Spotting weaknesses

What do I find very interesting in this position?



Black threatens the capture of the bishop on the next move, followed up with a double attack on the g2-pawn (threatens mate in 1) and the queen. For white it seems that these are desperate times. There is no good way to prevent the capture of the bishop. Retreating the queen to e4 would result in a loss of material. One can try from this position to induce an eternal check on the king but a calculation error, or missing a move is easily made. So only a forced sequence which can overrride the threat can save him the game. Forced sequences have the advantage that only limited amount of moves are possible, which eases one's calculation. It can also relieve pieces from their normal duty without a loss of time. Furthermore it is a very good exercise in visualization and assessing a position. Some people do not like to sacrifice material. In this case, one is forced to.



If we look at this position we see furthermore that black's king is in the center and is a bit exposed. White's rooks are on the center files exerting pressure on the king's position.Black's f-pawn is not really free and is the last flank protection to shield off the king. Black's king rook is badly placed and has only a limited function.



So why is rook taking the knight (1. Rxe6) an obvious move for white?

I can only come up with one answer. The reduction clarifies the position. Counting the amount of black pieces really being able to protect, shield off and assist the king in its protection, Black has to say only one can really protect him and that is the queen. The rooks are not really helping.They are exerting pressure on files not important to the protection of his king. They do not challenge the white pieces on any account. White has three pieces in the attack. The bishop is preventing the king its access to the f -file and also preventing the Queen of intervening on the e5 square. The King cannot hide himself behind the f-pawn. It seems that white has three pieces he can use in his attack on the king. A surplus of 2 pieces.

On the capture black has only 2 choices: either recapture or move his king out of the check.

1.Rxe6+



game continuation

Kxe6 2.Qe4+ Kd7 3.Qxb7+ Ke6 4.Re1+ Kf5 5.Qxf7+ Kg4 6.Qf3+ Kh4 7.Qh3# 1-0

Somewhere our Champ missed a mate in one?

[5.Qe4#]

I especially enjoy the variation where black's king is trying to play hide and seek.

[1...Kd7 2.Rexd6+ (2.Rdxd6+ Kc7 3.Qc2+ Qc5 (3...Kb8 4.Rd7 Qa5 5.Ree7 Rxg7 6.Rxb7#) 4.Qxc5+ Kb8 5.Rd8+ Rxd8 6.Be5+ Rd6 7.Bxd6#) 2...Kc7 (2...Ke7 3.Qe4+ Qe5 4.Qxe5#) 3.Qc2+ Kb8 4.Rd8+ Rxd8 5.Be5+ Qxe5 6.Rxd8#; 1...fxe6 2.Bh6+]


I calculated the following combination.

1...Kd7 2.Rdxd6+ Kc7 3.Qc2+ Kb8 4.Rd8+ Rxd8 5.Be5+ Qxe5 6.Rxe5 +/-

I did not calculated in anyway 2.Rexd6+? Why? It did not crossed my mind in anyway. I missed the threat 4.Rd7 and black should have no good answers.

It seems that I still miss plenty!

Steinitz - Strauss, 1860

What happens when your king is in a rat trap?

White just played Rfe1, pinning the knight against the king. Black answers with Qg5, eying a tactical blow against the bishop on g7 and the pawn on g2.

How can one save the bishop?

Valeri Beim latest shot

Currently going through the book " How to calculate chess tactics", written by Valeri Beim and published by Gambit.





It consists of two parts which ends with exercises for both parts: Part 1 - Tactics in chess ; Part 2 - The technique of calculating variations.

There seems to be a lot of new material in the book. Yours truely wonders if it will improve his calculation mussle dramatically. We will see said the blind man

I conclude with the words of Tigran Petrosian as stated in the book: I believe that in chess, everything depends on tactics.

Some other books by Valeri beim

-How to play Dynamic chess
-Lesson in chess strategy
-Chess recipes from the Grandmaster's Kitchen

Reflection over Terkhiin Tsagaan Nuur

It's time to revitalize to old bugger.

The wall

I hit the wall. My road is barred. Many thanks for the support through all those years and I enjoyed the process very much. Good luck to all in your endevaours.

Rating progress

Question is "doing the circles does it pay off" ?

My yearly progress

I played only 10 OTB games this year. The average strenght of my opponents was 1582.

Range:1513-1739



Rating increase of 103 points to 1668. I think I have climbed in 2 and 1/2 years time about 219 points. It is not so impressive as MDLM but I am quite satisfied. However, let's focus on the amount of games and we get a rather different picture. I played about 31 rated games since Jan 2005 which I hardly can call much. MDLM played about 20 tournament games a month if I am not mistaken. So I should raise the amount of tournament games if I want to increase more sharply.

I assume that an average of 25 would be fine with premisses that you play opponents above your current rating which ends for 80% in a victory. The more wins you have the less games you have to play to induce a substantial increase. So the large amount of games that MDLM played were surely not necessary. The biggest increase in my playing strenght, I think was due to avoid inacurracies in calculating, and (I only calculate when I think that position becomes critical (dangerous word)) avoiding mistakes. (I mainly focussed on 2 tactics, double attacks and pins)


So the question remains: "doing the circles does it pay off"

Well, it sure helps

I am on leave for three weeks. Enjoy your summer holidays.

If I am quite correct, Tempo wrote in one of his previous posts about the amount of games you should play to have an increase of 100 points. I played 10 games got a score of 8. Does it fit the bill?

My new Queen "Fleur"

Quite challenging!! born on the 22nd April.