Breakthrough draughts

[Henk de Witt]

If there are more people who'd be interested in launching such experimental GMI tournaments using crowdfunding, let's set up an association (does not need to be officially registered for the time being), so that we have a bit of 'weight' when we start the fund-raising. For the moment, just a message "I am in" will do.

Casper, dit lijkt me wederom een goed idee. Ik doe daar graag aan mee. Zou jij dit idee wat verder willen uitwerken? Het zou ook mooi zijn als diverse grootmeesters hier zelf aan mee doen.

[Casper van der Tak]

If there are more people who'd be interested in launching such experimental GMI tournaments using crowdfunding, let's set up an association (does not need to be officially registered for the time being), so that we have a bit of 'weight' when we start the fund-raising. For the moment, just a message "I am in" will do.

Casper, dit lijkt me wederom een goed idee. Ik doe daar graag aan mee. Zou jij dit idee wat verder willen uitwerken? Het zou ook mooi zijn als diverse grootmeesters hier zelf aan mee doen.

Ha Henk, doe ik, te beginnen met een korte beschrijving van de doelstelling van de vereniging. Ik neem aan dat jij contact informatie hebt van een aantal GMIs?

[Henk de Witt]

If there are more people who'd be interested in launching such experimental GMI tournaments using crowdfunding, let's set up an association (does not need to be officially registered for the time being), so that we have a bit of 'weight' when we start the fund-raising. For the moment, just a message "I am in" will do.

Casper, dit lijkt me wederom een goed idee. Ik doe daar graag aan mee. Zou jij dit idee wat verder willen uitwerken? Het zou ook mooi zijn als diverse grootmeesters hier zelf aan mee doen.

Ha Henk, doe ik, te beginnen met een korte beschrijving van de doelstelling van de vereniging. Ik neem aan dat jij contact informatie hebt van een aantal GMIs?

Inderdaad Casper.

[Casper van der Tak]

Perfekt, geef me een paar dagen, want ik heb op dit moment een klus in Amman.

[TAILLE]

I would have been very happy to see Virny play the 36.40-35 move and the game would have been far more complicated and interesting. But we were … in the international draughts context and in this context 36.37-31! was the best way to reach the draw without great difficulties.

There is one thing you forget. The position only is interesting because black chose for complications in order to create chances. In breakthrough draughts Schwarzman probably would have played 33. ... 11-16 instead of the daring 33. ... 22-27 followed by 35. ... 27-31.

Hi Jan,
Yes I agree 100% with you. In a breakthrough context the move 33…11-16 is far better (it is really a winning move!) and will lead to a very interesting fight.

White to play
The more logical move for white is obviously 34.37-31 with is a first trick: if black answers by 34…18-23? white wins by simply 35. 31-27 22x31 36.36x27 because of the difficulty for black to develop man 15.
The good move for black is 34…9-14! and after 35. 31-27 22x31 36.36x27 black does not play 36…18-23? but 36…3-9!
Here black has a winning position but white can build a tremendous trick:
37.48-43 15-20 38.43-39 (diagram)

Black to play
This position is a winning one for black but do you see the white trick without reading what follows?
Let me help you a little because I suspect you may not be a breakthrough draughts expert.
The natural move 38…20-24 seems very strong but it is a losing one. Can you see what white has prepared on this move?
The strong white sequence for winning is the following 38…20-24? 39.40-34!! 18-23 40.34-30!! 24x35 41.45-40 [you can also begin with42-37] 35x44 42.39x50 8-12 43.42-37 23-29 44.33x24 19x30 45.25x34 12-18 46.38-33 14-20 47.50-44 20-24 48.44-40 9-14 49.34-29 24-30 50.40-35 14-19 51.35x24 19x30 52.29-24 30x19 53.33-29 W+
Note that, except at the beginning of the sequence where white can choose the order of the moves 45-40 and 42-37, all white moves are unique for winning!

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

I'm sorry to ask Gerard. What other programs do you know in breakthrough.

[TAILLE]

I'm sorry to ask Gerard. What other programs do you know in breakthrough.

Oops, how can you dare ask such question? Don’t you remember the guy who you treat as a liar and who decided then to stop participating to the draughts forums?

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

Oops, how can you dare ask such question? Don’t you remember the guy who you treat as a liar and who decided then to stop participating to the draughts forums?

It's not about Bert. I ask also for other programs.

[TAILLE]

Oops, how can you dare ask such question? Don’t you remember the guy who you treat as a liar and who decided then to stop participating to the draughts forums?

It's not about Bert. I ask also for other programs.

To my knowledge, with Bert Tuyt we are the ones who investigate the most on breakthrough draughts.

