Hello,

Recently it has ben discussed here How to study endings.

I propose an ending to analyze:

It seems to me that white achieved an ending a little better but only a
mistake for black allowed the win (It was a 15min+3sec game)

Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??

[Event "Match des Legendes"]
[Site "Porto Vecchio FRA"]
[Date "2006.05.26"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Spassky, B."]
[Black "Karpov, Ana"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B17"]
[WhiteElo "2548"]
[BlackElo "2672"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "2006.05.26"]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.h3
Bf5 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 e6 10. O-O Be7 11. c4 O-O 12. b3 c5 13. Bb2 cxd4
14. Rfd1 Qa5 15. Bxd4 Rfd8 16. Qe2 Qf5 17. Rd3 Qe4 18. Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Rad1
Kf8 20. Kf1 f6 21. Be3 Rxd3 22. Rxd3 Ke8 23. Nd2 Nxd2+ 24. Rxd2 a6
25.Ke2 Rd8 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27. c5 Kd7 28. Kd3 Bd8 29. b4 Bc7 30. Kc4 h5
31. a4 Be5 32. b5 axb5+ 33. axb5 Kc7 34. g4 hxg4 35. hxg4 Kd7 36. f4 Bb2
37. f5 e5 38. Kd5 Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40.Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4 Bc3 42. Bg3 1-0

Hello,

Recently it has ben discussed here How to study endings.

I propose an ending to analyze:

It seems to me that white achieved an ending a little better but only a
mistake for black allowed the win (It was a 15min+3sec game)

Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??

[Event "Match des Legendes"]
[Site "Porto Vecchio FRA"]
[Date "2006.05.26"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Spassky, B."]
[Black "Karpov, Ana"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B17"]
[WhiteElo "2548"]
[BlackElo "2672"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "2006.05.26"]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3

5. Ng5 was played in the recent computer world championship.


--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918

"Antonio Torrecillas" wrote in message
...
Hello,

Recently it has ben discussed here How to study endings.

I propose an ending to analyze:

It seems to me that white achieved an ending a little better but only a
mistake for black allowed the win (It was a 15min+3sec game)

Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??

[Event "Match des Legendes"]
[Site "Porto Vecchio FRA"]
[Date "2006.05.26"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Spassky, B."]
[Black "Karpov, Ana"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B17"]
[WhiteElo "2548"]
[BlackElo "2672"]
[PlyCount "83"]
[EventDate "2006.05.26"]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.h3
Bf5 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 e6 10. O-O Be7 11. c4 O-O 12. b3 c5 13. Bb2 cxd4
14. Rfd1 Qa5 15. Bxd4 Rfd8 16. Qe2 Qf5 17. Rd3 Qe4 18. Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Rad1
Kf8 20. Kf1 f6 21. Be3 Rxd3 22. Rxd3 Ke8 23. Nd2 Nxd2+ 24. Rxd2 a6 25.Ke2
Rd8 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27. c5 Kd7 28. Kd3 Bd8 29. b4 Bc7 30. Kc4 h5 31. a4 Be5
32. b5 axb5+ 33. axb5 Kc7 34. g4 hxg4 35. hxg4 Kd7 36. f4 Bb2 37. f5 e5
38. Kd5 Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40.Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4 Bc3 42. Bg3 1-0


Hi, Antonio!

This game was featured in IM Andrew Martin's ChessBase
radio show last week. Some of his comments we

"17. ... Qe4? Very passive. Surely 17. ... Nh5! would have
given Black at least equal chances."

"27. c5 The King comes to c4 and a passed pawn will
be established. After that the White King tries to find a
way to invade on the kingside. I'm very surprised Karpov went
for this ending."

"34. g4! Forcefully driving home his advantage. Black's
kingside is softened up ready for the future invasion."


Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
with the chosen move.

Others?

Regards,
John

Hello John,

thanks, ... and some comments belov.

En/na John Sheatsley ha escrit:
"Antonio Torrecillas" wrote in message
Anyone interested propose what was the fatal mistake??

