|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-21-04 | | beatgiant: <35. Kxd3 Rxc3 36. Kxc3 and White reaches the pawn before Black does.> 35.  xd3  xc2 36. xc2 h4 and Black's pawn promotes. The bishop holds White's pawn. So White's resignation is justified. |
 |
| Nov-21-04 | | offramp: It's 150 years old but it looks as though it could have been played yesterday. |
|
| Nov-21-04 | | drukenknight: passed pawns must be pushed! Especially when you are ahead in material. Anderssen for once is ahead in material and doesnt seem to know theory. Pushing c6 before the pin on the B was created was the thing, after the pin, I dunno maybe he still can save it but difficult. |
|
Nov-21-04
 | | tamar: I kept expecting Anderssen to play h5. It is no good on moves 19 and 20 because of the answer ...Qg5, but it was definitely better than 23 Nxf5, overlooking 23...Rxf5 24 Bxf5 Qd7! has the threat of ...Qb5+ picking up the b2 bishop. After 23 h5 Qg5 24 Rh2 Ne7 25 h6 White still has chances due to the pin on g7 and the passed c pawn. |
|
| Nov-21-04 | | beatgiant: <drukenknight>
<Pushing c6 before the pin on the B was created was the thing>It's still very difficult for White, for example 31. c6 d8 (threatens the first rank) 32. c1 d2 (threatens  d3 ). <tamar>
<I kept expecting Anderssen to play h5.> You may have a different version of the score. This site has 18...gf4 so Black's knight is still occupying h5. |
|
Nov-21-04
| | tamar: Hey, <beatgiant> you're right. I have this in my Harrwitz database with the other h5 knight going to f4. Folks disregard my last note. |
|
| Nov-21-04 | | drukenknight: like tarmar I was expecting h5, but from black to stop that pawn. |
|
| Nov-22-04 | | Knight13: Never knew the h5 pawn was alive... |
|
| Dec-13-04 | | Chessmaster 9000: Slightly better is 23. Bxf5. Leads to 23... Rae8 24. Be4 e5 2. Ne2 Rd8 26. c6 Rb8 27. Qb2 Rbd8 (Time=0:19, Depth=1/9) |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | Jaymthegenius: Aha! I've found them! I quoted this game to Schiller, (Isnt this a Terrasch, I am playing against Schiller's mainline Terrasch). |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | Karpova: This is not a Terrash, it's a Tarrasch
Siegbert Tarrasch |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | Christian Sword: Once again we have an annoying duplicate. This game has the score 10 Bd3 Bb7 11 Rc1 Ne7 and another game has the score 10 Bd3 Ne7 11 Rc1 Bb7. The first one is probably correct. Can anyone tell me how to get rid of all those wrong duplicates, when spot an error doesn´t work |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | iron maiden: Use "suggest your correction"; it's under the kibitzing box. |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | Karpova: <WillC21>
but he wrote Tarrasch two times with an e while i pointed out two mistakes. he didn't make one mistake but 1*2 is still 2, so i was 75% right. |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | WillC21: He wrote the mistaken name down twice, spelled the same wrong way both times. There are 4 issues here, 2 "c's" and 2 "e's". When you wrote "Terrash" as his mistaken spelling, you were right about the "e's" but wrong about the "c's." His "e" was incorrect in both cases but he did include a "c" in both his spellings, which is correct. So 2/4 = 50% Correct on your behalf ;) |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | aw1988: <Never knew the h5 pawn was alive...> What!? Are you saying it could never move, or did you just not notice it? That has to be one of the strangest comments I've ever seen... |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | WillC21: <aw1988> Knight13 is only 13 years old. Be easy on him. |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | Karpova: <WillC21>
But it's not correct to include my quotation of his misspelling of Tarrasch's name since i spelled it correctly afterwards.
2 (correct spelling) + 2 (correct <mistakes>) / 6 (six possible mistakes) = 66,67% right! |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | WillC21: Possible mistakes are irrelevant. If you want to talk about possible mistakes, you would need to include every possible letter in the guy's name. 50% correct. |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | WillC21: Of course you spelled it right afterwards, because you know how it's really spelled. But you were mistaken in correcting him because your quotation of his mistaken spelling was incorrect. 50% |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | Karpova: Possible mistakes are not irrelevant since these were all the mistakes made (he made two himself, i made him look like he had made 4 mistakes) the result are six mistakes. |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | WillC21: Yea, I see your logic, but it is flawed because you are double-counting two of the mistakes. Two of the mistakes are not independent of each other, which was your fault in your quotation of him. So 4 mistakes, two being valid, still gives 50%. |
|
| Apr-30-05 | | aw1988: Sorry, true, it just confused the living daylights out of me. |
|
Nov-03-07
 | | nimh: Rybka 2.4 mp, AMD X2 2.01GHz, 10 min per move, threshold 0.33. Anderssen 6 mistakes:
12.Ne2 -0.39 (12.0-0 0.14)
23.Nxf5 -1.71 (23.Bxf5 -0.37)
28.Rc2 -1.93 (28.Bc3 -0.83)
29.Rd2 -3.03 (29.h5 -1.94)
31.Bc1 -4.72 (31.c6 -2.17)
32.Rg5 -8.42 (32.c6 -4.46)
Harrwitz 3 mistakes:
19...Qe7 -0.21 (19...Rb8 -0.57)
25...Qxe6 -0.69 (25...Nxe6 -1.61)
29...Ba5 -2.10 (29...Be5 -3.03) |
|
| Feb-20-09 | | WhiteRook48: was 35. 0-1 a mistake? |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
sac: 23...Rxf5
icon.
