|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-05-17 | | Chessdreamer: This game was played on Botvinnik's 35th birthday. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | malt: <morefishine:I can't believe it, I got all 30 moves>
I got 10
I'll stand in the corner ! |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | patzer2: Got the first four moves of today's Sunday puzzle (31. ?), but instead of 35. Rxd7! ± (+2.72 @ 25 ply, chessgmes.com Stockfish 8 engine) I went for 35. Rb1 which fizzles out to a level game after 35. Rb1 Rc3+ 36.Kd2 Rxa3 37.Rxd7 Rxa6 38.Rxb5 Ra2+ 39.Ke3 Ra3+ 40.Kf2 Ra2+ 41.Ke3 = (0.00 @ 24 ply, Stockfish 8.) The chessgames.com Stockfish 8 engine gives 35.Rxd7 Rxc1 36.Nxb5 Rhc8 37.Rxa7+ Kb8 38.Rxg7 h5 39.Re7 e5 40.dxe5 fxe5 41.Rxe5 Rb1 42.Rxh5 Rb3+ 43.Kf4 Rf8+ 44.Kg4 Rg8+ 45.Kh3 Rf8 46.f4 Rd8 47.Re5 Rb2 48.f5 Rh8+ 49.Kg4 Rbxh2 +- (+2.72 @ 25 ply.) For a Black improvement, the tournament book suggestion 33...Bc8 cited by <Prudov> is also the chessgames.com Stockfish 8 engine pick: +0.52 (27 ply) 33...Bc8 34.Nxb5 Rd7 35.Rxd7 Bxd7 36.Nxa7 Kxa7 37.Rc7+ Kxa6 38.Rxd7 b5 39.Rxg7 Rc8 40.d5 exd5 41.exd5 b4 42.Rg4 Kb5 43.d6 Rc3+ 44.Ke2 Kc6 45.Rxb4 Rc2+ 46.Ke3 Rxh2 47.Rd4 Kd7 48.Kf4 Rh3 49.g4 h5 50.Rd2 hxg4 51.fxg4 Ra3 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | mel gibson: The computer - DR4 64 bit - is giving not much more than a pawn advantage for white. It only agrees with the first move of the puzzle. 31. b5 (31. b5
(b4-b5 e6-e5 d4xe5 f6xe5 b5xc6 ♗d7-e6 ♘a3-c2 ♖h8-f8 ♖c3-d3 ♖d8-c8 ♘c2-b4
b6-b5 ♖d3-d2) +1.27/19 114)
score for white +1.26 depth 19. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | 1stboard: This is game number Fifty Four in Irving Chernev's book " The Most Instructive Games Of chess Ever Played " Comment : Chernev called this a Catalan System opening Also suggested black should have played on move 33 Bc8 instead of the text move and would have most likely have drawn. Also , interesting Chernev gave Black's 48th move Kb7 and exclamation point(!) Note also Botvinnik's 48th move Kg2 ! left black's rook on one decent square on the H file |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | gars: This is game 97 of "One Hundred Selected Games" (Botvinnik/Dover) and Botvinnik also calls the opening a Catalan System. |
|
Nov-05-17
 | | keypusher: < vrkfouri: Terrible game by black.Too passive.
In my opinion, this line with 5...Qd7 is not a good choice.> Black lasted 60 moves against the #1 player in the world, who was (by the #1 player's own account) playing one of his best games. So it seems unlikely that Black played terribly. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | ughaibu: Keypusher: maybe Vidmar would could be included in your next list of most underrated players. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | Retireborn: I don't think Vidmar is underrated, but (like his contemporary Euwe) he found it difficult to handle the Botvinnik of the 40s. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | brankat: Dr. Milan Vidmar has never been underrated. Not as a person, a chess player, a scientist, a teacher or a writer. Not to mention a husband, a father, a brother. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | Gregor Samsa Mendel: <Retireborn: I don't think Vidmar is underrated, but (like his contemporary Euwe) he found it difficult to handle the Botvinnik of the 40s.> Vidmar also had trouble against the Botvinnik of the 30s. Botvinnik vs Vidmar, 1936 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | Retireborn: <Gregor> Yes, it's nice, but one game doesn't prove much; if Botvinnik & Vidmar had played a match in the 30s, I'm not sure the result would have been all that different from the Flohr & Levenfish matches. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4
