Firegoat V Pablito15 - OzChess

**Pablito15** · 05-07-2011, 03:07 AM

In what will be remembered (by me) as an EPIC bungle in time trouble, Dave showed his experience and played the right way with an opponent low on the clock.

Kbitz this!

[Event "MCC Open"]
[Date "2011.??.??"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Firegoat"]
[Black "Pablito"]
[Result "1-0"]
[PlyCount "58"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. cxd5 {Goat gets me out of the book.} cxd5 5.
Nc3 Nc6 6. Bf4 $6 {Surely white's Queen doesn't want to be on d2 after 6. Qb6
so this is probably good for black.} Qb6 $1 7. Rc1 $6 (7. a3 Qxb2 $2 8. Na4 Qb5
9. Bd2 {+ - Houdini}) 7... Qxb2 8. Rc2 $6 {The rook turns out the be a
nuisance here for white} (8. e3 {I was more worried about this.} Bf5 (8... e5
9. Bxe5 Ne4 10. Nxe4 dxe4 11. Nd2 Nxe5 12. Rb1 Qc3 13. dxe5 {=}) 9. Bb5 {And
Bxc6}) 8... Qb4 9. a3 {In for a penny in for a pound. This liberates white's
pieces a bit too, makes it sharper. In hindsight Qa5 might have been better
against the Goat.} Qxa3 10. e4 {Spent half an hour here and couldn't calculate
anything definitively! In the end I just played something that hopefully left
the f3 knight en pris at the end of all the madness! Nice position to
calculate.} (10. e3 $2 Bf5 11. Nb5 $4 Bxc2 {Spent my time calculating this
sort of stuff.}) 10... dxe4 (10... Nxe4 11. Nxe4 (11. Nb5 Qa5+ 12. Nd2 e5 13.
dxe5 a6 {- + 2.5}) 11... dxe4 12. Ne5 e6 {- + 1.4 Houdini}) 11. Nb5 Qa5+ 12.
Nd2 Nd5 $1 {This much I saw and I thought I was winning after a6 traps the
knight- not so!} 13. Bg3 Bf5 $4 {On closer inspection I didn't like a6, Bc4,
axb5, Bxd5 with maybe Rxc6 stuff to come. Totally missed the possibility of
Rc5..} (13... a6 14. Bc4 e3 15. fxe3 Nxe3 16. Ra2 axb5 (16... Qxa2 17. Bxa2 {
-2.59/13 2} Nxd1 {-2.37/9 0} 18. Nc7+ {-2.19/13 2} Kd8 {-2.19/13 1} 19. Nxa8 {
-2.19/12 2} Ne3 {-2.21/14 5}) 17. Rxa5 Rxa5 18. Qb3 Ra1+ 19. Kf2 Ng4+ {
Ridiculous line!!}) 14. Bc4 $2 {As did Dave!} e3 $1 15. O-O Bxc2 16. Qxc2 exd2
17. Rb1 {Complicated to deal with in 30 seconds. Both defences, 0-0-0 or Ncb4
look superficially dangerous. So I bailed!} Rc8 $2 (17... a6 18. Bxd5 axb5 $2 (
18... d1=Q+ $3 {-4.61/13 1} 19. Rxd1 (19. Qxd1 axb5 {-4.87/13 1}) 19... Qxb5)
19. Bxc6+ bxc6 20. Qxc6+ Kd8 21. Qd5+ Kc8 22. Qc6+ Kd8 23. Qd5+ Ke8 {0.00/19 1}
24. Qc6+ {0.00/10 0} Kd8 {0.00/99 0}) 18. Bxd5 e6 (18... Nd8 $3 {-3.70/15 18}
19. Qxc8 Qxb5 20. Rd1 Qe2) 19. Bf3 {No time to take stock of the situation,
and if I'd seen d5 I would've definitely played Rybka's Be7!} a6 (19... Be7)
20. d5 $1 {This is the way to play against someone in time trouble, especially
from a poor position} exd5 21. Qf5 $1 {Not the best move but the one that
causes chaos.} Ne7 $4 (21... Qd8 {-5.25/14 6} 22. Bxd5 {-5.02/12 4} Qd7 {-5.25/
14 9} 23. Bxf7+ {-5.25/13 5} Kd8 {-5.25/13 2 - + 5. I defy anyone to calculate
that with 30 seconds!!}) 22. Nd6+ $1 Kd8 23. Nxb7+ Ke8 24. Nd6+ $1 Kd8 25.
Nxf7+ Ke8 26. Nd6+ Kd8 27. Nb7+ Ke8 28. Qxc8+ Nxc8 29. Nxa5 Bb4 $4 {There's a
Bishop on f3...} *

