november 30 2010
The budgetary savings measures implemented over the last few years have led, among other things, to the disappearance of the DDE.
One of the consequences of this is that the Eure et Loir is currently stuck in the ice, imprisoning the Master Greffier and depriving the course of 30 November 2010 of one of its most precious resources.
As a result, some tips were brilliantly found by the quality audience, but the laborious discovery of some moves usually found in 10 seconds by Rémy delayed the moment of the repairing meal.
To begin with, a position which demonstrates, if it were still necessary, that the mastery of a final is certainly a matter of calculation (and thus of the power of analysis of the one who seeks it) but also (and especially) of the theoretical knowledge of the executor
W(3): Kg2, Ne3, Pg3. B(3): Kg5 Ra6, Pf5. White to play and draw.
I suspect that for most readers of this report (as well as for the author, of course), finding the solution is more or less a matter of chance.
It is quite different when one benefits from the master's introductory remarks, which I will give you (the remarks):
** The B's winning plan consists in penetrating with the K by e4 and/or e3.
** To defend themselves, the Ws must have Ng5+ in response to Ke4 BUT on this check, the Bs must not have the move Ke3.
** The only possible W-fortress is therefore Nh3 and Kf2 or Kf3 (if the K is on g2, the e3 square is free).
Obviously, when one starts to calculate a defence knowing these considerations, things are much simpler. One realizes that there is a defence plan that fails by one beat if the bR is on b6 or c6 but that there is a miraculous rescue with the R on a6.
To follow, a (old) position of J. Behting.
W(3): Kg5, Nf1, Bd5. B(5): Kc1, Rh1, Bg1, Pf2,h2. White to play and win.
A panorama, as every year, of the world solving championship, one of the worst results in history for the so-called "French team". Your fake master was absent, phew! But in any case, the excellent results of 2008 and 2009 masked the sad reality: there are no newcomers, France is, in this field, a dead country. No young solutionist, no young composer (yes, only one) on the horizon.
We have removed a silly (in our opinion) 2# and an undrinkable study. We have left the solutions of some positions, just in case...
I add a long, pretty but rather easy problem, as well as a helpmate from our national hero... also long, much more than it seems! Watch out for the trap!
A miraculous rescue discovered in the analysis of a game, about a book review that took me a while (see on the attachment the variant 7...Ra6?). I'll probably put it on the sinking forum I mentioned last month.
New with two pawns against one: impossible? It's not Dutch.
At the age of 20, I had been fascinated by a strange study of the Behting brothers (Johann and Carl) involving a long manoeuvre of King and Bishop against King (with Knight immobilised), which recalls the interminable process of winning in King + two Knights against King + pawn. I had copied the solution, promising myself to dissect it later. It seems that I had something else to do in the meantime. But it is never too late...
After the 12th move of our game of the day, starting with 1 d4, we are in the final game of a very long world championship, with a controversial outcome. But this one had started with 1 e4. And we were already on the 14th move. Weird. Did you say "weird"? And this game can also be dedicated to Bent Larsen in memoriam, since it contains the moves a4! and h4! Let us recall that a journalist had written in 1966 that the winner of the Le Havre tournament had played a4 and h4 (or ...a5 and ...h5 when he had Black) in all games! This was a gross exaggeration: he did so "only" in 8 out of 11 games.
See you, God willing, for the fairy course in a fortnight, on December 14.
Have a good time.
Typically, this position, which is accessible to a slightly experienced human, is completely out of reach of the electronic monster, and this will remain so for some time. This is understandable, because if the human is unable to find the best moves for sure, he can on the other hand imagine the winning plan and verify that it is unstoppable. As the notion of a plan has no meaning for the machine, imagining the win amounts to calculating the points leading to mate in a position that cannot be forced in less than 40 moves.
Finally, the teacher wanted to show the following study first, but he postponed it while waiting (in vain) for Adeline to come. He finally decided to show it to us, to everyone's great benefit.
W(3): Kh2, Pe4,g4. B(2): Kf2, Pf6. White to play and win.
Obviously, when you know that it wins, you are obliged to find it, the variants being easy to calculate anyway. But it is quite extraordinary that this position is winning!
To conclude, a game of monsters which is especially worthwhile (as is often the case) for the variants which really existed for both players and which were not played.
1:d4 d5; 2:c4 dc; 3:e3 e5; 4:Nf3 ed; 5:ed Nf6; 6:Bc4 Be7; 7:O-O O-O; 8:h3 Nc6; 9:Nc3. Let us note (and for you, dear reader, I add "Ha, but read!") that in the last game of the 1984 World Championship the players obtained this position with the same line, but in 11 moves and starting with e4.
9:..Na5 10:Bd3 Be6; 11:Re1 Nc6; 12:a3 Qd6 (Karpov played a6; Bf4 Qd7) 13:Be3 Nd5; 14:Qc2 Kh8.
Here we come to an essential fork in the road. W's can obtain a position B against N after 14:Ne4 Qd7; 16:Ne-g5 Bg5; 17:Ng5 h6; 18:Ne6 fe. What is this position worth? The Master likes Black N, and it must be assumed that the player leading the W's did not believe too much in a W advantage because he preferred a pawn-giving suite.
What is this pawn sacrifice worth? As we shall see, it is to W's advantage but calculating it on the chessboard is almost impossible. 15:..Nxc3; 16:bxc (otherwise, the fight for square d5 is abandoned) Qxa3 17:Bxh7! (17:Rb1 Qd6! returning the P, 18:Rxb7 Rb8 and N's defend themselves). 17:..Bb3 !? (note the trap 17:...g6?! 18:Bxg6? Bb3! 19:Qf5 fxg6! to B's advantage but W could play better by 18:d5! Bf5 19:Qd2 Na5 20:Bc5! followed by Qh6 and win) 18:Qf5 (who said that Qf5 ended the game ?) g6; 19:Qf4! Kxh7 20:Qh6+ Kg8 21:Bg5! Bxd1! (it's moving !) 22:Rxe7! Qd6! 23:Rd7!! (23:Qh4? Bxf3; 24:Bf6 Bh5 B win) 23:..Qe6 24:d5 Qf5 25:Nh4 Qe5 26:dxc6 Bc2 (26:..Qg7 defends better, but loses d1) 27:Nf3 Qxc3 28:Rd4! and win.
15:..f5; 16:Bc1 Rad8; 17:Re2 Bf6; 18:Rde1 Bc8 (18:..Bg8? 19:Nb5!) 19:Bc4! Nxc3 (19:..Nb6? 20:Nb5 Qd7; 21:Be6) 20:bc h6; 21:a4 b6; 22:h4 Na5; 23:Ba2 c5; 24:Ng5 Ba6?!
A fairly logical move, assuming that W's can only put one piece at a time on e6 and that after Re6 the B no longer controls the f7 square.
Now W's win by playing an apparently forbidden variation.
25:Re6 Qd7; 26:Qxf5! (even so) Bxg5 27:Qg6!
with the terrible threat 28:Bb1 Kg8 29:Qh7 Kf7 and 30:Bg6 checkmate
27:..Qf7 28:Qxf7 Rxf7; 29:hxg5 cxd4; 30:cxd4 Bc4; 31:Re8+ resigns 20 moves later.
Let us note finally, for the tactical training, a continuation given by the computer showing its superiority on the human continuations in certain positions:
30:...hxg5 31:Bxg5 Rdf8 32:Be7 Rc8; 33:Bb1 Bc4; (here, we immediately think of Re5) 34:d5! Bxd5; 35:Re5 (how clever) Bb7 36:Rh5 Kg8 37:Bh7 Kh8 38:Ba3 (such a position can't be simplified to the simple price of a quality!) Rd8: 39: and here, which move wins a R?
39:Re7! Rxe7 (try to find another move) 40:Bxe7 wins at least one R. What a fritz!
Good night, and good reading.
Game of the day: the order of moves was 4 Bxc4 exd4 5 exd4 Nf6 6 Nf3, which is the current order. The move 4 Nf3 was played by Stahlberg... and Larsen, mentioned during the lecture. No doubt a delicate attention of the Acting Master Greffier, paying homage to this great player who has just passed away.
Let us add that 24...Qc7 was nevertheless a better defence. And that the move played in the analysis of 30...hxg5 is 35 R6e5!
Add a comment