[White "Spassky, B."]
[Black "Karpov, Ana"]

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7 5. Nf3 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nxf6 7.h3
Bf5 8. Bd3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 e6 10. O-O Be7 11. c4 O-O 12. b3 c5 13. Bb2 cxd4
14. Rfd1 Qa5 15. Bxd4 Rfd8 16. Qe2 Qf5 17. Rd3 Qe4 18. Qxe4 Nxe4 19.Rad1
Kf8 20. Kf1 f6 21. Be3 Rxd3 22. Rxd3 Ke8 23. Nd2 Nxd2+ 24. Rxd2 a6 25.Ke2
Rd8 26. Rxd8+ Kxd8 27. c5 Kd7 28. Kd3 Bd8 29. b4 Bc7 30. Kc4 h5 31. a4 Be5
32. b5 axb5+ 33. axb5 Kc7 34. g4 hxg4 35. hxg4 Kd7 36. f4 Bb2 37. f5 e5
38. Kd5 Ba3 39. g5 fxg5 40.Bxg5 Bb2 41. Bh4 Bc3 42. Bg3 1-0

Hi, Antonio!

This game was featured in IM Andrew Martin's ChessBase
radio show last week. Some of his comments we

"17. ... Qe4? Very passive. Surely 17. ... Nh5! would have
given Black at least equal chances."

Fritz, Rybka (the free version) and Shredder also suggest 17...Nh5 as
equal, ... but I'm not sure about 17.... Qe4 being a mistake. If the
ending can be "saved" it can be not a mistake.

"27. c5 The King comes to c4 and a passed pawn will
be established. After that the White King tries to find a
way to invade on the kingside. I'm very surprised Karpov went
for this ending."

That position is the kind of ending that can be draw in a big percent
and offer little chances to win for white, ... but there are very few
options to be lost. Being Karpov a Caro-Kan player he can reach those
kind of ending very often but with not special danger.

"34. g4! Forcefully driving home his advantage. Black's
kingside is softened up ready for the future invasion."

Fritz, Shredder and Rybka proposed 35...g5 but his is not entirely
clear (at least for me) ... there is a difficult pawn ending after
36.Bd4 and some other options.
If this is finally good, It should be added that white could have
avoided that playing first 34.f4 Bb2 and then 35.g4.

Another "all engine" propositions were 37...Be5 and 33...h4.

Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
with the chosen move.

28...Kc6 was also the engine suggestion in Shredder and Fritz analysis
(but not Rybka) but I do not see any difference after white pays Kc4
followed by b4, a4, b5. Anyone can see the difference?

Antonio

En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:

Hello John,
thanks, ... and some comments belov.

Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
with the chosen move.

28...Kc6 was also the engine suggestion in Shredder and Fritz analysis
(but not Rybka) but I do not see any difference after white pays Kc4
followed by b4, a4, b5. Anyone can see the difference?

Antonio

An Add/correction

I understand just now why that was a universal proposal of engines:

After 28...Kc6! 29.Kc4 a5!

- and now if white try to play a3, b4-b5 there is a tactical blow:
30.a3? Bxc5!! winning a pawn.

- white can not play either 30.f4 Bxc5!!

- that mean 30.a4 with no future for white 3-2 majority.

In that example we can see how much tactics and endings/strategy are
related. And more, I think that tactical resource to be more difficult
to see that many mate combinations.

Antonio

I think black problems started with 25...Rd8?! after 26.Rxd8 black has
less options for a draw. Better was, IMHO, trying to exchange the
bishops and..., only after that, go for a rook exchange (there are only
one column opened which means exchange can't be avoided).

....Bxc5!! Nice tactic.



Antonio Torrecillas ha escrito:

En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:

Hello John,
thanks, ... and some comments belov.

Sticking my neck out, I think Karpov's last chance was
28. ... Kc6 instead of ... Bd8. Black needs to contest
and restrain the 3-2 pawn majority and fails to do so
with the chosen move.

28...Kc6 was also the engine suggestion in Shredder and Fritz analysis
(but not Rybka) but I do not see any difference after white pays Kc4
followed by b4, a4, b5. Anyone can see the difference?

Antonio

An Add/correction

I understand just now why that was a universal proposal of engines:

After 28...Kc6! 29.Kc4 a5!

- and now if white try to play a3, b4-b5 there is a tactical blow:
30.a3? Bxc5!! winning a pawn.

- white can not play either 30.f4 Bxc5!!

- that mean 30.a4 with no future for white 3-2 majority.

In that example we can see how much tactics and endings/strategy are
related. And more, I think that tactical resource to be more difficult
to see that many mate combinations.

