Irish Championship 2018

ComDubh · 14-08-2018 2:32pm

Qe2+ looks pointless. No way Black is leaving Queens come off. My first thought is to try to reroute the dark-squared bishop to b4.

namenotavailablE · 14-08-2018 3:15pm

Agreed that Qe2+ does nothing so something else is sensible. The question is: what works?

Re-routing the bishop seems to give White the 'time factor' bonus- this may eliminate the ability of the bishop to reach b4. For example, 31.. Bc7; 32. Qxb7 Bd6; is met with 33.Qa8+ and Qxa5. White seems OK.

I can't see returning the black Queen to defend the bishop working either- 31..Qe6; 32. d5! Bxe3+; 32. Kxe3 Qxd5; 33. Qd4 Qg5+ (no point exchanging Queens); 34. f4 and white is probably still OK. EDIT: 32. d5 is nonsense....

Silicon monsters would solve it in nano-seconds!

ComDubh · 14-08-2018 3:56pm

OK, so Fritz goes 31.. Bd8! (Bc7 allows White perp.) 32. Qxb7 Qe2+ 33. Kc3 Qa2 34. Qb2 (if 31... Bc7, Qc8+ would be a draw) Qxa4 and Fritz prefers Black (-0.5). I certainly prefer to be Black here!

namenotavailablE · 14-08-2018 4:10pm

That seems good for Black and I'd also prefer the Black side of the deal. White would even lose if trying Qd6+

33..Qa2 is a hard move to visualise.

Thanks for the analysis!

Tim Harding · 14-08-2018 4:55pm

I looked at this with Stockfish9 (which is not only free but one of the strongest engines around) and it comes up with the same line based on ...Bd8 and ...Qxa2. Black is running no risk and if he's also the stronger reply he will most likely win in the end. White has to grovel and sometimes find "only" moves: 28 Nxc4 Qg4+ 29 Kf1 Bd3+ (or dxc4 first as above, making White use more time instead of forcing the reply) 30 Ke1 Bd3 31 Kd2 (31 Rd1 Kh7 is maybe not quite as bad for White as your line.) 31...Bd8! 32 Qxb7 Qe2+ 33 Kc3 Qa2 (not hard to see: wins a pawn) 34 Qb2 Qxa4+ (threatening ...Be7-b4+) 35 Ra1 (forced) 35...Qd7 and now it's time to form a new plan after pocketing the second passed pawn.

It's not clear that Murphy's 28 Rxc4 was any worse than Nxc4; he probably judged that his centralised knight was better than the rook. It was his follow-up 29 Qb5 which lost by force. After a better move, Black has an edge with the better practical chances and of course to be outright first Alex Lopez did not actually need to win this game anyway.

In general, I don't think this type of public discussion with long variations serves any great purpose. I suggest namenotavailabl follows commentary on the Sinquefield Cup online at chess24 from this weekend; even the Saint Louis blitz tonight and tomorrow (starting 7pm) could be fun and instructive.

mikhail · 14-08-2018 6:13pm

Tim Harding wrote: »

In general, I don't think this type of public discussion with long variations serves any great purpose.

We're discussing the national championships of a backwater in a modestly popular passtime. None of this serves any purpose beyond mild diversion.

Tim Harding · 14-08-2018 6:19pm

mikhail wrote: »

We're discussing the national championships of a backwater in a modestly popular passtime. None of this serves any purpose beyond mild diversion.

What I meant was that it serves little purpose for a (presumably) relatively low-rated player to ask somewhat more experienced players to turn on their computers for him.
A couple of us did it out of mild curiosity but really the position in question wasn't extraordinary enough to justify the time and effort and there is more to be learned from watching top GM games.

namenotavailablE · 14-08-2018 6:43pm

I have to respectfully suggest that there was zero obligation on any experienced player to actually turn on their computer. I'd like to acknowledge the contributions by the respondents. I hope that they gained something from their posts.

As for the assertion that publicly discussing variations serves any great purpose- I'd guess it's a matter of opinion. I reckon it facilitates an extension of ones knowledge or understanding of a position or series of moves. Certainly, I'd subscribe to the study of variations/ tactical positions/ motifs as a rather useful activity. Watching top GM games certainly has a value but I'd hold that playing through them afterwards and questioning the 'what ifs' is extremely valuable from a learning perspective.

Regarding my playing strength- certainly, I haven't played in many years so am not in any particular ranking. However, as a demonstration of what I spotted, I refer to my post #263 and the comment regarding Round 9, Board 9, move 55. I don't see a refutation to my proposed move (..Rb1) which wasn't played by the black side in the game and which seems to win rapidly. Perhaps my tactical ability is not entirely on the floor.

Anyway- I'll bow out from any further discussion of variations from games from the 2018 Irish Championship.

cdeb · 14-08-2018 7:02pm

I should just add as a moderator here that I don't see any value in suggesting that certain things can or can't be discussed on the forum

ComDubh · 14-08-2018 7:09pm

namenotavailabl wrote: »

Anyway- I'll bow out from any further discussion of variations from games from the 2018 Irish Championship.

