< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|May-04-04|| ||Lawrence: <AJ>, personally I wouldn't dare, you'd have to scrape the egg off my face with a shovel every day. Remember the Wild West? Wasn't it the Remington (Colt?) that was called "the equalizer"? Today it's Fritz, Junior, Shredder etc. |
|May-04-04|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <Lawrence> Good one. |
|May-04-04|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <Reply to Chessical>
I think we need to re-define your word, blunder. (BTW, most of us are not worthy to carry Tchigorin's chess bag.)|
Call it an error, mis-calculation, or even a mistake. Or possibly an oversight, but four or five moves down the road. But a BLUNDER??
To me this word means a really bad, gross mistake or a terrible oversight. BTW, all the spectators, (and most of the players!); at the tournament ... THOUGHT TCHIGORIN WAS WINNING IN THIS GAME!!!!! (Even after ...Bf5. Source = Wiener Schachzeitung and the tournament book.) QED
|May-04-04|| ||TrueFiendish: A blunder loses outright. What Tchigorin did, IMO, was make a "miscalculation". |
|May-04-04|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <TrueFiendish> Agreed. |
|May-04-04|| ||tamar: Even if ...Bf5 looks tempting, to fool as great an analyst as Chigorin, it can still be a blunder. That is the injustice of chess. One fantastic variation found by Marshall changes the evaluation of the whole game. Not afraid of walking into that uppercut on his , he starts kangaroo boxing Chigorin with the knights. |
|May-05-04|| ||Chessical: <LIFEMasterAJ> Blunder, mistake, miscalculation, whatever label we apply - the essential fact is the move lost. Moreover, at the grandmaster level Tchigorin operated at the move was a blunder. We can invent a whole graduated list of terms for mistakes. Yet will it add to our appreciation of the game by having lawyerly debates special pleading why to a player of such and such strength in these particular mitigating circumstances this is a "mistake" rather than a full-blown blunder? |
I believe that is true to say that Tchigorin lost a lot of points by blunders, perhaps due to the relatively late age he started playing. For example, on move 32 of game 23 in the world championship match of 1892 he blundered a piece in two whilst having an overwhelming position against Steinitz. Yet I can also agree that <most of us are not worthy to carry Tchigorin's chess bag>. Tchigorin was a very great player and a particularly profound theorist, and to point out that a move is not then best does not demean the admiration and respect felt for Tchigorin's overall achievements. Tchigorin after all sought truth in chess.
Nor can there be any implication that anyone is pretending to be on a par with Tchigorin by criticizing a single move. We all are on the shoulders of giants.
|May-06-04|| ||Whitehat1963: What's the finish? |
|May-06-04|| ||crafty: 30. ... f5 31. xh7+ xg5 32. f4+ xf4 33. gxf4+ g4 34. h4+ xh4 35. e2 a5 36. h1# (eval Mat06; depth 10 ply; 10M nodes)|
|May-06-04|| ||Calli: I think you all need to go back and read Honza's post. Bf5 is an error, but 18...Kf7?? is the blunder. My guess is that Chigorin was shaken on discovering his miscalculation and did not see the simple Nf5-Nd6 by Marshall. |
|May-08-04|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <Everyone>
Has anyone looked at my annotations yet?? What did you think?
|May-08-04|| ||Lawrence: <Honza> and <Calli>, Junior agrees with you that 18...Kf7 lost the game. eval +3.90 18...Nd7 gets a +0.85.|
After 14.Nh4 the engine considers 14...Bf5 one of the worst possible moves, ranking it as the 25th(!!) candidate and after a couple of minutes drops it down to 29th place.
Junior finds 24.Rxg7! eval +15.88, much stronger than Marshall's 24.Bb1 (which still gets +5.25, clearly a won game.)
<AJ>, your annotations are great, as always, and I liked the fact that you put in lots of diagrams so it was possible for even a "beginner" like me to follow the game.
|May-08-04|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <Lawrence> Thanks - but how many of these ideas would you have found without a computer? |
I mention the capture on g7 ... I had a letter posted in the FL State Chess Magazine in the 1970's about this idea. Burgess mentions this as well ... maybe in the excellent book: "Chess Highlights of The 20th Century."
Thanks again, a nice job on the analysis. (aj)
|May-09-04|| ||Lawrence: <AJ>, "how many of these ideas would you have found without a computer?"--frankly, not one. Being retired, I have the time to put these games through the engine, and the results are my basic contribution to this site, for those not bored by computer analysis. I'm sure the enginephobes have long since learned not to read my postings. |
|May-09-04|| ||ughaibu: Lawrence: Even enginephobes, or at least one of them, read your posts for their excellent wit. |
|May-10-04|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <Reply to everyone>
It is still an excellent game ... regardless of what you think about the ...Bf5 move. My friend - who has the nicest site on Cambridge Springs, 1904; thought it was extremely <ah> "gutsy" of Marshall to strand his Knights in the middle of nowhere. I know of few other games where you see this concept. |
|Jan-07-06|| ||Boomie: A good alternative to 4...c6 is Nc6.
4...Nc6 5. d5 Ne5 6. Qd4 Nf7 7. Bxf6 exf6 8. Nxe4 Be7 9. O-O-O O-O with an interesting game.
5. Bxf6 is not very good against 4...c6. Better is 5. f3.
5. f3 Qa5 6. Qd2 exf3 7. Nxf3 e6 with equality.
Black stumbles with 8...Be6. Bd6 followed by O-O maintains the edge.
8...Bd6 9. Bd3 O-O 10. c3 Qc7
13...Nf8 seems slack. Although it's hard to develop the knight in this opening, it's well enough placed on d7. From there it supports c5 or can go to f6 after f5. After g6 and Kg7, black's position is solid.
14. Nh4 is a move that can be kindly described as Romantic, although I doubt Morphy would play it here.
14. Qc2 Ng6 15. c4 is better.
14...Bf5 is bad for the many reasons mentioned below plus it makes 14. Nh4 look like a good move. Obviously Chigorin thought that white had to protect his queen. Once again, g6 is a solid move that controls the vital f5 square and renders the knight on h4 meaningless.
17. Nc8 nearly throws the win away although it leads to a delightful position. Better was 17. c4.
17. c4 Qb4
(17...Rxb2 18. Rfe1+ Kd7 19. Bf5+ Ne6 20. Rxb2 Qxb2 21. Rxe6)
18. c5 Re4 19. Ngxe4 dxe4 20. Bxe4
|Jan-14-07|| ||sfm: "blunder"
A gross error or mistake, resulting from carelessness, stupidity, or culpable ignorance.
|Jan-14-07|| ||uuft: I'm not worthy.|
|Jan-14-07|| ||hellopolgar: this game is descent but far from being "the best game" of someone who is at Marshall's level. the only shining move is 17. Nc8 and it is something we might see on yahoo chess. the title is a nice pun tho.|
|Jan-15-07|| ||kevin86: This is a good gamit by Marshall,though not his best. My choice would be the Gold Piece game Lewitsky-Marshall.|
|Jun-05-09|| ||WhiteRook48: funny pun|
|Jun-05-09|| ||sfm: "culpable"
meriting condemnation or blame especially as wrong or harmful (14th century English / Webster)
|Jun-05-09|| ||sfm: So:
A mistake that should be surprisingly obvious for the player, given his general level of play. (sfm)
|Dec-11-10|| ||mastermind7994: Very nice game played in 1905 by Marshall. The game is very instructive by itself showing great tactical eye by White.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·