Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358

    Tony Dowden vs Bruce R Watson, NZ Champs 2008

    PGN Viewer
     

    (posted here as it was discussed in the Tas Champs thread.)

  2. #2
    CC Grandmaster Tony Dowden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD
    Posts
    2,584
    Some comments on Dowden,T (2170) - FM Watson,B (2293), 2008 NZ Chp

    22.Bxe4? Unfortunately the whole concept seems to be unsound. But I must say it was a whole lot of fun playing the attacking side!
    26.Qg4 I had seen this far and the possibilities looked so enticing I could resist saccing. In particular after the apparently logical 26--Qc8 or 26--Rg8 White can continue 27.Rxd4!! Q/Rxg4 28.Rad6+ Kf5 29.Rf6 or 29.e4 (Jono) is mate!
    31---Qf7? Black finally goes astray (In the game I felt that Bruce had defended depressingly well up to here). Here the relatively simple 31---Ng7 32.Re7 Rd7! defends - but in time trouble both sides overlooked that Rd7 defends the g7 square and shields the queen from the Re7 attack. In the game I was actually also considering 31---Ng7 32.f5!? Nxe6 33.dxe6 but afterwards we found that Black can cunningly combine threats on White's king via Qc6 or Qc5 with his defence.
    33---Be3?? White's rook sac takes black by surprise and Black's stern defence suddenly collapses. From memory I think Black can give up his queen with 33---Rxf6 then after 34.Rxe7 Nxe7 35.Bxf6 White retains an initiative but Black has avoided being steam-rollered. [Oops, White's 35th is a blunder! See KB's question below (I think). How does Black win this position?! The correct line is 35.f5 and without an engine I'm claiming it as 'unclear'.]
    36.Bxf6 Black is about to suffer catastrophic material loss.
    Last edited by Tony Dowden; 13-03-2008 at 06:37 PM.

  3. #3
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358
    I think exd4 before Qg4 is much harder for black to deal with. It eliminates the defence of ...Bg6 then ...Nf5 as played in the game (26.exd4 Bg6 27.Qe2! or 26.exd4 d5 27.Qg4 Bg6 28.Qg5+ wins knight) and means that black has to rely on 26...d5 27.Qg4 Ng6 (at least for serious winning chances). A computer may say Black is +1.5, +2 or whatever but I think it is a very unpleasant position to defend.

    Tactics quiz time:

    If Black plays 33...Rxf6 instead of the clearly losing Be3?? then he has a truly astonishing resource. What is it?

    ("Best play" in positions like this under tournament conditions is more or less impossible. These "unsound" double piece sacs quite often come off.)
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 13-03-2008 at 05:41 PM.

  4. #4
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,124
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyD
    Some comments on Dowden,T (2170) - FM Watson,B (2293), 2008 NZ Chp

    22.Bxe4? Unfortunately the whole concept seems to be unsound. But I must say it was a whole lot of fun playing the attacking side!
    Most unexpected, especially with the second sacrifice. White's pieces seem superficially passive and huddled on the low ranks, but they spring to life here.

    All the same, could White have played 22. Bg2, with the idea of 23. g4 fxg4 24. Nxe4 with similar threats but less risk?

    Quote Originally Posted by TonyD
    26.Qg4 I had seen this far and the possibilities looked so enticing I could resist saccing. In particular after the apparently logical 26--Qc8 or 26--Rg8 White can continue 27.Rxd4!! Q/Rxg4 28.Rad6+ Kf5 29.Rf6 is mate!
    Presumably you would have played 29.e4# (otherwise the K goes there). Was there any safety net, Nunn's term for a way to bail out with, say, perpetual check if the line turned out not to be as good as you thought?

    Quote Originally Posted by TonyD
    31---Qf7? Black finally goes astray (In the game I felt that Bruce had defended depressingly well up to here). Here the relatively simple 31-- Ng7 32.Re7 Rd7! defends — but in time trouble both sides overlooked that Rd7 defends the g7 square and shields the queen from the Re7 attack.
    That's the thing: will defenders find the right saving sequence in the time available? And the switch from a slow, maneuvring game to a sharp tactical slugfest would have disturbed his equilibrium.
    Last edited by Capablanca-Fan; 13-03-2008 at 07:35 PM.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  5. #5
    CC Grandmaster Tony Dowden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD
    Posts
    2,584
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    I think exd4 before Qg4 is much harder for black to deal with. It eliminates the defence of ...Bg6 then ...Nf5 as played in the game (26.exd4 Bg6 27.Qe2! or 26.exd4 d5 27.Qg4 Bg6 28.Qg5+ wins knight) and means that black has to rely on 26...d5 27.Qg4 Ng6 (at least for serious winning chances). A computer may say Black is +1.5, +2 or whatever but I think it is a very unpleasant position to defend.

    Tactics quiz time:

    If Black plays 33...Rxf6 instead of the clearly losing Be3?? then he has a truly astonishing resource. What is it?

    ("Best play" in positions like this under tournament conditions is more or less impossible. These "unsound" double piece sacs quite often come off.)
    My b2 bishop 'disagreed' with 26.exd4 on positional grounds. In the game I did actually see 26.exd4 d5 27.Qg4 Ng6 28.Qg5+ Kg7 29.f5 but decided it wasn't what I was looking for. With the benefit of hindsight I admit it might have been White's safest option (not that I think I'd enjoy handling the White side after 29.f5 though).

    See my "Oops" comment above - presumably we are referring to the same resource?

  6. #6
    CC Grandmaster Tony Dowden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD
    Posts
    2,584
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    All the same, could White have played 22. Bg2, with the idea of 23. g4 fxg4 24. Nxe4 with similar threats but less risk?

    Was there any safety net, Nunn's term for a way to bail out with, say, perpetual check if the line turned out not to be as good as you thought?
    Yes, 22.Bg2 is fine (better, in hindsight) but I smelled blood!

    Yes and no. At a certain point during the game in the game (I can't remember when!) I thought 29---Kg8 might be too risky after 30.Re6, so a perpetual check would therefore result after 29---Qc7 (or 29---Rfe8) with Qf6-h8-f6-h8-f6, but 29---Kg8 turned out to be the main line.

  7. #7
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,358
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyD
    See my "Oops" comment above - presumably we are referring to the same resource?
    I think so. It's in white text in gap below (run cursor over it to see text) for those who want to see what I'm referring to:

    33...Rxf6 34.Rxe7 Nxe7 35.Bxf6 looks good for white but is refuted by 35...h6! (anything else and white wins easily). If White saves the queen he is mated, completely against the run of play, by 36...Be4# So all White has is 36.Qxg6+ Nxg6 37.Bxd8 with three pawns for the knight, but after ...a4! shattering White's pawn structure, white is probably lost.

    I've looked at 35.f5 and also 35.h4 with engine - they appear to also lead to black wins with perfect play though I am not certain about this - and for practical purposes anything could happen.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Tournaments for March 2008 ACF Ratings
    By Bill Gletsos in forum Ratings Arena
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 28-02-2008, 05:59 PM
  2. AUS Champs Blitz 2008
    By DarkHorse in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 08-01-2008, 01:14 PM
  3. Thanks Jenni
    By JohnH in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-07-2006, 01:59 PM
  4. ACF March 2004 Ratings
    By Bill Gletsos in forum Ratings Arena
    Replies: 310
    Last Post: 14-04-2004, 03:58 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •