chess notation

Chess Notation

Divide and you will find!
Wild name, real interests
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
ccmcacollister 46 ( +1 | -1 )
Interesting Positions: Mine is a Bind the like of which i have not seen before. From a GK blitz game, an essentially correct rememberance of it. (Meaning I think I got it right, or no more and one move out of order anyway) I am black in this one.
1. d4 d5
2. c4 e5
3. cxd5 Qxd5
4. Nc3 Qxd4
5. Qxd4 exd4
6. Nb5 Na6
7. Nxd4 Bd7
8. Ngf3 Bd6
9. e4 Nb4
10. Bc4 c5
11. a3 Nc6
12. Nxc6 Bxc6
13. Nd2 Nf6
14. f3 O-O
15. O-O b5
16. Ba2 c4
17. b3 c3
18. Nb1 b4
19. axb4 Bxb4
20. Be3 Rfd8
21. Rc1 Rd3

Position diagram and discussion to follow. Please feel free to post any interesting Chess positions, of course.
ccmcacollister 192 ( +1 | -1 )
diagram of the above after 21...Rd3

Note the very interesting Q-side bind. The N cannot move without dropping. The Bishop need move to support Na6 with the Queen Rook, but the Bishop cannot move either, unless the N moves out of its way first. And the Rook cannot move nor even support because of those two pieces in IT's way. I can't call this discoordination when it all fits so well. Let me coin a term for it "Anti-coordination"?! The WT pieces are all Working Together to take away each others moves !
I don't often see a chance to play a good bind strategy in blitz, so it was enjoyable. What I planned in the game would have gone something like:
22.Kf7 a5 23.Ke2 Rad8 etc. The last Rad8 to nullify any attempt to trade a Rook and walk his King over to the battlefield. So thus prevented, prepares that Strong 24...Bb5 move(threatening discovered check) , I think making it even the stronger than if played on move 23 instead.
BoY I'd like to have the Rook or Two behind a-pawn tho to push but decided I'd push the bind to its limit and see if it could "Grow" towards the West, rather than retreating my rook and going for a-file breakthru. That strategy does not free up his Bishop on a2 or solve any problems for him as a breakthru might if not properly prepared (and thats hard in blitz!), but puts the burden on WT totally to find an unbinding strategy. I didnt see one at the time. I wonder if there is? Such things can be notoriously hard to maintain and often serve as a temporary tactical advantage to build behind or plan breakthru's. But it looks pretty solid to me, so it seems he is nearly a Rook and 2 pieces down in that corner, if they cannot move. They cannot attack me anyway, eh? :)
What did happen is 22.Nxc3?! Bxc3 to breakthru the bind, a strategy I can appreciate. But after 23.Rxc3? Rxc3 he did Res.
ccmcacollister 233 ( +1 | -1 )
A Fischer-Random blitz For those who can decifer it the set up is:
[White "ccmCACollister"]
[Black "Paul gogarty"]
[WhiteElo "1604"]
[BlackElo "1690"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Event "InstantChess"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rqbbknnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RQBBKNNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[ICCause "1"]
[ICEcause "6"]
[BlackIFlag "U1"]
[WhiteIFlag "US"]
[Annotator "ccmCACollister"]

1.d4 b6 2.c4 Bb7 3.Nf3
Ne6 4.e3 Nf6 5.Qd3 a5 6.b3
Bxf3 7.Bxf3 Ra7 8.Bb2 O-O
9.Nd2 Ng5 10.Bd1 c5 11.Bc2 g6
12.h4 Ne6 13.h5 Qd6 14.O-O-O
Ng5 15.f4 Ne6 16.d5 Nc7
17.e4 e5 18.fxe5 Qe7 19.exf6
Qe8 20.Qe3 Kh8 21.Qh6 Rg8
22.e5 Qf8 23.Qxh7+ Kxh7
24.hxg6# 0-1

WT to move for MATE-in-TWO

Above, the last moves to produce the diagrammed position were 21.Qh6 Rg8 22.e5 Qf8 and now WT has mate-in-two at hand. Thus their are two points to be made from the diagrammed position now. The first is to show the strength of double checks!
Since after 23.Qxh7+! Kxh7 it is MATE by the double check which cannot be escaped 24.hxg6+ #
Double checks ARE so deadly so often because the checked KING ALWAYS has to move out of check, or it is Mate. There is no chance of Interposing, nor capturing the checker(s) when it is Double Check~! Watch for chances to use them in your games, and they will almost always bring you profit if not instant Mate.

