White 26

[cheesehead]

[B]List of all our legal moves[/B]

At top are the possibly viable moves, which each have at least one good reason and no immediate refutation. [I](=> They're in order of board position, [U]not merit[/U]![/I] <=) Leading "*" denotes a leading candidate move.

Leading "?" denotes dubious move, listed after non-dubious moves. Moves for which I've seen no apparent good reason (but please point out those for which you see good reason!) are listed, stuck-out, below the dubious moves. Concretely-refuted moves are listed, stuck-out, at the very bottom.

[B]26 Rd1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares possible future defense of d4)

[B]26 Rf1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, places it on open file pointing at f8 next to Black king, but also places it on target diagonal of future ... Ba6)

[B]* 26 Ne4[/B] (gets N/c5 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up)

[B]26 d5[/B] (gets pawn off d4-fork square, attacks the N/c6, but allows Black to swap isolated e-pawn)

[B]26 Nc2[/B] (gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, adds defender to d4, invites ... b3 kick to lock the Q-side pawns)

[B]* 26 Nxc4[/B] (captures pawn and thus reduces our potential weakness at d3, gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up, guards against possible future ... Rb2 after b-file opens, but might be vulnerable to future ... Ba6 pin against f1 if N/c5 moves)

[B]26 Ng4[/B] (gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nxh6 or Bxh6 follow-up)

-

? [B]26 Ra2[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, invites ... b3 kick to lock the Q-side pawns, but is cramped position)

? [B]26 Rc1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, but renders it vulnerable to ... Ne2+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4)

? [B]26 Re1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, guards e2, but renders it vulnerable to ... Nf3+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4 if we've played Bf1 or Bh3)

? [B]26 Kf1[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, gets king off the d4-fork diagonal, but interferes with Rf1 and leaves it on possible future ... Ba6 pin diagonal)

? [B] 26 Kf2[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, but leaves king on the d4-fork diagonal)

? [B]26 Be4[/B] (makes B more active, attacks g6, but probably best played later)

? [B]26 Bf1[/B] (attacks c4 pawn, but interferes with Rf1)

? [B]26 Bf3[/B] (prepares for Bd1 if that would be desirable to guard c2 or b3, but probably best played later)

? [B]26 Bh3[/B] (attacks e6 pawn, but leaves this unprotected B subject to discovered attack via ... e5 or future ... exd5)

-

[strike][B]26 Nf1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Kh1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Bxc6+[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Bh1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 g4[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 h3[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 h4[/B][/strike] no good reason

-

[strike]26 Ra3[/strike] concretely refuted by ... bxa3
[strike]26 Rb1[/strike] concretely refuted by ... bxc3
[strike]26 b3[/strike] concretely refuted by ... cxb3
[strike]26 cxb4[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Nxd4
[strike]26 Na6[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxa6
[strike]26 Nb7[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxb7
[strike]26 Nd7[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxd7
[strike]26 Nxe6[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxe6
[strike]26 Nd5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exd5
[strike]26 Nf5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exf5
[strike]26 Bd5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exd5

*********************************************************

[QUOTE=cheesehead;369798]I've discovered that I seem to have been using "GMT" incorrectly, and that I should've been using "UTC" in its place.

GMT starts at noon, not midnight as I've been assuming.[/QUOTE]Apparently, I got that old definition from an astronomical site. Astronomers used to use GMT-starting-at-noon, but that's just for historical reference now.

[QUOTE=cheesehead;371454]I'm going to note the deadline time here as 11:08 UTC, as it was for the most recent on-time move.[/QUOTE]

[quote=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwich_mean_time]Historically the term GMT has been used with two different conventions, sometimes numbering hours starting at midnight and sometimes starting at noon.[/quote]

I just noticed that BBC World Service radio uses "GMT" in the start-at-midnight sense, at least in its broadcast to the Americas that's picked up by my local NPR station.

Sorry for the mixup, guys. I'm back on GMT-starting-at-midnight now.

