Ich hatte vor 12. Nxd7 zwei Partien zur Verfügung:
aus 2012 Stephan - de Oliveira 1-0, welches ich zur damaligen Analyse kannte und mir 13. e4 damals noch durchaus als Alternative zum gewählten Text-Zug erschien, und
aus 2014 Emelyanov - Pessoa 1/2-1/2, was ich gestern für Weiss wiederholt nicht nennenswert verbessern konnte, weswegen ich 13. e4 auch verworfen und meinen positionellen Ansatz hier gewählt habe.
(12. Nd3?! verstehe ich ehrlich gesagt nicht "im Spirit" dieser Stellung :-)...)
14. Qc2 *
aus 2012 Stephan - de Oliveira 1-0, welches ich zur damaligen Analyse kannte und mir 13. e4 damals noch durchaus als Alternative zum gewählten Text-Zug erschien, und
aus 2014 Emelyanov - Pessoa 1/2-1/2, was ich gestern für Weiss wiederholt nicht nennenswert verbessern konnte, weswegen ich 13. e4 auch verworfen und meinen positionellen Ansatz hier gewählt habe.
(12. Nd3?! verstehe ich ehrlich gesagt nicht "im Spirit" dieser Stellung :-)...)
14. Qc2 *
14.-Lb7
"Spirit" oder Langeweile?
"Spirit" oder Langeweile?
I only have one additional game before 13. e3, but way behind those two, in quality:
Naum 4.2 4cpu - Gull 2.8b 4CPU (CCRL 40/40, 2014), it also continued with e4 and ended in a draw, probably because white played 16. f4, instead of b4.
Naum 4.2 4cpu - Gull 2.8b 4CPU (CCRL 40/40, 2014), it also continued with e4 and ended in a draw, probably because white played 16. f4, instead of b4.
> "Spirit" oder Langeweile?
Glaub mir, ich hätt' auch lieber die ICCF-GM Stephan-Linie hier durchgepondert und gespannt auf Deine Verbesserung über ICCF-GM de Oliveira gewartet, aber die hat mir der Nachbarsbursche schon auf seinem EiFön gezeigt... danach war ich erstmal leicht(!) deprimiert, aber so ist Fernschach in 2018 nun mal, zumal wir mit Dir ja auch einen durchaus motivierten Gegner haben, der auch bis drei Uhr Nachts noch an einer Position brät... Arbeit hast bis jetzt eh keine, die offensichtlichen Remis sortiere ja ich bereits für uns aus.
Und ja, die gewisse Komplexität scheint der Stellung schon abhanden gekommen - zumal mich hier alle anderen Alternativen schon hängen gelassen haben (Dein d-Bauer ist trotz e3 einfach zu stark)... dennoch kriege ich zumindest leicht bessere Endspiele, und stille Gewässer sind bekanntlich tief, manchmal zu gefährlich für unbegleitete Kreuzfahrtschiffe...
1. c4 Nf6 2. d4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. Nbd2 d5 6. Bg2 Be7 7. O-O O-O
8. b3 c5 9. dxc5 bxc5 10. Ne5 Qc7 11. Bb2 Nbd7 12. Nxd7 Qxd7 13. e3 Rad8
14. Qc2 Bb7 15. cxd5 * +/=
3r1rk1/pb1qbppp/4pn2/2pP4/8/1P2P1P1/PBQN1PBP/R4RK1 b - - 0 15
>stille Gewässer sind bekanntlich tief, manchmal zu gefährlich für unbegleitete Kreuzfahrtschiffe...
I think there's a poet in you.
, these translation-software have also come a great way.
"translation-software"? I have an old-fashioned dictionary!
Oh, so no hot German translation-girl under your office table?
I wish. But that's on my bucket list. The German girl, I don't care much about the table.
Ozy, i have the much better position already in this game!
15.- Nxd5
16. Nc4 *
3r1rk1/pb1qbppp/4p3/2pn4/2N5/1P2P1P1/PBQ2PBP/R4RK1 b - - 1 16
PS: Der Artikel bzgl. der "Italienischen Angelegenheit" scheint schon voraus zum Meeresspiegel?!
Psst, jetzt kommt gleich Eishockey!
16.- Nb4
Danke Dir.
17. Qe2 *
17. Qe2 *
17.- Bxg2
18. Kxg2 *
18.- Qb7
New board:
Come on Anton, are you going to play anything else than e4?
3r1rk1/pq2bppp/4p3/2p5/1nN5/1P2P1P1/PB2QPKP/R4R2 w - - 1 19
Come on Anton, are you going to play anything else than e4?
