drunknknite
He was winning,
but he didn't see it
and I escaped - as usual.

-Levon Aronian

I Ain't Afraid of No Ghosts

By drunknknite


This is the game that put me over 2000 for the first (and hopefully last) time. My Slav has been getting beaten up online and I was starting to feel uncomfortable in a lot of the positions. I decided during the day of this game to go back to my old move order and build a solid understanding of the theory surrounding the [Shoemaker's quotes] "pawn wedge" system (it's from the Kaufman book Chess Advantage in Black and White). I had been favoring the Slav because I didn't want to face the 'scary' Marshall Gambit. But I don't like the non-Semi Slavs, and by holding back the c pawn I retain the option of playing c5 and transposing into a Tarrasch Defense against certain lines.

The last time I decided to play this move order I dropped my queen. That was a bad experience. But after the game when I was looking at the Marshall I decided that it is definitely playable for Black. So I wasn't too disappointed to see Shoemaker offer it. I was even excited when he offered the exchange and another pawn to commit to an all out offensive. To draw Shoemaker into a gunslinging tactical battle is exactly what I wanted. There are many boring positional games that he could have chosen where I would be more prone to err. The game he chose was practically suicidal.

I went back to the Chess Publisher format at Chessaholic's request.



After the game Chris Harrington called me lucky, Shoemaker says he lost a won game. I've talked on this blog a lot about how the evaluation of the position is not necessarily the most important factor of the position. How both players will make mistakes and this is what's important. I spend a lot of the time trying to get to the bottom of things once the game is done. But during the game the 'truth' is of little importance. We both missed chances to win. We both made mistakes. Luck had nothing to do with it.
 

5 comments so far.

  1. ChargingKing March 17, 2008 at 7:35 PM
    I actually thought I say something but I was wrong after looking at the game...seeing ghosts myself ; )

    By "lucky" people mean that someone didn't take advantage of their opportunities or didn't see something....the concept of luck taken literally is a fallacy.
  2. Anonymous March 18, 2008 at 5:35 AM
    Your position could be "dead lost," but if your opponent only has, say, a 10% chance of seeing the winning move and a 50% chance of making a move that loses, then who really has the better practical chances? The concept of "practical chances" is a very interesting part of OTB play and chess psychology...

    Howard Goldowsky
  3. Chessaholic March 18, 2008 at 11:01 AM
    Hey Kevin thanks for using ye olde chesspublisher again. It's not perfect but for the kind of detailed analysis you do it works the best - I always enjoy playing through all the lines you look at. Once again, great analysis, looks like you put a lot of time and effort into it. Very helpful to a patzer like me.
  4. Anonymous March 19, 2008 at 2:28 PM
    In chess, there's no such thing as "luck". Well played.
  5. ChargingKing March 19, 2008 at 5:23 PM
    In ANYTHING there is no such thing as luck. The concept is fantasy!

Something to say?