[cheesehead]

Revised candidate move list:

[B]* 26 Nxc4[/B] (captures pawn and thus reduces our potential weakness at d3, gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up, guards against possible future ... Rb2 after b-file opens, but might be vulnerable to future ... Ba6 pin against f1 if N/c5 moves)

If [B]26 ... Nxd4 27 cxd4 Bxd4+ 28 Be3[/B] we're up a knight for one pawn (and that's an isolani with dim future prospects) and the center of the board has been cleared of pawns, wide open for us to exploit our material advantage with moves such as Rd1, Re1 or Rf1. But I'd expect Black to play ... bxc3 before ... Nxd4.

If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Nxd4[/B] shows that we haven't quite yet solved our d4-fork problem because we can't yet afford 28 cxd4 -- we have to get our rook or king off the diagonal from d4 to do that. So,
[B]28 Re1[/B] (not 28 Rc1 Ne2+) would prevent ... Ne2+, threaten to capture the e-isolani, [I]and, by at last solving our d4-fork problem, threaten 29 cxd4.[/I] That knight has to retreat with
[B]28 ... Nc6[/B] or [B]28 ... Nf5[/B], because otherwise we just capture it before it can capture anything else of ours (If 28 ... Nc2 29 Rc1), whereupon (either case) we capture Black's e-pawn with [B]
29 Nxe6[/B].

If [B]26 ... e5?
[/B][B]27 d5 [/B] (not 27 dxe5 mundane pawn swap favoring Black) forces [B]27 ... Na7[/B] or [B]27 ... Nd8[/B]. Now
[B]28 Nd6+[/B] forces either
[B]28 ... Kd8[/B] (if 27 ... Na7) or
[B]28 ... Kf8[/B] where 29 Rf1+ is uncomfortable for Black. or we could make different threats with
[B]28 Re1[/B] (instead of the 28 Nxa5 pawn grab) which aims at both the e-pawn and, behind it, Black's N/e7 and K/e8, threatening 29 Nxe5 and 30 Nxg6. If 29 ... Bxe5 30 Rxe5 threatening 31 d6 if Black doesn't move his king. (And his a5-pawn is still undefended.)

If [B]26 ... (what?) [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]* 26 Ne4[/B] (gets N/c5 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up)
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]26 Rd1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares possible future defense of d4)
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

[B]26 Rf1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, places it on open file pointing at f8 next to Black king, but also places it on target diagonal of future ... Ba6)
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

[B]26 d5[/B] (gets pawn off d4-fork square, attacks the N/c6, but allows Black to swap isolated e-pawn)
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

[B]26 Nc2[/B] (gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, adds defender to d4, invites ... b3 kick to lock the Q-side pawns)
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

[B]26 Ng4[/B] (gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nxh6 or Bxh6 follow-up)
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

-

? [B]26 Ra2[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, invites ... b3 kick to lock the Q-side pawns, but leaves R in cramped position)

? [B]26 Rc1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, but renders it vulnerable to ... Ne2+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4)

? [B]26 Re1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, guards e2, but renders it vulnerable to ... Nf3+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4 if we've played Bf1 or Bh3)

? [B]26 Kf1[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, gets king off the d4-fork diagonal, but interferes with Rf1 and leaves it on possible future ... Ba6 pin diagonal)

? [B] 26 Kf2[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, but leaves king on the d4-fork diagonal)

? [B]26 Be4[/B] (makes B more active, attacks g6, but probably best played later)

? [B]26 Bf1[/B] (attacks c4 pawn, but interferes with Rf1)

? [B]26 Bf3[/B] (prepares for Bd1 if that would be desirable to guard c2 or b3, but probably best played later)

? [B]26 Bh3[/B] (attacks e6 pawn, but leaves this unprotected B subject to discovered attack via ... e5 or future ... exd5)

-

[strike][B]26 Nf1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Kh1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Bxc6+[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Bh1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 g4[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 h3[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 h4[/B][/strike] no good reason

-

[strike]26 Ra3[/strike] concretely refuted by ... bxa3
[strike]26 Rb1[/strike] concretely refuted by ... bxc3
[strike]26 b3[/strike] concretely refuted by ... cxb3
[strike]26 cxb4[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Nxd4
[strike]26 Na6[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxa6
[strike]26 Nb7[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxb7
[strike]26 Nd7[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxd7
[strike]26 Nxe6[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxe6
[strike]26 Nd5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exd5
[strike]26 Nf5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exf5
[strike]26 Bd5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exd5

