![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
"Brian"
Jul 2007
The Netherlands
63168 Posts |
We've been looking exclusively at 22.Qc1 now, but I think we also have an alternative in 22.Qb1 leaving the bishop on e4 defended and intending, or keeping the option of, 22...Nxf1 23.Kxf1.
I see no possible moves other than 22.Qc1 or 22.Qb1. Am I correct in that? |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
May 2003
30138 Posts |
It seems to me that those are the only decent moves. The differences I see between
22. Qb1 Nxf8 23. Bxb7 Nd2 and 22. Qc2 Nxf8 23. Bxb7 Nd2 are (A) under Qb1, black has the option to move their bishop (say to f8) to try and use it later to keep pressure on our king, (B) under Qb1 we have the option of taking their knight if they do take our rook, thus bringing it more into play, (C) we will also likely trade white bishops in this line, thus bringing our queen out. From what I've been able to see so far, I like Qb1 better. I like taking their knight after it takes the rook. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
"Rich"
Aug 2002
Benicia, California
171810 Posts |
I prefer 22. Qb1 also. Here's one line resulting:
22. Qb1 Nxf1 23. Kxf1 Bc8 24. Bg2 Rd3 25. Be4 Bf5 26. Bxf5 Rxf5 |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
"Brian"
Jul 2007
The Netherlands
CCE16 Posts |
I agree. 22.Qb1, intending to answer ...Nxf1 with Kxf1, gets my vote.
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)
3·23·89 Posts |
I don't see any real difference between the two. Qb1 seems to gives another option or two which it might make sense to use depending on their move.
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
"Brian"
Jul 2007
The Netherlands
2·11·149 Posts |
[QUOTE=henryzz;332043]I don't see any real difference between the two. Qb1 seems to gives another option or two which it might make sense to use depending on their move.[/QUOTE]
I think the difference is fairly important because 22.Qc1 leads to the forced sequence 22...Nxf1 23.Bxb7 Nd2 whereas if the queen was on b1 in this line we would have to move it again now because it would be attacked. It was Rich who pointed that out when we were discussing move 20. Therefore we really need to decide now whether we want to let Black keep the knight and play Bxb7 (when we need to put the queen on c1), or whether we want to remove the black knight from the board (in which case the queen must go to b1). |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Liverpool (GMT/BST)
3·23·89 Posts |
Sorry I was thinking without a board.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
May 2003
110000010112 Posts |
I feel like black is stronger with the knight, because it gives extra added support to the rooks. Whereas, without the knight, they would have to use each other to do anything, and that opens up their king to attack from our queen.
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
May 2003
7·13·17 Posts |
The move Qb1 does open up a lot of alternatives for black. They could play, for example (and no, I don't think this is a good move order for them, but it gives them something to chew on, which is good for us):
22. Qb1 Rd2 23. Bxb7 Rfd8 and we seem to be doing just fine if we play carefully. |
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
"Rich"
Aug 2002
Benicia, California
2·859 Posts |
My preference is to remove their knight since it's in a harassing position.
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
"Brian"
Jul 2007
The Netherlands
2·11·149 Posts |
Yes, I'm getting a much more optimistic feeling for our position than I've had for many moves, given that we can remove their dangerous knight if they take our f1 rook with it. I'm definitely in favour of playing 22.Qb1.
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Stockfish game: "Move 9 poll", not "move 2^74,207,281-1 discussion" | MooMoo2 | Other Chess Games | 1 | 2016-10-25 18:03 |
| Stockfish game: "Move 8 poll", not "move 3.14159 discussion" | MooMoo2 | Other Chess Games | 5 | 2016-10-22 01:55 |
| Stockfish game: "Move 5 poll", not "move 0 discussion" | MooMoo2 | Other Chess Games | 0 | 2016-10-05 15:50 |
| Stockfish game: "Move 4 poll", not "move 100 discussion" | MooMoo2 | Other Chess Games | 0 | 2016-09-28 19:51 |
| Stockfish game: "Move 2 poll", not "move 2 discussion" | MooMoo2 | Other Chess Games | 0 | 2016-09-19 19:56 |