Will have a look today evening... as it is very cold here (-1x degree celcius), the additional heating of analysis is highly welcome! In each case i agree with Herbert, as i also think this is the best line - setting White difficult choices ahead.
19. Kg1 *
19.- Qe4
20. Na5 *
20.- Rd7
21. Bc3 *
21.- Bd8
22. Nc4 *
22.- Bf6 0,00
its boring now
its boring now
23. Bxf6 *
If you think your ruined pawn-structure is boring and there is nothing to be found, please post your 0.00-line and i will only come back to you when there is something to be played for... when its that boring you sure have full trust in doing so.
Still i think you will simply chicken out doing so, right?
If you think your ruined pawn-structure is boring and there is nothing to be found, please post your 0.00-line and i will only come back to you when there is something to be played for... when its that boring you sure have full trust in doing so.
Still i think you will simply chicken out doing so, right?
5rk1/p2r1ppp/4pB2/2p5/1nN1q3/1P2P1P1/P3QP1P/R4RK1 b - - 0 23
Is banter a corr-chess requirement? This is starting to sound like the Uly game chat.
Ozy, the start position is 0.00, so i really don't understand all that "its boring"-stuff. Corr-chess in '18 is boring! My opponent is pretty strong as he whiped GM Ohlin 8-0, so i'm sure he will underline his 0.00/"boring"-claim with posting here a >=50 half-moves-line to underline it. When chicken out doing so and needing to double-check every move, how can it be boring?!
the start position is 0,17 but this is really easy
the point is to have postions were stockfish needs several days to reach depth 60
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/stockfish-evaluation-at-depth-50-on-all-possible-initial-opening-moves
i didnt whipe out ohlin, he didnt play so 8-0 without a move
23.- gf
the point is to have postions were stockfish needs several days to reach depth 60
https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/stockfish-evaluation-at-depth-50-on-all-possible-initial-opening-moves
i didnt whipe out ohlin, he didnt play so 8-0 without a move
23.- gf
> the start position is 0,17 [+link]
Ok, that explains your current love (vs. Eldridge & vs. Legrand) to the KIA (1. Nf3/2. g3)...
I still think White has an [slight] advantage here, as in my opinion it can improve nearly riskless positionally... but you may show me your 0.00-line pretty quickly...
24. Rac1 *
24.- Rfd8
25. f3 *
25.- Qd5
26. Rc3 *
More than 10 days now...
Well, my play was at least impressive enough to distract my opponent going for 5...d5 any longer - he opted for both 5...Bb4 vs. Tsygankov and vs. Legrand; - but as i left the best move in my book by intention (no need to show all your cards in a "friendly" analysis, and also a good occasion to try something alternative...) and also made a most likely suboptimal choice already once beyond that, we stranded in that current position where i still was sure there is some kind of rearranging-majorPieces-trick on the White's first two ranks with a final exploit of Black's weak pawn-structure, but it is actually very hard to find&prove...
And yet, your moves are coming in a timely fashion. I take it your aren't playing any other games concurrently?
> And yet, your moves are coming in a timely fashion.
Well, its actually not that Herbert's mentioned play/approach, letting Stockfish run down depth 60 and inserting the move here, needs that much time with his hardware
... and it has absolutely nothing to do with fashion at all! Obviously you need engines to double-check your ideas, but playing like that there is not much corr-chess remaining, just computer- one... *yawn*. Yet, 22...Bf8 is pretty deep&good...> I take it your aren't playing any other games concurrently?
I'm currently playing whom i consider the best - myself[!], analyzing abovely mentioned lines and diverse other [openings-]lines. When i go through a few of my old games i just played with a single-core notebook and my analysis-approach ("clicking through the lines", like a OTB-GM would go unassisted in mind), i'm still proud what i could manage to achieve against all the "engine's best move"-inserters - its indeed that i could often add knowledge over that! But 2018 is now a real different beast: playing a solid opening all lines seem to fall to 0.00 sooner or later, so last romance in corr-chess is vs. gamblers or gambiters.
Playing against yourself will get you bored rather quickly. When was the last time you could score a win/loss?
> Playing against yourself will get you bored rather quickly.
Oh, analyzing owns ideas/lines or following interesting corr[-GM]-play is still a lot of fun to me. On the other side i really admire you for all your hard work on your DB, just to get its fruits maybe?! every two years... but hell, i still regret missing that Infinitychess-tourney last year.
> When was the last time you could score a win/loss?
As i generally take more resources for the white/light/good[!] side, still reasonably...
