CHESS 2008: Clive Bradbury vs. Skybird

[Skybird]

yours 12. Nc3-b5
mine 12.../d4xe3

Oh-oh. It seems Mr. Martin was wrong.

[clive bradbury]

12...e4xd3

13. Rd1xd8

[Skybird]

yours 13. Rd1xd8
mine 13.../e3xf2+

[clive bradbury]

One more - then bed for me.

13...e3xf2+

14. Ke1-f1

[Skybird]

yours 14. Ke1-f1
mine 14.../f2xg1Q+

if your move 15. Th1xg1
then my move 15.../Tf8xd8

[clive bradbury]

I resign, obviously. Well played, Skybird - you have reminded me why I only play blitz nowadays - and why I was always bad at postal compared to over the board! Played this game without really analysing anything, and boy, did it show! Let's hope I can put up more of a fight in our other game...

[Skybird]

Shake hands! Well, for me it is exactly the other way around like what you said about yourself - I suck at table chess these days, I paused for too long and can't keep all tho0se things in memory anymore without making notes, and do analysis on two boards. Correspondence chess is my thing. However, judging from this match and taking into account what you said you probably would beat me in the majority of matches if we were sitting at a table and play regular live chess. I'm much weaker at that.

[Skybird]

P.S. How did you came to that system in the Caro-Kann? You completeley surprised me, I never had heared of it, and since my chess literature is old (I only had a book by Taimanov, published in 1983, about Caro-Kann) it even is not mentioned. I did not had many matches in my small version of chessbase that comes as part of Hiarcs' opening database, four matches only who did not match the variation I tried to escape, and then I searched the internet, all comments I read said that this opening kills Caro Kann for Black, that's why I got a bit nervous at first, and then found this:

http://www.chessville.com/instructio...tin/Jun04b.htm

as you see, after

1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6 5.c5 e5!? 6.Nc3! exd4 7.Qxd4

he wrote

"I guess he could play 7...Be7 first, get castled and only then go ...Nc6. I suggest 8.Be3 0-0 9.Rd1 Nc6 10.Qa4 Re8 (10...Be6 11.Nf3) 11.Be2 against this procedure. Obviously the position is unclear but White has a queenside pawn majority and an attack on the d5 pawn. Unless Black can do something very fast (unlikely) the deficiencies in his position will surely start to tell."

My idea was to use d4 after that sequence "to do something very fast", but then realised that he seems to have overseen that d4 can be played immediately in 10. move, without Re8 (that explains my comments in 10th and 12th move). 10. .../d4 did the trick for me, it seems.

[clive bradbury]

A quick look shows (I think) that your early d4 was a serious mistake which I simply missed. The immediate Bxd4 for me leads to a combination which wins at least a pawn and gets my Q-side majority rolling, so serves me right for missing my chance!

The opening was developed by Gunderam, and has very little analysis available, especially in older books, which is one reason I like it.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by clive bradbury

A quick look shows (I think) that your early d4 was a serious mistake which I simply missed. The immediate Bxd4 for me leads to a combination which wins at least a pawn and gets my Q-side majority rolling,

Does it? I took the easy way now and let the machine calculating it, but it is pretty much what I figured out as well:

11. Bxd4 Nxd4 12. Rxd4 Qc7 13. b4 Bd7 14. Qd1 a5



It rates it as 2.24 pawns in favour of Black.

For example (machine analysis)


15. a3 axb4 16. axb4 b6 17. Ne4 Nxe4 18. Rxe4 Rfd8 (-2.49/13)



or
15. Rxd7 Nxd7 16. Nd5 Qe5+ 17. Be2 axb4 18. Nf3 Qe4 19. O-O Nxc5 20. Re1 Rfd8 21. Nxe7+ (-2.76/8)



or
15. Nd5 Nxd5 16. Rxd5 Bc6 17. Rd2 (-2.77/8)



or
15. Qd2 axb4 16. Rxb4 Bxc5 17. Rb2 Bc6 18. Qg5 Rae8+ (-2.80/9)



or
15. Qc2 axb4 16. Ne4 Nxe4 17. Rxe4 Be6 18. Rxe6 fxe6 19. Bd3 Qe5+ (-3.08/10)


You said you have chessmaster 6000. Try it and give his analysis here. I would be interested how it sees it. My software used for the analysis justn above has been hiarcs 10. I could also do it with Fritz 8, if you are interested. It is less competent in positional evaluation, but sometimes more aggressive in tactics, at least sometimes. all in all, Hiarcs is the better engine.

Would be interested in Hiarcs 12 and Rybka 3.