A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Question About Annotation



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 21st 03, 03:04 AM
Bob Durrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation

The following game is my current idea as to what annotations should look like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players as to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong chess master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess amateur who played the Black side. Is the following representative of what you would provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the purpose intended?

I ask this question because I wish to get better at annotation.


[Event "Annotated"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Opponent"]
[Black "Student"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "68"]

1. e4 e6 2. Nf3 c5

{a more usual move order is 1.e4 c5, 2.Nf3 e6.}

3. Bc4 {is a poor move rarely played. Anyone wishing to play this opening as Black
should be prepared to face 3.d4, d3, Nc3, c3, b3, c4, g3, Qe2, b4, Bd3, Be2,
e5, a3, h3, Bc4, and 3.Bb5, listed in order of decreasing merit.}

3... d5 {not best, if one believes the record. Perhaps Black should try something else
in the next game.}

(3... a6 {has done extremely well in practice})

(3... Nc6 {has also done very well in practice})

4. exd5 {best}

(4. Bb5+ {is also seen in practice})

4... exd5 5. Qe2+

(5. Bb5+ {has been seen some in practice})

5... Be6 {an ugly move but playable.}

(5...Be7 {Silva,P-Comp Hiarcs 8,A/Olivos 2002/EXT 2003/0-1 (33) prepares castling
and is the best move})

(5... Be7 6. Bb5+ Kf8 {is interesting}

(6... Bd7 {has been seen in practice}))

(5... Ne7 {is also playable})

6. Bb5+ Nd7

(6...Nc6 {is also playable and may be better. The knight would be more
aggressively placed on c6 than on d7 because it would attack d4. Also, if
White exchanges his bishop for this knight, Black will recapture with a pawn
strengthing his centre pawn at d5 and giving Black a half-open b-file for his
QR.})

7. Ne5

(7. Nc3 {Rey Cuervo,P-Moran Fernandez,F/Asturia 1997/EXT 2001/0-1 (30)})

(7. d4 {best})

7... Be7 {the best place for this bishop is not yet clear. On the other
hand, it is already clear that Black's KN belongs on f6. Hence, 7...Ngf6 was
the correct move.}

8. O-O {This move is OK but not best}

(8. Bxd7+ {best})

(8. d4 {is not as good as 8.Bxd7 but still better than the move played})

8... a6 {this move is a bit premature. It would be better to let White
commit to some of his piece placement first. Generally, playing the move now
helps White to find better places to put his pieces and to decide on move
ordering. Delaying a6 also would give Black the option of not playing that
move at all.}

(8... Ngf6 {clearly better})

9. Bxd7+

(9. Nxd7 {is also playable and takes away Black's bishop pair.})

9... Bxd7 10. Re1 {Evidently, White is trying to build pressure on the e-file. Had he seen that
Black had an adequate reply, he would have developed the queenside pieces
instead}

(10. d4 {would have been more accurate. It sets up an IQP situation.})

10... Be6 {a small error. Black misses a chance to relieve the pressure on the e-file}

(10... Nf6 {is much better})

11. Ng4 {opponent is generous, or drunk}

(11. d4 {is a logical way for White to begin the development of his queenside
pieces. The pawn is not really being sacrificed. It is a pseudosacrifice.}

11... cxd4 12. Nd2 {and White will occupy the hole in the centre with a
knight, restraining Black's IQP.})

11... Nf6 12. Nxf6+ {opponent exchanges off his only developed minor piece.}

(12. Ne5 {a threat to win material which cannot be met. Black must find the best way to lose a pawn.
})

12... Bxf6 13. f4 {this move got White into trouble by weakening his king's
defenses and wasting a tempo desperately needed for development of his
queenside pieces}

(13. d3 {developing} 13... O-O 14. Nc3 {developing} 14... Re8
15. Bd2 {developing and connecting the rooks})

13... O-O 14. d3 {seems OK}

(14. Nc3 {better})

14... Re8 {not significantly worse than the best move}

(14... Bd4+ {is not as strong as later in the game since White's queen can still go to f1.})

15. Qd2 {After this gross blunder, White has nothing better than to resign.}

(15. Nc3 b5)

15... Qd7 {this is a piece placement error. The queen belonged on h4, although that may not be immediately obvious. Also, the move played is a do-nothing move, threatening nothing. Missing the win of a piece and the game is a serious error. To be fair, it is unlikely that any amateur would have seen the correct line of play in blitz chess.}

(15... Bd4+ {best})

16. c3

(16. Nc3 {best})

16... d4 17. Na3 dxc3 18. bxc3 Rad8 19. Re3 b5 20. Bb2 b4 {this was a tactical mistake. Perhaps Black didn't notice that White's bishop was defended by his queen?}

(20... Bf5 {would pose difficult problems for White by building up the pressure. Black would clearly have the better chances. The idea of playing for "better chances" is seen often in grandmaster annotations. Players beset by many difficult problems to solve have poor "chances" because it is "likely" that they will falter.})

21. cxb4 Bxb2 22. Qxb2 cxb4 {there is no reasonable alternative} 23. Nc2 {best move}

(23. Qxb4 {would give Black an extra pawn but it does not give Black the win.
The game is likely drawn with correct play. Black's passed a-pawn will have
to cross squares not controlled by Black's bishop})

23... a5 {essentially forced} 24. Rae1 {This seems to be about as good as any move here.
Just about any move of the QR is playable here.} 24... h6 {obviously played to avoid the possibility of falling into a back rank mate, but the move applies no pressure to White's position.} (24... Bf5 {is a good move which threatens to win the d-pawn, effectively giving White problems to solve. Analysis shows that White cannot defend the pawn. There was no back rank threat. The move
played was therefore inappropriate. Strike while the iron is hot!})

25. h3

(25. Rg3 g6)

25... Bd5 {another do-nothing move}

(25... Bf5 {threatens to win a pawn and takes away move choices from opponent})

26. Rxe8+

(26. f5)

26... Rxe8 27. Rxe8+

(27. Ne3 Bc6 {frees the queen by defending the rook})

27... Qxe8 28. a3 {is terrible, but the game is lost in any case}

(28. Kf1)

28... b3 {a gross oversight}

(28... Qe2 {would have been a killer})

29. Na1 {and the knight self-traps itself}

(29. Kf2 {is the obvious move})

29... Qe3+ 30. Kh1 Qxd3

(30... a4 {would have the merit of producing a passed b-pawn after Nxb3})

31. f5

(31. Nxb3 {is still a small chance} 31... Qxh3+ 32. Kg1 Qe3+ {Strategy: Black wins if
exchange queens, so all Black needs to do is to threaten queen exchanges while
keeping his king in a fortress. Black can also give up the bishop and queen
for queen after pawns gone. White must avoid the exchange of queens.})

31...a4 32. f6

(32. h4)

32... Qf1+ 33. Kh2 Qf4+ {an intermezzo move to push White's king back. However, this was not necessary}

(33... Qxf6 34. Qxf6 {forced} 34... gxf6 35. Kg3 b2 36. Kf2 bxa1=Q 37. Ke2 Bc4+
38. Kd2 Qd4+ 39. Kc1 Qe3+ 40. Kc2 Bb3+ 41. Kb1 Qe1+ 42. Kb2 Qd2+ 43. Kb1 Qc2+
44. Ka1 Qc1#)

34. Kg1 Qxf6 {and White resigned} 0-1



  #2  
Old July 21st 03, 03:47 AM
Mhoulsby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation

From: "Bob Durrett"
Date: 21/07/03 03:04 GMT Daylight Time
Message-id:

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C34F02.8075AB70
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0019_01C34F02.8075AB70"


------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C34F02.8075AB70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The following game is my current idea as to what annotations should look
like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players
as to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong
chess master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess
amateur who played the Black side. Is the following representative of
what you would provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the
purpose intended?


I'm going to sound equivocal now, but it's the truth: the answer is that it
depends upon many factors. Mostly, it depends upon the *type of game* under
consideration, the *type of player* the
amateur is, and the scope of acuity of the master.

Also, it depends upon what the amateur wants to achieve. The annotation below
appears to have been generated by a program, is that correct?


I ask this question because I wish to get better at annotation.


[Event "Annotated"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Opponent"]
[Black "Student"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "68"]

1. e4 e6 2. Nf3 c5=20

{a more usual move order is 1.e4 c5, 2.Nf3 e6.}=20


While true, this is not relevant. Indeed, it's arguably counterproductive,
since amateurs frequently throw out whole sequences of opening moves without
fully understanding the purpose of those moves. I know I do...

It may be a good idea, then, for amateurs to become accustomed to different
move orders, how they might arise, and what the consequences could be...

3. Bc4 {is a poor move rarely played. Anyone wishing to play this =
opening as Black
should be prepared to face 3.d4, d3, Nc3, c3, b3, c4, g3, Qe2, b4, Bd3, =
Be2,
e5, a3, h3, Bc4, and 3.Bb5, listed in order of decreasing merit.}=20


Again, this appears seriously misleading. The question of how to handle the
opening phase depends very much upon *style*. In order to *develop* a suitable
style, an amateur must first hit upon white and black openings which he/she is
comfortable playing. For example, there is a player in my club who plays 1.b4,
and at the level at which he plays, it serves him well. In such games, it's
usually a case of "who blunders last, loses".

With that it mind, it is *even more important* to study tactics and endgames.

This is proven to be by far the most effective method of improving to expert
level.

3... d5 {not best, if one believes the record. Perhaps Black should try =
something else
in the next game.}=20

(3... a6 {has done extremely well in practice})=20


(3... Nc6 {has also done very well in practice})=20

4. exd5 {best}=20

(4. Bb5+ {is also seen in practice})=20

4... exd5 5. Qe2+=20

(5. Bb5+ {has been seen some in practice})=20

5... Be6 {an ugly move but playable.}=20

(5...Be7 {Silva,P-Comp Hiarcs 8,A/Olivos 2002/EXT 2003/0-1 (33) prepares =
castling
and is the best move})=20

(5... Be7 6. Bb5+ Kf8 {is interesting}=20

(6... Bd7 {has been seen in practice}))=20

(5... Ne7 {is also playable})=20

6. Bb5+ Nd7=20

(6...Nc6 {is also playable and may be better. The knight would be more
aggressively placed on c6 than on d7 because it would attack d4. Also, =
if
White exchanges his bishop for this knight, Black will recapture with a =
pawn
strengthing his centre pawn at d5 and giving Black a half-open b-file =
for his
QR.})=20


With respect, none of the above is relevant.

7. Ne5=20

(7. Nc3 {Rey Cuervo,P-Moran Fernandez,F/Asturia 1997/EXT 2001/0-1 (30)}) =


(7. d4 {best})

7... Be7 {the best place for this bishop is not yet clear. On the other
hand, it is already clear that Black's KN belongs on f6. Hence, =
7...Ngf6 was
the correct move.}=20

8. O-O {This move is OK but not best}=20

(8. Bxd7+ {best})=20

(8. d4 {is not as good as 8.Bxd7 but still better than the move played}) =


8... a6 {this move is a bit premature. It would be better to let White
commit to some of his piece placement first. Generally, playing the =
move now
helps White to find better places to put his pieces and to decide on =
move
ordering. Delaying a6 also would give Black the option of not playing =
that
move at all.}=20

(8... Ngf6 {clearly better})=20


Why is it "clearly better"? Do you know?

9. Bxd7+=20

(9. Nxd7 {is also playable and takes away Black's bishop pair.})=20

9... Bxd7 10. Re1 {Evidently, White is trying to build pressure on the =
e-file. Had he seen that
Black had an adequate reply, he would have developed the queenside =
pieces
instead}=20

(10. d4 {would have been more accurate. It sets up an IQP situation.})=20

10... Be6 {a small error. Black misses a chance to relieve the pressure =
on the e-file}=20

(10... Nf6 {is much better})=20

11. Ng4 {opponent is generous, or drunk}=20

(11. d4 {is a logical way for White to begin the development of his =
queenside
pieces. The pawn is not really being sacrificed. It is a =
pseudosacrifice.}

11... cxd4 12. Nd2 {and White will occupy the hole in the centre with a
knight, restraining Black's IQP.})=20

11... Nf6 12. Nxf6+ {opponent exchanges off his only developed minor =
piece.}=20

(12. Ne5 {a threat to win material which cannot be met. Black must find =
the best way to lose a pawn.
})=20

12... Bxf6 13. f4 {this move got White into trouble by weakening his =
king's
defenses and wasting a tempo desperately needed for development of his
queenside pieces}=20

(13. d3 {developing} 13... O-O 14. Nc3 {developing} 14... Re8
15. Bd2 {developing and connecting the rooks})=20

13... O-O 14. d3 {seems OK}

(14. Nc3 {better})=20

14... Re8 {not significantly worse than the best move}=20

(14... Bd4+ {is not as strong as later in the game since White's queen =
can still go to f1.})

15. Qd2 {After this gross blunder, White has nothing better than to =
resign.}

(15. Nc3 b5)=20

15... Qd7 {this is a piece placement error. The queen belonged on h4, =
although that may not be immediately obvious. Also, the move played is =
a do-nothing move, threatening nothing. Missing the win of a piece and =
the game is a serious error. To be fair, it is unlikely that any =
amateur would have seen the correct line of play in blitz chess.}=20

(15... Bd4+ {best})=20

16. c3=20

(16. Nc3 {best})=20

16... d4 17. Na3 dxc3 18. bxc3 Rad8 19. Re3 b5 20. Bb2 b4 {this was a =
tactical mistake. Perhaps Black didn't notice that White's bishop was =
defended by his queen?}=20

(20... Bf5 {would pose difficult problems for White by building up the =
pressure. Black would clearly have the better chances. The idea of =
playing for "better chances" is seen often in grandmaster annotations. =
Players beset by many difficult problems to solve have poor "chances" =
because it is "likely" that they will falter.})=20


Quite right.

21. cxb4 Bxb2 22. Qxb2 cxb4 {there is no reasonable alternative} 23. Nc2 =
{best move}

(23. Qxb4 {would give Black an extra pawn but it does not give Black the =
win.=20
The game is likely drawn with correct play.


Right. So endgame study is essential.

Black's passed a-pawn will =
have
to cross squares not controlled by Black's bishop})=20

23... a5 {essentially forced} 24. Rae1 {This seems to be about as good =
as any move here.
Just about any move of the QR is playable here.} 24... h6 {obviously =
played to avoid the possibility of falling into a back rank mate, but =
the move applies no pressure to White's position.} (24... Bf5 {is a good =
move which threatens to win the d-pawn, effectively giving White =
problems to solve. Analysis shows that White cannot defend the pawn. =
There was no back rank threat. The move
played was therefore inappropriate. Strike while the iron is hot!})=20

25. h3=20

(25. Rg3 g6)=20

25... Bd5 {another do-nothing move}=20

(25... Bf5 {threatens to win a pawn and takes away move choices from =
opponent})=20

26. Rxe8+=20

(26. f5)=20

26... Rxe8 27. Rxe8+=20

(27. Ne3 Bc6 {frees the queen by defending the rook})=20

27... Qxe8 28. a3 {is terrible, but the game is lost in any case}=20

(28. Kf1)=20

28... b3 {a gross oversight}=20

(28... Qe2 {would have been a killer})=20

29. Na1 {and the knight self-traps itself}=20

(29. Kf2 {is the obvious move})=20

29... Qe3+ 30. Kh1 Qxd3=20

(30... a4 {would have the merit of producing a passed b-pawn after =
Nxb3})=20

31. f5=20

(31. Nxb3 {is still a small chance} 31... Qxh3+ 32. Kg1 Qe3+ {Strategy: =
Black wins if
exchange queens, so all Black needs to do is to threaten queen exchanges =
while
keeping his king in a fortress. Black can also give up the bishop and =
queen
for queen after pawns gone. White must avoid the exchange of queens.})=20

31...a4 32. f6=20

(32. h4)=20

32... Qf1+ 33. Kh2 Qf4+ {an intermezzo move to push White's king back. =
However, this was not necessary}

(33... Qxf6 34. Qxf6 {forced} 34... gxf6 35. Kg3 b2 36. Kf2 bxa1=3DQ 37. =
Ke2 Bc4+
38. Kd2 Qd4+ 39. Kc1 Qe3+ 40. Kc2 Bb3+ 41. Kb1 Qe1+ 42. Kb2 Qd2+ 43. Kb1 =
Qc2+
44. Ka1 Qc1#)=20

34. Kg1 Qxf6 {and White resigned} 0-1


I may be wrong about the above annotation, in that it may not have been
generated by a program. Certainly it appears as if it was. In my own bitter
experience, trusting programs' analyses instead of analysing oneself, is very
costly.

hth

Mark
  #3  
Old July 21st 03, 04:44 AM
FredH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation

In addition to Mhoulsby's remarks, which seemed were more about content, I
thought the style and format of the annotations was suitable. It looks like
the original post (which I don't see in my newsreader) was copied as pgn and
pasted from some program, and there appears to have been a problem with
character translation, because of the =20 throught the post ?

Regards
Fred.


  #4  
Old July 21st 03, 07:29 AM
Roman M. Parparov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation

Bob Durrett wrote:
[-- multipart/alternative, encoding 7bit, 0 lines --]

[-- text/plain, encoding quoted-printable, 257 lines --]

The following game is my current idea as to what annotations should look like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players as to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong chess master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess amateur who played the Black side. Is the following representative of what you would provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the purpose intended?


[massive skip]

The good annotation has:
* Ideas behind the opening and the explanation of mistakes in it.
* Main plans employed by players in the middlegame, their alternatives
or lack of planned games.
* Weak moves and their explanation.
* Transition to endgame and its reasoning.
* Plans of the endgame and their performance.
* Summary.

In order to write an annotation you have to understand every move of
the game (or almost any) and not write statistical summary about it.
The annotation brought by you reminds me of what Tchigorin said once
about Pollock, that Pollock "... spent a lot of time annotating these
games but failed to understand the basic reasonings and ideas behind
them".

Here is an example of a bad annotation which I was correcting:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e... games.chess.*
--
Roman M. Parparov - NASA EOSDIS project node at TAU technical manager.
Email: http://www.nasa.proj.ac.il
Phone/Fax: +972-(0)3-6405205 (work), +972-(0)64-669-189 (home)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The economy depends about as much on economists as the weather does on
weather forecasters.
-- Jean-Paul Kauffmann
  #5  
Old July 21st 03, 01:58 PM
Bob Durrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation


"Mhoulsby" -remove- wrote in message
...
From: "Bob Durrett"
Date: 21/07/03 03:04 GMT Daylight Time
Message-id:

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C34F02.8075AB70
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0019_01C34F02.8075AB70"


------=_NextPart_001_0019_01C34F02.8075AB70
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The following game is my current idea as to what annotations should look
like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players
as to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong
chess master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess
amateur who played the Black side. Is the following representative of
what you would provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the
purpose intended?


I'm going to sound equivocal now, but it's the truth: the answer is that

it
depends upon many factors. Mostly, it depends upon the *type of game*

under
consideration, the *type of player* the
amateur is, and the scope of acuity of the master.

Also, it depends upon what the amateur wants to achieve. The annotation

below
appears to have been generated by a program, is that correct?


That is FALSE. All of the words are my own. I do not know of any computer
program that generates such annotations.




I ask this question because I wish to get better at annotation.


[Event "Annotated"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Opponent"]
[Black "Student"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "68"]

1. e4 e6 2. Nf3 c5=20

{a more usual move order is 1.e4 c5, 2.Nf3 e6.}=20


While true, this is not relevant. Indeed, it's arguably counterproductive,
since amateurs frequently throw out whole sequences of opening moves

without
fully understanding the purpose of those moves. I know I do...

It may be a good idea, then, for amateurs to become accustomed to

different
move orders, how they might arise, and what the consequences could be...


My purpose in giving "the most usual move order" was to assist anyone
wishing to find the opening in printed opening books. The first two moves,
1.e4 e6, might suggest that it is a French Defense. The opening, however,
transposed into a Sicilian Defense after 2.Nf3 c5. Knowing the most usual
move order is also extremely useful when using ECO [Encyclopedia of Chess
Openings].


3. Bc4 {is a poor move rarely played. Anyone wishing to play this =
opening as Black
should be prepared to face 3.d4, d3, Nc3, c3, b3, c4, g3, Qe2, b4, Bd3, =
Be2,
e5, a3, h3, Bc4, and 3.Bb5, listed in order of decreasing merit.}=20


Again, this appears seriously misleading. The question of how to handle

the
opening phase depends very much upon *style*. In order to *develop* a

suitable
style, an amateur must first hit upon white and black openings which

he/she is
comfortable playing. For example, there is a player in my club who plays

1.b4,
and at the level at which he plays, it serves him well. In such games,

it's
usually a case of "who blunders last, loses".

With that it mind, it is *even more important* to study tactics and

endgames.

This is proven to be by far the most effective method of improving to

expert
level.


I agree that study of middlegame and endgame phases is more productive for
amateurs. My approach to opening study has been to develop my opening
repertoire one move per game. In each new game, a move is played [usually
by the opponent] which is new TO ME. I then research the new position in
post-mortem analysis. After considering several different ways to proceed
from the position, I select the one which best suits my style and
preferences. In this way I satisfy your requirement to adopt openings which
are best suited for my style.


3... d5 {not best, if one believes the record. Perhaps Black should try

=
something else
in the next game.}=20

(3... a6 {has done extremely well in practice})=20


(3... Nc6 {has also done very well in practice})=20

4. exd5 {best}=20

(4. Bb5+ {is also seen in practice})=20

4... exd5 5. Qe2+=20

(5. Bb5+ {has been seen some in practice})=20

5... Be6 {an ugly move but playable.}=20

(5...Be7 {Silva,P-Comp Hiarcs 8,A/Olivos 2002/EXT 2003/0-1 (33) prepares

=
castling
and is the best move})=20

(5... Be7 6. Bb5+ Kf8 {is interesting}=20

(6... Bd7 {has been seen in practice}))=20

(5... Ne7 {is also playable})=20

6. Bb5+ Nd7=20

(6...Nc6 {is also playable and may be better. The knight would be more
aggressively placed on c6 than on d7 because it would attack d4. Also,

=
if
White exchanges his bishop for this knight, Black will recapture with a =
pawn
strengthing his centre pawn at d5 and giving Black a half-open b-file =
for his
QR.})=20


With respect, none of the above is relevant.

7. Ne5=20

(7. Nc3 {Rey Cuervo,P-Moran Fernandez,F/Asturia 1997/EXT 2001/0-1 (30)})

=


(7. d4 {best})

7... Be7 {the best place for this bishop is not yet clear. On the other
hand, it is already clear that Black's KN belongs on f6. Hence, =
7...Ngf6 was
the correct move.}=20

8. O-O {This move is OK but not best}=20

(8. Bxd7+ {best})=20

(8. d4 {is not as good as 8.Bxd7 but still better than the move played})

=


8... a6 {this move is a bit premature. It would be better to let White
commit to some of his piece placement first. Generally, playing the =
move now
helps White to find better places to put his pieces and to decide on =
move
ordering. Delaying a6 also would give Black the option of not playing =
that
move at all.}=20

(8... Ngf6 {clearly better})=20


Why is it "clearly better"? Do you know?


Yes I do. However, another person here zapped me for giving too much
analysis, so I chopped off all lines beyond the first move of the line. The
instructor would say "I leave the rest to the student as an exercise."


9. Bxd7+=20

(9. Nxd7 {is also playable and takes away Black's bishop pair.})=20

9... Bxd7 10. Re1 {Evidently, White is trying to build pressure on the =
e-file. Had he seen that
Black had an adequate reply, he would have developed the queenside =
pieces
instead}=20

(10. d4 {would have been more accurate. It sets up an IQP

situation.})=20

10... Be6 {a small error. Black misses a chance to relieve the pressure

=
on the e-file}=20

(10... Nf6 {is much better})=20

11. Ng4 {opponent is generous, or drunk}=20

(11. d4 {is a logical way for White to begin the development of his =
queenside
pieces. The pawn is not really being sacrificed. It is a =
pseudosacrifice.}

11... cxd4 12. Nd2 {and White will occupy the hole in the centre with a
knight, restraining Black's IQP.})=20

11... Nf6 12. Nxf6+ {opponent exchanges off his only developed minor =
piece.}=20

(12. Ne5 {a threat to win material which cannot be met. Black must find

=
the best way to lose a pawn.
})=20

12... Bxf6 13. f4 {this move got White into trouble by weakening his =
king's
defenses and wasting a tempo desperately needed for development of his
queenside pieces}=20

(13. d3 {developing} 13... O-O 14. Nc3 {developing} 14... Re8
15. Bd2 {developing and connecting the rooks})=20

13... O-O 14. d3 {seems OK}

(14. Nc3 {better})=20

14... Re8 {not significantly worse than the best move}=20

(14... Bd4+ {is not as strong as later in the game since White's queen =
can still go to f1.})

15. Qd2 {After this gross blunder, White has nothing better than to =
resign.}

(15. Nc3 b5)=20

15... Qd7 {this is a piece placement error. The queen belonged on h4, =
although that may not be immediately obvious. Also, the move played is =
a do-nothing move, threatening nothing. Missing the win of a piece and =
the game is a serious error. To be fair, it is unlikely that any =
amateur would have seen the correct line of play in blitz chess.}=20

(15... Bd4+ {best})=20

16. c3=20

(16. Nc3 {best})=20

16... d4 17. Na3 dxc3 18. bxc3 Rad8 19. Re3 b5 20. Bb2 b4 {this was a =
tactical mistake. Perhaps Black didn't notice that White's bishop was =
defended by his queen?}=20

(20... Bf5 {would pose difficult problems for White by building up the =
pressure. Black would clearly have the better chances. The idea of =
playing for "better chances" is seen often in grandmaster annotations. =
Players beset by many difficult problems to solve have poor "chances" =
because it is "likely" that they will falter.})=20


Quite right.

21. cxb4 Bxb2 22. Qxb2 cxb4 {there is no reasonable alternative} 23. Nc2

=
{best move}

(23. Qxb4 {would give Black an extra pawn but it does not give Black the

=
win.=20
The game is likely drawn with correct play.


Right. So endgame study is essential.

Black's passed a-pawn will =
have
to cross squares not controlled by Black's bishop})=20

23... a5 {essentially forced} 24. Rae1 {This seems to be about as good =
as any move here.
Just about any move of the QR is playable here.} 24... h6 {obviously =
played to avoid the possibility of falling into a back rank mate, but =
the move applies no pressure to White's position.} (24... Bf5 {is a good

=
move which threatens to win the d-pawn, effectively giving White =
problems to solve. Analysis shows that White cannot defend the pawn. =
There was no back rank threat. The move
played was therefore inappropriate. Strike while the iron is hot!})=20

25. h3=20

(25. Rg3 g6)=20

25... Bd5 {another do-nothing move}=20

(25... Bf5 {threatens to win a pawn and takes away move choices from =
opponent})=20

26. Rxe8+=20

(26. f5)=20

26... Rxe8 27. Rxe8+=20

(27. Ne3 Bc6 {frees the queen by defending the rook})=20

27... Qxe8 28. a3 {is terrible, but the game is lost in any case}=20

(28. Kf1)=20

28... b3 {a gross oversight}=20

(28... Qe2 {would have been a killer})=20

29. Na1 {and the knight self-traps itself}=20

(29. Kf2 {is the obvious move})=20

29... Qe3+ 30. Kh1 Qxd3=20

(30... a4 {would have the merit of producing a passed b-pawn after =
Nxb3})=20

31. f5=20

(31. Nxb3 {is still a small chance} 31... Qxh3+ 32. Kg1 Qe3+ {Strategy:

=
Black wins if
exchange queens, so all Black needs to do is to threaten queen exchanges

=
while
keeping his king in a fortress. Black can also give up the bishop and =
queen
for queen after pawns gone. White must avoid the exchange of

queens.})=20

31...a4 32. f6=20

(32. h4)=20

32... Qf1+ 33. Kh2 Qf4+ {an intermezzo move to push White's king back. =
However, this was not necessary}

(33... Qxf6 34. Qxf6 {forced} 34... gxf6 35. Kg3 b2 36. Kf2 bxa1=3DQ 37.

=
Ke2 Bc4+
38. Kd2 Qd4+ 39. Kc1 Qe3+ 40. Kc2 Bb3+ 41. Kb1 Qe1+ 42. Kb2 Qd2+ 43. Kb1

=
Qc2+
44. Ka1 Qc1#)=20

34. Kg1 Qxf6 {and White resigned} 0-1


I may be wrong about the above annotation, in that it may not have been
generated by a program. Certainly it appears as if it was. In my own

bitter
experience, trusting programs' analyses instead of analysing oneself, is

very
costly.


There is a distinction between analysis and annotation. Analysis is the
process by which alternative moves are found and by which merit of moves is
assessed. Annotation is the adding of words to convey information.

As explained elsewhere, I do my own analysis but utilize a chess engine in
the process to help me avoid accepting and publishing dumb ideas.
Specifically, I look at a position and decide which moves might make sense.
I then play them against the engine and usually discover that my ideas are
worthless. The process continues until a decent product is produced.

Incidentally, you provided quite a bit of commentary for me and I appreciate
that. Thanks. : )

Bob D.


hth

Mark



  #6  
Old July 21st 03, 03:41 PM
Antonio Torrecillas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation

En/na Roman M. Parparov ha escrit:
Bob Durrett wrote:

[-- multipart/alternative, encoding 7bit, 0 lines --]
[-- text/plain, encoding quoted-printable, 257 lines --]

The following game is my current idea as to what annotations should look like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players as to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong chess master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess amateur who played the Black side. Is the following representative of what you would provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the purpose intended?


[massive skip]

The good annotation has:
* Ideas behind the opening and the explanation of mistakes in it.
* Main plans employed by players in the middlegame, their alternatives
or lack of planned games.
* Weak moves and their explanation.
* Transition to endgame and its reasoning.
* Plans of the endgame and their performance.
* Summary.

In order to write an annotation you have to understand every move of
the game (or almost any) and not write statistical summary about it.
The annotation brought by you reminds me of what Tchigorin said once
about Pollock, that Pollock "... spent a lot of time annotating these
games but failed to understand the basic reasonings and ideas behind
them".


I think it's very important not to evaluate only the moves made but also
the ideas behind them during the game: a move can be "good" but played
with a wrong plan or a wrong calculation.

With this I mean that we have not only analyse the game but also the
owns annotations of each player (made just after the game). I always
suggest players to annotate in first place the game they suggest here.

Antonio Torrecillas

  #7  
Old July 21st 03, 04:36 PM
Antonio Torrecillas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation

An example is at the end of the message:

En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:

I think it's very important not to evaluate only the moves made but also
the ideas behind them during the game: a move can be "good" but played
with a wrong plan or a wrong calculation.

With this I mean that we have not only analyse the game but also the
owns annotations of each player (made just after the game). I always
suggest players to annotate in first place the game they suggest here.

Antonio Torrecillas


[Event "4-Op Barcelona"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.??.??"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Torrecillas Martinez, Antonio"]
[Black "Amat"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A35"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 c5 3. c4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. g3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O
Nc6 8.Nc2 d6 9. Nc3 Be6 10. b3 Qc8 11. Re1 Bh3 12. Bh1 Ng4 13. Bb2 Qf5

{Here I realize I was in danger because after 14.f3 Qxc2!! black is near
to winning. I calculate some lines and I played 14.f4. I have 14.Bf3
which concedes an small advantage to black but with 14.f4 (which seems
more weakening than 14.f3), I have control of "e5" avoiding black to
close long diagonal "a1-h8" (have a look at 19...e5 with the pawn in f3
or in f4) with a later ...e5 and white has open the other long diagonal
"h1-a8".

The comments about this move, and if I played well or not, depends very
much of my calculation and reasoning in that critical moment and not
only if it's a good or bad move from "many hours engines or humans
analyzing" point of view. It's like -obviously with a clear difference
of level- to say that a certain Talh move was bad because there exist a
refutation found years later, and this evaluation is not based in both
player thoughs during the game}

14. f4 Qxc2 15. Qxc2 Bd4+ 16. e3 Nxe3 17. Qd3 Nc2+ 18. Qxd4 N6xd4 19.Nd5
Rfe8 20. Re4 Nxa1 21. Rxd4 Nc2 22. Rd2 Bf5 23. h3 Bxh3 24. Rxc2 Rac8
25.Ne3 Rc7 26. g4 f5 27. gxf5 gxf5 28. Rh2 Bg4 29. Nxg4 fxg4 30. Rh4 e5
31. fxe5 dxe5 32. Bd5+ Kf8 33. Rxg4 1-0

  #8  
Old July 21st 03, 06:58 PM
Bob Durrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation


"mdamien" wrote in message
...
"Bob Durrett" wrote in message
...

The following game is my current idea as to what annotations should look

like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players

as
to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong chess

master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess amateur
who
played the Black side. Is the following representative of what you would
provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the purpose
intended?

I ask this question because I wish to get better at annotation.


[Event "Annotated"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Opponent"]
[Black "Student"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "68"]

1. e4 e6 2. Nf3 c5

{a more usual move order is 1.e4 c5, 2.Nf3 e6.}


I think it would be appropriate to comment here that Black would be
comfortable playing 2. ... d5. I don't know what level of student we're
talking about, but given the comment above, it would seem appropriate to
point out that Black *chose* to transpose.


I agree. As a French Defense player, I used to play 2...d5 exclusively, but
discovered that the resulting games just didn't appeal to me. Anyway, the
Sicilian is not a bad opening.


3. Bc4 {is a poor move rarely played. Anyone wishing to play this

opening
as Black
should be prepared to face 3.d4, d3, Nc3, c3, b3, c4, g3, Qe2, b4, Bd3,

Be2,
e5, a3, h3, Bc4, and 3.Bb5, listed in order of decreasing merit.}


If you're going to call 3. Bc4 a poor move, you should provide more
reasoning than "it's worse than 3. h3."


OK. Point taken. Thanks.


3... d5 {not best, if one believes the record. Perhaps Black should try

something else
in the next game.}

(3... a6 {has done extremely well in practice})

(3... Nc6 {has also done very well in practice})


As a student here, I'm thinking: OK, so he took a look at his database.

But
I'd rather hear you say something about the position of the bishop at c4

and
its limited prospects from, say, a2 after Black chases it away. Or

something
about Black's expansion on the queenside. Something, anything.


Yes. That's good. The honest truth is that the middlegame and endgame were
the main thrust of the analysis and the opening comments were added for
completeness.


4. exd5 {best}

(4. Bb5+ {is also seen in practice})

4... exd5 5. Qe2+

(5. Bb5+ {has been seen some in practice})

5... Be6 {an ugly move but playable.}

(5...Be7 {Silva,P-Comp Hiarcs 8,A/Olivos 2002/EXT 2003/0-1 (33) prepares

castling
and is the best move})

(5... Be7 6. Bb5+ Kf8 {is interesting}

(6... Bd7 {has been seen in practice}))

(5... Ne7 {is also playable})


Since we can assume that your student has no database or opening book
references,


It is unclear why we should make that assumption.

the above might be more useful in a different format (say,
tabular or outlined) where he could start a collection.


OK. Thanks. Actually, some students have huge collections of unread books.
: ) Also, almost everybody has software nowadays. This is becoming a
"computerized world" we live in.


6. Bb5+ Nd7

(6...Nc6 {is also playable and may be better. The knight would be more
aggressively placed on c6 than on d7 because it would attack d4. Also,

if
White exchanges his bishop for this knight, Black will recapture with a

pawn
strengthing his centre pawn at d5 and giving Black a half-open b-file for

his
QR.})


I think that's more the kind of comment a student would be expecting.


Yes. However, the question is: What kind of comment would be most
instructive, if the purpose of the instruction were to help the student find
ways of improving his game?


7. Ne5

(7. Nc3 {Rey Cuervo,P-Moran Fernandez,F/Asturia 1997/EXT 2001/0-1 (30)})

(7. d4 {best})


I'd be disappointed to see evaluations such as "best" without some
additional comments.


Good point.


7... Be7 {the best place for this bishop is not yet clear. On the other
hand, it is already clear that Black's KN belongs on f6. Hence,

7...Ngf6
was
the correct move.}


You say that one is "not yet clear" and that the other is "already clear";
this clarity (or lack thereof) is your own, though, and you expect your
student to accept your conclusion (7...Nf6) without enlightening him as to
why one is clear and the other is not. It's conceivable, for instance,

that
the knight might be useful at c6 -- as suggested by your earlier

testimony.

OK


8. O-O {This move is OK but not best}

(8. Bxd7+ {best})

(8. d4 {is not as good as 8.Bxd7 but still better than the move played})


Again, I'd hope for a series of moves after 8. Bxd7 with some discourse on
the final position.


There is a series of moves with many branches in my notes. But someone here
objected to showing all that, so I trunkated the lines for his benefit.


8... a6 {this move is a bit premature. It would be better to let White
commit to some of his piece placement first. Generally, playing the move

now
helps White to find better places to put his pieces and to decide on move
ordering. Delaying a6 also would give Black the option of not playing

that
move at all.}


OK. The move does force the exchange, though, which would seem on-topic in
terms of its prematurity.


Hmmm.


(8... Ngf6 {clearly better})

9. Bxd7+

(9. Nxd7 {is also playable and takes away Black's bishop pair.})


No doubt, your student would realize that he could play 9. Bxd7+ Bxd7 10.
Nxd7 with the same effect, especially since 10. Bxd7 would be forced after
9. Nxd7 Bxd7. So, he's left feeling confused by your comment.


The possibility of miscommunication is always there. One tries hard to
communicate without ambiguity, but we are all human so sometimes we do not
communicate as well as desired. I will work on that. Thanks.


9... Bxd7 10. Re1 {Evidently, White is trying to build pressure on the

e-file. Had he seen that
Black had an adequate reply, he would have developed the queenside pieces
instead}

(10. d4 {would have been more accurate. It sets up an IQP situation.})


By not recommending 10. Nxd7, you are conceding that 9. Bxd7+ is

preferrable
to 9. Nxd7, yet your previous comment, "and takes away Black's bishop

pair,"
suggests otherwise. Also, assuming this is a pretty low-level student, "an
IQP situation" may leave him scratching his head.


I would have said the level of the "student" who played Black in this game
but I really don't know. It is anywhere from USCF Class C to USCF Class A.
You bring up a good point, however. The optimum commentary depends on the
level of the student.


10... Be6 {a small error. Black misses a chance to relieve the pressure

on
the e-file}

(10... Nf6 {is much better})


Again, this is not much of a comment after Black preserves the bishop pair
have just recently mentioned.


You have mentioned this bishop pair thingie several times now. Sadly, or
fortunately, there is a lot more to chess than bishop pairs. I am sorry now
that I mentioned them at all.


