|Nov-06-03|| ||Honza Cervenka: Nice game with a beautiful final: 30.Re2 (30.Qxb3? Rxf2+) 30...Rxf2+ 31.Rxf2 Nd2+ |
|Nov-06-03|| ||Honza Cervenka: See the journey of black Knight after Mason's 19th move, which produced a weakness on d4: Nf6-h5-g7-e6-d4 and see Knight's effectiveness on that post in cooperation with heavy pieces. It is very instructive. |
|Jun-09-04|| ||iron maiden: "Best game prize, 1889?" What happened to the daily pun? |
|Jun-09-04|| ||chessgames.com: It's not always a pun! Usually, but not always. But if you insist, how's this:|
|Jun-09-04|| ||JSYantiss: *groan* |
|Jun-09-04|| ||weary willy: Hey, I want one of those fancy avatars |
|Jun-09-04|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Was 19.g3 forced? If yes, then it appears that Mason was already lost, which is remarkable, given that this looks like such a "quiet game." Perhaps White should not have played 15.ef5 and instead allowed doubled K Pawns? |
|Jun-09-04|| ||Honza Cervenka: <An Englishman> 20.g3 was not forced but quite comprehensible move. It prevents Nf4. |
|Jun-09-04|| ||Calli: Apparently, White can defend with 24.Ng2! Raf8 25.Ref1 covering the weak spots, at least for the moment.|
Yep, Nb3! cemented Mason's loss ;->.
|Jun-09-04|| ||Calchexas: *groan* stop it already...
BTW, I think the entire time this was going on, I'm like, 'Alterman Wall...set up an Alterman Wall...'
|Jun-09-04|| ||kevin86: This is an odd exception to the rule that three defenders stop three attackers;black's neat cut-off of white's queen by his knight is neat!|
James Mason may have had to "Journey to the center of the earth" to see such a fine ending. Or go "North-By -Northwest" double ha ha!!
|Jun-09-04|| ||Chesspatch: Question: Why 18 ... g6 and not Nh5 immediately? Is there a trick I don't see? And also, what's the immediate threat of a knight sitting on f4? Thanks, good day. |
|Jun-09-04|| ||Andrew Chapman: <Why 18 ... g6 and not Nh5 immediately?> He needs g7 free for the knight's tour to d4. |
|Nov-07-05|| ||korger: Does anyone know any reasons why this game was awarded the brilliancy price in the 1889 NY Congress, as opposed to Showalter vs Gossip, 1889?|
Though this is a solid game, there's nothing extraordinary about it, let alone "brilliant." Compare this to those spectacular fireworks which Gossip has unleashed upon his opponent, and I just cannot escape the inevitable conclusion that the dice were heavily loaded in Gunsberg's favor when the committee made their decision.
I know that Gossip was very unpopular whereas Gunsberg enjoyed the support of many benefactors, but their chess should not be judged by their personality or social background. This is an outrage.
|Nov-07-05|| ||Honza Cervenka: <there's nothing extraordinary about it, let alone "brilliant."> 29...Nb3!! is a neat shot with a beautiful interference+pin geometrical motif after 30.Re2 Rxf2+ 31.Rxf2 Nd2+! and all the game was also positionally very comprehensive. I like Gossip's combo very much and I know that many people would prefer that game instead of this one but I think that the quality of this game is higher. Shovalter against Gossip made several very weak moves and also Gossip did not act perfectly all the time (for example, see his Ne5-g4-e5 manoeuvre in moves 18 and 19). That could have been decisive for the tournament committee, especially under influence of ideas of ruling Steinitz's positional school.|
|Nov-08-05|| ||Calli: The Gossip game is a fine combination but almost a helpmate by Showalter! There is the great ending, but very little of interest in rest of the game. My favorite game of NY 1889 remains Max Weiss vs W Pollock, 1889 It also won a prize.|
|Nov-08-05|| ||Honza Cervenka: <Calli> Yes, that game is a little gem. And of course, this game is no showy fireworks before its ending but I don't think that the rest of the game lacks interest. Gunsberg's play was very powerful here and his exploitation of weakness d4 makes this game quite worthy as an instructive material for chess students.|
|Nov-08-05|| ||tamar: The paralysing move 28...Qe3 reminds me of Leko's 25...Qd3 versus Kramnik. It is like watching a bridge collapse.|
Kramnik vs Leko, 2004
click for larger view
|May-09-08|| ||whiteshark: "For winning this game Mr. Gunsberg was awarded the special price of $50 donated by Messrs. Frank Rudd and Fred. Wehle for the best game of the tournament."|
from the tournament book
|Nov-12-08|| ||FSR: As whiteshark said, the tournament committee awarded this game the best-played game prize. That was a highly controversial decision. Soltis writes that "there were many raised eyebrows" when the tournament committee awarded the prize to this game rather than Showalter-Gossip, cited by korger. Soltis, Chess to Enjoy, p. 197. It may have been a sort of extra consolation prize for Gunsberg, who finished third at 28.5 points, just half a point below the tournament co-winners Chigorin and Weiss (easily the greatest triumph of the latter's career). G.H. Diggle wrote, "Gossip was, of course, the last man to keep quiet about this decision, and for once he had considerable public sympathy on his side." G.H. Diggle, "The Master Who Never Was," British Chess Magazine, January 1969, p. 1, at p. 2. Calli referred above to Weiss-Pollock, a very nice game that won the brilliancy prize. (Very nice game by Pollock, that is; Weiss obviously had an off day.)|
|Feb-05-10|| ||backrank: Very nice methodical and instructive play by Gunsberg in exploiting the weakness d4 created by White's positional blunder 19. c4. Observe how towards the end, White's moves choices become more and more limited.|
|Oct-20-10|| ||sevenseaman: ,,,29. Nb3, an excellent exploitation of opportunity, aim being to have one defender less for f2 point; instructive.|