B. Durdyev vs S. Scarpetta, Rd.5, G2

[Alex_Moiseyev]

As I pomised, I am annotating here separately this game.

Bagtiyar Durdyev vs Sergio Scarpetta, Rd. 5, G2

Lille-2012

1. 11-15 23-18 2. 15-19 24x15 3. 10x19 27-24 4. 07-10 24x15 5. 10x19 21-17 6. 12-16 (A) 18-15 7. 08-12 22-18 8. 03-07 (B) 25-21 9. 09-13 26-22 (C) 10. 19-23 (D) 15-10 (E) 11. 06x15 18x11 12. 16-19 31-27 13. 07x16 27x18 14. 19-23 28-24 15. 16-20 24-19 16. 20-24 18-15 (F) 17. 24-27 15-11 18. 27-31 19-15 (G) 19. 31-27 17-14 20. 27-24 14-10 21. 24-19 (H) 22-18 22. 13-17 21x14 23. 01-06 10x01 24. 19x17 18-15 25. 17-14 29-25 26. 14-17 15-10 27. 17-14 10-07 28. 14-10 07-03 29. 10-15 03-08 30. 15-10 08-03 31. 12-16 03-08 32. 16-20 08-12 33. 20-24 12-16 34. 24-27 32-28 35. 27-31 28-24 36. 23-27 24-20 37. 27-32 (I) 11-08 38. 04x11 16x14 39. 32-27 14-18 40. 27-23 18x27 41. 31x24 20-16 42. 24-19 16-11 43. 19-15 11-08 ... White Wins

A. It was shown in Sixth in my annotation to game MK-19 which I played with Ron King in WCM-2003 that this move should be better avoided because it is leading to somehow critical position for red if meet properly. 3-7 and 8-11 are recommended.

B. Or 19-23, 26x19, 16x23, 25-22, 3-7, 31-26, 6-10 Draw with care

Diagram #1. White to move ......Diagram #2. White to move ...... Diagram #3. Red to move
.. ..
17-14 white better ................ 18-15? loses, 18-14/29-25 draw .. 1-6* wins quick

C. See diagram #1 before 26-22. In my eyes this move just passed advantage advantage from white to red. Playing 17-14 instead 26-22 would transfer game exactly to text in Sixth where 6-10, 15x6, 2x9 at note "H" is recommended.

D.Or extremely complicated and crazy 7-10! After 7-10 game can continue either way:

- 15-11, 5-9, 18-15, 9-14, 32-27 19-24 Even with complications;
- 31-27, 19-23, 15-11, 5-9, 18-15, 10x19, 27x18, 6-10, 3026, 10-15, 17-14, 1-5 etc. Even with crazy complications.

E. 31-27 here instead 15-10 was certainly easy for white reurning back to variation in previous note (2nd bullot)

F. See diagram #2. here is where Sergio get into lost, perhaps the only one in Lille. Draw was not easy at all and was available by tricky tactical idea: 18-14, 24-27, 14-9, 5x14, 10x17, 27-31, 29-25* ... and now 31-26 or 31-27 can be meet with triple trade 19-16, 4-8 can be meet by 29-25 and pitch 23-26, 30x23, 31-27 (31-26, 18-15 etc Draw), 19-15 and red can't win.

After 18-15 as played in the game, I was unable to locate scientific draw for white.

G. See diagram #3 before 31-27. Even though this move theoretically is still not missing a win, but it started a series of unnneccessary moves, losing tempo and eventually allow Sergio to find a safe way for drawn path. In position on diagram #3 game can be finished in just 2-3 moves if Bagtiyar find a pretty tactical idea: 1-6*, 17-14 (anything else ?), 23-26 (or 23-27), 30x23, 2-7, 11x2, 31-26* Red Wins

The text of game shows that it was move #19 and it is queite possible that Bagtiyar was already short of time at this moment.

