< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Feb-15-04|| ||PaulKeres: I agree <Lawrence> , there is so much good stuff on the net for free |
|Feb-15-04|| ||Honza Cervenka: The database of chessbase.com has this game with 81...Kc6. |
|Feb-15-04|| ||chessgames.com: Yes it should be, 81...c6. Thanks. |
|Feb-17-04|| ||PaulKeres: chessgames.com, how do you get those great figurative symbols, eg the picture of the king rather than K? Thanks |
|Feb-17-04|| ||Lawrence: Paul, you just put wriggly brackets around the moves. |
|Feb-17-04|| ||PaulKeres: Nice one, lets try 1. e4 e5 2. f3 |
|Feb-17-04|| ||PaulKeres: Excellent, thanks! |
|Feb-17-04|| ||drukenknight: how to lose an endgame. Most effective way? Give up the opposition. I think if he can exchange B will having the opposition he would be okay. |
|Oct-06-04|| ||Minor Piece Activity: 28...b6? was bad, breaking up the pawns, but isn't 30. Bf1 refuted by 30...a5 31. Nd3 a4 or is the passed overextended? |
|Oct-06-04|| ||Minor Piece Activity: Nevermind, I see 31. Na4+ and black would lose a pawn. |
|Jan-24-06|| ||waddayaplay: <It looks like the game was draw but capa prove it was no.> It was Eliskases who excelled in this game.|
|Jan-24-06|| ||waddayaplay: < In the 1937 elite tournament at Semmering, although failing to reach the 50% mark, he had the personal satisfaction of not only having defeated the final winner, the then 21-year-old Paul Keres, but also having outplayed former world champion Jose Raul Capablanca in the Cuban's own field of excellence, the endgame. >|
|Jan-18-08|| ||plang: The system with 6..Nbd7, 7..Qc7 and 8..e5 was popular in the 30s but is rarely played now presumably because of the strength of the response 8 g3 and 10 Bf4 which is an annoying pin for black. Alekhine referred to 8 g3 as the "Capablanca System" although, as in this game, Capablanca played the black side as well. Later on in 1937 the improvement 14 Ne4 was introduced by Euwe in game 1 of his second match with Alekhine. Eliskases had an advantage in the endgame because his kingside majority was more mobile than blacks queenside one. Eliskases recommended 28..Ne6 29 Kf2..Nd4 as a better defense. Eliskases referred to 30..Ne6! as a "sly defensive move". Reshevsky pointed out that white could have tried the interesting 31 Bh3 but that black then could have drawn by sacrificing a piece: 31..a5!
32 Bxe6..Bxe6 33 Nxe6..axb 34 Nd4..Kc5
35 Nb3+..Kc4 36 Na5+..Kb5 37 Nb3+..Kc4
(38 Nd2..Kd3 is dangerous for white).
Capablanca thought for an hour on 32..g5. Afterwards he said that he could have drawn with 32..c5 though Eliskases was not convinced. 43 e7 followed by Ke5, Kf6 and Bf7 would have been the easiest way to win.
|Jun-22-08|| ||pferd: This ending is featured in Paul Keres book, Practical Chess Endings. He also gives the following ending, composed by Troitsky in 1925, long before the invention of tablebases: White to move and win.|
click for larger view
|Feb-15-11|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Only Keres, Reshevsky and Eliskases won tournament games both Capablanca and Fischer !!|
|Feb-15-11|| ||goldenbear: <Eduardo Bermudez> I thought Maurice Fox also did it... didn't he?|
|Feb-15-11|| ||BobCrisp: <Fox> beat <Capa> in a simul.|
|Feb-15-11|| ||TheFocus: I wonder how many players <DREW> with both Fischer and Capablanca?|
Now I have something to do today.
|Feb-15-11|| ||chancho: Paul Keres beat Capa and Fischer.
Max Euwe is another...
|Feb-15-11|| ||TheFocus: <Eduardo Bermudez> <Only Keres, Reshevsky and Eliskases won tournament games both Capablanca and Fischer !!>|
You should include matches.
Euwe beat Bobby in a match and Capablanca in a tournament.
|Feb-15-11|| ||TheFocus: The following DREW games against both Capablanca and Fischer in tournaments or matches:|
|Feb-26-13|| ||whiteshark: You can find some fine annotations of this game (in German) here: http://rankzero.de/?p=3503|
|Feb-26-13|| ||RookFile: Naturally, Reshevsky comes to mind, he played both of them a bunch of times, winning, drawing, and losing to both.|
|Feb-27-13|| ||maxi: Capa said that 32...c5 (instad of 32...g5?) draws. Houdini 3 with 64 bits agrees with his assesment.|
I would like to discuss this crucial move, 32...g5? Why is it so bad? If we look at the position after move 31, we see that White has a small advantage. It is due to the better placement of the White pieces, and the fact that it is going to be more difficult for Black to obtain a passed Pawn than for White. But it is possible for Black to immediately force a drawish positon thru the temporary sac 32...c5. The main line is 32...c5 33.f5 Bd7 34.Nc3 Nd4 35.bxc5 a5 36.Bc4 Kc6 and all the Queen side Pawns will soon fall. The Black King will quickly go to his side and a draw would be on the table. The problem with 32...g5? is two-fold: it allows the White King to reach e3 right away, where it impedes the Black Knight to occupy d4, and it weakens the Black Pawn on f6, so that now White has the horrible possibility (if Black advances his c Pawn) of playing Na4-c3-d5+, with a double attack on the King and the weakened Black f6 Pawn. As a result Black's position is much more passive, and White will be able to create a passed Pawn and press on forward with it.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·