**Pablito15** · 05-07-2011, 03:26 AM

I've gone for: EPIC Bungle

**Lekko** · 05-07-2011, 01:51 PM

I voted for unethical Beaumont. How could he...

**Pablito15** · 05-07-2011, 04:54 PM

ha ha- good work. chess community still recovering

**Firegoat7** · 05-07-2011, 05:33 PM

Hi,

After the game I said that 6...Qb6 was not normal. Some even suggested that 6.Bf4 was an error. Clearly a mainline move cannot be an error, so its worth considering who won the opening.

Here I think Pablito won the early psychological battle, he put me under pressure and I didn't find the correct plan.

7.Rc1 is a clear error that sets the tone for the rest of the game. Better was 7.a3 and 7.Na4, both of which I considered. The themes with a3 are pretty common, but sharp. Na4 is again thematic and sharp. I considered both, but took Na4 more seriously before rejecting it.

When you make an error it is worthwhile to consider the psychological reasons for rejecting the moves.
Dogma was the issue here.
a3 and Na4 are both moves that break opening laws for the initiative. They require concrete assessment, accurate calculation and familiarity with the standard attacking patterns.

I spent a long time on this move, but failed to investigate the best lines. I think this was mainly due to the fact that I was looking at a variety of simple moves to just neutralise the position instead of actively exploiting the position of the Black Queen. Its easy to say calculation is the problem here (This is true to some extent), but the real issue is an intuitive assessment of initiative and co-ordination since I didn't spend to much time on the moves before rejecting them.

The move I played Rc1 aimed for rapid piece development, whilst at the same time challenging Black to waste time collecting the pawn. It was inaccurate, and the pin along the a5-e1 diagonal with the Black Queen created problems that in the end I wasn't able to neutralise.

Over the next few moves I try to mobilise my position to get active and am met with some strong play by Paul, who plays quite well. Fairly quickly my position is lost. Here my experience helped.

Even though almost all my moves on 11-16 are not best. I would argue that they are extremely practical given the circumstances. Sure, there was tricky tries like Rc5 and nc7 with d5 in some positions, that were better. But here is where I think computers lead club players astray. My basic plan is to develop ASAP whilst keeping as much material on the board to counter attack the weak Black King position. The computer seeks material.

It was a bad plan, naive even, but as Nimzowitsch said "...better to have a bad plan then no plan at all" Given that this is already swindle territory, much better to get the King safe and have something left to play with.

In the end Paul makes a critical couple of mistakes and allows my attack with Queen and Knight. Sure, I was lucky, yes Paul had the better/winning position. But I didn't win the game from giving up and resigning.

Take this lesson to heart, if you want to be a chess player you have to try and keep a cool head under enormous pressure. Its a worthy SCT game I think, despite the obvious flaws.

cheers,

**Just2Good** · 05-07-2011, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by Pablito15

In what will be remembered (by me) as an EPIC bungle in time trouble, Dave showed his experience and played the right way with an opponent low on the clock.

Kbitz this!

Was this a blitz game?