Diagram #4. Red to move ......... Diagram #5. Red to move
..
5-9* win, 24-19 draw .............. 27-32 ??, 11-8 WW

H. It's not easy to say where exactly red win disappeared, and I'll take a chance (critics/analysts - go ahead !) and pick position on diagram #4. Here Bagtiyar played 24-19, 22-18, 13-17, 21x14, 1-6, 10x1, 19x17 etc which eventually leaded to draw. I was unable to find a win for red after this trade.

In position on diagram #4 red still can win by 5-9*, 22-18, 1-5, 11-8, 4x1,, 15x8, 9-14, 18-9, 5-14, 8-3, 24-19 and catch a man.

I. And finally they reached position on diagram #5 ! Very painful for Bagtiyar. it is very possible that this importnat win could give him a medal ... maybe not. But definetely this important crucial game changed a course and outcome of tournament and gave a good jump start and rocketed Sergio who finally finished 2nd and got a silver medal.

[Ingo_Zachos]

Hi Alex,

thx for the analyses.

Just a few remarks:

1. the time rate was 30 moves in one hour, so from around move 15-30 or 31/32 (as not all players were sure they made the 30th move) players were often in zeitnot.

2. From the 1st time control (which is not after 30 moves, but after one of the players took more then an hour!) the players got 1 minute for each move and could easily run into time trouble again each move.

Once u start annotating any tournament or match game, the reader and annotator should know the time rates to understand why some blunders were made that would not happen with another time limit.

For that reason it is always essential to use the actual move numbers, as they are part of the story of the game. No position from practical play can be analysed properly if that is not taken into account.


3. Plz note that in the 6th round encounter Scarpetta - King the balloted opening was ... can u guess it? ... 1. 11-15 23-18, 2. 15-19!

In round five Sergio ppl. played on general preparation, and may have forgotten the games in Sixth, but I guess Sergio has been over his games in the evening and so in round six he played on special preparation, and Ron King was caught by the luck factor in 3-move events, as one player can get the same opening more then once, and may thus may have a substantial advantage by simply reviewing his games regularly.

Note: the busy player is the one which usually picks the good luck, while the lazy player picks bad luck.
Preparation pays out!

This is why I criticised the 3-move deck, as it gives random openings in each ballot, but does not guarantee that one player may get an enormous advantage over a whole tournament compared to his closest rivals.


Greetinx from a sunny lunch break,

Ingo Zachos

[Alex_Moiseyev]

Hi Alex, thx for the analyses.

Hi, Ingo, thx for your interest.

2. From the 1st time control (which is not after 30 moves, but after one of the players took more then an hour!) the players got 1 minute for each move and could easily run into time trouble again each move.

Something new and fresh for me. Igor wrote on Russian checkers site that at least one of his games ran out of time and he've got judgement with computer. How this possible if you had move per minute ?! In addition Igor said that program judication was wrong and later changed. WOW. Maybe we should allow program compete for title like Chinook did in USA Open in the beginning of 1990's ?

I am also curious ... if someone spend all 1hr for 30 moves and 2nd player spend just 30 minutes - they still BOTH went into move-per-minute play ?? And this is fear ?

WOW ... as more I live, as more I learn

Once u start annotating any tournament or match game, the reader and annotator should know the time rates to understand why some blunders were made that would not happen with another time limit.

For that reason it is always essential to use the actual move numbers, as they are part of the story of the game. No position from practical play can be analysed properly if that is not taken into account.

You right - thats why I included a full text of game with number of moves for my annotation of this game. However it is not apply to "Selected Positions" because this is not annotations at all, just diagrammed interesting moments. Serious annotation is still ahead and someone should do it ... like I did just for one game.

Selected Positions are not annotations

3. Plz note that in the 6th round encounter Scarpetta - King the balloted opening was ... can u guess it? ... 1. 11-15 23-18, 2. 15-19!

Sergio had some sort of luck in Lille and Ron had special luck !!!

This is why I criticised the 3-move deck

Our society and life are not perfect and are not scientific too. Three-moves style is close to ideal model of real life with random luck involve

[Ingo_Zachos]

...