GAME 45
Shortly after the opening moves, the Stockfish queen was chased from one side of the board to the other, while Komodo Dragon's central pawn mass began to march forwards.
Once black had sacrificed a pawn to block up the queenside, Stockfish decided that it was best to force a perpetual check.
Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
Moderator: Ras
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
GAME 46
In contrast to Stockfish having allowed the capture of the rook on h1, Komodo Dragon chose to play the rook to g1.
The position after 20...Re4 looks ominous for white, with its king stuck in the centre, much delayed development, that enemy pawn on e3, and the black army looking ready to pounce. All that, and Komodo Dragon is actually two pieces up!
However, the queens came off, the e3 pawn was gobbled up, and some sense of normality appeared.
It was interesting that Stockfish then gave up the exchange, but we entered an endgame in which rook, bishop and one pawn, were up against rook and five pawns.
The black pawns were not easy to coordinate though, and Stockfish eventually gave some up to get into a drawn position
In contrast to Stockfish having allowed the capture of the rook on h1, Komodo Dragon chose to play the rook to g1.
The position after 20...Re4 looks ominous for white, with its king stuck in the centre, much delayed development, that enemy pawn on e3, and the black army looking ready to pounce. All that, and Komodo Dragon is actually two pieces up!
However, the queens came off, the e3 pawn was gobbled up, and some sense of normality appeared.
It was interesting that Stockfish then gave up the exchange, but we entered an endgame in which rook, bishop and one pawn, were up against rook and five pawns.
The black pawns were not easy to coordinate though, and Stockfish eventually gave some up to get into a drawn position
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
Bishops Opening - Urusov Gambit
1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d4 *
The Urusov Gambit is an aggressive line in the Bishop’s opening that starts with the moves: 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d4 Instead of playing the normal Nc3 or Nf3, white looks to add pressure to the center of the board with d4 and open up more lanes for white’s remaining pieces to get involved into the attack. Black has two responses. Black taking on e4 with his knight is definitely a worse move. White can play dxe5 and then start to attack the knight on e4. The main line for black is to take exd4. White continues with Nf3 with many strong attacking lines. While this gambit isn’t as possible as the King’s Gambit or the Queen’s Gambit I do think this offers many great attacking lines for white and if black is not careful can find themselves in some tricky situations. As the case with most Bishop openings, black always has to fear the bishop taking on f7 forcing the king to recapture and lose the ability to castle.
1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d4 *
The Urusov Gambit is an aggressive line in the Bishop’s opening that starts with the moves: 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d4 Instead of playing the normal Nc3 or Nf3, white looks to add pressure to the center of the board with d4 and open up more lanes for white’s remaining pieces to get involved into the attack. Black has two responses. Black taking on e4 with his knight is definitely a worse move. White can play dxe5 and then start to attack the knight on e4. The main line for black is to take exd4. White continues with Nf3 with many strong attacking lines. While this gambit isn’t as possible as the King’s Gambit or the Queen’s Gambit I do think this offers many great attacking lines for white and if black is not careful can find themselves in some tricky situations. As the case with most Bishop openings, black always has to fear the bishop taking on f7 forcing the king to recapture and lose the ability to castle.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
GAME 47
As black, Komodo Dragon returned the gambit pawn, so that it could complete development with a solid position.
After each side had re-arranged its pieces, black seemed to be the aggressor, but it was just illusory.
All of the rooks were exchanged, leaving an ending where each side had queen, two minors and five pawns (on symmetrical files).
Then the minor pieces quickly came off as well, leaving a queen and pawn ending.
As Stockfish's passed a-pawn looked to be a potential threat, Komodo Dragon quite happily settled for the threefold repetition that was on offer.
As black, Komodo Dragon returned the gambit pawn, so that it could complete development with a solid position.
After each side had re-arranged its pieces, black seemed to be the aggressor, but it was just illusory.
All of the rooks were exchanged, leaving an ending where each side had queen, two minors and five pawns (on symmetrical files).
Then the minor pieces quickly came off as well, leaving a queen and pawn ending.
As Stockfish's passed a-pawn looked to be a potential threat, Komodo Dragon quite happily settled for the threefold repetition that was on offer.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
GAME 48
Komodo Dragon was first to vary in the return game, with 5. Bd2.
