Mini 686 - Chess Mafia (Done)

[veerus]

IH, 10...0-0 is followed by 11.Qxf5. That's the point.

6. Qe2 Be7 -- ?? Qe2?? and slow white's development to a screeching hault??

FOS: SensFan

for first suggesting it, though his 7. Qe3 follow-up is decent (but the whole move sequence is wasteful).. 6. Bc4 was best here.

That's complete bullshit. First of all, 51%+ agreed with the move, plan on FoSing them, too? Next, explain exactly what the problem is with pinning the Black Bishop to e7.

I realize that you weren't the only one who voted for the move to happen. My fos is based on the fact that you were the first one to suggest it thus planting the seed for further discussion. That and the subsequent failure to follow up with Qe3 are my only dings against you at the moment. In fact, you didn't even make a case for it, opting to move quickly with Nd5 which, if nothing else, at least planted a seed of doubt in my mind that your original suggestion was geniune. Care to explain what changed your mind?

Anyway, here's why I have a problem with 6. Qe2:
1) it blocked our white squared bishop which hampered development and easy castling
2) the pin did not accomplish

anything

.. in fact, if there's one thing it accomplished is wasted a move for white while "forcing" black to play a natural move that would allow for quicker castling (as evidenced by the current position)
3) it broke one of the cardinal rules of chess -- we brought the queen out too early (read: before our minor pieces are developed) and paid dearly for it in development. Look at the position right now -- black can castle on its next move while it would take us *3* moves to achieve the same. 10. Qe5 allows us to catch up a bit by making one of those 3 moves with tempo.

Also, Pesco, when I looked through the game, I noted when you (and others) suggested poor moves

at that time

thus my comments were not based on the current position.

[Indigo Heron]

I don't like Qe5. Enough said. I could give you an FoS just because of Qe5. You're pinning your hopes on the assumption that Black will not castle.

[SensFan]

3) it broke one of the cardinal rules of chess -- we brought the queen out too early

Yeah, you're so right that that's a hard-fast rule that can never be broken. I mean, imagine how dumb black would have to be to move the Queen in the following scenario:
*chess tag removed*1. f4 e5
2. g4 Qh4*/chess tag removed*

[veerus]

Oh ok, let's set up scenarios to fit a bad argument. That'll show me!

You still haven't answered why you abandoned Qe3 for an inferior move.

[SensFan]

Oh ok, let's set up scenarios to fit a bad argument. That'll show me!

I would argue that an empty (but for the Kings) e-file is a similar, though less extreme, case, though.

Oh, and I don't remember why I dropped it, to be honest. Do you actually want me to go back and see if I can figure out why I dropped it?

[Goatrevolt]

If black castles, why not just grab the free pawn and then work to trade pieces to a favorable endgame?

[Lawrencelot]

So what's the follow-up of Qe5, d6? I don't see the purpose, besides trying to get a pawn.

Unmove

if I didn't already

[The Central Scrutinizer]

3) it broke one of the cardinal rules of chess -- we brought the queen out too early

Yeah, you're so right that that's a hard-fast rule that can never be broken. I mean, imagine how dumb black would have to be to move the Queen in the following scenario:
*chess tag removed*1. f4 e5
2. g4 Qh4*/chess tag removed*

I'm pretty sure fool's mate fails as an exception to how you should properly play chess.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

That was poorly worded. I'm pretty sure you can't use fool's mate to demonstrate that a general rule of playing good chess is wrong... because no one even remotely mediocre is going to play that opening for white.

[SensFan]

That was poorly worded. I'm pretty sure you can't use fool's mate to demonstrate that a general rule of playing good chess is wrong... because no one even remotely mediocre is going to play that opening for white.

Fine. What about 1. e4 e5 2. bc4 bc5 3. qh5 Nf6 4. Qxf7#

[Pesco47]

Back onto the move at hand please.

How I'm seeing the Qe5 sequence:

10. Qe5 d6
11. Qb5+ Bd7

From here taking b7 results in black getting the advantage of development in the trades.

If we go

12. Qxb4 Nd5

Move 13 will be irrelevant since black can now call check from both sides of the board. g3 is by far the safest move we can play.

Unmove, Move g3

[Lawrencelot]

12. Qxb4 results in losing our queen to the bishop

[Pesco47]

The d6 pawn is in the way

[Lawrencelot]

I see. But why shouldn't we move Qc4 after your latest move sequence? I don't see how that situation is good for black, we gain a pawn with a very small cost.

[veerus]

Back onto the move at hand please.

How I'm seeing the Qe5 sequence:

10. Qe5 d6
11. Qb5+ Bd7

From here taking b7 results in black getting the advantage of development in the trades.

If we go

12. Qxb4 Nd5

Move 13 will be irrelevant since black can now call check from both sides of the board. g3 is by far the safest move we can play.

Unmove, Move g3

I'm about | | this close from voting you. I'm still giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're just bad at chess.

Taking on both b7 or b4 would give us a free pawn. After 12. Qxb4 Nd5, there are numerous GREAT replies with Qxb7 being best of the bunch and putting is up 2 pawns.

[veerus]

That was poorly worded. I'm pretty sure you can't use fool's mate to demonstrate that a general rule of playing good chess is wrong... because no one even remotely mediocre is going to play that opening for white.

