Masochist! :-j

Your last: 21. ... / h7-h6
My move 22.f2-f4

if your move 22. .../ Qe5-d6
then my move 23. Qd3-a3

if your move 23. .../ Qd6xa3
then my move 24. Nd5xf6+

.....if your move 24. .../ Kg8-h8
.....then my move 25. b2xa3

..........if your move 24. .../ Kg8-g7
..........then my move 25. Nf6-h5+

..........if your move 25. .../ Kg7-g8
..........then my move 26. a2xb3

You moved: 22.f2-f4
My move: 22... Qe5-d6
Your move: 23. Qd3-a3
My move: resigns 1-0

*handshake*

I wouldn't mind doing some analysis of this before another game (assuming you're up for another game ;)). We can let Hiarcs or Fruit pick it apart as well. For the rematch what are your thoughts on database/opening book usage? Since this is a similar format to email/correspondence chess where both are permitted I favour allowing them in our rematch (with same prohibition on computer analysis/assistance).

***Shake Hands***

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/4082/pos17lj.jpg

I thought we six chessies currently playing had consensus on the use of literature and database, as lined out in that old thread that started it all. I played without the database Fritz is coming with (Fritz 8, it has a minimized database of 500.000, not those 3.5 million giants the regular chessbase has nowadays), and of course I played without the engine (needs to be switched off each time I open Fritz). My Hiarcs verison currently is the old 7.32, which also was not used, and beyond that I have several free engines that I never use (Crafty, Comet, etc.) and the old versions of Junior (6) and Nimzo (7), all not used. I plan to get Hiarcs 10. Have seen some matches of it, impressive.

You have Fruit, have I got that right? Then maybe you do an analysis with Fruit which has it's own user interface, and I do Fritz and/or Hiarcs, for I only use the chessbase interface. We could post both protocols.

I played this match according to how I would have played a regular correspondence chess match. Here, database and literature is allowed, even computer assistance would be allowed (but I would still prefer if computer assistance is left out. We could think on a so-called "triple-brain-match", of course, where both opponents also can use various engines - man still has to make the decision which recommended move to follow).

Your Fruit versus my (to be got) Hiarcs 10 maybe also is an interesting duel.

I used my opening literature in this match as well. Berlin Sportverlag (former GDR) had an excellent lineup of chess literature, Russian school, amongst which was a "Modern Encyclopedia of chess Openings" in 24 volumes, of which I own those 13 that I used to play. The one that contains Queens Gambit and Katalan System was written by Taimanov, other major authors were Boleslawski, Suetin, and Bolugajewski. I have lost a good part of my former books during moving from city to city, but the standard work on endgames by Cheron (4 manuals) and a basic work by Kotow and Koblenz on Tactics (2) and Strategy (2) is still there. Not that I remember much of it :)

Interesting match it was, btw.

I haven't yet gotten around to reinstalling Chessbase and I don't have any engines installed (unless Winboard still includes Gnu Chess although that's not particularly useful for analysis being one of the more primitive programs) at the moment. I thought you'd either had or were planning to get Fruit which was why I'd suggested it. In either case Hiarcs or Fritz or Fruit would all be suitable for post-mortem dissection since I know at least Fritz can generate annotations and I'd imagine the same is true of Hiarcs and Fruit.

A "Cyborg" match (engine vs engine with human oversight) might be amusing to try at some point in the future. For now though my preference is to allow database and opening books but prohibit chess engine use. I know by correspondence rules engine use is allowed though I don't understand their reasoning behind it. Database and opening books I can see, and am a supporter of, since it affords a chance to learn an opening (better) by trying it out against a live opponent while being able to consult the theory on it at the same time. *shrug*

a. It cannot be controlled.
b. In higher playing classes corr. chess is played on a skill level that is beyond that of chess software. The latter is considered to be a helpful tool only, probably.

I played four corr. chess tournaments myself when still at school, and short after having finished it. Back then, the German league had a four-division structure, 2nd, 1st, major and master class. You had to qualify to get access to the next higher playing class. To be honest, I played four tournaments, in 1st, major and two in master class and won all four (although one probably because my biggest rival had to retreat due to sickness). Corr. chess was my thing. Sitting at a board and doing regular chess, I play much weaker, because I tend to oversee too many things then. when having the time to sort these blunders out, spending hours with breeding and come back and leave to it as I want, and manipulate the board like I am not allowed in board chess, I play much better.

But that is probabaly true for most players. I for myself never missed having given up club playing. Never was a club animal myself, anyway. :)

Those were the days, wearing pitchblack blow-trousers and snow-white air-jackets, with only Matt Bianco and martial arts on my mind :lol:

I've never been much into club play either, though this is due more to convenience and often a shortage of oppenents to play locally. Online I can play anytime, any time control and against a diverse group of opponents. The rules for online play are the same as for OTB however, though based on an honour system that the majority of players seem to respect. For me correspondence style chess is more of a supplement than the main course.

By the way I'm still awaiting your unleashing of the beasts to pick our game apart :D.

This is it, from my perspective.


For easier reading:
http://people.freenet.de/Skybird/Skybird-Scandium.doc


(506449) Skybird - Scandium [E01]
Subsim.com, 22.03.2006
[Fritz 8 (30s)]
E01: Katalanisch 1.c2-c4 Ng8-f6 2.g2-g3 e7-e6 3.d2-d4 c7-c5 4.Ng1–f3 I wanted to avoid Nimzo-Indian (or any Indian system) and Modern Ben-Oni, this explains the way I played the opening. 4...c5xd4 5.Nf3xd4 d7-d5 This move decided that it should be Katalan system, and that it does not shift back into an English variation again. 6.Bf1–g2 e6-e5 7.Nd4-f3 The major answer. Alternatives are Nb3 (leaves the diagonal for Bg2 open, but the passivity of White in the center is more decisive: the variation is considered better for black), Nc2 (bad position for attacking d4, black gets decisive initiative and centre activity), and Nb5 which I also considered to surprise you - this move is rare. All evaluations according to Taimanov) 7...d5-d4 8.0–0 Nb8-c6 9.e2-e3 Bf8-e7 Not an obvious mistake, but I think it is too passive and was the beginning of a series of weaker moves by Black. theory says Bc5 is the better (more aggressive) option, next 10. ed4:/ed4:, and then the best answer Nbd2 which is the most conseqeunt, weaker alternatives are Re1+ and Nb3. After Bc5 the variation would have led to sharper play and equal chances for both sides. 10.e3xd4 e5xd4 11.Bc1–f4 Diagramm

The end of the theory as Fritz does now it. 11...Bc8-g4!? A mistake that gave white decisive initiative and opened the firing lines for him. The consequence recommended itself, but I also considered h3 and Re1. h3 creates a long-lasting-weakness with the black Queen and bishop still in play maybe trying to exploit it, Re1 looks good and classical, but does not really push forward white's initiative. Qd3: I did not really like Nb4. 12.Qd1–b3 Fritz ranks h3 and Qd3 slightly higher after 2 minutes of analysis. All three moves are within 0.2 centipawns. 12...Bg4xf3 Collaborates with White's intentions to maximize the pressure of his bishops.Fritz rates this move as +0.56 for White. 13.Bg2xf3 Fritz: +0.56 13...Qd8-d7 14.Rf1–d1

Fritz gives Re1 and Nd2 as alternatives. I considered Re1, but never liked Nd2 and kicked it very early. the position here I liked very much, all developed figures are covered and are giving mutual support, while aggressively pushing the initiave and eroding d4, indirectly. 14...0–0 Ng4 +0.53; Rd8 +0.59, Rc8 +0.78, O-O +0.84 15.Nb1–c3 Taking benefits from a fine-spun web :) I also considered a3 and a4, but I feel that I would loose a tempo while gaining nothing substantial for it. 15...Ra8-c8 16.Ra1–c1 I also thought about Nd5, Nd5:, Bd5: 16...g7-g5 A true miscalculation. This sacrifice achieves nothing.Re8, Ng4, Bd8 are better alternatives of equal value of +0.69. [16...Rf8-e8!?±] 17.Bf4xg5+- Qd7-f5 18.Bg5xf6 Nc6-a5 Before this move, Fritz rates the position as +1.5 for white, after this move it jumps to +2.5 [¹18...Be7xf6 19.Bf3-e4 Qf5-g4+-] 19.Nc3-d5 Qb5 and Qc2 also on my mind. I was very close to moving Qb5. 19...Be7xf6 20.Qb3-d3

20...Qf5-e5 21.Bf3-e4 Re1 also on my mind. Fritz also lists Bg2 as an alternative: but while it looses nothing, it also does not achieve anything. 21...h7-h6? I assume the reply f4 has simply been overseen by Black. [21...Rf8-e8+-] 22.f2-f4 Qe5-d6 23.Qd3-a3 [23.Qd3-a3 Qd6xa3 24.Nd5xf6+ (24.b2xa3?! Kg8-g7+-) 24...Kg8-h8 25.b2xa3+-; 23.Nd5xf6+?! Qd6xf6 24.Qd3xd4 Qf6xd4+ 25.Rd1xd4 Rf8-d8+-] 1–0

Perspective from Black:

1.c2-c4 Ng8-f6 2.g2-g3 e7-e6 flexible move order that often allow transposition into Benoni or Nimzo-Indian systems depending on White's intention.

3.d2-d4 c7-c5 White's 3rd move is anti-Nimzo while 3.Nc3 would have invited it. Possible after his 3rd move was 3... Bb4+ (Bogo-Indian) but I'm not a fan of the quiet positional game that usually arises. 3... c7-c5 tries instead then to move into a Benoni.

4. 4.Ng1–f3 5.Nf3xd4 With his 4th move White indicates no taste for a Benoni game as 4. d4-d5 would have led the game in that direction. So black already denied his pet systems simply eats the pawn and moves from his own specific knowledge and into the realm of general opening principles. In this vein the d4 pawn, being a central pawn, is worth more to him than his flank c5 pawn which only limits the scope of his dark square Bishop.

5.Nf3xd4 d7-d5 a grab at the center

6. 6.Bf1–g2 e6-e5 continuing in the same vein, this time with tempo as it kicks the N off d4

7.Nd4-f3 7...d5-d4 continues the same theme. Nxe5 is not possible due to Qa5+.

8.0–0 Nb8-c6 Now e5 needs protection.

9.e2-e3 Bf8-e7 After 10. exd4 exd4 the e-file is open to black's K so this move is played to temporarily close it and allow castling. It is too passive though and not consistent with the previous more aggressive play.

10. 10. e3xd4 e5xd4 11.Bc1–f4 Bc8-g4 a pretend pin that's easily broken by Qb3 or Qa5, both of which were expected. The intention was, through the ensuing exchange of Bxf3, to deprive white of one of his attackers of d4 and thereby strengthen its defence indirectly. Howerver it has the drawback of also greatly increasing the white light square B's power along the long diagonal and along the critical points d5, c3, and b2 all of which are now weakened by the exchange of black's own light square B. The extent this trade of his B and the consequent strengthening of black's threats/hold on those squares can be seen throughout the rest of the game.

12.Qd1–b3 Bg4xf3 13.Bg2xf3 Qd8-d7 the only move.

14.Rf1–d1 0–0 The tide is already turning. While white is playing active and developing with threats, black is forced to develop his forces more defensively.

15.Nb1–c3 Ra8-c8 This was the only quasi-active move I could come up with at this point intending to try and take advantage, if possible, of the white Q's position to play Na5. It wasn't a good plan but the move itself was non-commital and not inherently bad. I was also beginning to realize by this point just how strong the squares b5 and d5 had become for white and how much power the N anchored on either by the c5 pawn and the Bf3 would exert. However there was no way to prevent it. This is the impact of the earlier Bg4 continuing to be felt most negatively for black.

16. Ra1–c1 g7-g5? White's superior position, his targets on c3 and b2 and consequent tying down of black's forces along with his ability to play Nb5/Ne5 at any moment to cement his position leads to this bad sacrifice. I was not worried about the weakening of my K position when I made the move, but I was very worried about White's Bishop pair pointing menancingly at my Queen side pawns as well as his Queen side majority. I had thought the game would be decided decisively on that side of the board if I didn't attempt to seize the initiative. This was the wrong way to do it as now when the N comes to e5 its even stronger due to the fatal weakening of f6.

7.Bf4xg5 Qd7-f5 18.Bg5xf6 Nc6-a5? another bad move but one I'd been fixated on. I overlooked the inbetween move Ne5 which immediately mates if Nxb3??. Black must now lose material and any more thoughts of regaining the initiative.

19.Nc3-d5 19...Be7xf6 20.Qb3-d3 Qf5-e5 21.Bf3-e4 21...h7-h6?? Unnoticed by black is that this allows f2-f4 and the combination that follows which results in a doubleattack on his two hanging minor pieces, only one of which can be saved. This is the culmination of the N's unopposed strength on e5 due to the earlier exchange of B for N on f3, the fatal weakening of f6 after g7-g5, and lastly the weak Na5 which accomplished nothing other than turning initiative irrevocably over to white and hanging the piece on a square where black's over-worked Q could not later defend it.

22.f2-f4 Qe5-d6 23.Qd3-a3 1-0

I have run a re-analysis with Hiarcs 7, which is several years older than Fritz 8. Interestingly, in the last third of the match he rated the position roughly 1.0 centipawns more to the advantage of White. This seem to reflect the traditional strength of the Hiarcs programs in the field of chess knowledge and positional understanding. The evaluations of Fritz seemed to be based more on a purely material level, giving longtermed strategic perspectives less attention.

Doing a new match now? Your turn to get it started.

Yeah I'll start the new thread now.