One solid line 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.Qc2

Thanks :-)

I actually started a thread a few days ago (so don't want to also clutter this thread up), and came across the early Qc2 idea while doing so. I confess I hadn't seen it before and it looks reasonable.

Mostly I was joking with that post. People tend to post more when the barrier to entry seems lower (as with the 1.Nc3 -- which has some good discussion). I just need to learn how to make more engaging threads. Or ones that are less specific.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 c5 3.d5 b5 4.cxb5 a6 5.bxa6 e6 6.Nc3 exd5 7.Nxd5 Nxa6 8.e4 Bb7 9.Bc4 Nxd5 10.Bxd5 Bxd5 11.exd5 Bd6 12.Nf3 0-0 13.0-0 is +0.25 according to the free version of houdini

I need to get back in the habit of trying to get better players to work for me for free posting games for analysis

Thoughts on this one?

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=57681

Some key areas.

Improvements in the opening (besides "don't play QGD 2. e6")? I'm not really sure about 6. ... b6 or 9. ... Nbd7.

Would 18. ... Kh8 have been more accurate? I struggled with that move for quite a bit of clock.

In the early endgame, was handing him a protected passed pawn with 35. ... e5 okay? What about letting his king penetrate to g6? I felt like I was making a lot of concessions, but I was getting something in return for them and I didn't see any other ways to make progress.

Finally, in the end, starting about move 46 or so, my plan was to just let him promote his pawn while I moved my connected passers in tandem. Then, when he finally promoted, I could just take his pawn and let my advanced connected passed pawns+good king position defeat his rook. I'm 99.9% sure that was a winning plan even against perfect opposition moves, but was there a cleaner win (i.e. one that didn't involve saccing a rook)?

Heh, I was thinking about that with my last post, but then I realized that this business model (of freelance analysis of a position) must already exist.

Now, to justify that comment some random thoughts on the game:

7...dxc4 is sort of a choice; not really a rush, although I know that some White players (such as myself) play that line with Bxf6/cxd5. I think you should be concerned about White playing a quick e4-e5.

For similar reasons, Bb7 before Nbd7 seems more natural, but there are annoying ideas, like dxc5 and you can't play Bxc5 because of Ne4. I think you'll have to compromise the pawn structure on the kingside due to the threat of Ne4.

15...Bf6 instead?

I don't like the queen trade. After Ndb1/Qd2, you should be playing for keeps; he's never finishing that queenside development if you keep the pressure on. The knight is stuck.

...b5 to prevent c4 might have been good.

38...Rxc4 getting rid of one pair of rooks might be good, as you can just keep yours on c7 and White doesn't have much play. There's no reason to let him win those kingside pawns.

At the very end, that plan is lazy, but seems fine to me.

Thanks!

38. ... Rxc4 seems super obvious and makes things much easier later on. I don't know why I didn't even consider it that much, but I seem to recall being really serious on the much weaker bxc4.

I can't remember exactly why but you're supposed to play 6...h6 before b6 in that opening. It has to do with the fact that your h pawn will come under attack by a queen/bishop battery and you're spending time fianchettoing rather than bringing your other knight to the defense as in other QGDs so you might as well gain a tempo on the bishop and get that pawn out if the way now. If he captures on f6 you're not committed to b6.

There was another poster inquiring about the exchange variation so let me also take this opportunity to plug Sadler's Queen's Gambit Declined, one of the best instructional books on chess I've ever read most of.

15...f5!! wins. (one ! for punishing the pointless 15. Bg3??, another for the way White's position falls apart)

18...Qg5 was the only way to keep the pressure on: 18...Kh8 19. Nxd5 Bxd5 20. Qe3 followed by Nc3, and you can't prevent the d5 break.

17...Be7 renders the whole Bb4 (and Qf6) manoeuvre a bit pointless. You could have played 17...Bxc3 18. Nxc3 Nf4, keeping the b1-knight misplaced and preparing to activate your other knight. Or if you're going to retreat the bishop, 16...N7f6 was a better developing move than Qf6.

I would have played 24...Bf6 instead of Bxf4 - the f-pawn is weaker than the c-pawn so I'd rather win the latter, plus it weakens the d-pawn and leaves the g3-bishop as an overgrown pawn for the moment.

From the Wijk thread, but thought this would be of interest to a general audience -- happening end of April, according to Kramnik. Six game training match, of classical chess. Pretty nice stuff...

Anand-Gelfand in May has the title on the line, of course, but somehow one might expect better chess at Aronian-Kramnik based on recent performances.

You really aren't a fan of Gelfand, are you

I finally figured out who Topalov reminds me of...

Perfect picture. What movie?

Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

I want to believe...but yeah, I guess I'm not. Anand hasn't been too sharp either, recently, but Gelfand just fell apart. Hopefully he can raise the level of his game...at least enough to let Anand show his class.

I guess it was Carlsen (en route to insulting Nakamura) who said there were ~four players who were clearly a cut above in the current competitive environment, and it's nice to see a couple of them play a match.

(I should start playing Bf4 against the QGD so I can appreciate these games more though.)

There's no way to appreciate these dumb Bf4 games, this variation is a total turnoff for the QGD. 6. ...Nbd7 is cool unless white plays 7. c5, when black can draw with care but never do more than that and has to watch out for a lot of tricks underway to said draw. 6. ...c5 gives white the option of either a minuscule technical advantage again with no black winning chances or to go for some ridiculously crazy lines.

\rant, cliffnotes: don't play 5. Bf4.

You make a pretty convincing case to play 5.Bf4 as White there

yeah man i was thinking about doing that myself...

But i still hope that someone digs up an advantage against the Lasker so people return to Bg5 and i get the Tartakower more often

Going through an old copy of My 60 Memorable Games, I have to say that descriptive notation is kind of growing on me.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

epic

1.d4g62.c4Bg73.Nf3d64.Nc3Nf65.Bg5O-O6.e4h67.Bxf6exf68.Bd3Re89.O-ONd710.Nd5Nf811.b3c612.Nf4Nh713.Rc1Bg414.h3Bxf315. Qxf3Ng516.Qe2h517.h4Ne618.Nxe6fxe619.e5f520.Bb1Qxh 421.exd6Rad822.c5Bxd423.Rfd1e524.b4Qf625.a3h426.Ba 2+Kg727.Qf3g528.Bb1e429.Qh5Rh830.Qe2Be531.a4h332.g 3a633.b5axb534.axb5Bb235.Rc2Be536.Kh2f437.Qxe4fxg3 +38.fxg3Rhe839.Qg4cxb540.Kg1Rh841.Rh2Qh642.Re1Bf64 3.Ba2Qh544.Qb4g445.Qxb5Bd4+46.Kh1Qxc547.Qxb7+Kg648 .Qf7+Kg549.Qf4+


Sorry I do not have a chess engine.

I was playing this 15/10 increment game and got disconnected and timed out.

Is it possible that someone can give me an evaluation of position

at 44.Qb4 g4 move
and the final position is black already lost?

You need to have spacing in the move list, now neither the chessvideos.tv game replayer (which you should use to post games) nor chessbase can parse the score

1.d4 g6 2.c4 Bg7 3.Nf3 d6 4.Nc3 Nf6 5.Bg5 O-O 6.e4 h6 7.Bxf6 exf6 8.Bd3 Re8 9.O-O Nd7 10.Nd5 Nf8 11.b3 c6 12.Nf4 Nh7 13.Rc1 Bg4 14.h3 Bxf3 15.Qxf3 Ng5 16.Qe2 h5 17.h4 Ne6 18.Nxe6 fxe6 19.e5 f5 20.Bb1 Qxh4 21.exd6 Rad8 22.c5 Bxd4 23.Rfd1 e5 24.b4 Qf6 25.a3 h4 26.Ba2+ Kg7 27.Qf3 g5 28.Bb1 e4 29.Qh5 Rh8 30.Qe2 Be5 31.a4 h3 32.g3 a6 33.b5 axb5 34.axb5 Bb2 35.Rc2 Be5 36.Kh2 f4 37.Qxe4 fxg3 + 38.fxg3 Rhe8 39.Qg4 cxb5 40.Kg1 Rh8 41.Rh2 Qh6 42.Re1 Bf6 43.Ba2 Qh5 44.Qb4 g4 45.Qxb5 Bd4+ 46.Kh1 Qxc5 47.Qxb7+ Kg6 48 .Qf7+ Kg5 49.Qf4+

Is that better?

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=58379

here you go.

So can anyone give me an evaluation?
44.Qb4 g4

and the end game?

Or is this not the thread for it?