Don't sweat it, the last interesting one was in 2014.
That's kind of cheating.
>i generally take more resources for the white
That's kind of cheating.
> Don't sweat it, the last interesting one was in 2014.
You deserved to win 2014, no doubt. For the upcoming next 2023-edition, i hope to bring the Ozywhipdias-sideline in the Spanishspidernetstucks-variation to the board...
> That's kind of cheating.
No, i just create complications for my Whiteself which i can't solve as Black!
Maybe as an individual, but in Freestyle teams are allowed, and team Intagrand had more resources, in every way: more HW, more D in the DB, more operators, and among everything else, more contempt for weaker players. I almost always played just what I thought best, and solid defence nullified those attempts rather often. In fact, the only time I recall actively pursuing bad moves, was in the game against Bojan Fajs, but that was towards the end of the tournament, and I was already sick of draws. I wonder what today engines have to say:
[Event "Long 90' + 15'', Rated"]
[Site "InfinityChess"]
[Date "2014.04.04"]
[Round "26"]
[White "Ozymandias (ct)"]
[Black "jobboy (ct)"]
[Result "1–0"]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.h3 Be7 9.f4 exf4 10.Bxf4 Nc6 11.Qe2 Nd7 12.0-0-0 Nce5 13.Kb1 Rc8 14.Qe3 Qc7 15.Nd4 Nb6 16.Qf2 Nbc4 17.Nd5 Bxd5 18.exd5 Qb6 19.c3 0-0 20.Bc1 Bf6 21.Ka1 Qd8 22.Nf5 b6 23.Be2 b5 24.g4 g6 25.Nh6+ Kh8 26.h4 Qe7 27.Rdf1 Bg7 28.h5 Nxb2 29.Qh2 Nxg4 30.Nxg4 Na4 31.Bb2 Bxc3 32.Bxc3+ Nxc3 33.Bd3 Na4 34.Rf6 Qa7 35.Qf2 Qxf2 36.Rxf2 f5 37.Nh6 Kg7 38.hxg6 hxg6 39.Rg2 Kf6 40.Rhg1 Ke5 41.Rxg6 Kxd5 42.Nxf5 Rcd8 43.Bc2 Nc3 44.Bb3+ Kc5 45.Ng7 Kc6 46.Ne6 b4 47.Nxd8+ Rxd8 48.a3 a5 49.R1g5 bxa3 50.Rxa5 Rh8 51.Rxa3 Ne4 52.Bc2 Nc5 53.Kb2
1–0
[Event "Long 90' + 15'', Rated"]
[Site "InfinityChess"]
[Date "2014.04.04"]
[Round "26"]
[White "Ozymandias (ct)"]
[Black "jobboy (ct)"]
[Result "1–0"]
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be3 e5 7.Nb3 Be6 8.h3 Be7 9.f4 exf4 10.Bxf4 Nc6 11.Qe2 Nd7 12.0-0-0 Nce5 13.Kb1 Rc8 14.Qe3 Qc7 15.Nd4 Nb6 16.Qf2 Nbc4 17.Nd5 Bxd5 18.exd5 Qb6 19.c3 0-0 20.Bc1 Bf6 21.Ka1 Qd8 22.Nf5 b6 23.Be2 b5 24.g4 g6 25.Nh6+ Kh8 26.h4 Qe7 27.Rdf1 Bg7 28.h5 Nxb2 29.Qh2 Nxg4 30.Nxg4 Na4 31.Bb2 Bxc3 32.Bxc3+ Nxc3 33.Bd3 Na4 34.Rf6 Qa7 35.Qf2 Qxf2 36.Rxf2 f5 37.Nh6 Kg7 38.hxg6 hxg6 39.Rg2 Kf6 40.Rhg1 Ke5 41.Rxg6 Kxd5 42.Nxf5 Rcd8 43.Bc2 Nc3 44.Bb3+ Kc5 45.Ng7 Kc6 46.Ne6 b4 47.Nxd8+ Rxd8 48.a3 a5 49.R1g5 bxa3 50.Rxa5 Rh8 51.Rxa3 Ne4 52.Bc2 Nc5 53.Kb2
1–0
Well, less resources makes your achivement (best results vs. top10) even better. Nice game there, making jobboy a joyboy.
The good thing about the top 10-15 players, is that they occasionally take some risks, like Bojan here, Etaoin, Victorious, Newton296, or Eros more recently (twice). That's when you can play, if you follow solid proven lines all the way out of book, there's nothing.
Do you have the game in DB that Herbert has lost vs. Eros and can put it in here like yours above? Thanks.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill