| |
Main
Date: 17 Nov 2006 07:01:02
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: basics endings
|
Anyone interersted in commenting that ending?
It seems a "rook plus pawn" ending any +2000 player should know, ... but
maybe time pressure forced Magnus to play wrong
[Event "Tal Memorial"]
[Site "Moscow RUS"]
[Date "2006.11.12"]
[Round "6"]
[White "Aronian, L."]
[Black "Carlsen, M."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E15"]
[WhiteElo "2741"]
[BlackElo "2698"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. Qc2 Nc6 6. Nbd2 d5 7. cxd5
Qxd5 8. e4 Nb4 9. Qa4+ Qd7 10. Qxd7+ Nxd7 11. Bxa6 Nxa6 12. O-O Nf6
13.a3 c5 14. Re1 Be7 15. Ne5 Rc8 16. b4 cxd4 17. Ndf3 Nb8 18. Nxd4 Nfd7
19. Nef3 O-O 20. Bf4 Nc6 21.Rac1 Nxd4 22. Nxd4 g5 23. Nc6 Rxc6 24. Rxc6
gxf4 25. Rc7 Ne5 26. Rxe7 Nf3+ 27.Kf1 Nxe1 28. Kxe1 a5 29. Rb7 axb4
30.axb4 Rd8 31. f3 Rd3 32. Ke2 Rb3 33. Rxb6 Rb2+ 34. Kd3 Rxh2 35. gxf4
h5 36. Rb5 h4 37. Rh5 h3 38. Kd4 Kf8 39. Ke5 Ke7 40.f5 exf5 41. Kxf5 Rb2
42. Rxh3 Rxb4 43. f4 Rb5+ 44. e5 Kf8 45. Rd3 Rb4 46. Kg5 Kg7 47. Rd7 Rb5
48. Kg4 Kf8 49. Kf5 Kg7 50. Ke4 Rb4+ 51. Rd4 Rb1 52. Rd7 Re1+ 53. Kd5
Rd1+ 54. Kc6 Rf1 55. Rd4 Kf8 56. Kd7 Rf2 57. Kd6 Rf1 58. Kd5 Ke7 59.Ra4
f6 60. Ra7+ Kf8 61. Kd6 fxe5 62. Ra8+ Kf7 63. Ra7+ Kf8 64. fxe5 Rd1+
65.Ke6 Re1 66. Rf7+ Ke8 67. Rh7 Kf8 68. Rh8+ Kg7 69. Rd8 Ra1 70. Ke7 Ra5
71. e6 Ra7+ 72. Rd7 Ra8 73. Rd6 Ra7+ 74. Ke8 1-0
|
|
| |
Date: 20 Nov 2006 07:22:53
From:
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
David Richerby ha escrito:
> Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > En/na SBD ha escrit:
> >> Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
> >>> I think black have not played acurately that ending no matter the
> >>> game is draw with 73...Kg6!!.
> >>
> >> That view is totally different than mine. There were often 10 or
> >> more drawing moves at each move throughout that game; I saw nothing
> >> wrong with black's play other than that it wasn't the easiest way
> >> to secure the draw - many roads to Rome and all that.
>
> I think you're just using different definitions of `accurate'. I'd
> say that Black's play is accurate up to 73... Ra7+? as every move
> played allows Black to hold the draw. On the other hand, there were
> easier ways to do it and it's always good to make it easier to hold
> the draw because then you don't find yourself in a position like that
> after White's 73rd move, where the `obvious' move turns out to be
> losing.
I think moves like "white loses his pawn for nothing" are mistakes no
matter with exact play game is draw. The player with advantage has to
force his opponent to play all the only moves He can. And the player
with inferiority has to play the easiest way to draw (not forcing
himself to do many "difficult only moves").
Respect to Carlsen play, I suspect Black missed something in the
endgame. Maybe Carlsen saw too later that 61...Rxf4 loses thinking
previously (when He played 59...f6) it was draw.
> > I have not seen that game with tablebases.
> > I fact I have not tablebases.
>
> http://www.lokasoft.com/tbweb.htm
>
> You can enter a position in FEN and explore the tablebase. The page
> will list all the legal moves and the results of each; you can click
> on a move to go to the resulting position.
> Dave.
thanks, it's an intertesting url
|
| |
Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
> Anyone interersted in commenting that ending?
>
> It seems a "rook plus pawn" ending any +2000 player should know, ... but
> maybe time pressure forced Magnus to play wrong
>
> [Event "Tal Memorial"]
> [Site "Moscow RUS"]
> [Date "2006.11.12"]
> [Round "6"]
> [White "Aronian, L."]
> [Black "Carlsen, M."]
> [Result "1-0"]
> [ECO "E15"]
> [WhiteElo "2741"]
> [BlackElo "2698"]
>
> 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Ba6 5. Qc2 Nc6 6. Nbd2 d5 7. cxd5
> Qxd5 8. e4 Nb4 9. Qa4+ Qd7 10. Qxd7+ Nxd7 11. Bxa6 Nxa6 12. O-O Nf6
> 13.a3 c5 14. Re1 Be7 15. Ne5 Rc8 16. b4 cxd4 17. Ndf3 Nb8 18. Nxd4 Nfd7
> 19. Nef3 O-O 20. Bf4 Nc6 21.Rac1 Nxd4 22. Nxd4 g5 23. Nc6 Rxc6 24. Rxc6
> gxf4 25. Rc7 Ne5 26. Rxe7 Nf3+ 27.Kf1 Nxe1 28. Kxe1 a5 29. Rb7 axb4
> 30.axb4 Rd8 31. f3 Rd3 32. Ke2 Rb3 33. Rxb6 Rb2+ 34. Kd3 Rxh2 35. gxf4
> h5 36. Rb5 h4 37. Rh5 h3 38. Kd4 Kf8 39. Ke5 Ke7 40.f5 exf5 41. Kxf5 Rb2
> 42. Rxh3 Rxb4 43. f4 Rb5+ 44. e5 Kf8 45. Rd3 Rb4 46. Kg5 Kg7 47. Rd7 Rb5
> 48. Kg4 Kf8 49. Kf5 Kg7 50. Ke4 Rb4+ 51. Rd4 Rb1 52. Rd7 Re1+ 53. Kd5
> Rd1+ 54. Kc6 Rf1 55. Rd4 Kf8 56. Kd7 Rf2 57. Kd6 Rf1 58. Kd5 Ke7 59.Ra4
> f6 60. Ra7+ Kf8 61. Kd6 fxe5 62. Ra8+ Kf7 63. Ra7+ Kf8 64. fxe5 Rd1+
> 65.Ke6 Re1 66. Rf7+ Ke8 67. Rh7 Kf8 68. Rh8+ Kg7 69. Rd8 Ra1 70. Ke7 Ra5
> 71. e6 Ra7+ 72. Rd7 Ra8 73. Rd6 Ra7+ 74. Ke8 1-0
I didn't think Kg6 was obvious, and I missed it myself, but I'm only a
Cat. A player. You would need to study the position (or be playing the
game) and exaust a bunch of other tries before you would find it.
http://chess-training.blogspot.com
|
| |
Date: 19 Nov 2006 21:01:35
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
> >> Respect to quality of GM endings: I think we have very much to learn
> >> from them, and today mistakes are explained by fast time controls.
> >
> >
> > I certainly will agree with the second part. However, I also think
> > there is an overemphasis on opening preparation and an underemphasis on
> > the endgame today at all levels.
>
> Because, as I've said with the 1/x rule, the rating system favors the player
> who is stronger in the opening, simply because every chessgame has an
> opening. To that extent, it is like the line of scrimmage in football in
> that it is usually the key battleground.
>
> That GMs can get away with being horrible in the ending only confirms that,
> otherwise they wouldn't be GMs because they would lose too many rating
> points.
I'll let someone else comment on the absolutely HORRIBLE logic used in
the above post by our notorious resident "openings grandmaster."
|
| | |
Date: 20 Nov 2006 09:59:55
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
Matt Nemmers <[email protected] > wrote:
> Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:
>> [...]
>
> I'll let someone else comment on the absolutely HORRIBLE logic used
> in the above post by our notorious resident "openings grandmaster."
Matt, it's not necessary to post `that was rubbish' every time Ray
posts. We all know that and by doing this, you're just doubling the
number of useless posts. Stick to posting about chess -- it's much
more interesting.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Evil Smokes (TM): it's like a pack of
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ cigarettes but it's genuinely evil!
|
| |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 02:27:37
From: SBD
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
On Nov 18, 2:59 am, Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected] > wrote:
> Respect to quality of GM endings: I think we have very much to learn
> from them, and today mistakes are explained by fast time controls.
I certainly will agree with the second part. However, I also think
there is an overemphasis on opening preparation and an underemphasis on
the endgame today at all levels. As to very much to learn from them,
investing in Cheron makes more sense to me, however dated.
|
| | |
Date: 19 Nov 2006 23:10:28
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
>> Respect to quality of GM endings: I think we have very much to learn
>> from them, and today mistakes are explained by fast time controls.
>
>
> I certainly will agree with the second part. However, I also think
> there is an overemphasis on opening preparation and an underemphasis on
> the endgame today at all levels.
Because, as I've said with the 1/x rule, the rating system favors the player
who is stronger in the opening, simply because every chessgame has an
opening. To that extent, it is like the line of scrimmage in football in
that it is usually the key battleground.
That GMs can get away with being horrible in the ending only confirms that,
otherwise they wouldn't be GMs because they would lose too many rating
points.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| | | |
Date: 20 Nov 2006 07:17:21
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
En/na Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" ha escrit:
>>>Respect to quality of GM endings: I think we have very much to learn
>>>from them, and today mistakes are explained by fast time controls.
>>
>>
>>I certainly will agree with the second part. However, I also think
>>there is an overemphasis on opening preparation and an underemphasis on
>>the endgame today at all levels.