Fine. What about 1. e4 e5 2. bc4 bc5 3. qh5 Nf6 4. Qxf7#

Not to beat a dead horse, but this also counts as fools mate. Regardless, e4, Bc4, Qf3 (not Qh5) is a valid opening with wild tactical possibilities that I've used effectively in the past. Point is, in this case the opening is designed to to use the queen as a main weapon for quick tactical strikes (primarily the constant mate on f7) and general disarray. In the opening the town has chosen (and most openings in general), the queen is intended to be developed after castling and placing most/all minor pieces into more productive squares (ie.. during the middle game).

[The Central Scrutinizer]

That was poorly worded. I'm pretty sure you can't use fool's mate to demonstrate that a general rule of playing good chess is wrong... because no one even remotely mediocre is going to play that opening for white.

Fine. What about 1. e4 e5 2. bc4 bc5 3. qh5 Nf6 4. Qxf7#

Not to beat a dead horse, but this also counts as fools mate. Regardless, e4, Bc4, Qf3 (not Qh5) is a valid opening with wild tactical possibilities that I've used effectively in the past. Point is, in this case the opening is designed to to use the queen as a main weapon for quick tactical strikes (primarily the constant mate on f7) and general disarray. In the opening the town has chosen (and most openings in general), the queen is intended to be developed after castling and placing most/all minor pieces into more productive squares (ie.. during the middle game).

"Scholar's Mate," I was told as a young 'un.

But this is a distraction.

Is there a reason that we're choosing to play hyperaggressive? Just in general, almost everyone seems to be in tune with shoving our queen out there without the benefit of careful development.

[veerus]

Is there a reason that we're choosing to play hyperaggressive? Just in general, almost everyone seems to be in tune with shoving our queen out there without the benefit of careful development.

Yes. Several in fact:
1) We are behind in development, therefore the time for "careful development" has passed.
2) Qc4 leads to a likely queen exchange which will only highlight our lag in development since our queen is the only active piece we have.
3) Qb5 is just a lesser and poorer Qe5.
4) g3,

currently

, would be a wasted move. Generally, the fianchetto is used so we can park a bishop on the g2 square so it oversees the long diagonal. As long as our pawn is on d4, the bishop (and the previous g3) will be wasted.
5) Qe5 is simply the

best

move we have. It attacks an unprotected pawn and it stops black from completing its development for one move while bringing us one more closer to the same objective.

And yes, you're right.. it is scholar's mate.. that name escaped me..

[Indigo Heron]

If Qe5, than Black goes O-O. We've established that.

However,

11. Qxf5 (your suggestion) d5 which puts the Queen in immediate danger.

12. Qd3 Nh5 (I think) 13. g3 Bf5 (pushing our Queen) 14. Qb5 (which is what Qc4 would bring us, only that Black's side is more developed. An alternative is Qd1). Be4.

*chess tag removed*[white=Everyone][black=? and ?]e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 f4 e6 Nf3 f5 exf5 exf5 Qe2 Be7 Nd5 Nb4 Nxb4 cxb4 d4 Nf6*/chess tag removed*

Looking just 3 moves ahead, I don't like how Black has quickly established itself on our side. Qc4 plays practically the same thing, only that Black has less of a chance to mobilise. Thus, I COMPLETELY DISAGREE with veerus' move, and warn that his move is one of those 'oh-what-could-have-been' moves.

@TCN: For now, g3 is unnecessary. The only immediate threat to the f4 pawn is Nh5, but that can be countered, and it is highly unlikely that Black will play that move if we move Qc4.

@veerus (again): We aren't behind, really. We have a superior position compared to Black. Admittably we lost some of it when we played Qe2 instead of Bc4, but we still have the advantage, and the game is still ours to lose.

[Indigo Heron]

EBWOP:

*chess tag removed*[White Everyone][Black ? and ?]e4 c5 Nc3 Nc6 f4 e6 Nf3 f5 exf5 exf5 Qe2 Be7 Nd5 Nb4 Nxb4 cxb4 d4 Nf6 Qe5 O-O Qxf5 d5 Qd3 Nh5 g3 Bf5 Qb5 Be4*/chess tag removed*

P.S. Sorry, forgot to re-check the board and input new moves.

[veerus]

IH.. this is the first highly useful post I've seen you make all game. I did not see 11....d5. The only change in your diagram that I would make is 14. Qb3, but I agree with the rest of the analysis and will have to consider if this position is better than the one resulting from Qc4. From looking at it right now, Qc4 does look better... I'll sleep on it. More to come tomorrow.

[Pesco47]

Nice backtracking after screaming 'Every move other than Qe5 wll lose us the game!'.

[veerus]

Only have a minute.. will post more later, but I'd like to see what others think. The continuation to Qe5 as shown isn't terrible but it is no longer as attractive as I once thought.

And no, Pesco, I'm not backtracking, I just thought black's best option would be to protect the pawn (with g6, d6 or d5) and not castle and then try to equalize as you've demonstrated. We still come away a pawn ahead, but the question now is whether or not that is worth leaving our king open in the middle of the board. The other continuations (g6, d6, d5) do not lead to such active piece play by black.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Just checking in to say that I'm still not swayed by these arguments.

[sirdanilot]

So, shouldn't we be slowly coming to a solution now?

I'm sorry for not posting much, but I am really no real expert at chess so I can't be that much of help this turn, but still I haven't seen a compelling argument against Qc4, so I'm going to keep my move there for now.