< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·
|May-01-07|| ||Themofro: Continued from last post:
14. Nh5! <Now Lasker has finally set up the attacking position he's been aiming for, and there is no valid defense, e.g. 14...d4 15. Nxf6+ (15. Bxf6 with the idea of Qg4 also leads to a powerful attack) 15...Bxf6 (15...gxf6 16. Rf3 fxe5 17. Bxh7+ Kh8 [17...Kg7 18. Rg3+ Kf6 19. Qh5 and mates] 18. Rg3 mates or wins the queen) 16. exd4 cxd4 17. Bxf6 gxf6 18. Rf3 and white wins at least a pawn. Also ...14 Ne8 loses to 15. Bxg7! with the idea of Qg4, and the relative best 14...Rf8 (giving the king somewhere to run) allows 15. Nxf6+ Bxf6 16. Bxh7+ (intending to meet 16...Kxh7? with the crushing 17. Qh5+ Kg8 18. Bxf6 gxf6 19. Qh6 and black can only watch in horror as white forves mate with Rf3-g3 etc.) 16...Kf8 and black can "continue to resist a pawn down" (Kasparov) but that would be a thankless task against a player of Lasker's ability.>
15. Bxh7+! <The cyclone hits. White begins an extraordinary combination which, as far as i know, is the first double bishop sacrifice of it's kind.>
15. Kxh7 16. Qh5+ Kg8 17. Bxg7!! <Like an unstoppable force of nature, Lasker keeps coming!>
17...Kxg7 <Declining it is no better.>
18. Qg4+ Kh7 19. Rf3 e5 <It is clear that black's every move is forced.>
20. Rh3+ Qh6 21. Rxh6+ Kxh6 22. Qd7! <The last sting of Lasker's brilliant combinations: white wins one of the loose bishops, remaining with queen vs. rook and bishop. Given his pawn superiority and continued attacking chances, white has a relatively easy win, although Lasker finds an artisitic way to close it out.>
He then goes through the rest of the game with no commentary, but gives both 30. Rxf6+ and 38. Qxd3 a exclamation mark.
|Jun-16-07|| ||vonKrolock: Taylor is right calling the double s sac a "combination", a true "sacrifice" would imply a character of imprevisibility, while here the sequence to d7 is previsible|
|Jul-05-07|| ||2Towers: Lasker, the mathematician, shows his "math skills" in this game. Remarkable specially at the time it was played....|
|Nov-15-07|| ||get Reti: How come Capablanca, in his book A Chess Primer, shows the DSB on b2 instead of e5 at move 14?|
|Dec-07-07|| ||Samagonka: well well thrashed!|
|Feb-16-08|| ||asdrubal1990: What a game!!!!!|
|Feb-28-08|| ||stupidiot21: awesome game|
|Mar-01-08|| ||Cibator: Another excellent double-bishop sac came in the following position (Koenig-Cornforth, UK National Club Championship final, London 1952):|
click for larger view
21.Bxh7+ Kxh7 22.Qh5+ Kg8 23.Bxg7 Kxg7 24.Ra3 Qc7 25.Rd7 Bd6 26.Qg5+ Kh7 27.Rxc7 Bxc7 28.Qe7 Rac8 29.Rf3 c5 30.Qh4+ Kg7 31.Qg5+ Kh8 32.Rf6 Be4 33.Rh6+ Bh7 34.Qh5 1-0
The opening was a French Defence - I'll PGN the full score when I can track it down.
Imre Koenig was a Hungarian-born IM who spent 15 years in the UK before emigrating again to the US, where he died in 1992. For some reason he doesn't seem to have any games on the CG database as yet.
His opponent Dr John W Cornforth, a strong Australian-born amateur, had a stellar career as a chemist, culminating with a Nobel prize in 1975 and a knighthood in 1977.
|Mar-24-08|| ||JG27Pyth: <I would characterize it as a <resign already, you moron> kind of move.> |
I actually played Qxd3 in "Guess the Move" thinking -- OH COME ON ALREADY... I know what I'd play here, but Lasker probably found better. Nope... good old Lasker: why show off your QvR technique when you can just brainlessly sac to the easily won pawn ending and (successfully) encourage your opponent to stop dreaming.
|Jun-21-08|| ||micartouse: The move 38. Qxd3 other than illustrating the absurdity of Black's playing in an ridiculous position, actually gives us an opportunity to philosophize about the valuation of pieces. As beginner's we are given arithmetic approximations of the piece values such that winning a pawn in the opening gives us a +1 advantage and the advantage is still +1 in the ending.|
However, values are better compared as a ratio. Let's just assign the king a value of 3 in terms of its force in the endgame (due to it being close to the minor pieces in mobility). Then Lasker plays 38. cxd3 and the ratio of force would be 18:9. If he plays 38. Qxd3 and Bauer trades heavy pieces, then the ratio of force is 9:4. In this evaluation, Lasker hasn't sacrificed anything - black would be the one sacrificing by playing 38 ... Rxd3.
This ratio of force concept makes more sense to me for practical purposes in less clear situations. For instance, take the starting position minus all the pieces leaving only pawns and kings. Here a 2 pawn handicap would be sufficient for a class level player to beat Anand - whereas with all the pieces, 2 pawns would be of little value against Anand (it would require almost a queen to create such an overwhelming ratio of force).
As for this game, Black should have resigned several moves before.
|Jun-21-08|| ||Poulsen: Nimzowitsch once lost to a multiple piece sacrifice: J Enevoldsen vs Nimzowitsch, 1933|
|Jun-28-08|| ||apexin: perhaps black's position is already resignable by move 22.|
|Jan-04-09|| ||WhiteRook48: what's up with ...d3?|
|Jan-18-09|| ||WhiteRook48: 15. Bxh7+!! and 17. Bxg7!! How Lasker ever thought up that brilliancy...|
|Jan-22-09|| ||WhiteRook48: 38. Qxd3! is clever|
|Jan-24-09|| ||WhiteRook48: great double bishop sac|
|Feb-08-09|| ||WhiteRook48: 22. Qd7! should go into "basic tactics"|
|Feb-16-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Black should have resigned after 14. Nh5|
|Feb-18-09|| ||WhiteRook48: actually he should have resigned after 1. f4|
|Mar-06-09|| ||WhiteRook48: sorry to pollute this page, but 5. Bd3 seems a bit erroneous as it blocks the d pawn|
|Mar-09-09|| ||OnlyBelieve: I don't have anything amazing to contribute. I just wanted to say that this game is awesome regardless of theory.|
|Dec-17-09|| ||I play the Fred: Wow, sleepyirv, you were quick! Well done!|
|Dec-17-09|| ||sleepyirv: Whoever wrote Clue 34 is a sick, sick genius.|
|Dec-17-09|| ||SirChrislov: Jesus!! late by seconds!|
|Dec-17-09|| ||The HeavenSmile: ditto|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·