Welcome!

Everybody is invoked to publish middle-game-analysis on this forum.

The analysis should start at about move 8-15 and can be finished if there stand out a endgame-situation or a resignation- you should publish endgames in the Endgame-Theory-Forum.
The analysis should argue tactically, positionally and strategically and should explain the realized and can present possible plans,.
But you this is only an advice: actually you can chose your own manner

Greetings,
Funky-AbaloneTheory-JazzClub  

--Last edited by Funky-AbaloneTheory-JazzClub on 2005-11-08 00:42:09 --

Middle-Game: Nr.1
----------------------------------------------------------------

The following game was played 26.10.2005 by two good players on Netabalone.

This is the notation of the opening:
1. a1b2 i5h5
2. i9h8 i6h6
3. b2c3 a5b5
4. g7g8f7 a4b4
5. f8f7 g4g5
6. b1c2 b4c4
7. i8h8 g5g6
8. b3c3 h6g6
9. h7h6 b5c5
10. d3e4 h4g4
11. c2c3d2 b6c6
12. g9f8 h7g7

I start with the analysis on move 13.



First I want to analyse this situation positional, than strategically.



positional analysis:

We can recognize the blue dividing line. This is an indicator that we have reached the middle-game. The starting-configuration has been transformed to this solidified situation.

"White" is divided into two "groups". One Main-group on the right of the dividing-line and one 3-marble-sub-group on the left of the dividing-line.
Black is divided into three groups and one isolated marble. There is a Main-group, a sub-group with three marbles, which is symmetrical similar to the white subgroup, but not identical. And there is a two-marble-sub-group on the edge.

If we compare these groups, than we find at least the following results:
The White main-group is stronger than the black: White has conquered a twisted middle-row, White has two strong 3-rows (two red lines) and the white group is in superior number to the black main-group.
The isolated marble and the two-marble-group are weak groups.
And even the black three-marble-group is weaker than the white 3-marble-group, because it will be easier for White to open the key-point e4 for the attack g4f4 than for Black to open the key-point e5 for the attack e7e6. And also White could build a isolated black marble e6 with the move g7f7.  

positional-strategical-movements:
If we consider now strategy-movements than we realise that the blue-dividing-line avoids "twisting" for the next moves. Both parties will probably  try to "decrease the complexity" and to "combine the own groups" in combination with the "destruction of the adversarial main-group". In this case I don’t see much possibilities for "lavieren", but White has more possibilities for "multi-attacks".

strategical-analysis:
If we esteem this situation with strategy-principles than the "material" is equal, White has advantage in the "centre" with dominance, but with a blocked pattern. The "coordination "of White is better and the "key-points" are not too difficult to recognize on both sides.
White has a light "attacking-initiative" and black has to defend the two black marble-group on the top and to consolidate the main-group.

If we neglect now the deeper tactical-analysis and if we summery this analyses-results, than we have to say: White has advantage. (Aba-Pro (Level9) agrees with the Score of -3,5 for the next white move).

(for strategy-positional movements, strategy-principles, positional patterns compare the "Elements-Catalogue")

We can anticipate now the deeper plans, but we can be snoopy to observe, in which "practical-ways" these players realize this possibilities.  
We don’t want to analyse tactically too much in this situation: lets follow and observe the real game-sequence  


To remember you the situation after move 12:




13. h9h8:

This move is obvious: Black plays h9h8.
This move defends the ejection on h9, combines the 2-group with the main-group and threaten with the 3-row on the h5 - by the way: and to defend the threat f5 with c5d5!.

13. ... d6d5:

This is the beginning of the Whites' attacks. White tries to keep the "initiative".


14. d1e2:


Black played  "d1e2", but probably 14. d2e3e2 would be better.

 What’s about 14. g6f5 ?
 14. g6f5 ?! with the intention "15. d1d2" is a trap:
 -> 14. ... g6g7 (threat: 15. ...g6f7)
 15. d1d2 g7f6 and White is very dominant.  


Now White has reached the first strategy-goal: the key-point on e4 is weaker than before, because the white marbles can open e4 by moving away. But White increases the pressure and opens the second key-point in the black-group: f5 with the move:

14. ... h5g4:


The question is now: how to defend the attack on f5?
I prefer here the simple h8h7-move. But maybe the moves
15. ... d4c4c3 and 16 ... b3c3b2  disprove this move, because the key-point e4 will be open.

Maybe this is a reason for:

15. g6f5:


Now 15. ... c5d5 16. d3e4 c6c5 seems pretty ugly for Black, despite with a standard-touch.

But white plays
15. ....g8g7:


This enforces black to move on h5.
16. h8h7:


Now d3 is really weak.
Move 15. ... g8g7 was the support for the next move:

16....  c6d6:

g6f6 would be too simple (Aba-Pro-move: Level8)

This is now a decisive situation:
There is the White-threat on d3 with 17. ... d6d5.
But is this really threat ?

        Variation:
        Lets play a simple move and then investigate the threat:
        17. a2b2 (just a simple move)
        17. ... d6d5 !?
       
      If White is attacking on d2, than black will attack
      on e5, the centre.
      if   18. b2b3  18. ... d5d4
      than 19. h5g5

      And we regard this position:
       
      AbaPro-Score is in this situation: + 5,9 for White.
      This is a positional-pattern of: "Rows against Blocks".
      Usually blocks are stronger than single-rows, but in
      this case there are several small blocks against combined rows.
      White will win a second black marble in the next move.  
      I am not sure about this situation. Maybe White is better.
      But we should calculate tactically deeper to be sure.
      (I stop the analysis of this variation here)

We come back to the move:

16....  c6d6:



Black plays now:

17. d3e3:

But this move is the decline of Black.

This was the Whites' trap:
17. ... c4d4c3:
Probably 17. ...g4f4 is not as beautiful, but at least as strong.


Black takes the marble
18. e3f3:


And White kills the key-point e4:
18. ... g4f4:

   
    "18. ... c3d3" is also playable,
    With the strategy to build a very dominant block
     19. ... g4f4 20. g3g4 g7f6 21. g4g5 e3e4

--> Now, it will be not too difficult for White to win this game.

But lets stop here and lets analyse the last moves.

We compare two situations: move 12 and 18


Where is now the Whites' advantage?
in respect of this answer I want to remember you to the positional-pattern: "infected Daisy" and "healthy Daisy":



If we regard the right image, than we recognize some positional patterns.

positional:
three strong, but blocked 3-rows (red lines), two 2-rows with push-possibility and two fragmentary shapes of infected Daisies (purple circles)  

(-> compare  "Elements-Catalogue of the General-Theory" IV.2.3)

 

If we look back to the left image and compare this with the right, than it is obvious that White has reached some goals.

positional-strategical-movements:
- combined the white groups
- destruction of the black main-group

strategy-principles:
- still initiative
- increased dominance
- conquered and deactivated the key-point e4

But what's now the strongest continuation? The best material- realisation of this positional and strategy-advantages?

-> Continuation  

--Last edited by SilverSurfer on 2005-10-28 01:38:35 --

Middle-Game Nr.1 continuation


Whites last move:
18. ... g4f4:

   
   
First we want to play with a block-player-strategy. Block-players thinks mainly to the rows and the want to built blocks with the rows. So we neglect the purple circles and play with the red lines.  

Black plays
19. d2e3  


   Variation:
   ...





















 

--Last edited by SilverSurfer on 2005-10-27 14:20:45 --