< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Apr-16-08|| ||boz: Schwartz must have played 25...Nf4+?? quickly without thinking. Blackburne's reply 26.Qxf4! probably came even quicker.|
|Apr-16-08|| ||kevin86: This one ends in a clever operetta in three parts:
1 stop the check,eliminate a defender of h5,and force black to capture your queen.
2 capture the pawn on h5-threatening a mate on h8 that is inescapable except for capturing the rook.
3 place a second rook in the same position-this time,a piece that cannot be taken.
Easy as pie.
|Apr-16-08|| ||Sneaky: This position is in many beginner's books on tactics, I've seen in a hundred times. Not complaining mind you--a lot of people here are probably enjoying this gem for the first time today.|
|Apr-16-08|| ||monopole2313: The position would probably rate as a high 1600's - low 1700's problem on chess.emrald.net .|
|Apr-16-08|| ||fenno: "Forcingly easy". I believe Blackburne was waiting the opponent's error that actually happened, when he moved 23. Rh4, but isn't 23. Bf6 objectively stronger?|
|Apr-16-08|| ||Knight13: I've seen this one before, but it's freakin' useless in tactics books. It almost never show up OTB anyway.|
|Apr-16-08|| ||wals: Static Evaluation: White's King is under check. White is down two knights.Has a
bishop pair for a bishop and a knight. Black has control of the e-file and strong control of the b8-h2 diagonal.|
Dynamic Evaluatuin: The white King must move, to where? f1 seems the safest, but what if the Nf4 was removed?
It's removal would also make Rxh5 more rewarding.
Should the Queen take Nf4 then BxQ Rxh5 g6xh5 Rxh5 and onward to checkmate with the aid of Bf6
Abstract Assessment: Candidate move = QxNf4
26.QxNf4 ...Bxf4 27.Rxh5 ...gxh5 28.Rxh5 should be enough for this puzzle
Analysis by Fritz 11: tine 7min prefers 26. ...Bd6-e7 a move I did not even consider. Lucky me.
1. (#6): 26.Qc1xf4 Bd6-e7 27.Rh4xh5 Be7xf6 28.Qf4xf6 g6xh5 29.Rh1xh5 Qc7-g3+ 30.Kg2xg3 Kg8-f8 31.Rh5-h8#
|Apr-16-08|| ||D.Observer: I was thinking of 26. Bg5 until I saw the check!|
|Apr-16-08|| ||InspiredByMorphy: <nimzo knight> I saw the same line and thought it was the solution. Blackburne's combination is of course more direct however.|
|Apr-16-08|| ||devioustalfan: GM lev Alburt gives 3.Nc3 for this variation instead of Blackburne's 3.exd5. however 3.exd5 exd5 led to a semi-open e-file. good enough for me.|
|Apr-16-08|| ||unferth: <nimzo knight: How about
26.Rxf4 Bxf4 27. Qc2,
Now white is threatening Qxg6+, if 27..Kf8 28. Rxh5 gxh5 29. Qh7
Is there a defense here?>
27 ... Rd5 holds, I think; white gets the exchange back but nothing more.
|Apr-16-08|| ||234: Tuesday puzzle <15. ?> Apr-15-08 Palatnik vs Geller, 1980|
|Apr-16-08|| ||sandmanbrig: saw it right away.|
|Apr-17-08|| ||TheaN: <Wals: White is down two knights.>|
o.O? What game are you looking at?
|Jul-10-08|| ||jmuller: > Apr-16-08 fenno: I believe Blackburne was waiting the opponent's error that actually happened, when he moved 23. |
In *The Art of the Checkmate*, Renaud and Kahn comment as follows on Blackburne's 23rd move: "Preventing 23...Bf4 and also preparing 24.Bf6.[algebraic notation added]"
|Mar-09-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Black was so burned|
|Aug-13-10|| ||anhao: very interesting game!|
|Oct-20-10|| ||sevenseaman: What courage, and vision!|
|Jun-02-13|| ||FSR: Blackburne Singing in the Dead of Knight.|
|Jun-02-13|| ||optimal play: <FSR> Already done!
Blackburne vs W J Knight, 1877|
|Jun-02-13|| ||FSR: <optimal play> Sigh. There is nothing new under the sun. Having used the pun before, CG.com probably won't use my iteration of it, and I won't be able to submit more puns because I think I'm at 201 unused puns, most of which CG.com apparently isn't interested in using. And no, they won't even let you withdraw puns.|
|Jun-02-13|| ||optimal play: <FSR> <And no, they won't even let you withdraw puns.> I wish they would. That was my only decent pun submission. All the rest of my suggestions are embarrassingly terrible and have no chance of ever being selected!|
|Jun-02-13|| ||Phony Benoni: <FSR> You mean we're getting 201 puns now? I'll have to start submitting again. |
|Jun-03-13|| ||FSR: <optimal play> Ah, that was your pun, I see. Good job.|
|Jun-03-13|| ||FSR: <Phony Benoni> Yes, quite a while back (maybe two years or so ago) I complained to Daniel about the inadequacy of the 100 limit. He lifted it to 200, saying that they had a huge backlog of puns that basically weren't going to make it, but since they hadn't formally "killed" them, the 100 limit was unfair. But he didn't change the language on the website or AFAIK apprise anyone other than me. And it's somehow 201 in practice, not 200. Often when I've tried submitting new puns, the site has zapped me, saying that I already have 201 on my list. Anyway, so now you know - it's 201, not 100.|
I look forward to your puns. Your <Zapoleon Blown Apart> was sheer genius, way better than my <Control Ault Delete>, which inexplicably took the Caissar last year. I didn't consider the latter one of my better efforts, but for some reason the public loved it. Go figure. I still have many fine puns, by my reckoning, that CG.com hasn't used. For example, Hungary Like V. Wolf, Chandler vs V Wolf, 1985, and Short Lopez, Short vs A A Lopez, 2008, a 22-move crush in the Ruy Lopez. And who can forget Your Carr is Readey, J Carr vs J Readey, 2001? CG.com and those who vote on its GOTD nominees, that's who. Sigh. There's no justice in the world. Of course, the selection of GOTDs is only the most trivial example of that.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·