|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-06-04 | | Taidanii: Very nice puzzle. Rd1+ was the first thing that popped into everyone's mind, I'm sure. It took me a little bit longer to see the check on g1 and the knight fork. |
|
Mar-06-04
 | | knightfly: 30.Rd2 or Nd3 both seem better alternatives to 30 Qxe5? |
|
| Mar-06-04 | | kevin86: similar to yesterday's problem,but far more subtle.Nice set up for the fork. |
|
| Mar-06-04 | | karlzen: <knightfly>, 30.Nd5, Ng2 or Rd2 should all draw. One nice variation is 30.Rd2! Rxd2? (Rf8 is more challenging but white shouldn't have much trouble drawing anyway) 31.Qxd2 exf4 32.Qd8+ Qg8 33.Qxg5 fxg2 34.hxg3 Qxc4? 35.Qd8+ Qg8 36.Qg8+ Kxg8 37.c6! and the pawn promotes. 30.Nd3 however, is very bad in view of Qb7+! |
|
| Mar-06-04 | | Checkmate123: I was thinking of Rd1 first...but Rg1 didn't strike me until 5 minutes later. A very good puzzle. |
|
| Mar-06-04 | | iron maiden: This puzzle baffled me for a few seconds, because (as is typical of daily problems) I was expecting a crazy sacrifice on the FIRST move instead of the second. |
|
Mar-06-04
| | knightfly: Thanks karlzen. 30. Nd3? Qb7+ is oviously good for black. |
|
| Mar-06-04 | | midknightblue: Karlzen 30 Ng2 seems to have some very interesting variations. I was looking at 30 Ng2 ...NH3. 31. Rd2. It gets complicated from here. Any thoughts? |
|
Mar-06-04
| | knightfly: <midknightblue>Doesn't 30.Ng2 Nh3 31.Rd2 lose to 31....Rxd2 32.Qxd2 Nxf2+ 33.Kg1 Nh3+ 34.Kh1 Qf1# |
|
| Mar-10-04 | | karlzen: Yes, what knigthfly said. The simple 31.cxb6 is good and suddenly white is better. Perhaps you meant some other variation <midknightblue>? |
|
| Mar-13-04 | | midknightblue: thanks knightly. I was looking at the 3 moves that karlzen noted above that could lead to a draw for white. Ng2 didnt look like a good move, but when I tried to think it through, it initially seemed to hold up ok with the first couple moves in my above kibitz. Thanks for showing the forced mate that followed. --Karlzen, that was the variation I meant, I just wasnt able to calculate the moves out in my head. Gotta keep on working on it :( |
|
| Mar-14-04 | | karlzen: Well, there is no better way of improving than training! :) |
|
| Dec-05-04 | | percyblakeney: Originally, Przepiorka’s 24th move wasn’t Rxd2; instead he inexplicably absent-mindedly grabbed Ahues’ rook (on d2) and took his own bishop on b2. A surprised Ahues decided to keep it going by taking the pawn on a2, and see what happened. Soon Przepiorka looked up with an astonished expression on his face: “But what has happened to my pieces?!” Ahues answered: “My rook has finished them off!” However, the last moves were taken back, and Ahues won the game without any help from his opponent (Kurt Richter: Kurzgeschichten um Schachfiguren). |
|
| Jul-03-06 | | Rama: I really liked 12. ... Ne7. I didn't understand 15. ... Kh8, is it a waiting move? 21. ... Nf5, gets the ball rolling, and 25. ... Nd4, sets up the final combination. 29. ... e5, was very canny. Is 30. Qxe5 ..., the best reply? Ahues could be creative and deadly. |
|
| Nov-08-07 | | outsider: as far as i know, percyblakeney's quote misses a swearword, and the actual phrase was approximately "what the f... has happened..." |
|
| Dec-15-07 | | whiteshark: <percyblakeney> Thank you for this anecdote! |
|
| Jan-25-08 | | whiteshark: Mixed pieces... L Palau vs S Kalabar, 1927 |
|
| Aug-19-09 | | whiteshark: Another <auto-aggressive> move (12.Qxf3) has been played here: Kholmov vs Lutikov, 1976 |
|
| Apr-20-16 | | ozmikey: <percyblakeney> Ahues' own version of the story (link below) has him saying "My rook went completely mad", which is even better, I think! https://web.archive.org/web/2007100... |
|
Jul-29-25
 | | OhioChessFan: This amusing pun has been near the top of the pun ratings for a while. |
|
Jul-29-25
 | | Honza Cervenka: 30.Qxe5?? was a blunder. 30.Nd5 Rxd5!? 31.cxd5 Qxd5+ 32.f3 Nxf3 33.c6! Ng5+ 34.Qg2 Qd1+ 35.Qg1 Qf3+ 36.Qg2 Qd1+ leads to a draw by repetition of moves. |
|
Jul-29-25
 | | Freelance Assassin: I didn't kill Jeffrey Epstein, but I did like going through this game despite the gross blunder at the end. 29... e5 is just a really suspicious move. It's like someone down a sketchy alley telling you to come over and get his free Audemars Piguet, and then you decide to walk towards him for some reason (30. Qxe5??) and got mugged instead. But other than that, it's a simple, well-played game by both sides. |
|
| Jul-29-25 | | goodevans: <29... e5 is just a really suspicious move. It's like someone down a sketchy alley telling you to come over and get his free Audemars Piguet...> Nice metaphor. And, yes, it seems some players' spidey senses desert them right at the critical moment. I'm reminded of this famous example which is widely regarded as the greatest swindle of all time but doesn't cut the mustard for me for exactly the same reason: A Beliavsky vs L Christiansen, 1987 |
|
Jul-29-25
 | | perfidious: Przepiorka might well have reflected on the position the way an ever-pragmatic world champion did in W Winter vs Lasker, 1936 : <<His attitude to chess is well exemplified by a game which I played against him in the Nottingham International Tournament of 1936. After over half an hour's thought I placed a Knight on a square on which it could be taken by a pawn. Lasker replied instantaneously with a quiet defensive move and I soon found that all I had gained by my "brilliancy" was the loss of valuable thinking time.After the game was over a spectator asked him what would have happened had he taken the Knight. "I do not know," he replied. "I was playing a strong master and if a strong master thinks for half an hour and then plays a piece where I can take it, I think that it will not be healthy for me to take, and I let it alone."> (William Winter, Kings of Chess)> |
|
| Jul-29-25 | | Saniyat24: Should I say bless you...! |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