[Krzysztof Grzelak]

To my knowledge, with Bert Tuyt we are the ones who investigate the most on breakthrough draughts.

I understand and thank you for the information.

[Rein Halbersma]

Oops, how can you dare ask such question? Don’t you remember the guy who you treat as a liar and who decided then to stop participating to the draughts forums?

It's not about Bert. I ask also for other programs.

To my knowledge, with Bert Tuyt we are the ones who investigate the most on breakthrough draughts.

I think Scan also has trained an evil for breakthrough, but no big dbs.

[Jan Pieter]

Hi Jan,
Yes I agree 100% with you. In a breakthrough context the move 33…11-16 is far better (it is really a winning move!) and will lead to a very interesting fight.

You're showing now 35. ... 11-16 instead of my suggestion 33. ... 11-16.
(maybe you were confused, because I wrote 33. ... 22-27 and 35. ... 27-31 instead of 33. ... 18-22 and 35. ... 22-27; sorry for that).

[TAILLE]

Hi Jan,
Yes I agree 100% with you. In a breakthrough context the move 33…11-16 is far better (it is really a winning move!) and will lead to a very interesting fight.

You're showing now 35. ... 11-16 instead of my suggestion 33. ... 11-16.
(maybe you were confused, because I wrote 33. ... 22-27 and 35. ... 27-31 instead of 33. ... 18-22 and 35. ... 22-27; sorry for that).

Ok. Anyway I hope you appreciated the analysis after 35.11-16

Position after 33...11-16

White to play

First of all we are too far from the db and Damy cannot give the result of such position.
Surely your proposal
33...11-16
is very interesting.
White has to take into account the threat 18-22 39-33 14-20 25x23 12-18 23x12 21-26 12x21 16x49.
The best way seems to play
34.40-34
and let me show you an interesting variant.
Black logical move is to gain tempi by playing
40...19-23 41.28x19 13x24
intending to follow with 14-20 and, unless white find a compensation, black with an advance of 6 tempi will easiliy win the game
In order to create some compensation one plan for white could be to try and fix the right black wing and to take the center by
42.37-31 15-20 43.25x14 9x20 44.31-27


black to play

hoping for 44...21-26 45.42-37 17-22 46.48-42 22x31 47.36x27 and white now white has enough compensaion to win the game.
but instead of that black can finish the game with a spectacular combination (whith seems quite easy for a international draughts GMI, even if it is his first game in breakthrough context!)
44...21-26 45.42-37
and now black keeps only one (!) man on the board to win the game by
45...26-31 46.37x26 24-30 47.34x14 18-22 48.27x7 3-9 49.14x21 16x49 B+

[TAILLE]

Hi Jan,
Yes I agree 100% with you. In a breakthrough context the move 33…11-16 is far better (it is really a winning move!) and will lead to a very interesting fight.

You're showing now 35. ... 11-16 instead of my suggestion 33. ... 11-16.
(maybe you were confused, because I wrote 33. ... 22-27 and 35. ... 27-31 instead of 33. ... 18-22 and 35. ... 22-27; sorry for that).

Ok. Anyway I hope you appreciated the analysis after 35.11-16

Position after 33...11-16

White to play

First of all we are too far from the db and Damy cannot give the result of such position.
Surely your proposal
33...11-16
is very interesting.
White has to take into account the threat 18-22 39-33 14-20 25x23 12-18 23x12 21-26 12x21 16x49.
The best way seems to play
34.40-34
and let me show you an interesting variant.
Black logical move is to gain tempi by playing
40...19-23 41.28x19 13x24
intending to follow with 15-20 and, unless white find a compensation, black with an advance of 6 tempi will easily win the game
In order to create some compensation one plan for white could be to try and fix the right black wing and to take the center by
42.37-31 15-20 43.25x14 9x20 44.31-27


black to play

hoping for 44...21-26 45.42-37 17-22 46.48-42 22x31 47.36x27 and white now white has enough compensaion to win the game.
but instead of that black can finish the game with a spectacular combination (whith seems quite easy for a international draughts GMI, even if it is his first game in breakthrough context!)
44...21-26 45.42-37
and now black keeps only one (!) man on the board to win the game by
45...26-31 46.37x26 24-30 47.34x14 18-22 48.27x7 3-9 49.14x21 16x49 B+

[Jan Pieter]

Black logical move is to gain tempi by playing

Thanks for your analysis, but hopefully you understand what I tried to point out. If you want to show the benefits of breakthrough draughts, you cannot simply take an interesting position from international draughts, since that position is unlikely to occur in breakthrough draughts. There it is all about gaining tempi.