**Pablito15** · 05-07-2011, 06:02 PM

What I find interesting as a Slav/Semi-Slav player is how woefully under-prepared a lot of us are against Bf4. I've always actually worried about this but it's the first time I've faced it. When you go through anything on the Slav Bb2, Bg5 and later developments of the bishop after e4, dxc5 are considered, but no-one ever mentions Bf4!!

So I was out of the book on more 5 and able to play pretty well. That's what I like about my chess now, I feel I'm able to play most positions with or without theory to help me. It's a great feeling after many years trolling through the "Starting Out: Braindeath in 148 pages" series.

I felt like I calculated better in the early stages of the game whereas Dave was playing for abstract initiative/tempi. I also felt lucky after a few of my moves and that they were actually better for me than I'd calculated.

Agree with you Dave that the game would've taken an interesting turn after a3.

In my mind I lost this off the chess board. I wasn't focused enough when I was under 2 minutes. When that low on time you have to understand everything about the position and the fact that I didn't consider Qf4 and Nd6+ ideas clearly showed you were working harder than me in the last stages.

Critical positions/mistakes for us to study:

**Pablito15** · 05-07-2011, 06:04 PM

Just 4 more

J2G you can tell me if these hogg up too much bandwidth!

**Just2Good** · 05-07-2011, 07:05 PM

Iconoclast hasn't said anything to me about our host increasing their monthly hosting fee, so I am guessing no - these wonderful diagrams are not hogging too much bandwidth.

**Just2Good** · 05-07-2011, 07:07 PM

Black is clearly winning after Qxb2. Just letting everyone know

**Lekko** · 05-07-2011, 11:21 PM

Originally Posted by Just2Good

Black is clearly winning after Qxb2. Just letting everyone know

Haha. Was my thoughts exactly. But apparently a3 and Na4 are better than Rc1 (I thought Dave would play either a3 or Qd2, but wasn't sure).

**Pablito15** · 05-07-2011, 11:47 PM

Not a bad position to get considering I gave what is apparently the mainline of the QGD a big ?!

View Poll Results: Pick the title for this game
How to play 2 pieces down: D. Beaumont's ICC Career comes to the MCC!	0	0%
An EPIC bungle!	2	33.33%
SCT- never say die	3	50.00%
Unethical Beaumont refuses to resign in clearly lost position chess community abhorred	1	16.67%
Cavezza insults chess!	0	0%
Voters: 6. You may not vote on this poll