Only if you want to! I mean, most of the discussion here is wasted hot air, and though I count as a strong player (in an Irish context) I certainly enjoyed engaging with the position you posted and had some further comments on it.

sodacat11 · 14-08-2018 8:36pm

While discovering the absolute "truth" in any position is undoubtedly useful it should not be forgotten that sometimes the "best" move in any position is not the computer recommendation. In a live game between two humans many other factors come into play and sometimes the move a computer gives is only useful if you are able to follow it up with a lot more computer moves.

ComDubh · 14-08-2018 8:44pm

@namenotavailabl, Sodacat is exactly right. The computer evaluation isn't so relevant in practical play. The position after the exchange sac looks very promising for Black, but that's not enough reason to play the move. There are tactics to be worked out as well, and I'm sure Alex saw the line with Qxa2, which looks really hard for White to play.

namenotavailablE · 14-08-2018 9:04pm

I agree- the psychology of a human-v-human game is never replicated by playing against a computer. A computer 'doesn't sweat, squirm or blush'. You can't hear the crack of the computer's 'spirit breaking'. We've all got away with (or been the victim of) second-and third-rate moves because our opponent (or ourselves) couldn't unravel the complexities of a particular position.

If there's no objection, I'll post a few screen grabs of particular positions from the championship which I found interesting and had alternative moves in mind or from positions in which I haven't a sure path to take. If anyone would like to comment about any such position, feel free to do so but - as per above- there is zero obligation to do so.

Also: if a mod wants to relocate the screen grabs to a separate thread, that's fine with me too.

namenotavailablE · 14-08-2018 9:22pm

Position 1:

White played 44. Nd5+ and went on to lose. The array of discovered check possibilities makes this 'one of those positions' that would be complex to analyse in OTB play.
I am wondering if 44. Nh5+ might draw. I tried 44. Ne8+ but think it loses. However, I suspect that Black can probably wriggle out.

If interested in further discussion, we can do so below.

namenotavailablE · 14-08-2018 9:40pm

Position 2:

White played 44. Ra6+ and the game was eventually drawn.

I am interested in the possibilities after 44. Rc7. The immediate threat is Ra6 with mate but there is also the possibility of doubling on the 7th rank and mating on e7. This second possibility seems to be escapable at material cost however if Black can move the pawn currently on d5.
Obviously, you'd need to evaluate the capture of the Bishop with check but I don't think Black has the time to capture- again, feel free to disabuse me of my misconception!

Some lines after 44. Rc7:

(a) ..Rxg3+; 45. Kh2 and the above mating threats seem unstoppable.
(b) ..Nf3+; 45. Kg2 Rhb8 (there isn't time for 45..Nxh4); 46. Ra7 and as far as I can see, 46..Rb2+ is met by 47. Bf2 (Kxf3 loses instantly to R8b3++) with a safe enough White king and a distinctly uncomfortable Black king. I think Black can play d4 but the K-side pawns look lost. However- the position holds many possibilities so if there's other lines, post them!

Sepp Blatter · 14-08-2018 9:46pm

Screen grab them by the pawns

namenotavailablE · 14-08-2018 9:51pm

Position 3:

White played 25. Bf1 and eventually won.

However, I was looking at the idea of 25. h5- Black would need to evaluate if he can allow:

(a) 25..gxh5; Bf5.
Alternatively, Black can try
(b) 25..dxc4; but it seems that 26. h6 is good although bxc4 is sensible. If cxd3, it looks as if the pawn will cost Black a rook in return but the position is extremely complex and cxd3 is not obligatory. The b7 bishop may have plenty to say yet, too

ChessPlayer123 · 15-08-2018 1:47pm

In response to position 2, black can play Rxg3+ Kh2 Ra3!!! (yes triple exlam is deserved for this move) Rxa3 Rxh4+ Kg3 Rg4+ Kh3 (or anywhere else) Rxf4 then black can take e5 with his king next and black is in an easily winning endgame

namenotavailablE · 15-08-2018 2:17pm

Yes- ..Ra3 is a phenomenal defence. Great find!

EnPassant · 15-08-2018 7:56pm

namenotavailabl wrote: »

Yes- ..Ra3 is a phenomenal defence. Great find!

Ra3 is nice but does it actually achieve anything?

Doesn't Rxh4+ Kxg3 Rg4+ achieve the same end one move quicker?

namenotavailablE · 16-08-2018 10:20am

Yes- Rxh4 also is winning. It seems that 44. Rc7 can be rejected and that Ra6+ as played is necessary- this could be confirmed with software.

namenotavailablE · 17-08-2018 1:28pm

Looking at position 1, assuming that White plays 45. Nh5 dis ch.