The second point is this: The game was played on at 3 minute time control, with plus zero added per move. But the Queen sac was seen, indeed planned (with e5 push making it possible), but never PLAYED. Because the time clocks are so bad at the site, and lose to much to transmission, that it TimedOut my position with over 10 seconds showing on my clock~! Arggggh, GRRrrrrrr, and
Well, I feel better. Sometimes it helps just to Tell Someone of the injustice, when a perfectly sound Q-sac is denied entry to this world by the uncaring Universe ... or bad clocks, as the case may be.

Another wacky thing that happened to me on that site is having my Lightining Fischer Random Chess RATING around 1650 when I signed off, and coming back the next day to find it dropped to 1520's, tho I was offline and no games played~!
They indicated that Maintanence I saw happening that day, which put them offline
between my play and the rating drop, May have interfered ... but alas (of course) they have no way to reinstate the true rating.
Thanks for "listening"~!
BTW, what is that called when you cannot stop yourself from pulling out clumps of hair . . . ?
chessnovice 2 ( +1 | -1 )
Hair pulling. It's called trichotillomania
More: Chess
ionadowman 95 ( +1 | -1 )
I can imagine... ;-) I must have missed this thread over the last few days. I really like that bind, craig. Excruciating for White. It reminds me a bit of what can happen to Black on the dark side of the Gunderam Line in the Caro Kann. This one was played at a more sedate pace than the Blitz games we've seen so far:
White: I.A.Dowman Black: Lee C.T. (Wellington, 12 Dec 1982)
1,e4 c6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 cxd5 4.c4 Nf6
So far a Panov-Botvinnik Attack, but now comes Gunderam's patent.
5.c5!? e6 6.b4 Be7 7.Nf3 0-0 8.b5 Qc2
9.Be3 Bd7 10.Nc3 b6 11.c6 Bc8 12.a4 Bb4
13.Qb3 Qd6 14.Bd3?! Ne4 15.Bxe4 dxe4 16.Ne5 a6
17.0-0 Bxc3 18.Qxc3 axb5 19.axb5 Rxa1 20.Rxa1 f6
21.Nc4 Qd8 22.Ra7 e5 23.Bh6! Qxd4! 24.Rxg7+! Kh8
25.Qxd4 exd4 26.Nd6 Be6 27.Re7 d3 28.Nxe4 Rd8
29.Nxf6 Bg8 30.Bg7#
At a much higher level, there's the game Schlechter-Janowski in which Black was also on the rack for much of the game, in effect playing without his Q-side. I'll post it next time...
ionadowman 58 ( +1 | -1 )
Just went over the Fischer random game... ... Quel horreur!
Something of similar flavour to be found in this famous game;
White: A. Nimzovitch
Black: A. Hakansson
French Defence, Kristianstad, 1922
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e5 c5 4.Qg4 ... Nimzovitch's innovation.
4...cxd4 5.Nf3 Nc6 6.Bd3 f5 7.Qg3 Nge7 8.0-0 Ng6
9.h4 Qc7 10.Re1 Bd7?! (...Bc5) 11.a3 0-0-0 12.b4 (12.h5 wins the exchange, but Nimzovitch preferred to keep things straightforward)
12...a6?! 13.h5 Nge7 14.Bd2 h6 15.a4 g5 16.b5 f4
17.Qg4 Nb8 18.c3 Re8 19.cxd4 Kd8 20.Rc1 (now the chase begins...)
20...Qb6 21.a5 Qa7 22.b6 Qa8 (the Q has a mobility of precisely zero)
23.Rc7 Nf5 24.Nc3 Be7 25.Nxd5 Nxd4 26.Nxd4 exd5
27.Qxd7+ Nxd7 28.Ne6#
One of my all time favorite games...
ionadowman 96 ( +1 | -1 )
Pawn phalanxes... ... can also present an interesting sight, especially when one side has given up a lot of material to achieve it. Many will be familiar with the this position from the 1834 match MacDonnell-La Bourdonnais:
White, to move, could find no defence and resigned the game.
There is a modern example of a similar motif, played in the Yugoslav Championship 1969.
White: Minic; Black: Rakic (Modern Defence, Averbakh System)
1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4 d6 4.Nc3 Nd7
5.f4?! e5 6.dxe5?! dxe5 7.f5?! Ne7 8.Qf3 Nc6
9.Be3 Nd4 10.Qf2 Nf6 ...
This is unusual in itself: The Black QN developed on f6 and the KN earlier landed on c6. Does that imply the "waste" of 2 tempi?
11.fxg6 fxg6 12.h3 0-0 13.Nc3 c5 14.0-0-0 Qa5
15.Kb1 b5 16.Qe1 b4 17.Nd5 Qa4 18.Bxd4 exd4
19.Bd3 Nxd5 20.exd5 b3 21.a3 Bf5 22.Bxf5 Rxf5
23.Qe6+ Kh8 24.Qc6 Qxc4!!
25.Qxa8+ Rf8 26.Qxa7 Qc2+ 27.Ka1 d3 28.Rb1 c4
29.Nd4 Qf2 30.Nb5 Qxa7 31.Nxa7 c3 32.Rbd1 Rf2
33.d6 Rxb2 34.d7 Ra2+ 35.Kb1 ...
35... c2+ (?! Much prettier is 35...Ra1+ 36.Kxa1 c3#)
36.Kc1 Bh6+ (0-1: 37.Rd2 b2#).
ganstaman 34 ( +1 | -1 )
I don't have much time for explanation or diagram, but ionadowman 's post wouldn't be complete without
ganstaman 57 ( +1 | -1 )
Ok, now I have time:

