[pgn][Event "Blitz 45m+30s-45m+30s"]
[Site "Potomac"]
[Date "2017.08.21"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Komodo 1918.00 64-bit"]
[Black "Rensch, Danny"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Annotator "Kaufman,Larry"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "1rbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/1PPPPPPP/1NBQKBNR w Kk - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "123"]
[TimeControl "45' + 30"]
{6144MB, Book2016.ctg, 24core} 1. e4 {-0.56/27 96} d5 {335} 2. exd5 {-0.54/28
64} Qxd5 {298} 3. Nf3 {-0.73/32 0} Nf6 {108} 4. Nc3 {-0.80/32 34} Qa5 {110} 5.
Bd3 {-0.83/33 261} g6 {146 (e5)} 6. O-O {-0.76/30 106} Bg7 {259} 7. Bb5+ {
-0.95/32 0} Bd7 {229 (c6)} 8. Bxd7+ {-0.87/29 56} Nxd7 {36} 9. Re1 {-1.06/29 28
} e6 {56} 10. Ne4 {-1.12/31 134} O-O {57} 11. h4 {-1.23/31 116} Nf6 {261 (Rfe8)
} 12. Nxf6+ {-1.12/31 107} Bxf6 {23} 13. d3 {-1.31/31 62} Rbd8 {162 (Bg7)} 14.
Bd2 {-1.24/31 86} Qd5 {319 (Qb6)} 15. Qc1 {-1.22/32 219} Bh8 {322 (Bg7)} 16.
Bf4 {-1.27/30 163} c5 {38} 17. Be5 {-1.31/33 103} f6 {36 (c4)} 18. Bc3 {
-1.21/31 62} b5 {52} 19. Qe3 {-1.52/31 94} Rfe8 {174 (b4)} 20. b3 {-1.56/30 91}
c4 {151 (Bg7)} 21. dxc4 {-1.40/32 60} bxc4 {16} 22. b4 {-1.52/32 25} Rd7 {
122 (e5)} 23. Ra1 {-1.25/31 58} Ree7 {226 (Bg7)} 24. Qe2 {-1.37/31 98} e5 {
98 (Bg7)} 25. Nd2 {-1.84/32 143} Rc7 {14 (f5)} 26. Ra5 {-0.82/30 59} Qf7 {22}
27. h5 {-0.76/30 25} Red7 {48 (e4)} 28. hxg6 {0} hxg6 {-0.74/28 0} 29. Ra6 {0}
Re7 {0} 30. Ne4 {-0.67/31 44} Re6 {3} 31. Ra5 {-0.81/33 114} Bg7 {3 (Rb6)} 32.
Rd5 {-0.28/24 1} Bf8 {124} 33. Qd1 {-0.58/30 8} Kg7 {93 (Be7)} 34. g4 {0.00/36
25} Kg8 {55 (Be7)} 35. g5 {0.05/33 39} f5 {12} 36. Nf6+ {0.00/34 11} Rxf6 {9}
37. gxf6 {0.00/37 7} Qxf6 {5} 38. Rxe5 {0.00/39 30} Qg5+ {57} 39. Kf1 {0.00/41
0} Re7 {106 (Qh4)} 40. Qd5+ {0.96/29 29} Kh7 {12} 41. Rxe7+ {0.98/30 12} Qxe7 {
60} 42. Qxc4 {0.88/32 0} Bg7 {27 (Qd7)} 43. Be1 {0.83/30 39} g5 {23 (Qd7)} 44.
b5 {0.88/30 24} g4 {45 (Qd7)} 45. Qd5 {0.18/33 62} Kg6 {211 (Qe5)} 46. Bd2 {
0.55/30 32} Bf6 {58 (Be5)} 47. Be3 {2.86/29 14} Bg5 {43 (Bc3)} 48. Bc5 {
4.19/30 34} Qc7 {26 (Qf6)} 49. Qg8+ {250.00/26 9} Kh5 {32 (Kh6)} 50. Qe8+ {
250.00/34 4} Kh6 {18} 51. Qe6+ {250.00/31 0} Kh5 {31} 52. Qxf5 {250.00/38 0}
Qb7 {18} 53. Be3 {250.00/37 0} Qe7 {129 (Qh1+)} 54. Bxg5 {250.00/28 20} Qxg5 {
16} 55. Qh7+ {250.00/30 0} Qh6 {18} 56. Qxh6+ {250.00/32 0} Kxh6 {12} 57. c4 {
250.00/33 0} Kg5 {15 (Kg7)} 58. c5 {250.00/33 4} Kf6 {16 (Kf5)} 59. b6 {
250.00/31 5} axb6 {22 (Ke6)} 60. cxb6 {250.00/30 4} Ke6 {16} 61. b7 {1/0 0} Kd7
{22} 62. b8=Q {1/0 0} 1-0[/pgn]
Revised chess.com handicap match
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 6052
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm
-
- Posts: 1346
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:47 pm
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
Maybe no blunder but many innacurency. Danny quickly played defensive with material advantage. I don't think it's good. I think you need a top 10 GM to win this handicap match.
-
- Posts: 6052
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
1...d5 opens the game, when with less minors you would like to first close itJJJ wrote:Maybe no blunder but many innacurency. Danny quickly played defensive with material advantage. I don't think it's good. I think you need a top 10 GM to win this handicap match.
11...Nf6 seems not good, h5 seems much better
15...Bh8 is extremely strange, seemingly e5 or h5 are much stronger
17...f6 is also strange, why not change bishops
this is just without board, maybe I make here some mistakes either.
advantage is big, but playing with rook for minor against engine is awkward.
-
- Posts: 2821
- Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 9:38 pm
- Location: Sortland, Norway
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
I propose this setup against GM level strength.JJJ wrote:Maybe no blunder but many innacurency. Danny quickly played defensive with material advantage. I don't think it's good. I think you need a top 10 GM to win this handicap match.
Code: Select all
1rbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/1PPPPPP1/1NBQKBNR w Kk - 0 1
-
- Posts: 1346
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:47 pm
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
Seems enough to get 50% oddsNordlandia wrote:I propose this setup against GM level strength.JJJ wrote:Maybe no blunder but many innacurency. Danny quickly played defensive with material advantage. I don't think it's good. I think you need a top 10 GM to win this handicap match.
Code: Select all
1rbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/1PPPPPP1/1NBQKBNR w Kk - 0 1
-
- Posts: 1346
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:47 pm
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
I m way below GM level, but to me BH8 was very bad.Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:1...d5 opens the game, when with less minors you would like to first close itJJJ wrote:Maybe no blunder but many innacurency. Danny quickly played defensive with material advantage. I don't think it's good. I think you need a top 10 GM to win this handicap match.
11...Nf6 seems not good, h5 seems much better
15...Bh8 is extremely strange, seemingly e5 or h5 are much stronger
17...f6 is also strange, why not change bishops
this is just without board, maybe I make here some mistakes either.
advantage is big, but playing with rook for minor against engine is awkward.
-
- Posts: 5960
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:15 am
- Location: Maryland USA
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
I don't agree about the first move, I think it was excellent. His advantage grew very much in the first 15 or so moves. Rooks need open files, so I don't know whiy you think he should try to close the position.Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:1...d5 opens the game, when with less minors you would like to first close itJJJ wrote:Maybe no blunder but many innacurency. Danny quickly played defensive with material advantage. I don't think it's good. I think you need a top 10 GM to win this handicap match.
11...Nf6 seems not good, h5 seems much better
15...Bh8 is extremely strange, seemingly e5 or h5 are much stronger
17...f6 is also strange, why not change bishops
this is just without board, maybe I make here some mistakes either.
advantage is big, but playing with rook for minor against engine is awkward.
Komodo rules!
-
- Posts: 349
- Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2016 8:31 pm
- Location: United States
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
His biggest mistake was taking so much time to play the first few moves as he described his plans to the audience.lkaufman wrote: I don't agree about the first move, I think it was excellent. His advantage grew very much in the first 15 or so moves. Rooks need open files, so I don't know whiy you think he should try to close the position.
-
- Posts: 6052
- Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:41 pm
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
I don't know, that is my experience in playing similar setups.lkaufman wrote:I don't agree about the first move, I think it was excellent. His advantage grew very much in the first 15 or so moves. Rooks need open files, so I don't know whiy you think he should try to close the position.Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:1...d5 opens the game, when with less minors you would like to first close itJJJ wrote:Maybe no blunder but many innacurency. Danny quickly played defensive with material advantage. I don't think it's good. I think you need a top 10 GM to win this handicap match.
11...Nf6 seems not good, h5 seems much better
15...Bh8 is extremely strange, seemingly e5 or h5 are much stronger
17...f6 is also strange, why not change bishops
this is just without board, maybe I make here some mistakes either.
advantage is big, but playing with rook for minor against engine is awkward.
possibly, as rooks develop slower in the opening, opening the game will mean the side with more rooks will have less pieces developed for some time pitted against enemy's well-developed minors, which might be dangerous in a range of situations.
of course, everything will depend on the particular setup.
closing the game, on the other hand, will give sufficient time for the rooks to develop, something like that, never played many games like this.
-
- Posts: 1346
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 1:47 pm
Re: Revised chess.com handicap match
Danny lost game two, that's too bad he made a big blunder.