05-07-2011, 03:07 AM	#1 (permalink)
Pablito15 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 668	Firegoat V Pablito15 In what will be remembered (by me) as an EPIC bungle in time trouble, Dave showed his experience and played the right way with an opponent low on the clock. Kbitz this! [Event "MCC Open"] [Date "2011.??.??"] [Round "1"] [White "Firegoat"] [Black "Pablito"] [Result "1-0"] [PlyCount "58"] 1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. cxd5 {Goat gets me out of the book.} cxd5 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bf4 $6 {Surely white's Queen doesn't want to be on d2 after 6. Qb6 so this is probably good for black.} Qb6 $1 7. Rc1 $6 (7. a3 Qxb2 $2 8. Na4 Qb5 9. Bd2 {+ - Houdini}) 7... Qxb2 8. Rc2 $6 {The rook turns out the be a nuisance here for white} (8. e3 {I was more worried about this.} Bf5 (8... e5 9. Bxe5 Ne4 10. Nxe4 dxe4 11. Nd2 Nxe5 12. Rb1 Qc3 13. dxe5 {=}) 9. Bb5 {And Bxc6}) 8... Qb4 9. a3 {In for a penny in for a pound. This liberates white's pieces a bit too, makes it sharper. In hindsight Qa5 might have been better against the Goat.} Qxa3 10. e4 {Spent half an hour here and couldn't calculate anything definitively! In the end I just played something that hopefully left the f3 knight en pris at the end of all the madness! Nice position to calculate.} (10. e3 $2 Bf5 11. Nb5 $4 Bxc2 {Spent my time calculating this sort of stuff.}) 10... dxe4 (10... Nxe4 11. Nxe4 (11. Nb5 Qa5+ 12. Nd2 e5 13. dxe5 a6 {- + 2.5}) 11... dxe4 12. Ne5 e6 {- + 1.4 Houdini}) 11. Nb5 Qa5+ 12. Nd2 Nd5 $1 {This much I saw and I thought I was winning after a6 traps the knight- not so!} 13. Bg3 Bf5 $4 {On closer inspection I didn't like a6, Bc4, axb5, Bxd5 with maybe Rxc6 stuff to come. Totally missed the possibility of Rc5..} (13... a6 14. Bc4 e3 15. fxe3 Nxe3 16. Ra2 axb5 (16... Qxa2 17. Bxa2 { -2.59/13 2} Nxd1 {-2.37/9 0} 18. Nc7+ {-2.19/13 2} Kd8 {-2.19/13 1} 19. Nxa8 { -2.19/12 2} Ne3 {-2.21/14 5}) 17. Rxa5 Rxa5 18. Qb3 Ra1+ 19. Kf2 Ng4+ { Ridiculous line!!}) 14. Bc4 $2 {As did Dave!} e3 $1 15. O-O Bxc2 16. Qxc2 exd2 17. Rb1 {Complicated to deal with in 30 seconds. Both defences, 0-0-0 or Ncb4 look superficially dangerous. So I bailed!} Rc8 $2 (17... a6 18. Bxd5 axb5 $2 ( 18... d1=Q+ $3 {-4.61/13 1} 19. Rxd1 (19. Qxd1 axb5 {-4.87/13 1}) 19... Qxb5) 19. Bxc6+ bxc6 20. Qxc6+ Kd8 21. Qd5+ Kc8 22. Qc6+ Kd8 23. Qd5+ Ke8 {0.00/19 1} 24. Qc6+ {0.00/10 0} Kd8 {0.00/99 0}) 18. Bxd5 e6 (18... Nd8 $3 {-3.70/15 18} 19. Qxc8 Qxb5 20. Rd1 Qe2) 19. Bf3 {No time to take stock of the situation, and if I'd seen d5 I would've definitely played Rybka's Be7!} a6 (19... Be7) 20. d5 $1 {This is the way to play against someone in time trouble, especially from a poor position} exd5 21. Qf5 $1 {Not the best move but the one that causes chaos.} Ne7 $4 (21... Qd8 {-5.25/14 6} 22. Bxd5 {-5.02/12 4} Qd7 {-5.25/ 14 9} 23. Bxf7+ {-5.25/13 5} Kd8 {-5.25/13 2 - + 5. I defy anyone to calculate that with 30 seconds!!}) 22. Nd6+ $1 Kd8 23. Nxb7+ Ke8 24. Nd6+ $1 Kd8 25. Nxf7+ Ke8 26. Nd6+ Kd8 27. Nb7+ Ke8 28. Qxc8+ Nxc8 29. Nxa5 Bb4 $4 {There's a Bishop on f3...} * __________________ My Blog!

05-07-2011, 03:26 AM	#2 (permalink)
Pablito15 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 668	I've gone for: EPIC Bungle __________________ My Blog!

05-07-2011, 01:51 PM	#3 (permalink)
Lekko HBK Join Date: May 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 1,359 ICC Handle: Heartbreak-Kid FICS Handle: HeartBreakingKid	I voted for unethical Beaumont. How could he... __________________ Originally Posted by Iconoclast Girls attract boys. more girls playing chess = many more boys playing chess

05-07-2011, 04:54 PM	#4 (permalink)
Pablito15 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 668	ha ha- good work. chess community still recovering __________________ My Blog!