[cheesehead]

Updated candidate move list:

[B]* 26 Nxc4[/B] (captures pawn and thus reduces our potential weakness at d3, gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up, guards against possible future ... Rb2 after b-file opens, but might be vulnerable to future ... Ba6 pin against f1 if N/c5 moves)

If [B]26 ... Nxd4 27 cxd4 Bxd4+ 28 Be3[/B] we're up a knight for one pawn (and that's an isolani with dim future prospects) and the center of the board has been cleared of pawns, wide open for us to exploit our material advantage with moves such as Rd1, Re1 or Rf1. But I'd expect Black to play ... bxc3 before ... Nxd4.

If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Nxd4[/B] shows that we haven't quite yet solved our d4-fork problem because we can't yet afford 28 cxd4. We'll have to get our rook or king off its d4-diagonal to do that. So,
[B]28 Re1[/B] (not 28 Rc1 Ne2+) would prevent ... Ne2+, threaten to capture the e-isolani, [I]and, by at last solving our d4-fork problem, threaten 29 cxd4.[/I] That knight has to retreat with
[B]28 ... Nc6[/B] or [B]28 ... Nf5[/B], because otherwise we just capture it before it can capture anything else of ours (If 28 ... Nc2 29 Rc1), whereupon (either case) we capture Black's e-pawn with [B]
29 Nxe6[/B].

If [B]26 ... e5
[/B][B]27 d5 [/B] (not 27 dxe5 mundane pawn swap favoring Black) forces [B]27 ... Na7[/B] or [B]27 ... Nd8[/B]. Now
[B]28 Nd6+[/B] forces either
[B]28 ... Kd8[/B] (if 27 ... Na7) or
[B]28 ... Kf8[/B] where 29 Rf1+ is uncomfortable for Black. or we could make different threats with
[B]28 Re1[/B] (instead of the 28 Nxa5 pawn grab) which aims at both the e-pawn and, behind it, Black's N/e7 and K/e8, threatening 29 Nxe5 and 30 Nxg6. If 29 ... Bxe5 30 Rxe5 threatening 31 d6 if Black doesn't move his king. (And his a5-pawn is still undefended.)

If [B]26 ... (what else?) [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]26 Rd1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares possible future defense of d4)
If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Rb2 28 Nxc4[/B], could the rook hang around with 28 ... Ra2 and maybe cause trouble?
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what else?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]26 Rf1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, places it on open file pointing at f8 next to Black king, but also places it on target diagonal of future ... Ba6)
If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Rb2 28 Nxc4[/B], could the rook hang around with 28 ... Ra2 and maybe cause trouble?
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what else?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]26 Ne4[/B] (gets N/c5 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up, _but takes the N off its powerful c5 outpost where it cramped both the R/b8 and B/c8_)
If [B]26 ... Nf5[/B]
Here, if [B]27 Nd6+ Nxd6 28 Bxc6+ Bd7 29 Bxd7+ Kxd7[/B], this two-piece swap-down might be to the long-term disadvantage of the side with the isolated pawn, but meanwhile Black's rid of our cramping N/c5, his N/d6 guards his c4-pawn, and his king is more centralized than ours for the endgame. We should do something else on move 27.
If [B]27 Nxf5 exf5[/B] we've enabled Black to reconnect his isolani.
If [B]27 g4[/B] allows the inconvenient [B]27 ... Nh4[/B]. If then 28 Bf1 or Bh3, 28 ... Nf3+ and 29 ... Nxd2 pulls our N/e4 back from the front lines. Maybe all this is to our long-term advantage for nabbing Black pawns, but meanwhile it just dissipates the initiative we had going.
If [B]27 Nxc4[/B] here Black can reply 27 ... Ba6 and we're not as well off as if we'd just played [B]26 Nxc4[/B].

