A very surprising evaluation: trophy inside

I was a bit surprised upon first observation of the actual evaluation of this position (in analysis way after the game).

                                   WHITE TO PLAY

 Let's see if anyone will to understand the best continuation (which makes a lot of sense, but then again, at first sight, it doesn't)?

I'd like a solution, and a pleathora of convincing lines. If you spout computer nonsense with only one long variation, you will not recieve a trophy from me. That's not solving a question like this.

Oh, for a real challenge to those really good calculators, try figuring it out as far as you can in your head. 

First user to solve it gets a trophy from me.

Why should anyone spend a lot of time to analyze a 3 minute game that you won because of a last move blunder?

/ No trophy.

In a blitz game, I would sac the rook with Rxd4, without a hesitation, because of he takes, he gets an inferior position with unccordinated rooks and the weak light squares. Even though I'm down the exchange, I center pawns are very weak and the bishop becomes very strong.

If he takes the knight instead, he has two sets of doubled pawns. 

Rxd4 and b4 are the two most interesting moves, the former being an exchange sacrifice and the latter a pawn sacrifice. I feel like white is better after the exchange sacrifice, with two pawns and an attack, while I'm not sure what the evaluation would be after b4, as black will get an absolutely terrible pawn structure for a pawn and some active pieces.

I don't give a crap about that. It's a position that I consider interesting.

Go shove it. I post what I want, deal with it.

Judging by your birthdate, you are some grumpy old man that has nothing else to do. Seriously, get a life. Digging in my games profile to what? Criticize me for posting stuff that happens in my games?

What happens in your games btw? Anything interesting? I think not.

Also, I'm not asking to analyze the whole game if you cared to notice the OP. I'm asking for a single moment in that game.

And the game was a time crapshoot at the end. 

Shepi and beerpatzer are on to something 

I would jump on 1.Rxd4 exd4 (1...hxg5 2.Rg4 is obviously better for White) 2.Nxe6 Nxe6 (pin tricks based on 2...Qe7 don't work after 3.Bd5) 3.Bd5 and retake the piece at the next move, with two pawns + a well-placed bishop for the exchange (d4 will die shortly).

It might be tempting but I am not sure it is good.

You are asking people to spend more time analyzing the game than you spent playing it.  If you were a grandmaster or an IM like Silman and we had any reason for any confidence that you had done the work yourself and there might be some kernel of value to be found, that would be one thing. 

But given the ending of the game, where you were losing and only won through a last move blunder, that seems unlikely.  

There is no reason for anyone to spend an hour on a position you didn't spend 10 seconds on.

You can ask for whatever you want. I just think that based on the facts in evidence, it is a waste of everyone's time.

I agree with ntmtwain.  But because this is an educational website I will  explain why rapid transit games even between GMs is not worth analyzing.

Yes, the tactic is interesting to you as a less experienced player.  And, that is good.  It shows your love of chess.   However, after a while you will learn that stronger players play rapid transit for 2  reasons.  One is to keep their 4 visualization pattern memory banks sharp (tactics, endgame, opening, and middlegame).  The second is to practice their clock technique under time pressure sharp. 

Other than those reasons listed above rapid  transit is bad for your game.

I'm just looking at aposition ffs, I pick stuff my OTB long games too, and from old games, random games, and from top level games these days. Blitz is just the one time control that I happen to have chosen.

This is exactly what I was thinking at some point, at least I'm not alone here hehe

Yeah, not an intuitive evaluation at all.  I was thinking that line would just be equal but looking with an engine in a few different lines white has precise tactics that take advantage of the otherwise minor defects in black's position.

Your Ne4 was my first thought, and seems like a safe and reasonable way to continue, and probably the move I'd choose in a real game.  The engine line seems to be... well... an engine line heh.  You increase the practical difficulty of your position instead of increasing the practical difficulty of your opponent's.

Doesn't matter what game it came from or the outcome of the game.  Interesting positions are interesting and will contain lessons.  If you don't find it interesting or instructive then why comment?

Ooh. Big fonts. A sure sign of a good argument.

Go back to my original comment. I asked a legitimate question. Why should anyone spend more time to analyze a position than you did? 

You have now said that you looked at it for half an hour. Had you said that in your original post,  I might have accepted that as a reason to spend some time looking at it.

When I went looking for your game, it was to get an idea of where the game went. I presumed that something of the positions's depth would be revealed in the actual game. When I saw it was your most recent game and that you had been losing, it caused me to wonder whether or not you had any idea you were losing and then to wonder if you had actually done any analysis of the game before putting out your challenge.

I still haven't seen anything along those lines from you.

Had you admitted that you ended up in a losing position and were wondering where you went wrong, it might also have given more of a legitimate reason for somebody to spend time working on analyzing a game than your demanding multiple lines of analysis and no computer "nonsense" in order to get a "trophy" from you.

I still haven't seen anybody post anything revealing anything especially deep in the position.  If it should turn out that it is a real diamond in the rough, I will be more than happy to change my opinion.

From a practical point of view, I think this is the best line. I can only see two candidates: retreating the knight to e4 or going to the aforementioned line. Given the activity of the black's pieces particularly the strongly posted knight on d4, I doubt white has sufficient time to take advantage of the potential weakness of the doubled pawns on the center after 25. Ne4. With 2 pawns in return for the exchange, he is at least materially equal. In addition, he also obtains excellent control in the center. His bishop raking on the light squares is also a monster with no piece to oppose. You can also appreciate how relatively safe White’s monarch is now as compared to the game continuation (notice how easier it would be to protect f3 and f2 squares after the sac).

@ 1st paragraph. I wrote in a different font because it was hard for me to disguish between your paragraph and my paragraph (hard to read for me). I dunno, the gray box text confuses me, thought might as well use another font. I didn't really care about it.

@2nd. For fun or for interest! That's why you should do it. If this is not acceptable, at a friendly website such as this, then I might well stop posting haha.

@3rd/4th paragraph. Okay..well I am not going to say "I've looked at this for a long time" for every single similiar post. I'm going to drop the argument now because this getting nowhere honestly. It's an informal norm that you should try and attempt what I asked. I don't really think about my credibility that much since it's a friendly website.

5th. I'll put out the mainline, and the real evaluation once someone gets kinda close enough or on the right track. It's just one of those positions where you have to find the best continuation and evaluate it properly. 

3.Bd5 is a good thought to have, the only issue with it is that black has the opportunity to play Re8 in response, while if white plays 3.Rxe6, then Re8 is not possible, and you can play Bd5 anyways next move. A move order difference.

To be fair, that's just the Rd8 line, there are a lot of beautiful things to see.

Perhaps I've divulged a bit too much of the solution though 

What are some other lines after Rxe6 though?

I think he just finds it a bit vain for one to not spend a lot of time on a game and then put themself in a position to judge who is "deserving" enough for a trophy as if they are the master of the position.

But of course to make that point is not to disagree with your comment that an interesting position is an interesting position regardless of how it was reached. I personally find mtwain a bit bitter (I've seen him on the forums before), criticizing petty things and hating you because of it or something.

At first glance I didn't have a particular urge to play Rxd4, but in a game I'd probably look at all the forcing stuff like Rxd4 and Nxe6 and stuff. I don't consider it especially obvious, perhaps because I am wary of the fact that if one's initiative dries up, they may miss their rook. The 27 Bd5?! line infiniteflash gave is an example of that kind of fear. But of course when shown in front of me, I would have to agree, rxd4 is a strong way to play.