05-07-2011, 05:33 PM	#5 (permalink)
Firegoat7 Moderator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Getting owned by White in the Dragon and trying to recover lost positions from shock paralysis OTB Posts: 2,044 ICC Handle: guest	Hi, After the game I said that 6...Qb6 was not normal. Some even suggested that 6.Bf4 was an error. Clearly a mainline move cannot be an error, so its worth considering who won the opening. Here I think Pablito won the early psychological battle, he put me under pressure and I didn't find the correct plan. 7.Rc1 is a clear error that sets the tone for the rest of the game. Better was 7.a3 and 7.Na4, both of which I considered. The themes with a3 are pretty common, but sharp. Na4 is again thematic and sharp. I considered both, but took Na4 more seriously before rejecting it. When you make an error it is worthwhile to consider the psychological reasons for rejecting the moves. Dogma was the issue here. a3 and Na4 are both moves that break opening laws for the initiative. They require concrete assessment, accurate calculation and familiarity with the standard attacking patterns. I spent a long time on this move, but failed to investigate the best lines. I think this was mainly due to the fact that I was looking at a variety of simple moves to just neutralise the position instead of actively exploiting the position of the Black Queen. Its easy to say calculation is the problem here (This is true to some extent), but the real issue is an intuitive assessment of initiative and co-ordination since I didn't spend to much time on the moves before rejecting them. The move I played Rc1 aimed for rapid piece development, whilst at the same time challenging Black to waste time collecting the pawn. It was inaccurate, and the pin along the a5-e1 diagonal with the Black Queen created problems that in the end I wasn't able to neutralise. Over the next few moves I try to mobilise my position to get active and am met with some strong play by Paul, who plays quite well. Fairly quickly my position is lost. Here my experience helped. Even though almost all my moves on 11-16 are not best. I would argue that they are extremely practical given the circumstances. Sure, there was tricky tries like Rc5 and nc7 with d5 in some positions, that were better. But here is where I think computers lead club players astray. My basic plan is to develop ASAP whilst keeping as much material on the board to counter attack the weak Black King position. The computer seeks material. It was a bad plan, naive even, but as Nimzowitsch said "...better to have a bad plan then no plan at all" Given that this is already swindle territory, much better to get the King safe and have something left to play with. In the end Paul makes a critical couple of mistakes and allows my attack with Queen and Knight. Sure, I was lucky, yes Paul had the better/winning position. But I didn't win the game from giving up and resigning. Take this lesson to heart, if you want to be a chess player you have to try and keep a cool head under enormous pressure. Its a worthy SCT game I think, despite the obvious flaws. cheers, __________________ "...What I meant? Dear Mr Ian Rout (ACF news publisher) could you please put Ozchessforum in the next news letter! There is no reason to hide this forum from the Australian chess public. What they meant? Sorry, No english!- Amir Karibasic

05-07-2011, 05:38 PM	#6 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Originally Posted by Pablito15 In what will be remembered (by me) as an EPIC bungle in time trouble, Dave showed his experience and played the right way with an opponent low on the clock. Kbitz this! Was this a blitz game? __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

05-07-2011, 07:05 PM	#9 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Iconoclast hasn't said anything to me about our host increasing their monthly hosting fee, so I am guessing no - these wonderful diagrams are not hogging too much bandwidth. __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

05-07-2011, 07:07 PM	#10 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Black is clearly winning after Qxb2. Just letting everyone know __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

05-07-2011, 11:21 PM	#11 (permalink)
Lekko HBK Join Date: May 2009 Location: Melbourne Posts: 1,359 ICC Handle: Heartbreak-Kid FICS Handle: HeartBreakingKid	Originally Posted by Just2Good Black is clearly winning after Qxb2. Just letting everyone know Haha. Was my thoughts exactly. But apparently a3 and Na4 are better than Rc1 (I thought Dave would play either a3 or Qd2, but wasn't sure). __________________ Originally Posted by Iconoclast Girls attract boys. more girls playing chess = many more boys playing chess

05-07-2011, 11:47 PM	#12 (permalink)
Pablito15 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 668	Not a bad position to get considering I gave what is apparently the mainline of the QGD a big ?! __________________ My Blog!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: