My Puzzle Forum

BryanCFB

This forum will contain puzzles of mine that are taken directly from over the board games of mine.  I hope to periodically add more puzzles over time.  Please feel free to comment if you wish or just take a look and hopefully solve if that is what you desire.

Thank you and enjoy!

BryanCFB

Black to play and win.

fightingbob

Nice combination, Bryan.  I looked at 4...Qg2 first, but as long as 5.Kc1 Ba3, 6.Kd1 (instead of 6.Kb1?), Black has nothing.  When in doubt, take the material. 

BryanCFB
fightingbob wrote:

Nice combination, Bryan.  I looked at 4...Qg2 first, but as long as 5.Kc1 Ba3, 6.Kd1 (instead of 6.Kb1?), Black has nothing.  When in doubt, take the material. 

Thank you Bob.

BryanCFB

Find the winning breakthrough for white.

BryanCFB
Black to move and make white's position fall apart!
fightingbob
BryanCFB wrote:

Find the winning breakthrough for white.

Nice, efficient win.  How come I never get opponents who leave their king this vulnerable. grin.png

I initially visualized 1.Bxh5 gxh5, 2.Qe2 Bg7 (the only move that holds out a bit longer) 3.Qxh5+ Kg8, 4.Rxg7+ Kxg7, 5.Rg1+ Kf6, 6.Qg5+ Ke5, 7.Nf3# and didn't look for anything quicker.  That is common among tournament players when you have a win and you're on the clock.  However, when you actually play the moves you often find something quicker like your 5.Qh6+ Kg8, 6.Rg1#.

fightingbob
BryanCFB wrote:
Black to move and make white's position fall apart!

Congratulations, Bryan.  It is very rare indeed for a 1656 to take apart a 2158 so quickly and efficiently.  I imagine Mr. Rothman was shocked.

BryanCFB
fightingbob wrote:
BryanCFB wrote:

Find the winning breakthrough for white.

Nice, efficient win.  How come I never get opponents who leave their king this vulnerable.

 

Thanks again.  And what you say is amusing to me because when I'm not playing well I also often feel that my opponents never make such glaring positional errors (...Kh7 was black's move before the puzzle)!  However I feel much better when I remember of instances of opponent errors such as in this game and remind myself that I have been on the plus side of games like this on quite a few occasions.

BryanCFB
fightingbob wrote:
BryanCFB wrote:
Black to move and make white's position fall apart!

Congratulations, Bryan.  It is very rare indeed for a 1656 to take apart a 2158 so quickly and efficiently.  I imagine Mr. Rothman was shocked.

Yes.  That day was the first time I defeated an expert.  I also beat one (rated 2009) in Round 1 so it was truly a memorable day.  But the best part about the game against Rothman is he beat me in the 1993 US Amateur Teams East so I certainly got a measure of revenge!  Whether he remembered defeating me I am not sure.  I certainly wasn't going to ask him.Smile  But it was obvious he wasn't thrilled losing to someone 500 points below him as he quickly left the playing area without uttering a word.

Unfortunately after getting paired against and losing to a 2300 in Round 3 and blowing a superior position and losing to a 2125 in Round 4 I lost some confidence and was also mentally drained and proceeded to also lose Rounds 5 and 6 to Class A players. 

Despite the poor finish though I will never forget that weekend (as long as my mind doesn't betray meSmile) and that was the inspiration for choosing this puzzle for my forum.

Thanks again.

Dsmith42

Fun stuff - very good tactical puzzles.

BlueKnightShade

BryanCFB, Regarding your first puzzle: After the moves 1...Rxf4+!! 2.gxf4 black can perform a mate in two, so here you go:

fightingbob
BlueKnightShade wrote:

BryanCFB, Regarding your first puzzle: After the moves 1...Rxf4+!! 2.gxf4 black can perform a mate in two, so here you go:

When put in the form of a puzzle it's easy, but I can't explained why I missed it the original.  I must not have seen the follow up to Qxd6+, which I did visualize.  Chess blindness!

BlueKnightShade
fightingbob wrote:

When put in the form of a puzzle it's easy, but I can't explained why I missed it the original.  I must not have seen the follow up to Qxd6+, which I did visualize.  Chess blindness!

Well, I think it is quite natural. When you are focused on a clear winning line you might not notice if there are other even stronger options.

 

Some more thoughts:

You might like to play the winning line you have seen. Maybe it appeals to your sense of beauty or in some other way is nice. Like in the current game, you get the opportunity to give a check and win the rook in one corner followed by a check winning the rook in the other corner. It is not often you get the chance to win the rooks in both corners.

Another thought: Once you have found such a clear win you are probably less likely to spend time and energy looking for other winning possibilities which means further calculations when there is no need for it.

If you are on the losing side it is much worse, because you might look desperately for a line that will save the game, and when you don't find one you look for other possibilities. So you calculate and calculate ad nauseam hoping to find something.

 

Anyway, 1... Rxf4+!! was a nice sacrifice. It feels great when you can make such a move, doesn't it? :-)

BryanCFB
BlueKnightShade wrote:
fightingbob wrote:

When put in the form of a puzzle it's easy, but I can't explained why I missed it the original.  I must not have seen the follow up to Qxd6+, which I did visualize.  Chess blindness!

Well, I think it is quite natural. When you are focused on a clear winning line you might not notice if there are other even stronger options.

 

Some more thoughts:

You might like to play the winning line you have seen. Maybe it appeals to your sense of beauty or in some other way is nice. Like in the current game, you get the opportunity to give a check and win the rook in one corner followed by a check winning the rook in the other corner. It is not often you get the chance to win the rooks in both corners.

Another thought: Once you have found such a clear win you are probably less likely to spend time and energy looking for other winning possibilities which means further calculations when there is no need for it.

If you are on the losing side it is much worse, because you might look desperately for a line that will save the game, and when you don't find one you look for other possibilities. So you calculate and calculate ad nauseam hoping to find something.

 

Anyway, 1... Rxf4+!! was a nice sacrifice. It feels great when you can make such a move, doesn't it? :-)

Thanks for pointing that out.  I have no recollection of that being pointed out to me almost 24 years ago!  And I definitely showed the game because I of course was very proud of the combination.  But you're definitely right that I saw the winning of both rooks and I obviously was overly focused on that.  And had I seen the mate in two I would have played it without hesitation despite the chance to win two rooks.  I guess 1...Rxf4+!! was even better than I thought!

I'd like to think in the last 24 years that I've learned to look for even better moves than those that I originally see, and indeed I have, but apparently not all of the time because I missed the mate in two in the analysis I provided.Smile  Chess blindness indeed!

Thanks again for the feedback.

BryanCFB
Dsmith42 wrote:

Fun stuff - very good tactical puzzles.

Glad you like it.  There will be more to come!

BryanCFB
White to play and win.  
 

BryanCFB

The puzzle in the above post is not overly difficult but the outcome is not quite decided after the first move. 

I've included a lot of analysis in the solution in lines where white can go wrong for those who may be interested.  If not interested then simply enjoy the puzzle!

BryanCFB

By the way, black had a much better defensive move on move #1 in the puzzle two posts above this than what was played in the game and it is not covered in my analysis.  I don't want to mention it here so close to the puzzle and so soon after posting it.  So if anyone notices it I am aware of it.Smile  Despite this however, there is still a lot to learn from this puzzle.

BryanCFB

Black to play and win.

In this game I missed my chance to defeat future International Master Tom Bartell.  This was around the time when he really started his rise in the chess rankings at around the approximate age of 10!