The move is great, and seems to be wining on the spot.
Black queen can no longer stay on a1-h8 diagonal, which she can't leave either due to mate threat.
If eg. ....Qh8, then Rg3+, Qxg7#.
If ....Qd6 then Rg3+, Kh8, Qg7#
If ...Qg7 then Rg3 winning the queen for the rook.
The move is great, and seems to be wining on the spot.
Black queen can no longer stay on a1-h8 diagonal, which she can't leave either due to mate threat.
If eg. ....Qh8, then Rg3+, Qxg7#.
If ....Qd6 then Rg3+, Kh8, Qg7#
If ...Qg7 then Rg3 winning the queen for the rook.
All very true. And if Black plays Qg4, then Rg3.
If Black then follows with Qg6, then White has a choice of either h4, Be2, Ba6 attacking the rook, or Rxg6+ trading the rook for Black's Queen.
Is there any case to be made for arguing this is not a good move? Would playing Rg6+ before c3 have been much better? Or does it not really matter?
Ooh -- good one. Yes, I think Rg6+ before c3 might even be better. As it's a forcing move, you still have c3 as a follow up.
The chess.com analyzer gets closer to a human level understanding at the higher depth. At the default depth it just calls the move a mistake.
It takes the queen from the defence of the king.
The follow up would be Rg3+, right?
Here is the game that the position is from. There is no doubt that Rg3+ would have been the follow up if Black had not resigned there.
Reason I posted the question is because I was trying out a 3rd party analysis tool that said the move was a blunder.
I wasn't sure whether or not there was any sentimentality for the game as a whole coloring my belief that it was a great finishing move.
The analysis tool called c3 a "blunder," even though it is a winning move! That's because Rg3 was much better! My Stockfish assesses c3 as +6.75, clearly winning. But the engine rates Rg3+ at +12.75. The size of that difference is why the analysis tool calls your (winning!) move a blunder
The analysis tool called c3 a "blunder," even though it is a winning move! That's because Rg3 was much better! My Stockfish assesses c3 as +6.75, clearly winning. But the engine rates Rg3+ at +12.75. The size of that difference is why the analysis tool calls your (winning!) move a blunder
Yes that explains it, but I wish the analysis tool was a bit more sophisticated than just reducing everything down to centipawns. Real master games are not won by centipawns, they are typically won by resignation after the losing opponent realizes they no longer have a chance.
Tarrasch consistently outplayed Mieses throughout the game, exploiting every weakness in his position and accumulating a growing advantage.
Tarrasch did not make any blunders in that game, and that is why the game won a brilliancy prize.
This is like a computer program giving Muhammed Ali a failing grade due to him deciding to pull his final punch as his opponent was falling onto the canvas!
Hi I am Renuka
I don't get it. If instead of 1.c3 white plays 1.g3+, then 1... Kh8, 2.c3 Qe5, then what?
Tarrasch possessed the technique to easily convert a Q vs R advantage to a win. Mieses knew that and resigned. Many moves a computer calls "mistakes" or "blunders" in analyzing GM games are just the winning player taking an easy win when they see it rather than hunting for an even faster or more elegant victory.
I don't get it. If instead of 1.c3 white plays 1.g3+, then 1... Kh8, 2.c3 Qe5, then what?
3.f4 and where does the queen go now?
I don't get it. If instead of 1.c3 white plays 1.g3+, then 1... Kh8, 2.c3 Qe5, then what?
3.f4 and where does the queen go now?
Not looking good for Black
If you look at it objectively 20. c3 is absolutely a blunder and at the same time a move that will force a resign. After 20. c3 black can keep going on by giving up the queen for a rook. Sometimes those kind of positions can still be tricky, but not here. So black will resign. However 20. Rg3+ is much better, as black now can't sacrifice the queen for a rook. After 20. ... Kh8 there's 21. c3, Qe5; 22. f4 and black can't keep defending g7 and loses the whole queen. And after 20. ... Qg4 it's not just that black loses a queen for a rook but after 21. Rxg4, fxg4 it's checkmate after 22. Bxh7+, Kh8; 23. Bg6+, Kg8; 24. Qh7+, Kf8; 25. Qxf7#.
This position teaches us 3 things:
- if you can see a good move, take the time to look for a better move. You can usually do this by always making sure that you look for at least 3 candidate moves. Never even instantly capture something back without looking for alternatives!
- if the computer suggests a move, ask yourself if that move is necessary and human. After 20. c3 black just resigned. How important is it that 20. Rg3+ is indeed better?
- and lastly, analyse your wins too!
If you look at it objectively 20. c3 is absolutely a blunder and at the same time a move that will force a resign. After 20. c3 black can keep going on by giving up the queen for a rook. Sometimes those kind of positions can still be tricky, but not here. So black will resign. However 20. Rg3+ is much better, as black now can't sacrifice the queen for a rook. After 20. ... Kh8 there's 21. c3, Qe5; 22. f4 and black can't keep defending g7 and loses the whole queen. And after 20. ... Qg4 it's not just that black loses a queen for a rook but after 21. Rxg4, fxg4 it's checkmate after 22. Bxh7+, Kh8; 23. Bg6+, Kg8; 24. Qh7+, Kf8; 25. Qxf7#.
This position teaches us 3 things:
- if you can see a good move, take the time to look for a better move. You can usually do this by always making sure that you look for at least 3 candidate moves. Never even instantly capture something back without looking for alternatives!
- if the computer suggests a move, ask yourself if that move is necessary and human. After 20. c3 black just resigned. How important is it that 20. Rg3+ is indeed better?
- and lastly, analyse your wins too!
Thank you Roel! There seems to be a dichotomy here in that:
How good, or bad, is this move, and why?