Verdict: [B]26 Ne4[/B] may be worse than useful, now that there's no B on f6 to chase.

-

[B]26 d5[/B] (gets pawn off d4-fork square, attacks the N/c6, but allows Black to swap isolated e-pawn)
If [b]26 ... exd5 27 Nxd5 Nxd5 28 Bxd5 Ne7 29 Bxc4 bxc3 30 bxc3 (or 30 Bxc3 Bxc3 31 bxc3 ?) we're a pawn up, but it's an isolated one.
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what else?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]26 Ng4[/B] (gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nxh6 or Bxh6 follow-up)
if [B]26 ... h5[/B] just kicks our knight back, unless we see some use for it on h6. There, it has little force on f7, because Black can just take it with Bxh6 -- but of course, then after our Bxh6 re-capture, we'd have a powerful dagger pointing at f8.

Verdict: Problematic without specific tactical justification for Nh6 follow-up.

-

? [B]26 Ra2[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, invites ... b3 kick to lock the Q-side pawns, but leaves R in cramped position)

? [B]26 Rc1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, but renders it vulnerable to ... Ne2+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4)

? [B]26 Re1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, guards e2, but renders it vulnerable to ... Nf3+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4 if we've played Bf1 or Bh3)

? [B]26 Nc2[/B] (gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, adds defender to d4, invites ... b3 kick to lock the Q-side pawns)
There seems to be no purpose here for this N unless Black is so foolish as to advance with ... b3 so we can replay Na3 (or Ne3).

? [B]26 Kf1[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, gets king off the d4-fork diagonal, but interferes with Rf1 and leaves it on possible future ... Ba6 pin diagonal)

? [B] 26 Kf2[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, but leaves king on the d4-fork diagonal)

? [B]26 Be4[/B] (makes B more active, attacks g6, but probably best played later)

? [B]26 Bf1[/B] (attacks c4 pawn, but interferes with Rf1)

? [B]26 Bf3[/B] (prepares for Bd1 if that would be desirable to guard c2 or b3, but probably best played later)

? [B]26 Bh3[/B] (attacks e6 pawn, but leaves this unprotected B subject to discovered attack via ... e5 or future ... exd5)

-

[strike][B]26 Nf1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Kh1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Bxc6+[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 Bh1[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 g4[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 h3[/B][/strike] no good reason
[strike][B]26 h4[/B][/strike] no good reason

-

[strike]26 Ra3[/strike] concretely refuted by ... bxa3
[strike]26 Rb1[/strike] concretely refuted by ... bxc3
[strike]26 b3[/strike] concretely refuted by ... cxb3
[strike]26 cxb4[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Nxd4
[strike]26 Na6[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxa6
[strike]26 Nb7[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxb7
[strike]26 Nd7[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxd7
[strike]26 Nxe6[/strike] concretely refuted by ... Bxe6
[strike]26 Nd5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exd5
[strike]26 Nf5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exf5
[strike]26 Bd5[/strike] concretely refuted by ... exd5

[LaurV]

[QUOTE=cheesehead;371627]Updated candidate move list:

<snip>

? [B]26 Bf1[/B] (attacks c4 pawn, but interferes with Rf1)

? [B]26 Bf3[/B] (prepares for Bd1 if that would be desirable to guard c2 or b3, but probably best played later)

? [B]26 Bh3[/B] (attacks e6 pawn, but leaves this unprotected B subject to discovered attack via ... e5 or future ... exd5)

<snip>


[/QUOTE]
I first had a look to the moves you marked with question mark, to shorten the list and help you concentrate better to the "good" moves.

I would strike those 3 out, all of them. After ...Nxd4, we must take the horse, otherwise they check Nf3 and we lose the bishop on d2. Moving the bishop in g2 out of the main diagonal is bad for us right now.

Still looking.

[LaurV]

We can also strike 26 Nc2, after the exchange in b-c they play Rb2 and we are in deep dung, Rc1 does not save the horse/bishop, after Nxd4. This is bad for us.

We can also strike 26 d5, after exd, bxc, etc, we help them exchange and/or develop those horses and the bishop, i.e. we give active pieces for their passive crap. Bad for us.