>
>
> Because, as I've said with the 1/x rule, the rating system favors the player
> who is stronger in the opening, simply because every chessgame has an
> opening. (...)
please, do not disturb!
we are discussing chess here.
|
| | | | |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 17:46:03
From: Ray Gordon, creator of the \pivot\
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
>>>I certainly will agree with the second part. However, I also think
>>>there is an overemphasis on opening preparation and an underemphasis on
>>>the endgame today at all levels.
>>
>>
>> Because, as I've said with the 1/x rule, the rating system favors the
>> player who is stronger in the opening, simply because every chessgame has
>> an opening. (...)
>
> please, do not disturb!
>
> we are discussing chess here.
So am I.
--
Money is not "game."
Looks are not "game."
Social status or value is not "game."
Those are the things that game makes unnecessary.
A seduction guru who teaches you that looks, money or status is game is not
teaching you "game," but how to be an AFC. He uses his students' money to
get women and laughs that "AFCs pay my rent."
|
| |
Date: 17 Nov 2006 14:04:09
From: SBD
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
> I think black have not played acurately that ending no matter the game
> is draw with 73...Kg6!!.
That view is totally different than mine. There were often 10 or more
drawing moves at each move throughout that game; I saw nothing wrong
with black's play other than that it wasn't the easiest way to secure
the draw - many roads to Rome and all that.
I also think that many games that are given up as "easy" or "obvious"
draws by players of middling strength are not so easy or obvious - in
fact they choose the draw in order not to have to engage in the play
required to win or draw.
Just my opinion, of course. One reason I don't follow too many current
GM games is the horrible endgame play one finds there - again, my
opinion.
|
| | |
Date: 18 Nov 2006 09:59:45
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
En/na SBD ha escrit:
> Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
>
>>I think black have not played acurately that ending no matter the game
>>is draw with 73...Kg6!!.
>
> That view is totally different than mine. There were often 10 or more
> drawing moves at each move throughout that game; I saw nothing wrong
> with black's play other than that it wasn't the easiest way to secure
> the draw - many roads to Rome and all that.
>
> I also think that many games that are given up as "easy" or "obvious"
> draws by players of middling strength are not so easy or obvious - in
> fact they choose the draw in order not to have to engage in the play
> required to win or draw.
>
> Just my opinion, of course. One reason I don't follow too many current
> GM games is the horrible endgame play one finds there - again, my
> opinion.
I have not seen that game with tablebases.
I fact I have not tablebases.
The first question I have about that game is:
- 59...f6 seems to hold the equality but maybe white can not progress in
that position and it's not necessary.
- 69...Re2 seems easier. White need to defend his e pawn with Re8 in
order to move his king, and in that case Ra1 or Ra2 would be acurate.
But with any move which does not prepare that idea, black can just wait
with Re2-e1.
Respect to quality of GM endings: I think we have very much to learn
from them, and today mistakes are explained by fast time controls.
Antonio
|
| | | |
Date: 20 Nov 2006 10:10:24
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected] > wrote:
> En/na SBD ha escrit:
>> Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
>>> I think black have not played acurately that ending no matter the
>>> game is draw with 73...Kg6!!.
>>
>> That view is totally different than mine. There were often 10 or
>> more drawing moves at each move throughout that game; I saw nothing
>> wrong with black's play other than that it wasn't the easiest way
>> to secure the draw - many roads to Rome and all that.
I think you're just using different definitions of `accurate'. I'd
say that Black's play is accurate up to 73... Ra7+? as every move
played allows Black to hold the draw. On the other hand, there were
easier ways to do it and it's always good to make it easier to hold
the draw because then you don't find yourself in a position like that
after White's 73rd move, where the `obvious' move turns out to be
losing.
> I have not seen that game with tablebases.
> I fact I have not tablebases.
http://www.lokasoft.com/tbweb.htm
You can enter a position in FEN and explore the tablebase. The page
will list all the legal moves and the results of each; you can click
on a move to go to the resulting position.
> Respect to quality of GM endings: I think we have very much to learn
> from them, and today mistakes are explained by fast time controls.
Yes. And the mistakes in modern GM endings are often very
instructive.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Generic Chair (TM): it's like a chair
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ but it's just like all the others!
|
| |
Date: 17 Nov 2006 07:47:48
From: SBD
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
-comments?-
Well, on move 73 you have to find Kg6 since all other moves lose - is
it really that easy that every player above 2000 would see it? The
check is something many players would make automatically, and young
players aren't always the best at endings.....
|
| | |
Date: 17 Nov 2006 21:28:28
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: basics endings
|
En/na SBD ha escrit:
> Antonio Torrecillas wrote:
>
> -comments?-
>
> Well, on move 73 you have to find Kg6 since all other moves lose - is
> it really that easy that every player above 2000 would see it? The
> check is something many players would make automatically, and young
> players aren't always the best at endings.....
The endgame after 42...Rxb4 seems an easy draw. I have seen players with
no interest in continue playing in similar positions agreeing draw.
I think black have not played acurately that ending no matter the game
is draw with 73...Kg6!!. I though it would be interesting to discuss
here what were safe aproaches to that ending.
The ending R+P vs R reached after 64th move is in many ending manuals.
The previous ending R+2P vs R+P is very know too.
Antonio
|
|