Clearly, if Black wants to play for a win, a king move is pointless (as a draw by repetition results) and 45..Bg7 would lose after 46. Bxg7+ Kg8; 47. Rxh6. Therefore, Black must try 45. ..f6. The question is- can white save the game:

If 46. Rxf6 (I don't think Bxf6 gets anywhere after Kg8)..Kg8, is 47. Rxf5 playable? For example, 47..Re1 seems to be bad after 48. Nf6+ and if the king tries to get out via the f-file the rook (and in some lines the Queen) can be lost, along with the game [e.g. 48. Nf6+ Kf7; 49. Nd5+ (introducing potential forks of the Queen so it seems that the Black king can't safely go queenside) ..Kg6; 50. Rf6+ Kh7; 51. Rf7+ Kg8; 52. Rd7 (threatening Nf6 with mate).. Re6; (seems pretty much forced?) 52. Nf6+ Rxf6; 57. Bxf6.

Is there a better line for either side? Can White construct some sort of a fortress from the resulting position?

Tim Harding · 17-08-2018 2:48pm

namenotavailabl wrote: »

Looking at position 1, assuming that White plays 45. Nh5 dis ch.

Clearly, if Black wants to play for a win, a king move is pointless (as a draw by repetition results) and 45..Bg7 would lose after 46. Bxg7+ Kg8; 47. Rxh6. Therefore, Black must try 45. ..f6. The question is- can white save the game:

If 46. Rxf6 (I don't think Bxf6 gets anywhere after Kg8)..Kg8, is 47. Rxf5 playable? For example, 47..Re1 seems to be bad after 48. Nf6+ and if the king tries to get out via the f-file the rook (and in some lines the Queen) can be lost, along with the game [e.g. 48. Nf6+ Kf7; 49. Nd5+ (introducing potential forks of the Queen so it seems that the Black king can't safely go queenside) ..Kg6; 50. Rf6+ Kh7; 51. Rf7+ Kg8; 52. Rd7 (threatening Nf6 with mate).. Re6; (seems pretty much forced?) 52. Nf6+ Rxf6; 57. Bxf6.

Is there a better line for either side? Can White construct some sort of a fortress from the resulting position?

All your move numbers are wrong, starting with 45 which should be 44 Nh5+. Would you care to re-post with correct renumbering please?
Actually, don't bother.

Stockfish9 says White is totally lost after three different Black replies.
Your major premise (namely that K moves lead to repetition) is just faulty because 44...Kh7 is the best reply. If White then plays 45 Nf6+(presumably what you meant?) the BK exits via g6.

namenotavailablE · 17-08-2018 4:36pm

OK- apologies for the wrong starting value and yes- 45. Nf6+ would be the intention but now I see how the king escapes.
So- that was an irretrievable position.

Anybody got any views on position 3 above about playing 25. h5 (instead of 25. Bf1 as actually played in the game)?

cdeb · 17-08-2018 5:15pm

Tim Harding wrote: »

All your move numbers are wrong, starting with 45 which should be 44 Nh5+. Would you care to re-post with correct renumbering please?
Actually, don't bother.

Mod note - Tim, if you're going to talk that way to someone who just wants to discuss chess on a chess forum, maybe it's you who shouldn't bother

sodacat11 · 17-08-2018 8:51pm

Is there a league table or results page anywhere for that I.M norm league that is currently ongoing? I know the timeline on the ICU website has individual results but I'd like an overall view.

Retd.LoyolaCpt · 18-08-2018 12:07am

sodacat11 wrote: »

Is there a league table or results page anywhere for that I.M norm league that is currently ongoing? I know the timeline on the ICU website has individual results but I'd like an overall view.

Going well for the norm hunters at the Third of the way stage: https://www.icu.ie/articles/781

Non-norm hunters are 5.5/19

prey · 18-08-2018 12:46am

sc cod ave sb cd df mdv tog ab ap #
Sam E. Collins m 2445 - 0.5 0 0.5
Conor O'Donnell f 2373 - 1 0.5 1 2.5
Alvaro Valdes Escobar CHI m 2369 - 0.5 0 0.5 0 0.5 1 1 3.5
Stephen Brady f 2336 0.5 - 1 1.5
Colm Daly f 2329 1 - 1 2
David Fitzsimons f 2328 0.5 0 0.5 - 1
Michael De Verdier SWE 2298 0.5 1 - 1 2.5
Tom O'Gorman f 2280 1 0.5 0 - 1 0.5 3
Alexiei Bottino ITA 1982 0 0 0 - 0
Aleksejus Pachalov RUS 1961 0 0 0 0.5 - 0.5

Rathminor · 18-08-2018 9:25am

Do Michael De V’s results in this competition push him over the threshold for an FM title?

Tim Harding · 18-08-2018 10:57am

cdeb wrote: »

Mod note - Tim, if you're going to talk that way to someone who just wants to discuss chess on a chess forum, maybe it's you who shouldn't bother

Didn't mean to be rude, sorry. I wrote the first sentence about move numbers, then saw how Black K escapes. Should have deleted the first bit.

Irish Championship 2018

Comments