Find the Best Move
White to Move
Highlight For Answer: White promotes to a Knight and checkmates the black king!
In chess, the piece count is certainly important, but position has always been the deciding factor.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Find The Best Move #1
Find the Best Move
Black to Move
Highlight For Answer: Black has white trapped and if white takes with bxc3 then Ba3 checkmate!
Chess Video Of The Week
This is the chess video of the week, it is called Chess Strategy-Good vs Bad Bishops. Hope you like the video chess fans!
Rugal King vs Pierrepinal Result 0-1
Event Online Game
Site http://www.flyordie.com/
Date 23.05.2010
Round 1
White rugal king
Black pierrepinal
Result 0-1
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 d5 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e3 h6 6. Bxf6 Bxf6 7. Nf3 O-O 8. Bd3
c5 9. O-O cxd4 10. exd4 dxc4 11. Bxc4 Nc6 12. d5 exd5 13. Qxd5 Qxd5 14. Bxd5 Nb4
15. Bb3 Bg4 16. a3 Nd3 17. Ne4 Bxb2 18. Rab1 Bxa3 19. Bc4 Nb2 20. Ba2 Bxf3 21.
gxf3 b5 22. Kh1 Rfd8 23. Rfg1 a6 24. Rg2 Nd3 25. Rbg1 Bb2 26. f4 Nxf4 27. R2g4
Be5 28. f3 Kf8 29. Nc5 Rac8 30. Ne4 f5 31. Rxf4 Bxf4 32. Ng3 Rd2 33. Be6 Rcc2
0-1
Friday, May 21, 2010
Chess Quote Of The Day
 |  A simple game of chess which doesn't interest me in the least--man, whoever he may be, being for me a mediocre opponent. What I cannot bear are those wretched discussions relative to such and such a move, since winning or losing is not in question. And if the game is not worth the candle, if objective reason does a frightful job--as indeed it does--of serving him who calls upon it, is it not fitting and proper to avoid all contact with these categories? |  |
| --- Andre Breton | ||
Chess Quote Of The Day
"The difference between a successful person and others is not a lack of strength, not a lack of knowledge, but rather in a lack of will."
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Weekly Endgame Study
Weekly Endgame Study (2)
Every week we present you an endgame study selected by IM Yochanan Afek: player, trainer, endgame study composer and writer. A week later the solution is published. Good luck solving!N. Kralin
1977
White to play and win
‘Schism in Russian Chess Federation’ over nomination Karpov – UPDATE: GM Genna Sosonko comments
15 May 2010, 11.17 CET | Last modified: 15:57 | By Arne Moll | Filed under: Reports | Tags: Politics, Videos
Yesterday, in a bizarre series of events, the Russian Chess Federation nominated Anatoly Karpov as candidate for the FIDE presidential elections, contrary to the earlier endorsement of Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. The result, according to the current FIDE President, is a “schism” in the Russian Federation.Just a few weeks ago, we reported on the RCF’sendorsement of Ilyuzmhinov, leading to furiousreactions in the Karpov camp. Yesterday, the official meeting regarding about nomination took place in Moscow, but resulted in total confusion, as was firstreported live on Twitter by chess journalist Denis Bilunov and quickly followed by practically all Russian media.
What happened? Well, it seems two simultaneous meetings of the Supervisory Board of the RCF took place. On one meeting, not attended by RCF President Dvorkovich but in the presence of Garry Kasparov – 18 (or 17, according to other sources) out of 32 members nominated Karpov as candidate. As the Karpov Campaign site reports,
Ilyumzhinov’s supporters on the Council realized they lacked the votes to overcome Karpov and attempted first to postpone the meeting and then to move it behind closed doors. Failing that, they chose to boycott the proceedings entirely, but even with a few Council members absent from Moscow and several others abstaining, a quorum was reached and the vote proceeded. Karpov received the unanimous and enthusiastic support of all attending members, providing a 17-vote majority in full view of the media.
RCF President Dvorkovich called both meetings illegitimate: one because the President (himself) was not present, and the other because not sufficient members were precent to legalize the voting procedure. As Dvorkovich explains in an interview with Gazeta.ru, this is his version of the proceedings:
In accordance with the Federation’s statutes, the Chairman of the Supervisory Board collects its members and organizes a meeting in one place. We informed the Chairman of the Executive Board of the Federation A. Bakh where the meeting should be taking place. Unfortunately, the information was not delivered to all Board members by him. My assistants in the same day were on the phone with the members of the Supervisory Board a few hours before the start of the meeting. Unfortunately, the position of the Chairman of the Supervisory Board on the issue of the FIDE Presidential candidate led to the fact that it was impossible to organize the meeting.
Not surprisingly, Dvorkovich is challenging the results. To us, it does seem rather strange to have a round of votes in the absence of the President, even if he did try to block the whole thing. However, a majority is still a majority. Shortly after the RCF meeting, Ilyumzhinov himself issued a statement in which he used big words:
The situation reminds me of the one in the early 90s, where Kasparov and Karpov were involved and then, as you know the chess world became divided into two parallel organizations, with two champions. And now unfortunately, they start to split the chess world again. One of them wants to become President of Russia, and the other one – President of FIDE. But we live in democracy. It is a pity that they are splitting the RCF.