Almost from nowhere came some brief fireworks, after white had played 9. Ng5, but once the smoke had cleared, we were into an early endgame with equal material by move 19, with rook, knight and six pawns, against rook, bishop and six pawns.
Stockfish eventually tried to construct a mating net around the advanced white king, but a clever resource in 66. Nd5+ forced a trade off into a drawn position.
Komodo Dragon was first to vary in the return game, with 5. Bd2.
Almost from nowhere came some brief fireworks, after white had played 9. Ng5, but once the smoke had cleared, we were into an early endgame with equal material by move 19, with rook, knight and six pawns, against rook, bishop and six pawns.
Stockfish eventually tried to construct a mating net around the advanced white king, but a clever resource in 66. Nd5+ forced a trade off into a drawn position.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
Blackmar-Diemer Gambit
1. d4 d5 2. e4 *
While rarely seen in professional chess, this aggressive pawn sacrifice remains popular with amateur players of all levels up to Master. In the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, white sacrifices a pawn in an attempt to accelerate the development of their pieces.
The Blackmar–Diemer Gambit arose as a development of the earlier Blackmar Gambit, named after Armand Blackmar, a relatively little-known New Orleans player of the late 19th century who popularized its characteristic moves (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.f3) and was the first player to publish analysis of the opening.[2] The popularity of the original Blackmar Gambit, however, was short-lived, as it was basically unsound, allowing Black to secure a superior position after White's immediate 3.f3 with 3...e5!. In 1889, Ignatz von Popiel came up with the idea of 3.Nc3, though his main idea was to meet 3...Nf6 with 4.Bg5 (rather than the more usual 4.f3) and provided analysis of the Lemberger Counter-Gambit (3.Nc3 e5). The evolved, modern form of this gambit owes much to the German master Emil Josef Diemer (1908–1990), who popularized the continuation 3.Nc3 Nf6 and then 4.f3 (when 4...e5? is ineffective as 5.dxe5 hits Black's knight, and after 5...Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 the knight has to retreat to d7 or g8). The position resulting after 3... Nf6 4.f3 reflects the main line of the gambit accepted, although other Black responses on move three are possible. After many years of analysis, Diemer wrote a book on the opening in the late 1950s, titled Vom Ersten Zug An Auf Matt! (Toward Mate From The First Move!), with most of the published analysis devoted to the Ryder Gambit (and associated Halosar Trap), a double-pawn sacrifice characterized by the moves 4...exf3 5.Qxf3.
1. d4 d5 2. e4 *
While rarely seen in professional chess, this aggressive pawn sacrifice remains popular with amateur players of all levels up to Master. In the Blackmar-Diemer Gambit, white sacrifices a pawn in an attempt to accelerate the development of their pieces.
The Blackmar–Diemer Gambit arose as a development of the earlier Blackmar Gambit, named after Armand Blackmar, a relatively little-known New Orleans player of the late 19th century who popularized its characteristic moves (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.f3) and was the first player to publish analysis of the opening.[2] The popularity of the original Blackmar Gambit, however, was short-lived, as it was basically unsound, allowing Black to secure a superior position after White's immediate 3.f3 with 3...e5!. In 1889, Ignatz von Popiel came up with the idea of 3.Nc3, though his main idea was to meet 3...Nf6 with 4.Bg5 (rather than the more usual 4.f3) and provided analysis of the Lemberger Counter-Gambit (3.Nc3 e5). The evolved, modern form of this gambit owes much to the German master Emil Josef Diemer (1908–1990), who popularized the continuation 3.Nc3 Nf6 and then 4.f3 (when 4...e5? is ineffective as 5.dxe5 hits Black's knight, and after 5...Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 the knight has to retreat to d7 or g8). The position resulting after 3... Nf6 4.f3 reflects the main line of the gambit accepted, although other Black responses on move three are possible. After many years of analysis, Diemer wrote a book on the opening in the late 1950s, titled Vom Ersten Zug An Auf Matt! (Toward Mate From The First Move!), with most of the published analysis devoted to the Ryder Gambit (and associated Halosar Trap), a double-pawn sacrifice characterized by the moves 4...exf3 5.Qxf3.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
GAME 49
Stockfish regained its pawn after Komodo Dragon declined to capture on f3, but it came at the expense of having advanced pawns on the kingside.
