moves and will not always find the right plan.

• 3 years ago

Nice game, Roman.

• 3 years ago

Very instructive vid!

• 3 years ago

good video

• 3 years ago

I found this video very instructional but also quite misleading. The presentation makes it sound as if D. formed a good plan, executed the plan, and won because of it. But, analysis reveals that this is far from the truth. Black missed several opportunities in the middle game to seize equality or the advantage.

17...c5 would have equalized, keeping the dark-square bishop active and making d5 worthless for white.

20...O-O-O, as baati noted, would have equalized by putting sufficient pressure on the f3 pawn.

22...c3 would have given black at least a slight advantage. For example, 23. Nb3 Qc7  24. Bg2 a5  25. bxc3 a4  26. Nc1 Rc8  27. a3 Qxc3

23...c3  24. Be6 cxd2 and white can probably win the exchange back, but can't really be better.

24...Rb7 is the crucial mistake. After 24...Rf6, white still has to work hard to prove an advantage, even after the exchange sac.

Now, I wholeheartedly agree that 26. Nb3 is a fantastic move, and that from that point on, D. puts on an attacking clinic. I've played through the ending several times, and I love the power of those passed pawns against the king.

So, I have mixed feelings about this video. I'm not sure that D. is always realistic about the position, meaning that it's less educational than it could be.

• 3 years ago