26 Bh1 - too passive. We lose a tempo which they gave us for free. No effect against Nxd4, eventually Nb3 after, bad for us.

26 Be4 - this is interesting, but the best we can do is 26...bxc 27 bxc Nxd4 28 Nxc4 Ne2+ Kf1 Nxc3, and now if we want to play Re1, then our own bishop is on the way, we need to lose a move to take it out from there. I don't like it, we can play directly 26 Nxc4, two moves earlier and gain two tempos (that is why I said they actually gave as one additional tempo, we already had the sente here, indeed this Bg7 was a mistake!)

[LaurV]

Small deviation for the 26 Nc2 bxc3: a better response for us seems to be 27 Bxc3 (big B instead of small b). Yet, in this case 27...Nd5 28 Re1, it seems black has a good escape with Kf7. It seems weak at the first sight, his king undefeated in the middle, but we can't beat the e6 pawn (two against two), Re1 (check) is futile (helps them to bring the king even better, e7 then d6 or so), and we can't take the horse (help them to connect the pawns, already too advanced). I think we can strike 26 Nc2, for sure.

Other moves we can't really strike (including Rc1, Rd1, Re1, they are defensive, but not bad).

[LaurV]

[QUOTE=cheesehead;371627]
[B]* 26 Nxc4[/B] (captures pawn and thus reduces our potential weakness at d3, gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up, guards against possible future ... Rb2 after b-file opens, but might be vulnerable to future ... Ba6 pin against f1 if N/c5 moves)

If [B]26 ... Nxd4 27 cxd4 Bxd4+ 28 Be3[/B] we're up a knight for one pawn (and that's an isolani with dim future prospects) and the center of the board has been cleared of pawns, wide open for us to exploit our material advantage with moves such as Rd1, Re1 or Rf1. But I'd expect Black to play ... bxc3 before ... Nxd4.

If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Nxd4[/B] shows that we haven't quite yet solved our d4-fork problem because we can't yet afford 28 cxd4. We'll have to get our rook or king off its d4-diagonal to do that. So,
[B]28 Re1[/B] (not 28 Rc1 Ne2+) would prevent ... Ne2+, threaten to capture the e-isolani, [I]and, by at last solving our d4-fork problem, threaten 29 cxd4.[/I] That knight has to retreat with
[B]28 ... Nc6[/B] or [B]28 ... Nf5[/B], because otherwise we just capture it before it can capture anything else of ours (If 28 ... Nc2 29 Rc1), whereupon (either case) we capture Black's e-pawn with [B]
29 Nxe6[/B].
[/QUOTE]

Well, I really like the Nxc4 version, as you shown it in your post, I don't need to go further. I say that Nxc4 is our best reply, we can't do better that that! We have the tempo. We take one pawn. We put the horse very well for a d6 attack which also cover f7. We also defend b2, so they can't place the rook there after the b-c exchange, we have very strong position for the horses. Black can't go directly Nxd4, because 27 cxd4 Bxd4+ 28 Be3 and they just lost a horse. If they don't want to exchange the b-c, then they need to defend both the e6 and h6 (to be able to get the bishop mobile) and they need to block out Bf4 (no place for the black rook) so either "Nd8 Re1 g5", or otherwise, "g5 Re1 Nd8". After which 28 h4 gxh 29 Bf4 - no place for the rook (as said), e5? we take it, Nxe5, look to that position, they are doomed. Black Bxe5, Bxe5, g3xh4, we have two pawns more, like half queen already :razz:

So, the only reasonable path for them would be the exchange of b-c, then sacrifice the horse in the middle to get out of this. Which we don't bite:

26 Nxc4 bxc3 27 bxc3 Nxd4 28 Re1, they must run back with the horse, otherwise is lost, Nc6 29 Nxe6 Bxe6 30 Rxe6 - we have the rook on line 6, like someone who I know wanted long ago :razz:

This is good for us. We are going to win it... hopes are back.

My vote:

Nxc4 - 5 points
Other moves: 0 points.