Antonio

I've analyzed half the game. I have a couple questions:

A. On move 8, why did Spassky choose Bd3 over Bc4?
B. On move 12, why did Spassky choose b3 over c5?

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7

This is the Caro-Kann, Classical Variation. Black is believed to be
passive yet solid, and games draw more often with this opening than
others.

White can attack the center with c3, Nf3, and Bf4. Black may be
considering e5 or f5. White should answer Nf3, the least-commital move.

5. Nf3 Ngf6

White's knight is under attack. 6. Ng5 h5 Na3 leaves his knight badly
posted, 6. Nc5 Nxc5 dxc5 loses his central pawns. Nd2 blocks the
dark-squared bishop while Nc3 blocks the c-pawn. Nc3 seems best as
Black has no d-pawn, so the c-pawn shouldn't need to be active in the
near future.

6. Nxf6+ Nxf6

I totally missed Nxf6. That's even better!

Ne5 gives White's knight an outpost, puts pressure on f7, and prevents
e5. With Black's d-pawn gone and f-pawn blocked, the output should last
several turns.

Bc4 is also good, putting pressure on f7 and enabling a kingside
castle.

7. h3 Bf5

I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says h3(-.21) is playable, as are
my variants: Bc4(-.17), Ne5(-.17).

Bf5 doesn't pose any immediate threats. I don't want to exchange
bishops as the light-squared bishop is probably White's good and
Black's bad bishop.

8. Bd3 Bxd3

I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says Bd3(-.32) is a mistake
compared to my variants. Bd3 (-.32), Bc4 (+.06), Ne5 (-0.01). Why did
Spassky choose Bd3?!

Qxd3 is the obvious continuation to avoid doubled pawns.

9. Qxd3 e6

This seems like a quiet moment. White has good responses to e5, c5,
Qa5, and Bc5. This is a good opportunity to castle O-O.

10. O-O Be7

Bf4 seems strong linking White's rooks, developing a new piece, seizing
a long diagonal, and further dominating the e5 square. Ne5 and Re1 are
also playable.

11. c4 O-O

I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says c4(-.35) is playable as are
my variants: Bd3 (-.35), Ne5 (-0.34), Re1 (-.35). I guess they're all
about the same.

c5 seems like a logical follow-up, entombing Black's bishop. If b6,
then b4. Ne5 or Bf4 also make sense. Re1 probably doesn't achieve as
much.

12. b3 c5

Again, I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says b3(-.26) is a mistake
compared to my variant: c5 (+.72), and playable compared to my variants
Ne5 (-.23) and Bf4 (-.34). What did Spassky choose b3?!

Ba3 seems a good reply. 13. Ba3 cxd4 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Qxd4 or 13. Ba3
Qa5 14. Bxc5 Bxc5 15. dxc5 Qxc5. Bb2 and Be3 are also playable. A
bishop move is needed here because dxc5 is suicide, cxd5 Qxd5 allows a
queen exchange, and cxd5 Nxd5 Bc5 gives Black a nice attack.

13. Bb2 cxd4 14. Rfd1 Qa5

Recapturing the pawn should be a priority. The bishop recapture looks
best, followed by the queen, and then by the knight in order or
strength.

15. Bxd4 Rfd8

Expected. The Queen should move out of the pin. Safe squares are b1,
c2, e2, f1, and e3. Qc2 is best as it maintains pressure on g6.

16. Qe2 Qf5

I consult with Rybka. Qe2(-.30) is playable compared with my variant,
Qc2 (-.33). I guess the idea behind Qe2 is to facilitate Ne5, finally
seizing the outpost. Back-rank mate tactics are finally starting to
appear.

Rd3 is good here, preparing to bring the second rook into action.

17. Rd3 Qe4

It's a close call. I would play Qxe4 to avoid complications, but Re1
looks playable.

18. Qxe4 Nxe4

Rad1. There seems no easy way to kill the knight, but this move both
protects against Nc5 and continues the offensive push.

19. Rad1 Kf8

Black is protected now against a back-rank mate, and his pieces are
coordinated. White should exchange or chase away the enemy knight with
Nd2.

20. Kf1 f6

I consult with Rybka. Nd2 is a huge blunder. 20. Nd2 Nc5 21. Bxc5 Rxc5
22. Be3. Drat. I can play 19 moves as good as Spassky but that 20th
move is why I'm not a master! He must have seen this, else he'd surely
have chased away the enemy knight.

Ray Gordon said:
5. Ng5 was played in the recent computer world championship.

