b3 was my opponents idea that the pawn could promote before the Rook could get back to b8 and had the Rook been on f7 and the King on f6 prior, then this was OK. As it was, b3 in the game lost instantly.
Play for a Draw, but Don't Accept Draw Offers.
Sort:
In your analysis.. its far better white king move to f6 instead going to d6 in move 6. Black is in zugzwang. White need to put his rook on b4 then black bishop is no where to go. Then black g6 pawn will be captured. This is easy ending for white
PortlandPatzer wrote:
At move 91 either side could have hit the draw button in regards to the 50 move rule.
My rule of thumb is that unless there is a possibilty of gaining an advantage somewhere (barring White trying to hold the material and infiltrate from the Kc3 move suggested), then both players should play it out as if you draw on move 61 for example, you will never Know whether or not the oposition would have blundered on move 62. Here there is no advantage for Black to look for more than a draw since his Bishop is bad. This indicates he had a lesser understanding of endgames than some other players. He should have been content with a draw since barring White blundering, he cannot get a position to make his Bishop could without accepting an inferior and possibly, losing position.
If White had a way to hold the Knight and combine an idea of attacking the e pawn with Kc3 in place and then later the Rook sacrifice on the d file, his chances of winning might have increased slightly even in a RvN ending perhaps but even still, the win would likely be difficult to prove.
As the case was, White could not execute this idea fully and thus, was rightfully justified in offering (and later claiming a draw).
Here is a position where the opposite was true though not without problems until Black gaffed up the position making an easy win by playing b2?? after White played Rf8. The position took nearly 80 moves to set up and by evaluation, White was only a point ahead but had a winning game from the position though my opponent continued to offer draw after draw. Until the b2?? move, I almost accepted the draw but in post mortem found that even if Black had played another move besides the b2 advance, White still had the win in hand given he had a timely sacrificw and could stop the pawn on the opposite side of the board with the King. This is the ending from that game.
Great concept to exchange rook for bishop and dangerous c pawn. But easier if instead of hxg5 on move 5 should go for fxg5. Then black is seriously in trouble. Because white can make his pass g pawn with mating and queening threat
I think in usally 3 draws are the max draw offers in tournaments. And also nobody know when a draw position can change
Basically, neither side should lose their mind. It's possible for either side to try to sacrifice a pawn with g4 or ...g5, but it will probably only hurt the player that does this. Still, if one of the players tries it, you have to be ready to take advantage of it -- perhaps keep the king close to the kingside if things open up there. White may want to maintain his rook on c3 just in case black wants to try to breakthrough with a ...c3 advance.
If neither player gives into this temptation, even as dozens of moves are played, the game will probably get drawn by a 50 move rule or repetition, and that is how this game seemed to end.
If the 50 move rule or threefold rule didn't exist, then I could understand it being rude to go on to infinity until the other guy resigns out of boredom, but with the draw conditions in place, the person who wants to draw has a clear path to it: his task that the opponent gives him is to force a draw condition, and he should focus himself on completing that task, easy as it may be.
b3 is really bad. Everything else in that move seems to keep winning chances to me at least.