It's black to move and Landa played:
56....Re1 ??
....which is patzer chess - at very best.
Landa should be ashamed & maybe even gave a half a point away today.
It's black to move and Landa played:
56....Re1 ??
....which is patzer chess - at very best.
Landa should be ashamed & maybe even gave a half a point away today.
I guess he trusted Jobava knew how to win this....which is quite a big assumption (& kinda ding dong dumb).
The right move is probably 56...Rf7....and Landa needs to try for this setup:
....and he should probably be able to get it. At that point, It'll be up to Jobava to prove he knows what to do here....and it's not innate.
Q vs. R is loaded w/ stalemate chances for Black.
From Exhibit #5, Jobava cannot win this game w/ him (white) to move. So, Jobava hasta smoothly recreate this position w/ Jobava (black) to move.
I know this 'cuz I once had a arms length teacher for a week (3 lessons) who was a World Class Soviet player who all a you have heard a....and they had me dissertate this to exhaustion.
If Jobava knows what to do ?....then he happily allows this setup....but he may not & so he got a half a point without working for it.
This is just wrong. First of all, after Rf7 white has the obvious Qb7 Ke8, Qc8 Ke7, Ke5 and the position keeps getting shifted one move to the right and when we get to the h-file, Black will have to make a move like Rh1 anyway--he can't get into the position you show. Second, the win after Re1 requires a bit of calculation, which is really all Black can hope for anyway. Calling the move Re1 "pazter chess" because it moves the rook away from the king is doubly ironic, because the position you show is the Philidor position, where with Black to move, he has to move the rook away from the king. Even with White to move, the win is easy--he has his choice of tempo-losing moves: Qe4 and Qe5 both get the job done, although maybe Qe4 is longer. Black's best method of defense is the third rank defense, which is impossible to reach from the given position barring a few exceptionally stupid moves from White.
You need to read what I've written. Then reread it very carefully. This will prove that you're the one that's actually fulla it.
You're talking somewhat capsized & Landa is 500 points over you w/ a top-tier title. So listening to you or analyzing what Landa actually did is alot more revealing to the truth of this position....there smarty pants.
Now. Show us all your brilliancy w/ a step-by-step sequence 'cuz we're not all blindfold Super GM's like you.
You're talking somewhat capsized & Landa is 500 points over you w/ a top-tier title.
Coming from a player that has a rating much more than 500 points lower than Landa, and makes the public claim that his Re1 is a "pazter move"?
And somehow "analyzing what Landa actually did" (in your words, a "pazter move") is supposed to be most helpful in understanding this position? More helpful than learning that this position is completely hopeless? More helpful than actually learning the position you had "dissertated" on is actually trivial because it's not hard to lose a tempo, like I've already commented? More helpful than learning that White has a straightforward win after Rf7, like I've also commented?
If you are uninterested in understanding the chess, then make it clear, preferably by not posting in the "Endgame Study" Forum. If you're only interested in getting into a name-calling contest, make it clear from the outset.
But Landa's 56...Re7 ?? (outright loses) is either just defeatist and a quitter's move or he really didn't know the triangulate thingy (I woulda made Jobava prove to me). So I give him the benefit of the doubt & say it's probably the latter.
And he should be ashamed if he didn't know that one 'cuz every master plus should have that one down cold.
In GM Jobava (2700 minus some pennies) vs. GM Landa (2600 & change) it looked like this: