[Use Of Weapons]

Mwahahahah!

dxc6


 current-position.png (51.42K)
Number of downloads: 0


I now have several options. Whatever you do, you're shortly going to be down a bishop. 17. ... Bxc6 or 17. ... Be6 or Bg4 will be followed by Qxd6, which would threaten 18. ... Rd1 and force your Queen to retreat, potentially exchanging. Moving your black bishop would obviously be disastrous and lead to mate in two -- I suggest you don't do that. 17. ... bxc6 is an option, still losing you a bishop but opening up that file for your rook. It would force you to castle kingside fairly shortly, as again Rd1 is a clear danger. If Qxd6 is followed by Nd5, you'd be in serious trouble.

[Obdigore]

Our best move is Q A5 - C7.

[Obdigore]

I've decided that A8->D8 is a better move, and does not put our queen at risk if he stacks a rook in D.

[Use Of Weapons]

I think you really need to respond to the immediate threat first. You can't keep losing material

[Obdigore]

I am. There is not a single move that prevents us from loosing a bishop, so I'm suggesting how we are going to be positioned and dictating which bishop you take.

[Mentalist]

Sir Thursday, on 16 September 2011 - 08:24 AM, said:

I don't think we even need to exchange on d5. That just lets White get rid of his doubled pawns. We might as well play Bd7 straight away. In fact, I feel pretty strongly that that's the right call (we can always make the exchange later if we want to redevelop the bishop on the Queenside).


Bd7

??????????

do we WANT to lose a bishop?

who cares about doubled up pawns, position is more important!

[Mentalist]

obdi, what do you htink about 0-0-0? it puts th rook where it needs to be, and gives us a chance to get our king out of the centre at the same time

[Tapper]

What about Bd7-g4? Sure, we'll lose material to his queen, but the line to our king is covered. Alternatively, what about Qa5-c7?
We'll trade a bishop for his advanced pawn, in that case, but stem his queen's attack. Gotta say though, we're all over the place and very few pieces are covering each other. Oh well

This post has been edited by Tapper: 16 September 2011 - 07:53 PM

[Tapper]

Mentalist, on 16 September 2011 - 05:00 PM, said:

obdi, what do you htink about 0-0-0? it puts th rook where it needs to be, and gives us a chance to get our king out of the centre at the same time

Possible.

If we go 17. ....0-0-0,
18. Qd6 leaves our bishop threatened and now covered by his queen. Our counter could be Bxc6 then, having his queen face our lined up rooks, but then
19. Qf6 threatens 20. Ra1-d1.

[Mentalist]

Having said that, i then thought of c:b7+
that could cause problems.

[Sir Thursday]

Oh jeez, I'm really sorry guys. First time I decide not to bother consulting with others and look what happens . I don't know how I missed the discovered attack on the bishop...probably cost us the game now. My bad.


ST

[Obdigore]

Mentalist, on 16 September 2011 - 05:00 PM, said:

obdi, what do you htink about 0-0-0? it puts th rook where it needs to be, and gives us a chance to get our king out of the centre at the same time

If we castle we lose both bishops. I would much rather Q -> C7

[Use Of Weapons]

Castling Queenside wouldn't lose both bishops, as after cxd7, Rxd7 would leave your other bishop protected.

[Obdigore]

UseOfWeapons, on 20 September 2011 - 10:18 AM, said:

Castling Queenside wouldn't lose both bishops, as after cxd7, Rxd7 would leave your other bishop protected.

Unless you do Q -> D6 after the castle.

[Use Of Weapons]

But I wouldn't do that, because 17. ... 0-0-0 18.Qxd6 would allow you to play bxc6 or, even better, Bxc6, removing the pawn and forcing my Queen to retreat for the loss of a tempo.

[Use Of Weapons]

So....?

[Mentalist]

I still think castling is a better option. Qc7 will becountered by Nd5, which just leads to no end of trouble for us.

one of the bishops is a lost cause, but with 0-0-0 we complete development and can try challenging white for the d-file.

[Gust Hubb]

What about the bishop at d7 moving down to g4?

I am totally not a chess person, so this is more of just a hypothetical.

This post has been edited by Gust Hubb: 22 September 2011 - 02:03 AM

[Mentalist]

well, then we lose the d6 bishop, still, and have to deal with the potentially very problematic C pawn.
not to mention White will have his queen deep in our territory, with a lot of backing (N95, RC1, RD1 being a few likely examples)

[Mentalist]

well, then we lose the d6 bishop, still, and have to deal with the potentially very problematic C pawn.
not to mention White will have his queen deep in our territory, with a lot of backing (N95, RC1, RD1 being a few likely examples)