Another loss: unsound sacrifice
Ahh, Blunderprone why didn't I study your game more closely?
My second loss in a slow game post-Circles. I didn't play correctly in the opening (Smith Morra, I had white), and then I made an unsound sacrifice which he refuted, quite soundly. My decision was: either mess around on the queenside where all his material is aiming, or sac a Bishop and go in for a King beheading. I chose wrongly.
The Smith-Morra gambit is just a powerful tactical cannon. I started with it about a month ago, and haven't learned to wield it quite yet. There are so many cool little traps and tricks for white, but some of them are counterintuitive.
My second loss in a slow game post-Circles. I didn't play correctly in the opening (Smith Morra, I had white), and then I made an unsound sacrifice which he refuted, quite soundly. My decision was: either mess around on the queenside where all his material is aiming, or sac a Bishop and go in for a King beheading. I chose wrongly.
The Smith-Morra gambit is just a powerful tactical cannon. I started with it about a month ago, and haven't learned to wield it quite yet. There are so many cool little traps and tricks for white, but some of them are counterintuitive.
posted by Blue Devil Knight at 11/14/2007 10:32:00 PM
16 Comments:
Interesting sac, but ubfortunately black is able to get his queen over to the kingside quickly and hold everything. With those two rooks black had it almost loooked as though he was the one sac'ing to open up the kingside.
The Smith-Morra is a wild variation. As a Silician player I don't like facing it. Fortunately not many have played it against me. A couple of my losses have been because I've walked into butt ugly traps. However if I can withstand the attacks and hold the pawn I do okay.
Polly: the Queen's sneaky maneuver capturing my pawn and insinuating herself into the middle of the action was my downfall, I think. I hadn't even considered that move.
I don't know what's happening to me. I'm starting to play very recklessly. Perhaps I will hit an equilibrium, this will help show me when sacs are OK and when they are not...In the fires of refutation will come better attacking skills.
17.Qh5 is better in my opinion
i believe that white would win
17.Qh5 and 18.Rh3, black had no
defense, if 17. ... Qe5, 18.Qh6
and white attack is huge
Check your email. Early Christmas present on the Smith-Morra :)
Your Smith-Morra play is similar to what mine once was. Bb4 you will come to learn is a truly lame move by black. Yes, Qd4 is best reply. You didn't know that but now you do. I didn't know it either at one point, but now it's like a reflex. It is a truly lame move by black. Other point, don't move that dark squared bishop so quickly. The dark squared bishop placement is the toughest choice in the Smith-Morra. Bg5 for Nge7, Bf4 for Qc7 are givens. Otherwise, try and wait and see what your opponents doing before placing that piece.
ariakkas: good idea!
PMD: many thanks for the present. I know so little about this opening but it is clearly just a powerful crazy one. I can't wait until I've grown comfortable with it.
I have played the SM for 5 years and only mastered the M-(Masochistic) part. I could not turn it into a weapon. So I have no advice.
I doubt if speculative sacs are a good idea for you. It adds to the fun part and that is of course the most important. It invites to lazyness in calculation though, which seems to be a weak point of you. To gain experience it is a good idea, but at least check the preconditions of Vukovic.
The GPA delayed proves to be much more dangerous in my hands.
Well...had you paid attention to MY game....
Qd4 doesn't stand out because it goes against the "AVOID EARLY QUEEN EXCURSIONS" rule stuck in our head. But remember, the S-M is for rebels...meant to break rules. You can't be passive. The first 7-8 moves have tobe done with a purpose.
Purpose #1: ( against moving pawns again in the opening) Also ask if you can push e4-e5. This grabs space and fucks up black's king knight
Purpose #2 ( goes to early queen moves and double piece moves)Will this prevent Black from castling? Create threats to keep him too busy to castle
Purpose #3 (goes against moving a piece twice in the opening ..this is with a purpose) Weaken Black's Kingside with the Bg5 maneuver after teh knight comes out. He will kick it. then teh Bishop belongs on e3, Nf3-d4 then push the f-pawn to f4 like a man!
Purpose #4.(goes against leaving a pice en-prise) Sometimes SACKING the light squared bishop on b5 is a good thing, especially of you can replace it with a knight and some mating threats on either c7 or d6
Purpose #5 (goes against deliberately loosing a piece)OR sac the Knight on d5 to rip open the center before he's castled and hammer away.
