ICB Where did you learn to play chess mate?

[Kev]

I don't know why black made that move but I believe that even the lowest level of Kasparov thinks at least 10 moves ahead. I was fighting kasparov and I'd like someone with a national/fide master level to assess this game. hehehe. There's a reason for that move.

are you a national master, CGM? if you are, I'd accept your opinion. I might have been playing a low level unknown GM in chessmater during that time.

anyway, I'd agree with you at 21.Qh6 i was winning already. I guess the computer could already see by the 18th move that I was on my way to winning the game. I can hardly remember my feeling and what I have been thinking back at this time but vaguely, I can remember my feeling of superiority against the computer.hehehe. most probably a low level GM. Anyway, I can't remember whether I have set it to low level. However, during my college days, I'd usually set it to at least average. I was playing NMs during those times.

What national masters were you playing Bruce? In real organised chess competitions you mean? If you remember their names I can most likely find their games in my Chessbase dvd which contains over 4.3 million games.

As for the standard of play in this game its way way way below GM level, I would say about 1200.

Some moves just make no sense whatsoever. Why would a GM as black play 6.h6 then 9.h5?

9...h5 might be played because Black wants to move the pawn away from the attack of the Queen, thus freeing up the rook. a subsequent ...h4 by black would prevent the knight from occupying h4 and thus controlling the square f5. Maybe black wants to push on to h3 with a view to weakening the White Kingside.

If white had played 9.Nh4 right away, instead of 9.Qd2 then 9...h5 would be almost mandatory to keep the Queen out of h5.

The exchange it premempted with 10.Bxd5 was just wrong as well, why give up your good bishop for a knight that could easily be kicked off with c6 after Na5 for example?

An immediate ...Na5 by Black loses the knight. Maybe Black wants to remove the knight from a very strong outpost on d5, where it attacks the f6 pawn, tying down the Black Queen to it's defense. So 10...Bxd5 frees up the Black Queen.

The idea that it would willing allow for doubled pawns on both the c and f files is dumb as well, black is practically positionally lost by move 12.

Not necessarily. This very formation is common in some variation of the Ruy Lopez. Black gets a mobile pawn center, and open files for the rooks. Black can possibly now play ...d5 or ...f5 with possible dynamic play.

Choosing to castle into an open g file seems as the king is safer on f8 and the rook is better in g8 than the king.

I would tend to agree. May as well leave the King where it is.

15.f5 is another weakening move, blacks kingside is already wrecked don't compound the situation by opening lines. The pawn on f6 at least prevents the knight from having an unassailable outpost on g5 on f5 the knight can now permanently jump lodge himself there and nothing can move him.

The queen h pawn grab on move 18 again just opens the h file and loses by force after R h1, Qg4, Rh3 and doubling rooks on the h file, capturing the undefendable pawn and then mating on the h file with rooks and queen.

Yeah 20.Rh3 looks pretty good. There is also the threat of 21.Rg3 after Rh3

I can tell you that sadly your opponent in this game played around the 70 or 80 elo, maybe 1100 level. It shows no positional understanding at all and the real Kasparov could probably defeat 500 of this program in a simultaneous with a couple seconds of think time for each move.

More likely a case of a low move horizon setting. The positional understanding early on wasn't all that that bad, I wouldn't call it 1100. Later on move horizon limitations caused it some grief.

Anyways, I think we all agree it wasn't a very strong computer opponent.

9.h4 is just a poor move imo, it's wasting time and allows white to play 10.b4 forcing Bb6 followed by a4 which in turn forces a6 then Nxb6 and the black queenside is wrecked.

Black would have been better served with 9.a3 or else 9.f5 which at least threatens to break up whites center with fxe5 and activates the light bishop if exf5.

Regarding the Na5 yeah for some reason I had the queen on e2 my bad.

Regarding the pawn formation, it's pretty bad, Black is positional doomed in an endgame pretty much. He has a bad bishop against a potentially very strong knight. Playing f5 at any time to will give the knight a permanent outpost on g5 and its hard to see what counterplay black will have.

It's not quite a won position but already Black has no realistic winning chances imo especially at grandmaster level.


Its play reminded me of my old chess computer, an actual real board with a built in computer that had supposedly 100 levels and was easy to beat on all of them.


That was nowhere near GM standard play from black, in fact it was below the standard of our own games CGM I'm sure you'll agree?

I think Bruce played pretty well but to be honest I didn't look at his moves much, just paying attention to super gm and greatest player of all time Garry Kasparov