|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Nov-15-07 |
| zealouspawn: I've never seen Alekhine dominated so thoroughly as in this game. |
 |
Nov-26-07
 |
| Ulhumbrus: Capablanca comments on the move 18 Be4! in his book my chess career. To quote from his remarks " ...It would take many lines to explain this move properly and then I might not be clearly understood..." Apart from whatever else it may do, the move 18 Be4 appears to get ready to remove the Nd5 which guards the point c7, after which White's Q attacks and then invades the point c7. |
 |
Mar-30-08
 |
| chancho: The display board in this photo shows the final position of this game: http://www.pnte.cfnavarra.es/oronoz... |
 |
| Mar-30-08 |
| scholes: What was 34 ..kh3 35 Ng2 |
 |
Mar-30-08
 |
| Calli: For the un-cropped photo, see our St Petersburg 1914 album http://picasaweb.google.com/Caissa1... |
 |
| Aug-02-08 |
| Whitehat1963: People will never agree on whether Capablanca was better than Alekhine. But I ask a different question: Which Capablanca was better, the Capablanca of 1916-1924 or the Capablanca of 1936? And just how good was he already by 1911? |
 |
| Aug-02-08 |
| maxi: I'll contribute my two-bits worth.
As far as I can tell Capablanca till 1919 or 1920 was a creative genius of the first order, but somewhat careless and with a certain (possibly justified) tendency to underestimate his opponents, so he often makes mistakes. But usually he does not have to pay for them because he is so good he can still win and his opponents are often so much in awe of him that they do not make full use of the opportunities he allows them. Capablanca 1920-1924 is a creative genius with almost perfect play. He is at his strongest. He has brilliant conceptions, both tactical and strategic. He intuitively plays the best move. He is at is best. The later Capablanca is very strong and capable of subtle positional chess, but does he does have not the creativity and tactical sharpness of his youth. He also tries to keep his games simple, which is not a very good thing to do in many games. |
 |
Aug-02-08
 |
| Once: A great champion is also moulded by having strong opponents. In his early career, Capa was playing a kind of chess that his opponents could not understand or live with. Unfortunately, that kept him lazy - he could win without trying too hard. Had Capa been forced to struggle - who knows how strong he would have become? Which was better - Alekhine or Capablanca? Impossible to say, because they had different strengths and each hit their peak at different times. It is like trying to choose between malt whisky and a fine claret. I am just glad that I can enjoy both. |
 |
Aug-02-08
 |
| Bishoprick: The greatest player we have had has to have been Emanuel Lasker. No one else has held the world championship or dominated his peers for so long, 26 years I believe. Only Steinetz comes close. By the standards set by these two world champions all the others are relative flash-in-the-pan. Kasparov and Botvinik also held the championship for a long time, and have a claim to be right behind Lasker and Steinitz. All the others were very good, and I love some of their games, but they were around and in top form very briefly. |
 |
| Aug-02-08 |
| CapablancaFan: <Bishoprick> I find your assesment to be a little misleading. Although you are certainly correct that Lasker retained his title longer than any other, defensive technique wasn't totally refined as it is today. The strength of player skill and overall quality of the the game has been much more elevated since Lasker's time. Lasker's play later in his career grew much more inconsistent as the quality of his opponents grew exponentially. |
 |
Aug-02-08
 |
| Once: I'm with <CapablancaFan> on this one. Lasker did hold the world title for the longest, but he played infrequently and the quality of his opposition was not so strong. He was a great figher who excelled in complicated positions. He was also very good at just scraping the results he needed. But to claim that the others are a flash in the pan? Sorry, <Bishoprick>, can't agree with that one. |
 |
| Aug-02-08 |
| maxi: The number of strong players has grown enormously with the years. I am not sure how Capablanca would compare with a present-day player, but one thing is certain: today we have many talented players. Computers serve to disseminate chess knowledge worldwide, and there is a lot of young people out there that are very strong. |
 |
Oct-04-08
 |
| notyetagm: <Ulhumbrus: Capablanca comments on the move 18 Be4! in his book my chess career. To quote from his remarks " ...It would take many lines to explain this move properly and then I might not be clearly understood..." Apart from whatever else it may do, the move 18 Be4 appears to get ready to remove the Nd5 which guards the point c7, after which White's Q attacks and then invades the point c7.> 18 d3-e4!
 click for larger viewYes, preparing to invade down the open c-file in general and the weak c7-square in particular seem to be a major point of 18 d3-e4!. Several moves later we get 23 c1x c7, with the White c7-rook in <SEVENTH HEAVEN> *dominating* the position. Notice in particular the nasty <LATERAL PIN> of the Black f7-pawn to the Black g7-king. 23 c1x c7
 click for larger view |
 |
Dec-19-08
 |
| GIAaron: This is like a 2300 beating a 2050.Trivial stuff.