I go to bed, 11 PM here, tomorrow back to work - no Easter holiday here, this would be a lot of fun to get a [U]third[/U] holiday this month, after my AV in the beginning of the month, Songkran last week, now Easter, it would be fun, but unfortunately nobody celebrates Easter here, beside of few American neighbors and my wife...

[cheesehead]

[QUOTE=cheesehead;371525][QUOTE=cheesehead;371506][QUOTE=LaurV;371497]Yeah, I could not believe it too, I was also looking to that for a while last night (about 2 hours!) with the feeling that they made a mistake.[/QUOTE]

Or they see something we don't ...[/QUOTE]

Ah, I think I have it now. They may indeed have seen a threat we had not yet realized we had -- a convergence of force at f8.[/QUOTE]

As my subconscious explained to me when I woke up this morning, it's much simpler than that.

If they hadn't played 25 ... Bg7 (or 25 ... Ng8), then we could have won their a-pawn with 26 Ng4.

(Of course, they didn't know that we didn't even mention Ng4 as a follow-up to 25 Ne3 during our move 25 analysis.)

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

[QUOTE=LaurV;371631]I would strike those 3 out, all of them.[/QUOTE](Bf1, Bf3, Bh3) - struck [quote]After ...Nxd4, we must take the horse, otherwise they check Nf3 and we lose the bishop on d2. Moving the bishop in g2 out of the main diagonal is bad for us right now.[/quote]Thanks.
[QUOTE=LaurV;371633]We can also strike 26 Nc2, after the exchange in b-c they play Rb2 and we are in deep dung, Rc1 does not save the horse/bishop, after Nxd4. This is bad for us.[/QUOTE]Oops. My oversight.
[quote]We can also strike 26 d5, after exd, bxc, etc, we help them exchange and/or develop those horses and the bishop, i.e. we give active pieces for their passive crap. Bad for us.[/quote]Besides, d5 is better saved for after ... e5 :-)
[quote]26 Bh1 - too passive. We lose a tempo which they gave us for free. No effect against Nxd4, eventually Nb3 after, bad for us.[/quote]Yep. Should've been marked as worse than useless.
[quote]26 Be4 - this is interesting, but the best we can do is 26...bxc 27 bxc Nxd4 28 Nxc4 Ne2+ Kf1 Nxc3, and now if we want to play Re1, then our own bishop is on the way[/quote]That's enough to relegate Be4 for now.

[QUOTE=LaurV;371650]Well, I really like the Nxc4 version, as you shown it in your post, I don't need to go further. I say that Nxc4 is our best reply, we can't do better that that![/QUOTE]It was hard to visualize, until I actually played 26 Nxc4 on a board, just how good the two knights looked on c4/c5, completely shutting Black rook out of b-file even after ... bxc3, with both-color-square coverage around them, plus two great files (e/f) for our rook.

[quote]26 Nxc4 bxc3 27 bxc3 Nxd4 28 Re1, they must run back with the horse, otherwise is lost, Nc6 29 Nxe6 Bxe6 30 Rxe6 - we have the rook on line 6, like someone who I know wanted long ago :razz:[/quote] :-)

[quote]This is good for us.[/quote]Yes.
[quote]We are going to win it...[/quote]Not just yet! We must remain vigilant.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Updated candidate move list:

[B]* 26 Nxc4[/B] (captures pawn and thus reduces our potential weakness at d3, gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up, guards against possible future ... Rb2 after b-file opens, but might be vulnerable to future ... Ba6 pin against f1 if N/c5 moves)

If [B]26 ... Nxd4 27 cxd4 Bxd4+ 28 Be3[/B] we're up a knight for one pawn (and that's an isolani with dim future prospects) and the center of the board has been cleared of pawns, wide open for us to exploit our material advantage with moves such as Rd1, Re1 or Rf1. But I'd expect Black to play ... bxc3 before ... Nxd4.