Interesting. I was thinking 5. Ng5 is bad because 5. Ng5 h6 Ne4, 5. Ng5
h6 Nh3, 5. Ngg5 h6, Ngf3 were obviously bad moves.

However, 5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 is quite good! Black can go wrong, and even
if he plays perfectly white still retains the better position.

5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 Qa5

If 6. ... fxe6 it's mate with 7. Qh5+ g6 8. Qxg6#. Only Qb6 or Qa5+
save the day.

7. Bd2 Qb6

Any move except Qb6 loses to Nc7.

8. Nxf8 Nxf8 9. Bc3 Nf6

5. Ng5 was played in the recent computer world championship.

Interesting. I was thinking 5. Ng5 is bad because 5. Ng5 h6 Ne4, 5. Ng5
h6 Nh3, 5. Ngg5 h6, Ngf3 were obviously bad moves.

5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6!!


However, 5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 is quite good! Black can go wrong, and even
if he plays perfectly white still retains the better position.

Yep. The computer even goes a step further here, meeting ....h6 with a
winning sacrifice on f7.


5. Ng5 h6 6. Ne6 Qa5

If 6. ... fxe6 it's mate with 7. Qh5+ g6 8. Qxg6#. Only Qb6 or Qa5+
save the day.

Soltis published this about 20 years ago which is where I found it. I think
Kasparov or someone he was playing tried it.


--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918

wrote:
I've analyzed half the game. I have a couple questions:

A. On move 8, why did Spassky choose Bd3 over Bc4?
B. On move 12, why did Spassky choose b3 over c5?

1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Nd7

This is the Caro-Kann, Classical Variation.

No, the Classical Variation is the one with 4...Bf5. This is called
the Smyslov Variation (or the Petrosian/Smyslov, or simply the Modern
....Nd7 Variation).

Black is believed to be passive yet solid, and games draw
more often with this opening than others.

White can attack the center with c3, Nf3, and Bf4. Black may be
considering e5 or f5. White should answer Nf3, the least-commital move.

5. Nf3

5. Ng5 is the current main line, but bookish. The old main line was 5.
Bc4 Ngf6 7. Ng5 e6 8. Qe2 (threatening 9. Nxf7) Nb6 and now White had
to choose between 9. Bb3 and 9. Bd3. (The White d-pawn isn't really
hanging, e.g. 9. Bd3 Qxd4? 10. Ng1f3 followed by Ne5)

5. Bc4 Ngf6 6. Nxf6+ Nf6 6. c3 Bf5?? (6...Qc7 or 6...e6) 7. Qb3 winning
a pawn is an old trap.

Ngf6

White's knight is under attack. 6. Ng5 h5 Na3 leaves his knight badly
posted, 6. Nc5 Nxc5 dxc5 loses his central pawns. Nd2 blocks the
dark-squared bishop while Nc3 blocks the c-pawn. Nc3 seems best as
Black has no d-pawn, so the c-pawn shouldn't need to be active in the
near future.

Do you actually mean to say that "if 6. Ng5 h6 7.Nh3"?

6. Ng3 has been popular, avoiding exchanges without obstructing the
c-pawn.

6. Nxf6+ Nxf6

I totally missed Nxf6. That's even better!

Ne5 gives White's knight an outpost, puts pressure on f7, and prevents
e5. With Black's d-pawn gone and f-pawn blocked, the output should last
several turns.

Old stuff! 7. Ne5 was popular until it was discovered that 7...Be6! or
7...Nd7!? are okay for Black.

Bc4 is also good, putting pressure on f7 and enabling a kingside castle.

But Black is okay after 7... Bf5 and 8...e6, when the B on c4 is not
doing much and might provoke a later pawn storm with ...b5 and ...a5.

7. h3 Bf5

I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says h3(-.21) is playable, as are
my variants: Bc4(-.17), Ne5(-.17).

7. h3 is a old favorite of Spassky's. He "threatens" 8. Bd3 when Black
has no good place for his QB.

Bf5 doesn't pose any immediate threats. I don't want to exchange
bishops as the light-squared bishop is probably White's good and
Black's bad bishop.

Black needs to develop his Bc8 before playing ...e6.

8. Bd3 Bxd3

I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says Bd3(-.32) is a mistake
compared to my variants. Bd3 (-.32), Bc4 (+.06), Ne5 (-0.01). Why did
Spassky choose Bd3?!

It leaves Black with a rather passive position where he must have good
drawing chances but almost zero chances of winning. Not a bad choice
by an older White player who can keep the draw in hand while probing
for mistakes.

Qxd3 is the obvious continuation to avoid doubled pawns.

9. Qxd3 e6

This seems like a quiet moment. White has good responses to e5, c5,
Qa5, and Bc5. This is a good opportunity to castle O-O.

10. O-O Be7

Bf4 seems strong linking White's rooks, developing a new piece, seizing
a long diagonal, and further dominating the e5 square. Ne5 and Re1 are
also playable.

11. Bf4 strikes at nothing. Spassky cleverly puts his QB on d4, where
it is very active (eyeing a7 and f6).

11. c4 O-O

I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says c4(-.35) is playable as are
my variants: Bd3 (-.35), Ne5 (-0.34), Re1 (-.35). I guess they're all
about the same.

c5 seems like a logical follow-up, entombing Black's bishop. If b6,
then b4. Ne5 or Bf4 also make sense. Re1 probably doesn't achieve as
much.

12. c5?? Bxc5. Even if it weren't tactically bad, a move like 12. c5
is positionally suspect in that it leaves White with a backward d-pawn
and a hole on d5 that Black can easily occupy.

12. b3 c5

Again, I consult with Rybka. At depth 12 he says b3(-.26) is a mistake
compared to my variant: c5 (+.72), and playable compared to my variants
Ne5 (-.23) and Bf4 (-.34). What did Spassky choose b3?!

Are you sure your computer didn't see 12. c5 Bxc5?

12. b3 is a good move, putting the White B to work on a long diagonal
that will soon be opened (after ...cxd4) and protecting the c-pawn from
eventual attacks along the c-file.

Ba3 seems a good reply. 13. Ba3 cxd4 14. Bxe7 Qxe7 15. Qxd4 or 13. Ba3
Qa5 14. Bxc5 Bxc5 15. dxc5 Qxc5. Bb2 and Be3 are also playable. A
bishop move is needed here because dxc5 is suicide, cxd5 Qxd5 allows a
queen exchange, and cxd5 Nxd5 Bc5 gives Black a nice attack.

13. Ba3 is just silly. White isn't eager to swap this piece so easily.

13. Bb2 cxd4 14. Rfd1 Qa5

Recapturing the pawn should be a priority. The bishop recapture looks
best, followed by the queen, and then by the knight in order or
strength.

15. Bxd4 Rfd8

Expected. The Queen should move out of the pin. Safe squares are b1,
c2, e2, f1, and e3. Qc2 is best as it maintains pressure on g6.

What on earth does g6 have to do with anything?? Do you mean that the
move 16. Qc2 inhibits the Black queen from occupying f5? So what?
After 16. Qc2?! Rac8 White has to worry about possible ...b5 and ...Nd5
ideas.

16. Qe2 Qf5

I consult with Rybka. Qe2(-.30) is playable compared with my variant,
Qc2 (-.33). I guess the idea behind Qe2 is to facilitate Ne5, finally
seizing the outpost. Back-rank mate tactics are finally starting to
appear.

Rd3 is good here, preparing to bring the second rook into action.

17. Rd3 Qe4

It's a close call. I would play Qxe4 to avoid complications, but Re1
looks playable.

I would be tempted to try 18. Re3 and chase the Black queen around, but
evidently White judged that the ending would be more unpleasant for
Black than the middlegame.

18. Qxe4 Nxe4

Rad1. There seems no easy way to kill the knight, but this move both
protects against Nc5 and continues the offensive push.

19. Rad1 Kf8

Black is protected now against a back-rank mate, and his pieces are
coordinated. White should exchange or chase away the enemy knight with
Nd2.

I don't see why.

20. Kf1 f6

I consult with Rybka. Nd2 is a huge blunder. 20. Nd2 Nc5 21. Bxc5 Rxc5
22. Be3. Drat. I can play 19 moves as good as Spassky

Talk about delusions of grandeur! Even Ray only claims he can make 14
"perfect" moves in the opening. You're a long way from playing 19 moves
"as good as Spassky."

but that 20th move is why I'm not a master!

It's not "that 20th move" but a general case of cluelessness that gets
you.

He must have seen this, else he'd surely have chased away the enemy knight.

He probably never even wasted time looking at a move like 20. Nd2.

Charles