For the Freestyle Specialist!

[Richard Pask]

11-15 23-19; 9-13 22-18; 15-22 25-18; 13-171 21-14; 10-17 29-25; 5-9 25-22; 9-13 27-23; 8-11 32-27; 4-8 24-20; 1-5

9-13 24-19; 5-9 28-24; 11-15 22-18; 15-22 25-18; 1-5 32-28; 13-17! 21-14; 10-17 29-25; 9-13 25-22; 8-11 24-20; 4-8 same!

[George Hay]

Richard Pask, nice transposition! Of course a freestyle specialist would see that it is a Single Corner transposition.

--George Hay

[Russian GM]

Nice transposition,but it"s loosing position! 9-13 24-19 5-9 28-24 11-15 22-18 15-22 25-18 1-5 32-28 13-17? loosing move... I'am rite? Russian GM.

[George Hay]

Russian GM, it looks to me that after 13-17, 21x14, 10x17, that if White played 18-14 instead of 29-25 it would be more trouble for Black. In response to 18-14, 9x18, 23x14, it looks to me that Black could make trades to a drawn position with careful play. I have been using Checkersland, but Anglo-American Checkers is not its specialty. What is the winning line of play?

--George Hay

[Alex_Moiseyev]

29-25 is a winning move which leads to Mr. Pask transposition position which is loss after 19-16*

[Richard Pask]

Many thanks for this Alex!

After DEO's 1979 WCM with Lowder, he became quite enamoured with the 13-17 Will o' The Wisp exchange and tried to introduce the same idea into other ballots. Thus with Black against Ed Markusic in the 1985 Florida Open he played 13-17 from the 9-13 24-19; 5-9 ballot. Markusic actually continued with 29-25; 9-13 18-15 to an unforced white win. Frazier established a draw for Black after 18-15, but funnily enough DEO didn't flag up the 11-15 23-19; 9-13 transposition. I only found it the other day.


I certainly wasn't advocating the black side from either ballot, but that said I didn't realize White could force a win. Nor did DEO, as from the Wisp he was suggesting 27-24 (Instead of your 19-16!) ; 6-9 31-27.

Now 27-24; 6-9 31-27 forms a position which may arise soundly from several move orders - I show it from 9-13 23-19; 5-9 in CC - so it is still of relevance, but your 19-16 exchange seems to knock out Game #1673 in CC!

Is 19-16 your invention or is it published?

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Richard, 19-16 is result of tandem my invention and Kingsrow skills. Credit must be given evenly to both.

AM

[Richard Pask]

Well done to both of you!

By holding back the man on 27, White retains the option of 27-23 as required: a fine win.

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Hi again, Richard!

I always try to find a true. In this particular run from Will-O-Wisp the most important question is - when was the critical moment in the game where red made a losing move? With my best friend Kingsrow + 10 pc db it seems like position on diagram is critical. 4-8? here is a losing move by 24-20*, 1-5*, 19-16* WW. However after 11-16* red still has very narrow, extremely weak draw!

Continue from diagram: 11-16*, 24-20, 6-9*, 20x11, 7x16, 18-15 (one of many powerful attacks here and all of them lead to technical draw), 4-8*, 15-11, 8x24, 27x11, 12-16*, 28-24, 16-20*, 31-27, 1-6 (or 17-21), 24-19 and now either 6-10 or 17-21 draw.

Red to move and draw.

11-16*

AM

[Richard Pask]

Dear Alex,

This is also very interesting as it appears to correct DEO's play to win v Lowder 1979 given in his Ency and reproduced in my CC!


Of course, it all means that, against a very knowledgeable player, the black line is impractical. Somehow however, I don't think that would stop Lowder from playing it!