If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Nxd4[/B] shows that we haven't quite yet solved our d4-fork problem because we can't yet afford 28 cxd4. We'll have to get our rook or king off its d4-diagonal to do that. So,
[B]28 Re1[/B] (not 28 Rc1 Ne2+) would prevent ... Ne2+, threaten to capture the e-isolani, [I]and, by at last solving our d4-fork problem, threaten 29 cxd4.[/I] That knight has to retreat with
[B]28 ... Nc6[/B] or [B]28 ... Nf5[/B], because otherwise we just capture it before it can capture anything else of ours (If 28 ... Nc2 29 Rc1), whereupon (either case) we capture Black's e-pawn with [B]
29 Nxe6[/B].

If [B]26 ... e5
[/B][B]27 d5 [/B] (not 27 dxe5 mundane pawn swap favoring Black) forces [B]27 ... Na7[/B] or [B]27 ... Nd8[/B]. Now
[B]28 Nd6+[/B] forces either
[B]28 ... Kd8[/B] (if 27 ... Na7) or
[B]28 ... Kf8[/B] where 29 Rf1+ is uncomfortable for Black. or we could make different threats with
[B]28 Re1[/B] (instead of the 28 Nxa5 pawn grab) which aims at both the e-pawn and, behind it, Black's N/e7 and K/e8, threatening 29 Nxe5 and 30 Nxg6. If 29 ... Bxe5 30 Rxe5 threatening 31 d6 if Black doesn't move his king. (And his a5-pawn is still undefended.)

If [B]26 ... Nd5 [/B]Black may be repositioning, intend to follow with Nce7 to remove our Bxc6+ threat. Also, prevents 28 d5 after possible 27 ... e5. But
[B]27 Re1[/B] would deter 27 ... e5 anyway.

If [B]26 ... g5 [/B] <== needs analysis

If [B]26 ... h5 [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]26 Rd1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares possible future defense of d4)
If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Rb2 28 Nxc4[/B], could the rook hang around with 28 ... Ra2 and maybe cause trouble?
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what else?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

-

[B]26 Rf1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, places it on open file pointing at f8 next to Black king, but also places it on target diagonal of future ... Ba6)
If [B]26 ... bxc3 27 bxc3 Rb2 28 Nxc4[/B], could the rook hang around with 28 ... Ra2 and maybe cause trouble?
If [B]26 ...[/B][B][B] (what else?)[/B] [/B] <== needs analysis

-

? [B]26 Ra2[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, invites ... b3 kick to lock the Q-side pawns, but leaves R in cramped position)

? [B]26 Rc1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, but renders it vulnerable to ... Ne2+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4)

? [B]26 Re1[/B] (gets rook off the d4-fork diagonal, guards e2, but renders it vulnerable to ... Nf3+ fork follow-up after ... Nxd4 if we've played Bf1 or Bh3)

? [B]26 Ne4[/B] (gets N/c5 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nd6+ follow-up, _but takes the N off its powerful c5 outpost where it cramped both the R/b8 and B/c8_)
If [B]26 ... Nf5[/B]
Here, if [B]27 Nd6+ Nxd6 28 Bxc6+ Bd7 29 Bxd7+ Kxd7[/B], this two-piece swap-down might be to the long-term disadvantage of the side with the isolated pawn, but meanwhile Black's rid of our cramping N/c5, his N/d6 guards his c4-pawn, and his king is more centralized than ours for the endgame. We should do something else on move 27.
If [B]27 Nxf5 exf5[/B] we've enabled Black to reconnect his isolani.
If [B]27 g4[/B] allows the inconvenient [B]27 ... Nh4[/B]. If then 28 Bf1 or Bh3, 28 ... Nf3+ and 29 ... Nxd2 pulls our N/e4 back from the front lines. Maybe all this is to our long-term advantage for nabbing Black pawns, but meanwhile it just dissipates the initiative we had going.
If [B]27 Nxc4[/B] here Black can reply 27 ... Ba6 and we're not as well off as if we'd just played [B]26 Nxc4[/B]. Verdict: [B]26 Ne4[/B] may be worse than useful, now that there's no B on f6 to chase.

