|
« TAP TO LOG IN
|
ANNOTATED GAME
League division C1
silkenfist (1863) vs. tyrin (1830)
Annotated by: tyrin (2033)
Chess opening: Caro-Kann (B18), classical, Flohr variation
silkenfist (1863) vs. tyrin (1830)
Annotated by: tyrin (2033)
Chess opening: Caro-Kann (B18), classical, Flohr variation
 Interactive |
• |  Show all comments |
• | All annotated games | • | View chessboard as: |
| |||||
|
1. e4 |
I have not computer with me so may be I have some bad analyses here. {In brakes are comments made by the white} | ||||
| | |||||
|
1... c6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 dxe4 4. Nxe4 Bf5 5. Ng3 Bg6 6. Nf3 Nd7 7. h4 h6 8. h5 Bh7 9. Bd3 Bxd3 10. Qxd3 e6 11. Bf4 Ngf6 12. O-O-O Nd5 13. Bd2 Qc7 14. Ne4 |
Until now everything has been played in many games. Here most of the players prefer c4 Nf6 15. | ||||
| | |||||
|
14... O-O-O 15. c4 Nd5f6 16. Bc3 |
I believe that this move is unnecessary and passive now. It can be played later. Probably after c5 from black. The white should start building pawn structure on the king's field. {Bc3 is indeed a bad move, since it allows Qf4 followed by Qg4. Over the board, I estimated the danger of that maneuver lower than that of the pawn breaks against the white center.} 16...Qf4 17. Ned2 Qg4 18. Rh4 Qf5 (of course 18... Q:g2 doesn't not work at all) 19. Q:f5 e:f and white get a much better pawns position. | ||||
| | |||||
|
16... Nxe4 17. Qxe4 Nf6 18. Qe5 |
Should be Qe2 {Nonsense. There was no reason to give away a tempo.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
18... Bd6 19. Qe2 Qd7 |
Here I am a little bit lost. {This is a typical position for the Caro-Kann. White has a miniscule space advantage but it is hard for either side to find a coherent plan.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
20. Ne5 Qe7 21. f4 |
I would prefer pawns position like f3-g4-h5, but it's about a style {The pawn-formation f3-g4-h5 is the usual, positional way to play against the Caro-Kann, aiming to win the endgame through superiorn pawn formation. However, Black just keeps the pieces on the board and the positon closed. 21. f4 aims to increase the space advantage further to achieve a decisive pawn break later.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
21... Rhe8 |
{This move is a positional error. It allows white to play Ba5, forcing an exchange of bishops. With his passive Bishop gone, the king-side advance would have significantly better prospects.} I am not sure about is this a positional error. I can not say the black bishop is better than the white one. Actually in my after game analysis i found out that in Timoshenko - Danilov game in 2000 the black made this move and the white did not tried to exchange the bishops. | ||||
| | |||||
|
22. Qf3 Qf8 |
During the game I wrote here a comment to myself that I have no idea what to play and I decided to play slowly without any pawn movements just wait and see what my opponent will do. But probably here the best move should be preparation for c5 like Kb1 or may be c5 at once {Misses the chance to correct the previous error with Bc7 or Rg8.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
23. Ba5 Bc7 24. Nxc6 |
Obviously bad combination {A plain silly move. I am reasonably sure, most of blacks win in the Caro-Kann stem from white players becoming impatient and ruining their position without need. Bxc7 would have been enough for whíte to gain some play. As a matter of fact, I can't even say what exactly I missed. Somehow, I was under the impression, I would have the time for d5.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
24... bxc6 25. Qxc6 Qd6 26. Qa8+ |
{Objectively, this makes things just worse. But then again, Qxc7 would be the immediate admission of defeat} | ||||
| | |||||
|
26... Kd7 27. Qxa7 Rda8 |
Q:f4 is also good, but I decided to make the board simple {Q:f4 would have been decisive. White needs to retreat the bishop and after that, the black king just strolls to the kingside casually.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
28. Qxc7+ Qxc7 29. Bxc7 Kxc7 30. a3 |
{That's what I calculated as worst-case-scenario. I figured, it should be esy enough to remove the kingside pawns to achieve at least a draw.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
30... Ra5 |
Very bad move. I believe here Ra4 is better with capturing the c4 pawn or d4 one, because it prevent a good queen's pawn structure in the future | ||||
| | |||||
|
31. g4 |
{Frustration keeps producting bad moves. The hasted pawn sacrifice just doesn't work. After simply 31. c5, Black still would need a lot of work to break the white position} | ||||
| | |||||
|
31... Nxg4 32. Rhg1 f5 |
At that part of the game for me the plan for white should be to push the queen's pawns as far as it possible and so my plan was to prevent that. So I continue to attack the a pawn {My engine suggests 32. Nf6 instead, but I find f5 more convincing. Keeping the position closed just increases the potence of the knight and the white queenside pawns are no danger. If I hadn't given away material earlier, this move would produce tactical possibilities for an exchange sacrifice. But with a minor piece up, keeping the positon closed with mutual positional weaknesses is just the way to go.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
33. Kd2 Kd6 34. Rde1 Re7 |
I am trying to bring my Knight into the center | ||||
| | |||||
|
35. Kc3 Nf6 |
{The engine likes that move, but the centralisation of the black pieces is not enough to generate winning chances. I'd prefer to coordinate the black rooks, starting with Ra6, keeping an eye on the weakness e6} | ||||
| | |||||
|
36. Re5 |
Again here I believe the plan for white should be pushing the queen's pawns. So the rooks must prevent h5 and a3 {Pushing the queenside pawns would most likely lose them. Re5 wins a tempo, occupies a good square and prepares play agains the e6/f5 pawns.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
36... Ra8 37. Rh1 Ne4+ |
{Looks nice, but actually the knight doesn't do much on this square.} | ||||
| | |||||
|
38. Kc2 Rc7 |
{Too impatient. With the rook on e5, the black weaknesses needed attention first.} | ||||
| | |||||
| |||||