Tempo: Very good point: speculative sacrifices are typically lazy shortcuts for me. On the other hand, I thought I had the ingredients: more material Kingside, open a line, etc. etc.. But I didn't even think of his Queen move. Especially before sacrificing I need to remind myself to check very carefully for the various defensive resources he has.
I have trouble believing it that you didn't like this gambit. Grand Prix is fun too though.
BP: ahh, the master speaketh. Thanks for the help. I just realized it's going to take me a while to learn when each of these strategies is called for, the types of pawn structures etc setups by black in which white has the different plans. Hey, I'm done with the Circles, I'm allowed to spend some time learning an opening! I think I'm gonna indulge.
BP: That Bg5 trick is funny. I hadn't seen that one.
Also, one of my biggest things is what to do when black plays a6...b5 (kicking my bishop) and then b4 (kicking my knight). In some lines this is OK for white, but in other lines it seems pretty bad for white, and my books don't discuss this common maneuver. I'll try to find an example.
I have a feeling I'll be doing a series of posts on the SM Gambit....
Excellent points BP makes about the specific purposes on all of White's bending and breaking of sound opening principles.
I think often when we make changes to our style of play, we tend to go overboard in the new direction. Once we have settled into the new style it tends to stabilize. Last week I had made my mind up that I would play with more confidence and try to mix things up a bit. I got a little too over confident, and paid for it with King Kong on Friday night, and Anatoliy on Saturday night.
Sometimes totally wild sacrifices are good to try, just to get the blood flowing. If you can do it in meaningless internet games where you're not concerned about rating points or money being on the line that's the ideal situation.
On ICC there is a 3 part series on hte S-M that is worth the watch.
On Pawn formations:
e6 only: cries for e5 to be pushed. B to e3 through the g5 portal with the f-Knight to d4 adn f4 push.... keep the rook on the f-file and have fun on the king side
e6 and d6 ( Pirc like): Still aim for e5 ...as you should always ask if you can get away with e5... which is key in this game to cramp black. again nd4 followed by f4 puts the right pressure on the center.
a6: always ask yourself if you can get away with the sac. Move Bf4! Then when b5 happens, play Bxb5 followed by Nxb5 and now Black has some serious crap on c7 and d6 to deal with. you will always have Rc1 to back things up.
Sorry I am not totally back in "the fold" yet but I do feed my chess addiction by keepign up with my blog reading.
Did you see my parting song?
17.Qh5 is better in my opinion.
This I agree.
i believe that white would win
17.Qh5 and 18.Rh3, black had no
defense, if 17. ... Qe5, 18.Qh6
This is not so clear.
17. Qh5 Kg7 planning to meet Rh3 with Rh8. 18. Rg3+ Ng6 and now 19. Bd3 Nxe5 20. Re1 f5 21. Rxe5 Rf6, white has the piece back but black might be defending ok. If 19. Nxc6 bxc4 20. Ne7 Be5 and black might be defending. I honestly don't know whether black can hold it together against either of those tries, but I don't yet see the win for white. I also don't know whether white has something better earlier. This could be a very complex attack, it's starting to prove too hard for me without moving the pieces.
White might want to throw in 17. Nxc6 to force the recapture of this knight rather than allowing bxc4 as in the above 2nd line.
BP: very very VERY helpful stuff. Cool idea about the B sac in conjunction with Bf4. I am going to take some time to process this... after work! :)
Yes, I saw your famous musical production. Awesome. I can imagine it now, some hall in Massachussetts (or perhaps New Hampshire or even Maine, but definitely not Vermont) seeing that performance.
RE: Tempo's diagnosis. i wouldn't say "lazy" calculation, but simply calculation (visualization) that is still improving. recall your Danish brilliancy prize game where you thought you had mate in 3 (Rxd6! Qxd6, Qxf7 Kd8, Ng5-e6+? Bc8xe6). oops. this is a visualization issue. i don't believe it's an objectivity issue, b/c your annotations are fair and level. as long as your moves are intellectually driven (not emotionally), you can play ANY move. moves based on disrespect for opponent, impatience, overconfidence, desire to impress people, etc--- these are things to avoid.
Loomis: all these resources I didn't even consider. Perhaps I need to review this game more as a visualization exercise, as I obviously had trouble in the game with this!
Katar: I think you hit the nail on the head. Thanks for the note.
Yes, 3. c3?? is an unsound sacrafice. Chess life recently showed this in a Lenderman game against a GM. He got crushed easily.
Post a Comment
<< Home