But that's not fair of course.The point is that these guys were in the process of discovring the tecniques which all strong players now take for granted.Each generation has climbed on the shoulders of previous generations,and so now we know a stack more than we did then.Also we have computers,lots of tournamnts,internet chess,and most importantly we have a million players,whereas back then there were maybe 500.Bring back Capa today,give him 5 years to learn modern tecniques and he could well rise to the top again...but maybe not-maybe he could never calculate as well as a Topalov or even a Karpov? |
 |
| Dec-19-08 |
| ILikeFruits: how dare...
ye insult...
the greatest...
revolutionary...
el comandante capablanca...
viva cuba!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
 |
Dec-19-08
 |
| GIAaron: lol! I could never insult the great Capa.There were long periods of time when he was by far the greatest living player on the planet.
I simply make a pretty much self-evident comment about general human progress.We see the same in tennis(most obviously in women's tennis),race running times,science, etc etc,although alas not music at the moment!
I am very confident that when computers bcome pretty much perfect,they will be able to show us that objectively better chess gets played with each pasing decade.In fact it would be very strange indeed if this were not to be the case!
This obviously in no was detracts from the natural talent that the best players from each generation possessed. |
 |
| Dec-19-08 |
| ILikeFruits: hello giaaron...
how are you... |
 |
Dec-19-08
 |
| GIAaron: actually me real name is Keith.Hi Ilike,I'm good thanks-and you? |
 |
| Dec-19-08 |
| ILikeFruits: im a...
fruit... |
 |
| Dec-19-08 |
| missing kasparov: [Event "St Petersburg exhibition"]
[Site "St Petersburg"]
[Date "1913.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Capablanca, Jose Raul"]
[Black "Alekhine, Alexander"]
[ECO "D30"]
[Result "1-0"]
DEEP RYBKA 3
1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. e3 Nf6 4. Nf3 e6 5. Nbd2 Nbd7 6. Bd3
Be7 7. O-O O-O 8. Qc2 dxc4 9. Nxc4 c5 10. Nce5 cxd4
11. exd4 Nb6 12. Ng5 g6 13. Ngf3 Kg7 +1.05/12 0s
(13... Nfd5 +0.44/12 8s 14. Bh6 Nb4 15. Qb1 Nxd3 16. Qxd3
Re8 17. Rfc1 Qd5 18. Rc7 Qd8 19. Rc2 Nd5) 14. Bg5 +0.13/11
0s (14. Bd2 +1.05/11 23s Nbd7 15. Rac1 Nxe5 16. dxe5 Nd5
17. Rfd1 Kg8 18. Bh6) 14... Nbd5 +1.04/9 0s (14... Nfd5
+0.13/12 12s 15. Bd2 f6 16. Ng4 Kh8 17. a4 a5 18. Bh6 Nb4
19. Qe2) 15. Rac1 Bd7 +1.07/8 0s (15... Nd7 +0.50/11
11s 16. Qd2 Bxg5 17. Nxg5 Nxe5 18. dxe5 Bd7 19. Rfd1 Qb6
20. h3 Bc6 21. Rc4 Kg8) 16. Qd2 +0.48/9 0s (16. g3
+1.06/9 9s Rc8 17. Qd2 Ng8 18. Bh4 Kh8) 16... Ng8
17. Bxe7 Qxe7 +0.80/10 0s (17... Ngxe7 +0.30/11 10s
18. Nc4 f6 19. Rfe1 Rc8 20. g3 Kg8 21. a3 Qc7) 18. Be4 Bb5
+0.92/13 0s (18... Ngf6 +0.34/13 35s 19. Bb1 Rac8
20. Ng5) 19. Rfe1 Qd6 20. Bxd5 exd5 21. Qa5 a6 +1.38/12
0s (21... Qa6 +0.69/12 8s 22. Qxa6 Bxa6 23. Rc7) 22. Qc7
Qxc7 23. Rxc7 h6 24. Rxb7 Rac8 25. b3 Rc2 +3.16/13 0s
(25... Rb8 +1.53/15 7s 26. Rc7 Rbc8 27. Rec1 Ne7 28. g4
Rfe8 29. g5 h5 30. Nh4 a5 31. Kg2 Rxc7 32. Rxc7 a4 33. b4
Kf8) 26. a4 Be2 +3.62/14 0s (26... Be8 +2.89/14 13s
27. Nd3 Nf6 28. Nc5 Kg8 29. Nxa6 Bd7 30. Ne5 Bc8 31. Rc7
Rb2 32. Nc5 Ne4 33. Nxf7 Rxf7 34. Rxc8+ Kg7 35. Ne6+ Kf6
36. Nf4 Kg7) 27. Nh4 h5 +5.34/7 0s (27... Kf6 +3.07/13
11s 28. g4 Ne7 29. Nd7+ Kg7 30. Nxf8) 28. Nhxg6 Re8
29. Rxf7+ Kh6 30. f4 +5.43/6 0s (30. Nf4 +7.12/10 12s)
30... a5 +7.05/7 0s (30... Rxe5 +6.31/10 11s 31. Nxe5)
31. Nh4 Rxe5 32. fxe5 +6.49/7 0s (32. dxe5 +7.94/13
14s) 32... Kg5 +8.29/8 0s (32... Bd3 +7.15/11 12s
33. e6) 33. g3 Kg4 +M4/3 0s (33... Kh6 +9.38/12 10s
34. e6) 34. Rg7+ Kh3 35. Ng2 1-0
|
 |
Dec-19-08
 |
| GIAaron: me too ilikefruits
|
 |
Sep-01-09
 |
| birthtimes: Whitehat1963: "People will never agree on whether Capablanca was better than Alekhine. But I ask a different question: Which Capablanca was better, the Capablanca of 1916-1924 or the Capablanca of 1936? And just how good was he already by 1911?" Here's what Capa himself had to say...
"Looking back to this period from San Sebastian [1911] to Saint Petersburg [1914] it will be found that the play has gradually developed in strength. The endings are as ever before of a high type, the imagination has reached its full scope, and brilliant combinations and conceptions are the rule. The openings are much better played, and in fact there seems to be no special weakness in any of the departments of the game. I think I might be said to have reached the height of my power as a chess master. Hereafter I may gain a little from experience, and the style may be somewhat changed accordingly, but whatever I may gain in one way I am sure will show a corresponding loss somewhere else. I may become more difficult to beat, but will also not be so apt to overcome strong opposition. It is only in the openings that I have yet a great deal to learn, and this will soon be done as we shall see presently. Hereafter, if I may be allowed to continue this dissertation, the interest in my play will centre mainly upon the question as to whether or how far I may be able to perfect certain phases of my game, and in which way this will affect my style of play, which will tend in the future to apparently ever-increasing simplicity, without losing, as some games will show, the former brilliancy when the occasion demands it." From "My Chess Career" by J.R. Capablanca, 1966, pp. 129-130. Originally published in 1920. |
 |
Sep-01-09
 |
| birthtimes: Here's what Capa himself had to say about his 18th move..."This move I considered a very long time. It looks very simple and inoffensive, yet it is the foundation of the whole attack against Black's position. The fact is that the bishop is doing very little, while the Black knight at d5 is the key to Black's defense, hence the necessity of exchanging the almost useless bishop for a most valuable knight." After White's 21st move, Capa explains, "Now the square at c7 is controlled by White, and this decides the game. Should Black attempt to protect it by Bc6 he will soon lose a pawn through knight takes bishop, as White will be able to bring up enough forces and win either the c-pawn or the a-pawn. It should be noticed that Black's weakness throughout the middle game is his inability to command the Black squares." And after 27. Nh4, "The knockout blow. The bishop no longer defends the square at d7, so that the king cannot come out to f6 because of Nd7+, and so there is no way of defending the kingside pawns. Black could have resigned now." From "My Chess Career" by J.R. Capablanca, 1966, pp. 96-97. |
 |
| Sep-01-09 |
| AnalyzeThis: <maxi: The later Capablanca is very strong and capable of subtle positional chess, but does he does have not the creativity and tactical sharpness of his youth. He also tries to keep his games simple, which is not a very good thing to do in many games. > I think all this is true. The later Capa had better openings then the early Capa, though. |
 |
| Sep-01-09 |
| theagenbiteofinwit: Alekhine's game was immature at this point in time. Marshall was stronger than Alekhine in 1913. |
 |
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing > |