michiguel wrote:
I did not use any engine in any of my comments. They are useless to make up plans in these endgames, which is the only way to analyze them.
I was trying to give you guys a human perspective about how to play this, so I do not understand the sarcasm. Next time I will keep the comments to myself.
Miguel
Don't do that Miguel, just do what I do and ignore the unhelpful comments. I also enjoy trying to see if I can see what is going on without resorting to the engine output, but most of the time, I don't have a clue. lol
sorry... I overreacted...
Miguel
Understandable though, you're a good player and we want good players to post!
What I'd like to know is what happened to Anand today? I'm truly vexed.
22. f4?! wasn't what I'd expect from Anand and then even though he had a few venues to draw he gets into horrific time trouble and then blitz plays into a loss??
muxecoid wrote:Shouldn't it be a draw with opposite squared bishops?
I don't know why Anand resigned. Yes, he made the position worse with Bc6, but I (and Rybka) don't see the path to victory for white.
For instance,
Kh6 -> Bg7 -> g6 then hxg6 Kxg6 -> Kf6 -> Bh6 -> Ke7
As I said many moves ago. With the scheme K defending h7 and B defending d7, taking the pawn to g6 wins. I do not understand why Anand allowed this so easily.
Miguel
Maybe you should be playing Topalov then, but remember you'd have to leave your engine at home
I did not use any engine in any of my comments. They are useless to make up plans in these endgames, which is the only way to analyze them.
I was trying to give you guys a human perspective about how to play this, so I do not understand the sarcasm. Next time I will keep the comments to myself.
Miguel
I agree, they are useless when it comes to planning, which is the roadmap that most humans go by.
I personaly ripped off a lot of +2400 Elo engines by forcing them to reach and endgame of my taste....I have dozens of such games....
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
Hood wrote:Black position was theoreticaly defencable but practicaly lost.
Topalov task were much easier then Anand, so the result is quite usual for
pratical play. They are humans not robots.
With Bd3 instead of Bc6, it does not seem a hard draw. I think Anand relaxed and thought that anything would draw, the Bg7 and g6 plan by Topalov is a nice one. Anand probably underestimated that.
shiv wrote:
With Bd3 instead of Bc6, it does not seem a hard draw. I think Anand relaxed and thought that anything would draw, the Bg7 and g6 plan by Topalov is a nice one. Anand probably underestimated that.
Hi!
I too think 54...Bc6 was a mistake. Any move keeping Black's bishop capable of supporting the h-pawn would have made it much more difficult, if not impossible for White to break through.
That's the position before Black's move 54:
8/1p3k1p/p2Pp3/Pb2B1K1/8/5P2/1P4P1/8 b - - 0 54
After 54...Bc4 or Bd3 or Be2, even after Bf1, Ba4 or Ke8 I don't see the white win so soon if at all.
muxecoid wrote:Shouldn't it be a draw with opposite squared bishops?
I don't know why Anand resigned. Yes, he made the position worse with Bc6, but I (and Rybka) don't see the path to victory for white.
For instance,
Kh6 -> Bg7 -> g6 then hxg6 Kxg6 -> Kf6 -> Bh6 -> Ke7
As I said many moves ago. With the scheme K defending h7 and B defending d7, taking the pawn to g6 wins. I do not understand why Anand allowed this so easily.
Miguel
Maybe you should be playing Topalov then, but remember you'd have to leave your engine at home
I did not use any engine in any of my comments. They are useless to make up plans in these endgames, which is the only way to analyze them.
I was trying to give you guys a human perspective about how to play this, so I do not understand the sarcasm. Next time I will keep the comments to myself.
Miguel
Perhaps you were, however, so many people berate the top players because they are slinging the analysis of the top engines. It often begs the question, capiche?
That being said, I was not being sarcastic, from what you said you saw the position more clearly than Anand, I was only teasing that maybe your strong engine was guiding your analysis. No offense was meant, and frankly I liked your analysis, it was close to mine.
Although, I was shocked to see Anand resign, I had to move some pieces around to see the win. Without bg7 removing the mobility of the black king, the win was FAR less clear. If you saw this FAST, then you are a far stronger player than most. A good friend and a FM was also shocked for a few minutes, but we were drinking scotch, its to be expected.
affirms our assumption.
Here ist the comment there to 54...Bc6??
"This move loses instantly as White can now play the 'Harikrishna plan' which Anand had managed to avoid until now. At the press conference Anand said 'Kg8 was a blunder' but he probably had his bishop on a different square in his mind. 54... Ke8 55. f4 Kd7 56. g4 Bd3 57. f5 exf5 58. gxf5 h6+! is the important pointe Anand must have missed; after 59. Kg6 Bc2 Black can just sit and wait."
muxecoid wrote:Shouldn't it be a draw with opposite squared bishops?
I don't know why Anand resigned. Yes, he made the position worse with Bc6, but I (and Rybka) don't see the path to victory for white.
For instance,
Kh6 -> Bg7 -> g6 then hxg6 Kxg6 -> Kf6 -> Bh6 -> Ke7
As I said many moves ago. With the scheme K defending h7 and B defending d7, taking the pawn to g6 wins. I do not understand why Anand allowed this so easily.
Miguel
Maybe you should be playing Topalov then, but remember you'd have to leave your engine at home
I did not use any engine in any of my comments. They are useless to make up plans in these endgames, which is the only way to analyze them.
I was trying to give you guys a human perspective about how to play this, so I do not understand the sarcasm. Next time I will keep the comments to myself.
Miguel
Perhaps you were, however, so many people berate the top players because they are slinging the analysis of the top engines. It often begs the question, capiche?
That being said, I was not being sarcastic, from what you said you saw the position more clearly than Anand, I was only teasing that maybe your strong engine was guiding your analysis. No offense was meant, and frankly I liked your analysis, it was close to mine.
Although, I was shocked to see Anand resign, I had to move some pieces around to see the win. Without bg7 removing the mobility of the black king, the win was FAR less clear. If you saw this FAST, then you are a far stronger player than most. A good friend and a FM was also shocked for a few minutes, but we were drinking scotch, its to be expected.
I have an FM title for what is worth but that is completely pointless. History has shown that analysis by any people could question moves by GMs. Besides, the losing position I saw it long time before when I said that Anand should have played Bd3 many moves ago. http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... =&start=62
Anand should have kept the B in a4 or b5 to have always the alternative to switch it to defend the h7. I cannot understand how Anand did not see this.
Coming back to engines, they are pretty much clueless for this type endgames, if you want to find the truth. They won't make blunders, but that is not interesting. Solutions need deep planning, previous knowledge regarding certain patterns, and some sort of retrograde analysis. Engines do not analyze that way.