? [B]26 Ng4[/B] (gets N/e3 off the d4-fork diagonal, prepares Nxh6 or Bxh6 follow-up)
if [B]26 ... h5[/B] just kicks our knight back, unless we see some use for it on h6. There, it has little force on f7, because Black can just take it with Bxh6 -- but of course, then after our Bxh6 re-capture, we'd have a powerful dagger pointing at f8. Verdict: Problematic without specific tactical justification for Nh6 follow-up.

? [B]26 Kf1[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, gets king off the d4-fork diagonal, but interferes with Rf1 and leaves it on possible future ... Ba6 pin diagonal)

? [B] 26 Kf2[/B] (would deter ... Ne2 after ... Nxd4, but leaves king on the d4-fork diagonal)

-

[strike][B]26 Bxc6+[/B][/strike] no good reason

-

[strike]26 Ra3[/strike] refuted by ... bxa3
[strike]26 Rb1[/strike] refuted by ... bxc3
[strike]26 b3[/strike] refuted by ... cxb3
[strike]26 cxb4[/strike] refuted by ... Nxd4
[strike]26 Na6[/strike] refuted by ... Bxa6
[strike]26 Nb7[/strike] refuted by ... Bxb7
[strike]26 Nd7[/strike] refuted by ... Bxd7
[strike]26 Nxe6[/strike] refuted by ... Bxe6
[strike]26 d5[/strike] opens board to Black's advantage
[strike]26 Nc2[/strike] refuted by ... bxc3, bxc3 Rb2
[strike]26 Nd5[/strike] refuted by ... exd5
[strike]26 Nf1[/strike] only gets in our own way
[strike]26 Nf5[/strike] refuted by ... exf5
[strike]26 Kh1[/strike] moves K [I]away[/I] from where the endgame action will be
[strike]26 Bd5[/strike] refuted by ... exd5
[strike]26 Be4[/strike] only gets in our own way if played now
[strike]26 Bf1[/strike] refuted by ... Nxd4 then ... Nxf3+
[strike]26 Bf3[/strike] refuted by ... Nxd4 then ... Nxf3+
[strike]26 Bh1[/strike] worse than leaving it at g2
[strike]26 Bh3[/strike] refuted by ... Nxd4 then ... Nxf3+
[strike]26 g4[/strike] loosens our king defense for no reason
[strike]26 h3[/strike] loosens our king defense for no reason
[strike]26 h4[/strike] loosens our king defense for no reason

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Well!

Looks like the only remaining candidate with positive virtue is 26 Nxc4.

[I]Hey! Isn't that why we played 22 Bd2 a few eons ago?[/I]

Getting our rook off the d4-fork diagonal can wait until next move.

Vote:

Nc4 -- 5
else -- 0

But let's take a day to let our subconsciousnesses ponder it.

[cheesehead]

[QUOTE=cheesehead;371675]
Vote:

Nc4 -- 5[/quote]N[u]x[/u]c4, that is.
[quote]else -- 0

But let's take a day to let our subconsciousnesses ponder it.[/QUOTE]

[WMHalsdorf]

I'm wondering if Re1 would allow Black to make a mistake in trying to save their current queen side or would they try the sacking the Knigth.

[LaurV]

I don't believe they will make a second mistake in a row, we are lucky we got one shot, hehe... Actually, as I remember from last night, playing Re1 first was not so good, for some reason, I think it allows them to beat Nxd4 first, without exchanging the b-c. If we take the horse, for two pawns, then Bxd4, we can't move the horse from e3 because is linked, and we need another 2 or 3 moves to get free (save the other horse, move the king etc). Bad for us. So, we can't take the horse, and if we play Nxc4 now, then they have the sente to play the horse. Because b2/b4 is blocked by the black/white pawn, they can play Nb3, and if we take it, then they take it back with bxc-bxc or exchange it for the bishop in d2 (cxd2). So, we don't get so well out of it.

If we play Nxc4 before Re1, they can't take d4 directly (lose the horse, we play Be3 after Bxd4) and must exchange b-c first (giving us the second tempo I was talking about, to move Re1, because they have to run away with the horse, now they can't play Nb3 because we link it with Rb1, as the column b is free now, we get the horse for free. In this case, they can only retreat the horse back to c6, or move it to f5, where we scary it off with g4 or so. This turns better for us.