So it seems we have a true schism within the Russian Chess Federation, and it will be interesting to see what happens next. What does this “schism” imply for the future of FIDE? It’s clear the Iluymzhinov camp has been dealt a several blow last night, because Ilyumzhinov, though President of Kalmykia, is Russian after all, too. But as Mig Greengard points out, it’s unlikely Ilyuzhinov will throw in the towel already. Also, we think it is not improbable that the entire voting procedure is indeed ruled illegal and things will have to be settled at a later date.
This time, Ilyumzhinov will have to come up with something extra, though, if only because it seems at least one of his supporters, the elusive Ignatius Leong, is leaving him already. Meanwhile, support for Karpov is still growing, with Syria and Scotland having also said to express their support for Karpov. It really looks like this time, things may be different. Perhaps Ilyumzhinov should take some advice from Mark Crowther, who on The Week in Chess ponders:
Under the rules, how will Ilyumzhinov even be able to stand? I don’t believe he can submit his name to go forward without the Russian Chess Federation Nomination. Although the rules are written in such a way that it maybe possible to get on an established ticket after the nominations are in. Another way I understand is that using the Presidential board has sufficient powers to nominate Ilyumzhinov, or think they have.1.2 Nominations for the Presidential ticket and Continental Presidents must reach the FIDE Secretariat at least three months before the opening of the General Assembly. To be elected, each candidate shall be nominated by his federation. He/She should have been a member of their federation at least one year before the General Assembly.
Practically the only chess site that hasn’t reported on the elections at the time of writing this report, is FIDE’s official homepage. News is likely to develop quickly: we’ll try to keep you updated on the most important facts as fast and accurately as possible.
Andor Lilienthal Dies Aged 99
Andor Lilienthal Dies aged 99
Submitted by SonofPearl on Sun, 05/09/2010 at 2:45am.
The world's oldest grandmaster, the legendary Hungarian GM Andor Lilienthal has died aged 99.Lilienthal had a long and illustrious career, beating many world champions. Lasker, Capablanca, Alekhine, Euwe, Botvinnik and Smyslov all fell victim to his brilliant play.
Born in Moscow, but brought up in Hungary, Lilienthal emigrated to the Soviet Union in 1935. He played for Hungary and the Soviet Union at several Olympiads, and qualified for the Candidates Tournament in the 1948-51 cycle.
Lilienthal remained active in his later years and was often a guest of honour at chess competitions.
His most famous game was his 26-move queen sacrifice victory against the great Cuban champion, Capablanca.
Rest In Peace, Andor Lilienthal.
“I honestly thought he had gone nuts” – interview with the World Champion
“I honestly thought he had gone nuts” – interview with the World Champion
On Tuesday, World Champion Viswanathan Anand from India retained his title by defeating Veselin Topalov from Bulgaria 6.5-5.5, thereby also creating an all-time record of unique visitors on one day at this website. A day later he sat down for a lengthy interview with ChessVibes – enjoy a 28.5 (!) minute video interview with the World Champ.“I honestly thought he had gone nuts”, Viswanathan Anand told us about the mistake by his opponent Veselin Topalov in the decisive game of the World Championship. “Either he had missed Qe8, or I had missed something.” We spoke with Anand about all games, about the Sofia rule, about playing slow (”I never thought anyone would advise me to play faster”), his favourite curry, about which historical world champion he’d like to play, and several other things.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Lasker Trap
The Lasker Trap derives from the Queen's Gambit Declined lines and in particular comes from the Albin Countergambit. Black immediately challenges the center by offering up his own unprotected pawn on e5. After white takes the pawn on e5, black has a few options
The most common play is simply to retake the pawn on c4, to equalize the material but at the same time, taking away any queens gambit lines that your opponent may be familiar with. The Lasker Trap, however, does not immediately take the pawn and instead pushes forward with pawn to d4. This simply move applies immense pressure on white and they are foced to deal with this thorn in their side. If white defends incorrectly he can easily fall into the Lasker Trap.
The most common play is simply to retake the pawn on c4, to equalize the material but at the same time, taking away any queens gambit lines that your opponent may be familiar with. The Lasker Trap, however, does not immediately take the pawn and instead pushes forward with pawn to d4. This simply move applies immense pressure on white and they are foced to deal with this thorn in their side. If white defends incorrectly he can easily fall into the Lasker Trap.
Siberian Trap
The Siberian Trap derives from the Smith Mora Gambit in the Sicilian Defense. White will offer up a pawn sacrifice in the Smith Mora Gambit in exchange for rapid development. The Siberian Trap allows white to do exactly that and at the same time, get his pieces to active squares and ready for a devastating attack.
If white is not careful he will quickly find himself in a world of hurt. His pieces will be developed to great squares but black will be able to use his active knights and cause a lot of problems for white. White will have to choose to either loose his queen or king.
If white is not careful he will quickly find himself in a world of hurt. His pieces will be developed to great squares but black will be able to use his active knights and cause a lot of problems for white. White will have to choose to either loose his queen or king.
The Kieninger Trap derives from the Budapest Gambit. Black rarely offers up a gambit but the budapest gambit is the rare exception. After black gives up his pawn on e5, he moves his knight to g4, attacking the white pawn on e5.
White then has the option to either give back the pawn that was taken in the gambit or try and hold on to the extra pawn. The Kieninger Trap is unleashed if white tries to hold on the extra pawn.
White then has the option to either give back the pawn that was taken in the gambit or try and hold on to the extra pawn. The Kieninger Trap is unleashed if white tries to hold on the extra pawn.
Montecelli Trap
Monticelli Trap
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article uses algebraic notation to describe chess moves.
Start of chess board.
a8 black rook b8 black knight d8 black queen f8 black rook g8 black king
a7 black pawn b7 black bishop c7 black pawn d7 black pawn f7 black pawn g7 black pawn h7 black pawn
b6 black pawn e6 black pawn
g5 white knight
c4 white pawn d4 white pawn
c3 black knight g3 white pawn
a2 white pawn b2 white pawn c2 white queen e2 white pawn f2 white pawn g2 white bishop h2 white pawn
a1 white rook e1 white king h1 white rook
End of chess board.
Position after 10.Ng5!
The Monticelli Trap is a chess opening trap in the Bogo-Indian Defence, named for Italian champion Mario Monticelli from the game Monticelli–Prokes, Budapest 1926.
The trap begins with the moves
1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 e6
Black plays the Indian Defence.
3. Nf3 Bb4+
Black plays the Bogo-Indian-Defence.
4. Bd2 Bxd2+
5. Qxd2 b6
6. g3 Bb7
7. Bg2 O-O
8. Nc3 Ne4
9. Qc2 Nxc3
10. Ng5!
(See diagram.)
Black must respond to two different threats: the mate threat 11. Qxh7# and 11. Bxb7 winning a bishop and a rook.
However, chess legend José Raúl Capablanca (Black) showed this trap wasn't so irrefutable when he drew in a game against fellow legend Max Euwe (White) in 1931 (Amsterdam).
Capablanca responded with
10. ... Ne4!
11. Bxe4 Bxe4
12. Qxe4 Qxg5
13. Qxa8 Nc6
14. Qb7 Nxd4
15. Rd1 c5
16. e3 Nc2+
17. Kd2 Qf5
18. Qg2 Nb4
19. e4 Qf6
20. Kc1 Nxa2+
21. Kb1 Nb4
22. Rxd7 Nc6
23. f4 e5
24. Rhd1 Nd4
25. Rxa7 exf4
26. gxf4 Qxf4
27. Re1 Nf3
28. Re2 Nd4
29. Re1 (½-½).
Nonetheless, this trap is still a massive blow to most opponents.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article uses algebraic notation to describe chess moves.
Start of chess board.
a8 black rook b8 black knight d8 black queen f8 black rook g8 black king
a7 black pawn b7 black bishop c7 black pawn d7 black pawn f7 black pawn g7 black pawn h7 black pawn
b6 black pawn e6 black pawn
g5 white knight
c4 white pawn d4 white pawn
c3 black knight g3 white pawn
a2 white pawn b2 white pawn c2 white queen e2 white pawn f2 white pawn g2 white bishop h2 white pawn
a1 white rook e1 white king h1 white rook
End of chess board.
Position after 10.Ng5!
The Monticelli Trap is a chess opening trap in the Bogo-Indian Defence, named for Italian champion Mario Monticelli from the game Monticelli–Prokes, Budapest 1926.
The trap begins with the moves
1. d4 Nf6
2. c4 e6
Black plays the Indian Defence.
3. Nf3 Bb4+
Black plays the Bogo-Indian-Defence.
4. Bd2 Bxd2+
5. Qxd2 b6
6. g3 Bb7
7. Bg2 O-O
8. Nc3 Ne4
9. Qc2 Nxc3
10. Ng5!
(See diagram.)
Black must respond to two different threats: the mate threat 11. Qxh7# and 11. Bxb7 winning a bishop and a rook.
However, chess legend José Raúl Capablanca (Black) showed this trap wasn't so irrefutable when he drew in a game against fellow legend Max Euwe (White) in 1931 (Amsterdam).
Capablanca responded with
10. ... Ne4!
11. Bxe4 Bxe4
12. Qxe4 Qxg5
13. Qxa8 Nc6
14. Qb7 Nxd4
15. Rd1 c5
16. e3 Nc2+
17. Kd2 Qf5
18. Qg2 Nb4
19. e4 Qf6
20. Kc1 Nxa2+
21. Kb1 Nb4
22. Rxd7 Nc6
23. f4 e5
24. Rhd1 Nd4
25. Rxa7 exf4
26. gxf4 Qxf4
27. Re1 Nf3
28. Re2 Nd4
29. Re1 (½-½).
Nonetheless, this trap is still a massive blow to most opponents.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)