Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Blue or Red Pill VIII

Today I'd like you to join me at the Surrey - Middlesex county match held at Ashtead Chess Club last Saturday afternoon. Following the game we will have a lift home from Paul Archer to enjoy that will include the uncertain delights of an interminably long anecdote from fellow passenger Paul Barasi, the central theme of which will be that he has not 'been' for three days. For the moment, though, all that is in the future. Right now we've got some chess to play.

White to play
JMGB v A.N. Other
Surrey v Middlesex, 23/1/10


1. O-O

Can't be bad. Complete your development and then get busy while Black tries to move his bishop, get his king safe and find a square for his queen. Got to be good for White and yet, on the other hand there's also,

1. Nxf7

Looks very tempting doesn't it? Might there even be some mileage in a follow up sacrifice with 2. Bxe6+ Kxe6, 3. Ng5+? Not that you have to throw the bishop in as well. Perhaps just give up one knight then check with the other? 1. ... Kxf7, 2. Ng5+ Kg8?? is going to be mate and if Black goes elsewhere the very worst you're going to end up with is a couple of pawns and Black's king stuck in the centre in exchange for the piece. Does it matter so much that it's not immediately obvious how you're going to get the rooks into the attack?

To sac or not to sac? That is the question.

BORP Index


Richard James said...


You mean Paul Barasi, the inventor of Barasi chess. I've known him, for my sins, since 1967.

I note from the SCCU website that your game was against a friend and teammate of mine. As you won, can I assume that you won by playing the sac?

Jonathan B said...

Cheers Richard - post ammended.

I did win and I did sac the knight although whether it's fair to say I won by playing the sac I'm not at all sure.

I didn't know at the time whether Nxf7 was the best move and in fact I still don't know. I suspect maybe not. I'd been watching the Simon Williams DVD on the Dutch the morning of the game and was probably unduly influenced.

Tom Chivers said...

Sac 'em both - it's only a knight and bishop after all.

Comment Moderator said...

Double piece sac follwed by a draw offer presumably T.C.

Chris Morgan said...

Would you really sac 'em both Tom? I would probably have a big dilemma if faced with this position and then not play the sac because I can't see any winning lines...but maybe I'm too cautious.

Tom Chivers said...

Can't white follow up with Ng5+ and Qf5?

I would say that I sacrifice pieces a little bit more flippantly on the blog than at the board.

Jonathan B said...

Black doesn't have to take the second piece ...