11. Ng4 {opponent is generous, or drunk}


Would be better to mention White's development issues here, that would

bring
you to condemn the move so harshly.


Yes. That appears valid. The comment left too much to the student.

As it is, the student has to look over
your "pseudosacrifice" and then be content with "opponent exchanges off

his
only developed piece" at move 12.


OK


(11. d4 {is a logical way for White to begin the development of his

queenside
pieces. The pawn is not really being sacrificed. It is a

pseudosacrifice.}

11... cxd4 12. Nd2 {and White will occupy the hole in the centre with a
knight, restraining Black's IQP.})

11... Nf6 12. Nxf6+ {opponent exchanges off his only developed minor

piece.}

(12. Ne5 {a threat to win material which cannot be met. Black must find

the best way to lose a pawn.
})


So, even drunk, White has this winning move? And what is the threat? Seems
pointless to mention such a thing without giving more information.


Actually, winning a pawn does not a game win. Black still had a good game
even without that pawn.


That's all the time I have to look at this right now, but hopefully some

of
that is helpful.


Yes, that was very good. I will go back and make the indicated changes.
Maybe, after incorporating all the suggestions, I will re-post the game to
see if I got it right the second time.

Bob D.


Matt






  #9  
Old July 21st 03, 07:12 PM
Bob Durrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation


"Roman M. Parparov" wrote in message
...
Bob Durrett wrote:
[-- multipart/alternative, encoding 7bit, 0 lines --]

[-- text/plain, encoding quoted-printable, 257 lines --]

The following game is my current idea as to what annotations should look

like when the purpose of the annotations is to inform one of the players as
to where that player needs to improve. Imagine you were a strong chess
master and had been hired to annotate a chess game for a chess amateur who
played the Black side. Is the following representative of what you would
provide? If not, what would be more appropriate for the purpose intended?

[massive skip]

The good annotation has:
* Ideas behind the opening and the explanation of mistakes in it.
* Main plans employed by players in the middlegame, their alternatives
or lack of planned games.
* Weak moves and their explanation.
* Transition to endgame and its reasoning.
* Plans of the endgame and their performance.
* Summary.

In order to write an annotation you have to understand every move of
the game (or almost any) and not write statistical summary about it.
The annotation brought by you reminds me of what Tchigorin said once
about Pollock, that Pollock "... spent a lot of time annotating these
games but failed to understand the basic reasonings and ideas behind
them".

Here is an example of a bad annotation which I was correcting:


http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e... games.chess.*
--
Roman M. Parparov - NASA EOSDIS project node at TAU technical manager.
Email: http://www.nasa.proj.ac.il
Phone/Fax: +972-(0)3-6405205 (work), +972-(0)64-669-189 (home)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The economy depends about as much on economists as the weather does on
weather forecasters.
-- Jean-Paul Kauffmann



The above looks like an excellent set of guidelines. I will attempt to
follow them in my future annotation efforts. Thanks.

Bob D.


  #10  
Old July 21st 03, 07:19 PM
Bob Durrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Question About Annotation


"Antonio Torrecillas" wrote in message
...
An example is at the end of the message:

En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:

I think it's very important not to evaluate only the moves made but also
the ideas behind them during the game: a move can be "good" but played
with a wrong plan or a wrong calculation.

With this I mean that we have not only analyse the game but also the
owns annotations of each player (made just after the game). I always
suggest players to annotate in first place the game they suggest here.

Antonio Torrecillas


[Event "4-Op Barcelona"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "1982.??.??"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Torrecillas Martinez, Antonio"]
[Black "Amat"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A35"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[EventDate "1982.??.??"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 c5 3. c4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 g6 5. g3 Bg7 6. Bg2 O-O 7. O-O
Nc6 8.Nc2 d6 9. Nc3 Be6 10. b3 Qc8 11. Re1 Bh3 12. Bh1 Ng4 13. Bb2 Qf5

{Here I realize I was in danger because after 14.f3 Qxc2!! black is near
to winning. I calculate some lines and I played 14.f4. I have 14.Bf3
which concedes an small advantage to black but with 14.f4 (which seems
more weakening than 14.f3), I have control of "e5" avoiding black to
close long diagonal "a1-h8" (have a look at 19...e5 with the pawn in f3
or in f4) with a later ...e5 and white has open the other long diagonal
"h1-a8".

The comments about this move, and if I played well or not, depends very
much of my calculation and reasoning in that critical moment and not
only if it's a good or bad move from "many hours engines or humans
analyzing" point of view. It's like -obviously with a clear difference
of level- to say that a certain Talh move was bad because there exist a
refutation found years later, and this evaluation is not based in both
player thoughs during the game}

14. f4 Qxc2 15. Qxc2 Bd4+ 16. e3 Nxe3 17. Qd3 Nc2+ 18. Qxd4 N6xd4 19.Nd5
Rfe8 20. Re4 Nxa1 21. Rxd4 Nc2 22. Rd2 Bf5 23. h3 Bxh3 24. Rxc2 Rac8
25.Ne3 Rc7 26. g4 f5 27. gxf5 gxf5 28. Rh2 Bg4 29. Nxg4 fxg4 30. Rh4 e5
31. fxe5 dxe5 32. Bd5+ Kf8 33. Rxg4 1-0



I guess it is fair to conclude that you would require your students to give
such commentary with their game scores. Perhaps that would lead to greater
benefit to the student. If I ever send a scoresheet to a master for his
comments, I will be sure to include such information.

What should the financially strapped amateur do? For the most part, he must
rely on his own post-mortem analyses. Nevertheless, you suggestion seems
still applicable since the amateur can focus more on the thought processes
he had during the game.

Thanks for the comments.

Bob D.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.