tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post9127722064907289594..comments2023-12-28T02:11:22.501+00:00Comments on The Streatham & Brixton Chess Blog: A Blogger Goes Chessing in Hampstead: Close but no ISETom Chivershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09850710685193416732noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-43236090443173336822014-01-21T22:03:07.404+00:002014-01-21T22:03:07.404+00:00Thanks for the comments chaps.
Shirov-Bareev was ...Thanks for the comments chaps.<br /><br />Shirov-Bareev was the <a href="http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/interesting-sacrificed-exchange.html" rel="nofollow">very first ISE</a>, Jonathan. I reckon it was long enough ago that I could get away with rehashing it without anybody noticing. *Stares hard in general direction of a certain national newspaper columnist*Jonathan Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00293162543015231439noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-46344458116545771642014-01-21T12:35:17.806+00:002014-01-21T12:35:17.806+00:00I agree - Nxe5 in game 1 looks very odd. You have...I agree - Nxe5 in game 1 looks very odd. You haven't even really got any material for it (R+2 vs B+N) and your light squares are wide open - what do you even play after Qxa8? f3 Nf6 etc just looks horrible. Qb3 looks like a much more respectable option.<br /><br />In the second game, the exchange sac seems much less sound - it's properly Rook for Knight this time, the unopposed Bishop can't get out as quickly because of e6, plus f3 is a much more sensible move in this position because you can play e4 and block off the long diagonal.Matt Fletcherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13885091955173203114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-69830590522578365802014-01-21T11:02:18.114+00:002014-01-21T11:02:18.114+00:00It seems to me that 6 Nxe5 would be a very strange...It seems to me that 6 Nxe5 would be a very strange move. I'd be surprised if Black wasn't just much better.John Coxnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-78103425597730208682014-01-21T02:02:48.905+00:002014-01-21T02:02:48.905+00:00I once watched a 2100 lose to a 1400 in the Englis...I once watched a 2100 lose to a 1400 in the English Opening (1.c4 e5 2.g3) in just such a position. Two decades later I don't remember the exact game of course, but Herr Systemssen as white probably played (as he usually does) the sequence Bg2, Nc3, e2-e3, when black simply moved ...Bc8-e6 and was down the Exchange right in the opening. I know it was before white castled. Except that after ...Qxa8, f2-f3, I don't think black had ...Be6xc4, so maybe white had varied from his usual?<br /><br />Anyway, then they played chess.<br /><br />Besides the chessic features that matter to the likes of Anand and Topalov, there are a couple of psychological features that favor a lower-rated black here.<br /><br />(1) Black knows the correct plan. In your average position, that may not be true, but in this type of position, black knows that he must attack. No dithering necessary. Even better, it's the simplest possible plan, so black is likely to play good moves for quite some time.<br /><br />(2) Black has nothing left to lose. Having already fallen victim to white's one big trick, all black's remaining pieces are safe from counter attack. And any future white threat will be seen from a mile away.<br /><br />Put those two psychological features together and your typical 1400 player is I daresay more like an 1800 player. Which makes him the most dangerous player of all: the UNDER-RATED player.<br /><br />As for those chessic features, I recall playing through the game (I was on friendly terms with both players), and concluding that white is not simply winning, it's far from easy. As it went, white just waited around for the next "1400" mistake, which never happened. Instead black obtained firstly definite compensation, secondly a strong attack, and thirdly a bucket of pawns.an ordinary chessplayernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-14481626093303289832014-01-20T23:07:46.740+00:002014-01-20T23:07:46.740+00:00Erm. I think Black's extra piece in the Croydo...Erm. I think Black's extra piece in the Croydon League game might also be relevant?<br /><br />Retired FMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-67733118080541374192014-01-20T22:30:50.164+00:002014-01-20T22:30:50.164+00:00Generally speaking, sacrificing a rook on a8 or a1...Generally speaking, sacrificing a rook on a8 or a1 for a bishop, and recapturing with the queen, is likely to recur a lot in this series. Hope you have Shirov v Bareev, Biel 1991 or similar, at some point.Jonathan Rogersnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-62251366151104745832014-01-20T19:13:58.616+00:002014-01-20T19:13:58.616+00:006 Qb3 as advantage to White and 6 Nxc6 as advantag...6 Qb3 as advantage to White and 6 Nxc6 as advantage to Black is what I meant to say.<br /><br />RdC<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37675897.post-23858739623032172532014-01-20T11:14:44.536+00:002014-01-20T11:14:44.536+00:00At move 5 in your Croydon League game, you are fol...At move 5 in your Croydon League game, you are following the footsteps of Capablanca against Sergeant at Margate in 1936. Neither Sergeant nor the handful of subsequent players have played 5. ..Be6, so the exchange sacrifice is untested in practice. For what it's worth, a computer engine suggests 6. Qb3 as an advantage to Black (6. .. Bc8 being Black's reply). 6. Nxe5 is evaluated in White's favour.<br /><br />In the Catalan position, once again there are no practical examples of a 7. .. b5 punt. Here again the engine prefers to seek an advantage with thematic queen-side play such as b3 or a4. There's not much in it, as it evaluates taking the exchange as nearly just as good for White.<br /><br />It's a critical positional point in the Catalan and related positions as to whether Black can play b5 or not.<br /><br />RdC<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com