Overwhelming attack

ghost_of_pushwood

From a 5-min game between two masters...White played 33 d6 here (and I thought of another possibility)...

 

1314nenon

ok....

Farm_Hand

I like it. To me it's very logical. As is so often the case, black's pieces make a poor impression, lounging on the queenside, while white's pieces surround the squares near the black king. I would be happy to win a game like that.

ghost_of_pushwood

Would you have played that there?  Or 33 d6?  Or maybe something else...actually, I was just thinking about 33 Nh7...

Farm_Hand

In a blitz game, no, I think that's beyond me. Maybe if I were feeling cheeky and wanted to go for it, but I wouldn't be sure it worked.

In a tournament game I'd be looking very hard at those kind of ideas. I can't say for sure whether I'd find it in a way where I'd be confident enough to play all the correct moves.

As for d6, honestly that wouldn't even be a candidate move. I don't understand the appeal of d6.

Farm_Hand

I've had a few tournament games with opportunities like this.

I usually take a ~30 minute think around here.

I play the best moves for about 5 moves.

Then I'm a piece down with a big attack... and I screw it up and lose tongue.png

I'm not very good in positions like this. I need a lot of time on the clock even though I'm sure the win is so obvious as to be super boring for GMs. I'm not just very good at these kinds of positions.

ghost_of_pushwood

d6 seems reasonable to me.  Keeping the knight out of d6, opening a diagonal or two, pushing the passer forward.  Does seem a bit slow though.

ghost_of_pushwood

Botvinnik wasn't too great in those situations either.  Which led to one of the gutsiest openings I ever did see...Bronstein doubtless would never have tried such a thing against Tal, but he knew that Botvinnik had no great love for speculative attacks...

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1032217

Farm_Hand

Ooooh, ok, that's at least one or two good things.

I couldn't have even named one... I mean... it just looks weird to me.

 

I'm aware of a bias I have. All game long I'm big on minor pieces that touch pawns. Touching friendly pawns = passive. Touching enemy pawns = good. If the enemy pawns are weak, then great.

This is an oversimplification of course... and minor pieces can even be good for reasons totally unrelated to pawns (that's how deep the bias goes, I have to remind myself of this)

So a move like d6 is a bit invisible to me because you're giving black's knight something to attack. You're opening up c6 or e6 for the bishop.

Farm_Hand
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:

Botvinnik wasn't too great in those situations either.  Which led to one of the gutsiest openings I ever did see...Bronstein doubtless would never have tried such a thing against Tal, but he knew that Botvinnik had no great love for speculative attacks...

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1032217

That's a complicated game, I'll have to look at it later, I need to go eat.

Farm_Hand

Here's an example from a real tournament game I played. TC was... something like G/90

 

 

Floatingsnow

wow