So, what did we learn? First of all, we played a really great game. We didn't make any big mistakes, most of our moves were small mistakes costing us 0.10 to 0.20 (a tenth of a pawn). For a bunch of players that are rated 2050 or lower, it was an amazing display.
I think we're also seeing that the Blackmar-Diemer gambit is a very hard opening to play. We spent a long time analyzing variations, played a fantastic game, and were still at a disadvantage to just one guy! We were mounting a tremendous comeback at the end, and seeing this main line from rybka, where we get to play our planned Rxf6! sacrifice, I'm a little disappointed we didn't get to play this one out. This kind of endgame, with many pieces and dynamic chances is one that rybka will be particularly weak at analyzing. It would have been interesting to see who really wins this.
I've learned a lot about the blackmar-diemer, but I'm coming to the conclusion that it's a very difficult opening to play for white and think perhaps we should look for something better. Maybe we should play something like the King's Indian Attack... fianchetto the king bishop and play positions that look more like the way we've been playing as black. What do you think?
Awesome game, great team analysis, and rybka agrees our team rocks. :)
In this game we played the blackmar-diemer gambit and won as white: http://www.chess.com/votechess/game.html?id=15697. This post is for post-mortem analysis of key positions, talking about what we learned, what we liked / didn't like about the game, etc.
Some analysis from rybka:
after 3.f3, rybka gives a slight advantage to black (-.41, depth=18). I think we should ask ourselves how comfortable we are giving away white's inherent advantage (and then some) as a fundamental part of our opening repertoire. The main line given is 3... e6 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. fxe4 Qh4+ 6. Ke2 etc.
5.Bg5. We had a discussion in the chat about developing knights before bishops, and generally how best to organize our minor pieces. rybka gives Nc3 as best with a score of -.30 (d=15), Nbd2 (...Bf5) as -37 (d=14). Bf4 (...Nd5) as -.42 (d=14) and our chosen Bg5 (...h6 Be3) as the worst option at -.47 (d=15).
6. Nbd2. just as good as Nc3 according to rybka
7. c3. rybka initially prefers Bxf6 Bxf6 c3 Nc6 Bb5, scoring it -.43 vs -.54. The knight became a pretty good piece for them later in the game, perhaps this is why we should be willing to give up the bishop here.
8. Bd3. good move. about equal to Bxf6
9. Bxe7. best
10. Ne4. rybka strongly prefers jimvger's Nc4 c5 O-O, scoring it -.59. After Ne4 f5 we're moving right back to d2 with rybka scoring us at -1.00, or about the same as the crazy-looking Nf1. So we were right to be concerned that Nc4 allowed c5... this is black's best move and they are developing a decent advantage. We were simply wrong to think that we could do better! :)
11. Bf1. rybka sides with jimvger again, suggesting the simple O-O Nxd3 Qxd3 f5 as best for white, scoring -.41 at a depth of 14, compared with -.85 for our chosen move. ouch! Fortunately, black missed the best reply (e5!).
12. Qd2. Best. go team!
13. Bd3. Just as good as rybka's choice of O-O-O. good job team!
14. O-O-O. We spent a long time deciding which way to castle here. In the end rybka sides with those castling long (-.52), but in fact castling short gets an almost identical score. All that discussion over nothing! :0
15. h4. rybka prefers king safety with Kb1 (-.59) with our chosen move scoring a touch worse at -.70. brazenbishop did well by suggesting Rhe1, which is rybka considers just as good as Kb1 (-.6). bb's alternate suggestion of Qf2 was not as strong, scoring -.77.
16. dxc5. best.
17. Nxc5. best.
18. Ng5. rybka prefers Kb1 or Rhe1 (-.74), presumably to take Qe3 forcing the trade of queens. Our attacking plan of Ng5 is definitely worse at -.93. black now has a nearly winning advantage.
19. Bh7+. This controversial move, sacrificing the knight and risking trapping the bishop is best, according to rybka, scoring -.93. Well done!
20. Kb1. rybka has suggested Kb1 a couple times now... how will it feel about this move? the cpu prefers Bc2 Qe3, scoring -.92. After Kb1 rybka plays Qe3 anyways and scores the game a bit worse at -1.10.
21. Bc2. best (-1.01).
22. Qe3! strong move! rybka initially likes Nf3 saving the piece, and after some it likes our backup plan of Qf4, with a score of -.69. The computer thinks Qe3 is terrible at first, but after some thought, the cpu agrees that this deep move is even better, scoring a fantastic -.67, and now we are fighting for a draw. Game on! The computer agreed that e5 is the best reply to Qf4.
23. Rhg1! rybka likes Rh3 out of the gates, but after looking deeper into the position it agrees with our choice of Rhg1, scoring the game at -.61. It's interesting to see that the deeper rybka looks, the more it likes white's position. After Rdg1??, we are clearly losing as rybka trades the queens for the two rooks and scores the game -2.30.
24. Rdf1!! the computer likes Qg3, then prefers Rd4, then goes back to Qg3. rybka scores the game at -.54 at a depth of 15 for Qg3. But... given some more time, the computer looks deeper and finds Rdf1! and scores the game at -.46 at a depth of 18 moves. Great find team!
24... Black loses on time.
Rybka gives the main line from here as follows: