Who disagrees with me and why?.
What Ne5 variation are you refering to?.
But, all together, if there are no dramatical novelties in Nd5 variation, I conclude Poisssoned Pawn with e5 is draw.
Nd5 is very safe and if you know it well, it is probably the best choice against a strong opponent (OTB or even in correspondence chess).
g5 is murky, probably a draw with best play by both sides. Nepomniachtchi recently used it to beat Anand, who responded badly (he didn't seem to know the line). It gives nice practical chances in an OTB game, especially if white doesn't know it. Still, you must have a strong stomach having your king at d8 and a bad development, but if you know the lines well, this is no problem.
[Event "CCM9 - GrenkeLeasing Rapid WCh"]
[White "Anand, Viswanathan"]
[Black "Nepomniachtchi, Ian"]
[Source "Chess Tigers"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 Qb6 8. Qd2 Qxb2 9. Rb1 Qa3 10. e5 h6 11. Bh4 dxe5 12. fxe5 g5 13. Bf2 Ng4 14. Bg3 Nd7 15. Be2 Ngxe5 16. O-O Bg7 17. Nxe6 fxe6 18. Ne4 Rf8 19. Bh5+ Ke7 20. Rb3 Rxf1+ 21. Kxf1 Nc4 22. Rxa3 Nxd2+ 23. Nxd2 Be5 24. Rf3 Bxg3 25. Rf7+ Kd6 26. hxg3 b5 27. Rh7 Bb7 28. Bf3 Rf8 29. Ke2 Bd5 30. Bxd5 exd5 31. Rxh6+ Rf6 32. Rh5 Re6+ 33. Kd1 g4 34. Nb3 Nf6 35. Rf5 Ne4 36. Kc1 Nc3 37. a3 Re3 38. Rf6+ Ke5 39. Rxa6 Rxg3 40. Nc5 Rxg2 41. Nd3+ Kd4 42. Ne1 Re2 43. Nd3 Rh2 44. Ne1 Ne4 45. Kb2 Rh1 46. Nd3 Nc3 47. a4 Nxa4+ 48. Ka3 Ra1+ 49. Kb4 Rb1+ 50. Ka3 Nc5 51. Nxc5 Kxc5 52. Rg6 Rg1 53. Kb3 g3 54. Rg4 g2 55. Kb2 b4 56. Rg5 Kd6 0-1
[-0.86] d=18 12...Nfd7 13.Be2 Be7 14.Bxe7 Qxe7 15.Nf3 Nc6 16.Ne4 O–O 17.Qc3 Qd8 18.O–O Qc7 19.Nd6 Ndxe5 20.Nxe5 Qxd6 21.Nxc6 Qxc6 22.Qxc6 bxc6 23.Rb6 c5 24.Bf3 Ra7 25.Rd1 Bd7 (0:03.19) 57627kN
> Who disagrees with me and why?.
You don't even know how to spell it, therefore you know nothing about the Poisoned Pawn.
My 2 cents: The Bronstein variation, or Bronstein's pawn grab.
How about the Playchess Pawn Variation? A name reserved for the most played variation there perhaps in B96, as Playchess fashion goes, or the best line for Black in Poisoned Pawn computer games so far? What line would that be?
As a matter of fact, I think that not many top GM's playing 6. Bg5 know about Playchess theory. It should rise in the future, but in 2009 the number is still quite small. Hence every player going for either Nd5 or g5 has a huge advantage in theoretical knowledge, even against a super GM. Once again: the Anand game clearly shows they are not up to date.
>As a matter of fact, I think that not many top GM's playing 6. Bg5 know about Playchess theory. It should rise in the future, but in 2009 the
>number is still quite small. Hence every player going for either Nd5 or g5 has a huge advantage in theoretical knowledge, even against a super
>GM. Once again: the Anand game clearly shows they are not up to date.
I had quite a discussion in Mainz with Vasik and SMK about whether you really want to play this line when you're the (somewhat older) World Champion against a young up-and-coming talented player.
My idea was that you don't actually want to do this, because this a line where you HAVE to be up to date with theory, and knowing the theory is at least as important as your chess skills. So presumably, if you're the World Champion, you can overpower your opponents in much safer lines. Conversely, an up-and-coming talent that plays such a sharp line like this should be expected to know the latest theory very well. So by playing this line, you're taking an unnecessary risk.
IIRC, both Vasik and SMK disagreed with me, because Anand often plays this on both sides, and when you're the World Champion, you want to play your game and not adjust for your favorite line for (inferior) opponents.
I would say the eventual game proved my point, but I'm curious about your opinion here.
The game just shows that he didn't know g5, or didn't give it much attention. If he only had taken a serious look at Nfd7, without paying any attention at Nd5 or g5, it is clear Anand had no idea about these lines and what mine fields were awaiting him. The problem is: we know these lines, but he probably did not.....
All in all I think that if you play 10.e5 in the Poisoned Pawn, you have to be up to date and know what you are doing. This line is far too complicated to trust your intuition and ability to 'figure it out behind the board'. Being up to date means knowing how to counter Nfd7, Nd5 and g5. Entering this line not being up to date is risky, perhaps even suicide. Or it will cost you a lot of time to select a safe line in which you are not worse.
I think Anand was sure he was entering a safe line, as he only gave attention to Nfd7, which in his opinion is probably 'the only logical move'. I am interested if Anand will continue playing 6. Bg5 vs the Najdorf as soon as he takes a deep look at Nd5 and g5. Meanwhile, I don't think he will try it in a serious tournament game.
I think it should be black. Even Rybka says Nfd7 and we know already its the worst move at this position. There are chances For BLACK to go wrong. With a good updated book, Engine seems to support black.....suddenly just like lightening from the sky 1 or 2 sacs on e6 and f7 comes and suddenly eval changes. The characteristic of the opening is that all obvious looking moves leads to disaster for both black (like Nfd7)and white (like Bf7 played by anand),but black having more chances of going wrong if the player is not familiaragainst white. It needs correct defence and calculation of tactics to come back to the game,as he has to return the tempo that cost white development advantage. I personally admire the analysis done by GM Eugeny Naer who is currently the strongest exponent now available who regularly play it OTB in GM level. I have included all his analysis in my coming book. I dont think many care my books now as now sedat has created a craze in many player for making books which makes me rethink while posting the book here.
the game in question occurred back when r3 didnt exist. it was 2.3.2a that couldnt see it.
w/ r3 on an octal, i think it finds it in a few minutes. perhaps someone can confirm this.
there are at least 3 pts of interest for your consideration:
1. can IDeA find 24. Bc7, and if so, how long does it take (state your hw)?
2. can r3 find 24. Bc7, and if so, how long does it take (state your hw)?
3. can r3 avoid black's losing move, whatever move that is? it might come as early as 18 ... Qa5+, i dunno...
how long does r3 take to find Bc7?
Unassisted IDeA looked at Bc7 right away (don't have an exact time) but after 20 hours has only considered it a total of 4 positions vs. 20 hours and 4,000 positions for Be5. Since the eval for Be5 (1.72) is so much better than Bc7 (0.00), no time is being spent on Bc7.
if u force 24. Bc7, does IDeA see that black is lost?
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill