Page 1 of 1

would you castle in this position ...

Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:17 am
by pilgrimdan
1. e3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nd2 Nbd7 4. Be2 e5 5. c3 Bd6 6. Ngf3 e4 7. Ng1 c6 8. Nf1 Nb6 9. Ng3 O-O 10. Bh5 Nxh5 11. Nxh5 Qg5 12. Ng3 Bg4 13. N1e2 Nd7 14. Qc2 Nb6 15. b3 Qh4

[d]r4rk1/pp3ppp/1npb4/3p4/3Pp1bq/1PP1P1N1/P1Q1NPPP/R1B1K2R w KQ - 1 16

Re: would you castle in this position ...

Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 12:32 pm
by Ras
Depending on the level of play, this looks pretty lost for White already:
- not castled
- the queenside bishop not developed
- plus that it's a bad bishop
- the knights are passive
- blocked centre prevents a counter-attack in the centre
- nothing going on on the queenside
- black threatening f7-f5

IMO, White doesn't have counterplay and can only try to trade down. Castling kingside looks bad because that's where the black pieces are aiming, and I don't think White can get a queenside attack going fast enough.

An idea for the moment seems a2-a4, where Black can't do f7-f5 because after Bc1-a3, White could get rid of the bad bishop for Black's good one and take Black's pair of bishops. Plus that on a3, the bishop eyes f8 so that Black can't quickly open the f file.

Re: would you castle in this position ...

Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2018 1:41 pm
by pilgrimdan
okay ... thank you for your thoughts ...

Re: would you castle in this position ...

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:23 am
by peter
Hi Dan!
pilgrimdan wrote:1. e3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nd2 Nbd7 4. Be2 e5 5. c3 Bd6 6. Ngf3 e4 7. Ng1 c6 8. Nf1 Nb6 9. Ng3 O-O 10. Bh5 Nxh5 11. Nxh5 Qg5 12. Ng3 Bg4 13. N1e2 Nd7 14. Qc2 Nb6 15. b3 Qh4

[d]r4rk1/pp3ppp/1npb4/3p4/3Pp1bq/1PP1P1N1/P1Q1NPPP/R1B1K2R w KQ - 1 16
After some Forward- Backward of two lines, one from 16.0-0 (?) and one from 16.a4,
I get these outputs:

[d]r4rk1/pp3ppp/1npb4/3p4/3Pp1bq/1PP1P1N1/P1Q1NPPP/R1B2RK1 b - - 0 1
Analysis by asmFishW_2018-04-08_popcnt:
16...f5 17.f4 exf3 18.gxf3 Bh3 19.Rf2 g5 20.f4 gxf4 21.Nxf4 Kh8 22.Nxh3 Bxg3 23.Rf3 Bd6 24.Kh1 Rg8 25.Qe2 Nd7 26.Bd2 Nf6 27.Rg1 Rxg1+ 28.Nxg1 Rg8 29.Be1 Qe4 30.Nh3 Rg6 31.Nf2 Qh4 32.Nd3 Qg4 33.Qf1 Qe4 34.Qe2 Kg7 35.Nf2 Qh4 36.Nd3 Qg4 37.Qf1 Qe4 38.Nf4 Rh6 39.Kg1 Bxf4 40.exf4 Ng4 41.h3 Ne3 42.Qe2
-+ (-1.84) Depth: 45/77 00:39:14 61760MN

[d]r4rk1/pp3ppp/1npb4/3p4/P2Pp1bq/1PP1P1N1/2Q1NPPP/R1B1K2R b KQ - 0 1
Analysis by asmFishW_2018-04-08_popcnt:
16...Bc7 17.c4 Rac8 18.h3 Be6 19.cxd5 cxd5 20.Qd2 Nd7 21.Qb4 b6 22.Bd2 Nf6 23.Rc1 Nh5 24.Nxh5 Qxh5 25.Qe7 Rfe8 26.Nf4 Bxf4 27.Rxc8 Rxc8 28.exf4 Qg6 29.0-0 Bxh3 30.Qg5 Bf5 31.Rc1 Rxc1+ 32.Bxc1 f6 33.Qxg6 Bxg6 34.Kf1 Kf7 35.Ba3 Bh5 36.Ke1 Ke6 37.Kd2 Bg4 38.Bf8 g6 39.b4 h5 40.a5 h4 41.axb6 axb6 42.Ke3 Kf5 43.Bd6 Bd1 44.Bc7
=/+ (-0.67) Depth: 43/61 00:36:49 53882MN

Re: would you castle in this position ...

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 7:13 pm
by pilgrimdan
peter wrote:Hi Dan!
pilgrimdan wrote:1. e3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nd2 Nbd7 4. Be2 e5 5. c3 Bd6 6. Ngf3 e4 7. Ng1 c6 8. Nf1 Nb6 9. Ng3 O-O 10. Bh5 Nxh5 11. Nxh5 Qg5 12. Ng3 Bg4 13. N1e2 Nd7 14. Qc2 Nb6 15. b3 Qh4

[d]r4rk1/pp3ppp/1npb4/3p4/3Pp1bq/1PP1P1N1/P1Q1NPPP/R1B1K2R w KQ - 1 16
After some Forward- Backward of two lines, one from 16.0-0 (?) and one from 16.a4,
I get these outputs:

[d]r4rk1/pp3ppp/1npb4/3p4/3Pp1bq/1PP1P1N1/P1Q1NPPP/R1B2RK1 b - - 0 1
Analysis by asmFishW_2018-04-08_popcnt:
16...f5 17.f4 exf3 18.gxf3 Bh3 19.Rf2 g5 20.f4 gxf4 21.Nxf4 Kh8 22.Nxh3 Bxg3 23.Rf3 Bd6 24.Kh1 Rg8 25.Qe2 Nd7 26.Bd2 Nf6 27.Rg1 Rxg1+ 28.Nxg1 Rg8 29.Be1 Qe4 30.Nh3 Rg6 31.Nf2 Qh4 32.Nd3 Qg4 33.Qf1 Qe4 34.Qe2 Kg7 35.Nf2 Qh4 36.Nd3 Qg4 37.Qf1 Qe4 38.Nf4 Rh6 39.Kg1 Bxf4 40.exf4 Ng4 41.h3 Ne3 42.Qe2
-+ (-1.84) Depth: 45/77 00:39:14 61760MN

[d]r4rk1/pp3ppp/1npb4/3p4/P2Pp1bq/1PP1P1N1/2Q1NPPP/R1B1K2R b KQ - 0 1
Analysis by asmFishW_2018-04-08_popcnt:
16...Bc7 17.c4 Rac8 18.h3 Be6 19.cxd5 cxd5 20.Qd2 Nd7 21.Qb4 b6 22.Bd2 Nf6 23.Rc1 Nh5 24.Nxh5 Qxh5 25.Qe7 Rfe8 26.Nf4 Bxf4 27.Rxc8 Rxc8 28.exf4 Qg6 29.0-0 Bxh3 30.Qg5 Bf5 31.Rc1 Rxc1+ 32.Bxc1 f6 33.Qxg6 Bxg6 34.Kf1 Kf7 35.Ba3 Bh5 36.Ke1 Ke6 37.Kd2 Bg4 38.Bf8 g6 39.b4 h5 40.a5 h4 41.axb6 axb6 42.Ke3 Kf5 43.Bd6 Bd1 44.Bc7
=/+ (-0.67) Depth: 43/61 00:36:49 53882MN
thanks Peter ... appreciate the analysis ...