|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-09-04
 | | patzer2: In today's problem (24?), ChessGames.com treats us to another fourth move variation of the Queen's Gambit Slav today with 4...Bf5. Lest anyone think the results of this game reflect poorly on the opening choice, take at look at how a Super GM used it to win in Tkachiev vs Shirov, 2003 and how another specialist in this opening got much the better of the draw inZhu Chen vs Dreev, 2002 Indeed, 4...Bf5 is a tough nut for White to crack as witnessed by the fact that in ten tries against it, Karpov has managed only one win against eight draws and one loss, with Karpov vs Bareev, 2002 being his most recent encounter against it. Dreev who is considered a specialist from the Blackside has faced it ten times as White and managed to secure eight draws, but lost twice as White in Dreev vs Gelfand, 1997 and Dreev vs Stripunsky, 2001 I think the 4...Bf5 variation of the Queen's Gambit Slav might be a good choice for club level players looking for a solid continuation against 1. d4. It doesn't appear to require a lot of memorization of complex opening lines, so players trying to master the system can concentrate more time and effort on the study of typical middle game and end game positions. |
 |
Jan-09-04
| | patzer2: One new idea to explore for a possible White advantage or opening initiative against 4...Bf5 is 5. Nh4!? as in Shirov vs H A Gretarsson, 2003 |
|
Jan-09-04
| | patzer2: After 4...Bf5 5. Nc3 (the most popular reply), the rare attempt 5...a6!? has given Black good recent results as in Radjabov vs Morozevich, 2002 (by transposition) and Yusupov vs Anand, 2002 with Black achieving a 44% winning percentage versus 39% for White. Although the sample of only 18 games is probably too small to jump to any final conclusions, this opening line (4...Bf5 5. Nc3 a6!?) appears to be worthy of additional testing in tournament play. |
|
Jan-09-04
 | | kevin86: I thought I had seen this one before! It is in A Horowitz' book:Chess Traps,Pitfalls,and Swindles. It is the kind of trap to fall into,if you are trying to be "too cute" |
|
| Jan-09-04 | | StoneWaller: GM Euwe was also President of FIDE. Can anyone imagine a modern FIDE head playing at this level? I can't; not chess, anyway . . . |
|
Jan-09-04
 | | Chessical: <StoneWaller> you do not have to imagine, look at Tal vs F Campomanes, 1960 |
|
| Nov-29-04 | | tacticsjokerxxx: Lasker was lucky in this game, it's not much more notable than that. |
|
| Jun-08-05 | | coolchess: A horrible blunder of Euwe. |
|
| Jun-08-05 | | Kangaroo: Max Euwe was especially unhappy facing Emanuel Lasker Among two mathematicians, the elder one was a deeper expert in chess and psychology! Look at the games they had played for a better view on how Lasker succeeded against Euwe!
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
| Jun-08-05 | | MrSifter: <Kangaroo> That is indeed very impressive, since Lasker was already an old man when playing those games and Euwe was around his peaks. |
|
| Jun-08-05 | | aw1988: I don't think Lasker had a particular one-shot peak. He played strongly throughout his whole career. |
|
| Jun-08-05 | | Kangaroo: <MrSifter: <Kangaroo> That is indeed very impressive, since Lasker was already an old man when playing those games and Euwe was around his peaks.> Lasker's character was not subject to age. He always was a good fighter. The age slightly reduced his level of good luck, yet even in 1935 he successfully comepted with Capablanca, who was 20+ years younger, see
Lasker vs Capablanca, 1935 Also, look at his score with Alekhine! http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
| Jun-09-05 | | iron maiden: I think this game made Lasker the oldest player ever to defeat a reigning world champion at normal time controls. |
|
| Jun-09-05 | | Granite: Lasker was a Juggernaught - best player of all time. |
|
Jun-09-05
 | | perfidious: As late as 1937, no less a figure than Capablanca said that Lasker was too old for a match, but that in a single game, he remained the most dangerous player in the world. |
|
| Jan-27-06 | | whatthefat: I'd be sick for days if I was swindled like that. |
|
| May-21-06 | | RaggieB: 23...Ba5 was aserious blunder on Euwe's part. Perhaps beeter would have been Kd5 to add pressure to teh somewhat weak d4 pawn. The game went from aclear draw to an unthinkable loss. |
|
Apr-01-07
 | | Marmot PFL: Lasker should have asked for a title match after this game. Euwe could play him, and what could Alekhine do? After all he played Bogo twice and ducked Capablanca for years. <perfidious> Capa was also over the hill by then, and not in great health. Botvinnik, Fine, Reshevsky or Keres would have beaten either of them in a match. |
|
| Mar-16-08 | | Knight13: 23...Ba5 is oversight. I might've played that move! It's not like we amateurs would spot 24. b4 that easily. |
|
| Nov-08-08 | | Fanacas: He could have ben short on time. |
|
Dec-03-08
 | | FSR: This blunderful game was the last in Euwe's negative trifecta (0-3) against Lasker - the only such record between world champions. |
|
| Aug-07-09 | | birthtimes: In his analysis, Alekhine missed a simple combination that would have won Euwe the exchange on the 14th move. Alekhine writes, "White had no objective reason to avoid a draw, as the alternative 13. Rxe4 Qf6 would now offer him attacking chances." But if 13. Rxe4 then 13...Nc5!! wins Black the exchange since 14. dxc5 would trigger 14...Bxh2+ and White would lose his Queen on the next move! Strange how even great attacking masters miss a few, every now and then. And yet Lasker, who was 67 years old at the time of this game, probably saw this in a heartbeat! |
|
| Aug-18-09 | | WhiteRook48: did you get that from a computer? |
|
Dec-07-10
| | perfidious: <Marmot PFL> Who said anything about Capablanca playing a match? If you read my remarks carefully, Capa's statement was a compliment to Lasker's great understanding. Of course Capa would have likely have lost to all the youngsters whom you name in a set match, and Lasker certainly would have. <birthtimes> Alekhine was known to do his analysis without benefit of a board at times-there was a comical oversight in the book he wrote on the New York 1924 event. |
|
Jun-03-12
 | | Gypsy: <Capa was also over the hill by then, and not in great health. Botvinnik, Fine, Reshevsky or Keres would have beaten either of them in a match.> That may be the case, but such a match never came. As it went in this great tournament, we can admire the fact that Capa finished a joint first and Lasker, placing in a middle of the field, performed most honorably. |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Annotations by 