Komodo Dragon castled long, while Stockfish played Kf2, and proceeded to play for something on the queenside, which entailed going down a pawn again.
However, Komodo Dragon was always safe, and amongst several exchanges, the queens came off too.
The double rook, bishop (opposite colours) and pawns ending that resulted, held no real fears for either side, and once the rooks came off, it was dead drawn.
Stockfish regained its pawn after Komodo Dragon declined to capture on f3, but it came at the expense of having advanced pawns on the kingside.
Komodo Dragon castled long, while Stockfish played Kf2, and proceeded to play for something on the queenside, which entailed going down a pawn again.
However, Komodo Dragon was always safe, and amongst several exchanges, the queens came off too.
The double rook, bishop (opposite colours) and pawns ending that resulted, held no real fears for either side, and once the rooks came off, it was dead drawn.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
GAME 50
Stockfish decided to keep the extra pawn by capturing on f3.
Komodo Dragon then castled queenside, while Stockfish castled kingside.
In response to Stockfish starting to advance its queenside pawns, Komodo Dragon sacced the exchange on e6, to gain a foothold in the centre.
The queens came off, and although each side had an equal number of pawns, Stockfish was still the exchange up.
Further exchanges saw the game progress into an ending in which Komodo Dragon had bishop, knight and pawn against a rook and bishop.
The rest of the game was a bit tortuous, as they played out the draw.
Stockfish decided to keep the extra pawn by capturing on f3.
Komodo Dragon then castled queenside, while Stockfish castled kingside.
In response to Stockfish starting to advance its queenside pawns, Komodo Dragon sacced the exchange on e6, to gain a foothold in the centre.
The queens came off, and although each side had an equal number of pawns, Stockfish was still the exchange up.
Further exchanges saw the game progress into an ending in which Komodo Dragon had bishop, knight and pawn against a rook and bishop.
The rest of the game was a bit tortuous, as they played out the draw.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
Sicilian Wing Gambit
1. e4 c5 2. b4 *
The Sicilian Wing Gambit is a very early attempt to disrupt Black’s standard play in the Sicilian Defense.
The c5-pawn deters White from playing d2-d4. Removing the c-pawn will allow White to play d2-d4 and occupy the centre with the classic pawn duo on e4 and d4. This will grant White extra space in the center, which Black will find difficult to counter.
Additionally, White will enjoy speedy development if Black accepts the gambit with 2…cxb4 3.a3 bxa3.
https://www.chessable.com/blog/chess-op ... ng-gambit/
1. e4 c5 2. b4 *
The Sicilian Wing Gambit is a very early attempt to disrupt Black’s standard play in the Sicilian Defense.
The c5-pawn deters White from playing d2-d4. Removing the c-pawn will allow White to play d2-d4 and occupy the centre with the classic pawn duo on e4 and d4. This will grant White extra space in the center, which Black will find difficult to counter.
Additionally, White will enjoy speedy development if Black accepts the gambit with 2…cxb4 3.a3 bxa3.
https://www.chessable.com/blog/chess-op ... ng-gambit/
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 43965
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Stockfish 16CPU v Komodo Dragon 16CPU (LTC Gambits Match)
GAME 51
Stockfish emerged from the opening phase, still a pawn down, but with the more active position.
However, the pressure exerted on Komodo Dragon's weak queenside pawns, eventually led to the material balance being restored.
With the black queen and rook posing a possible threat though, Stockfish gave up the pawn again to trade off into a drawn rook and pawn endgame, in which Dragon Komodo had a 4-3 pawn majority on the kingside.
Stockfish emerged from the opening phase, still a pawn down, but with the more active position.
However, the pressure exerted on Komodo Dragon's weak queenside pawns, eventually led to the material balance being restored.
With the black queen and rook posing a possible threat though, Stockfish gave up the pawn again to trade off into a drawn rook and pawn endgame, in which Dragon Komodo had a 4-3 pawn majority on the kingside.
gbanksnz at gmail.com