[Event "London"]
[Site "London"]
[Date "1904.07.25"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "13"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Francis Joseph Lee"]
[Black "Hector William Shoosmith"]
[ECO "D02"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "122"]

1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 e6 3.e3 Bd6 4.Bd3 f5 5.c4 c6 6.Nbd2 Qf6 7.Qc2 Nd7 8.b3 Nh6 9.Bb2 Nf7 10.Ng1 Qg6 11.g3 Nf6 12.f4 Ne4 13.Ngf3 Qh6 14.Bxe4 fxe4 15.Ne5 Bxe5 16.dxe5 Qh3 17.Ba3 Bd7 18.cxd5 exd5 19.Qc5 Qe6 20.h3 b6 21.Qc2 a5 22.Bb2 h5 23.Nb1 Nh6 24.Nc3 Nf5 25.Qf2 b5 26.Ne2 c5 27.Rc1 Rc8 28.Rg1 Nh6 29.Rh1 Nf5 30.Rg1 Nh6 31.Rh1 Rf8 32.Rc2 g6 33.Kd2 b4 34.Kc1 a4 35.Kb1 Bb5 36.Nc1 Bd3 37.Nxd3 exd3 38.Rd2 c4 39.Bd4 Qa6 40.Qf1 Ra8 41.g4 Rf7 42.gxh5 axb3 43.hxg6 bxa2+ 44.Ka1 Qxg6 45.Rg1 Qe6 46.Qg2 b3 47.Qg6 Qxg6 48.Rxg6 Nf5 49.e6 Rf8 50.e7 Nxd4 51.exf8=Q+ Kxf8 52.exd4 c3 53.Rgg2 Re8 54.Rd1 d2 55.Rgg1 Re2 56.h4 c2 57.Rc1 b2+ 58.Kxb2 d1=Q 59.Kc3 Qd2+ 60.Kb2 a1=Q+ 61.Kxa1 Qc3+

After black's 57th:
ccmcacollister 16 ( +1 | -1 )
Thanks chessnovice ! Fortunately I now have a beard again ...