7...Bd7 8.Bg2 Qxc4 9.Nxc4 Bb5 10.Nce5 Nbd7 11.Bd2 Nxe5 12.Nxe5 Nd5 13.a4 Ba6 14.Bxd5 exd5 15.b4 f6 16.b5 fxe5 17.dxe5 Rb8 18.Rb1 Bxb5 19.axb5 Bc5 20.0-0 Bb6 21.Kg2 Ke7 22.Ra1 Ke6 23.f4 Rhe8 24.Rfc1 g5 25.fxg5 Kxe5 26.Rf1 Kd4 27.Rf4+ Kc5
= (0.20) Depth: 27 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4
8...Bd7 9.Nce5 Bb4+ 10.Bd2 Bxd2+ 11.Nxd2 Nc6 12.Nxd7 Kxd7 13.e3 Nb4 14.Ke2 c6 15.a3 Nbd5 16.Rc1 Rad8 17.Nb3 Ne4 18.Bg2 Nd6 19.Nc5+ Kc7 20.h4 h5 21.Rc2 a5 22.Rhc1 Kb8 23.b4 axb4 24.Bxd5 exd5
= (0.20) Depth: 26 |
|
Nov-05-17
| | keypusher: <brankat >. I underrated him. In Tartakower and DuMont's 500 Master Games of Chess, he pretty much showed up only as a loser. I was surprised to learn later that he had a plus score against Nimzowitsch, for example. < Retireborn: <Gregor> Yes, it's nice, but one game doesn't prove much; if Botvinnik & Vidmar had played a match in the 30s, I'm not sure the result would have been all that different from the Flohr & Levenfish matches.> Given that Flohr was #3 in the world in 1933, and Levenfish was #31 in the world in 1937, the results of the Flohr and Levenfish matches are not very much like each other. If Botvinnik had played at anywhere near his normal level, and at the level at which he played in every match in his life except the Levenfish match, I expect he would have beaten Dr. Vidmar (who was past his peak by the 30s) pretty easily. |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4
11...Bd7 12.Rc1 0-0-0 13.a3 Kb8 14.Be2 Be8 15.b4 Ne7 16.Kf1 Nfd5 17.Kg2 Bc6 18.Bf3 Bb5 19.Ne5 Rhf8 20.h4 f6 21.Nec4 Bxc4 22.Rxc4 c6
= (0.20) Depth: 27 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4
20.Rc5 Ba6 21.Rac1 Rd7 22.R5c2 c6 23.Ndb3 Rhd8 24.Rd1 Re7 25.Nc5 N6d7 26.Nab3 g6 27.f4 Nb6 28.a4 f5 29.Re1 fxe4 30.Bxe4 Nd5+ 31.Kf3 Nb4 32.Rcc1 Na2 33.Rcd1 Nb4 34.Na5 Kc7 35.Bb1 Rde8 36.Rc1 b6 37.Nxa6+ N8xa6 38.Nc4 Nd5 39.Ne5 Nab4
+ = (0.67) Depth: 25) |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | Retireborn: <keypusher> Well, Vidmar shared first place with Flohr in 1932; https://www.365chess.com/tournament... Of course by my own logic one tournament doesn't prove much, and it may be true that he was in decline by 1936; but even so I think Vidmar would have been a tough match opponent for Botvinnik, and I say that as a big fan of dear old Botty :) |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4
26.Nc4 f6 27.Na3 c6 28.Bb5 Nc7 29.Bxc6 Bxc6 30.Rxc6 Kd7 31.Rc4 Rc8 32.b4 b5 33.Rc5 Rb8 34.Nb1 Rb6 35.Nc3 Rc8 36.h4 Rxa6 37.Rxa6 Nxa6 38.Rxc8 Kxc8 39.Nxb5 Nxb4 40.Nxa7+ Kd7 41.Nb5 Kc6 42.Na3 g6 43.Nc4 Kb5 44.Nd6+ Kc6 45.e5 Nd5+
+ - (0.97) Depth: 25 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4
29...Rf8 30.Na3 b5 31.Nc2 f5 32.h4 Nc7 33.Ra1 h6 34.Bd3 g5 35.hxg5 hxg5 36.Kf2 fxe4 37.Bxe4 Nd5 38.Bxd5 Rxd5 39.Rh1 Kc7 40.Rh6 Bd7 41.Rh7 Kb6 42.Rc5 Rc8 43.Rg7 Kxa6 44.g4 Rxc5 45.dxc5
= (0.20) Depth: 26 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4
30...b5 31.Nc2 Rhe8 32.Ne1 Nb6 33.f4 h6 34.Nf3 g5 35.h3 Na8 36.fxg5 hxg5 37.e5 Nc7 38.Rb3 Rf8 39.Bg2 Nd5+ 40.Ke2 fxe5 41.Nxe5 Kc7 42.Bxd5 exd5 43.Rbc3 Rf6 44.g4 Kb6 45.Ra3 Be8 46.Rf3 Rh6 47.Ra1
+ = (0.42) Depth: 25 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4: d 21
1. ± (1.09): 31...Rhf8 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.h4 f5 34.Be2 h6 35.h5 Rg8 36.Nb5 Nxb5 37.Bxb5 Kc7 38.Rh1 Rd6 39.Rf1 Rgd8 40.Rd3 Rf8 41.Rdd1 Rdd8 42.Rb1 fxe4 43.fxe4 Rf6 44.Rf4 Rff8 45.Rb2 2. ± (1.10): 31...e5 32.dxe5
3. ± (1.10): 31...f5 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.Nc4 Bxa6 34.Ne5 Bxf1 35.Rxf1 Nb5 36.Rcc1 Rhe8 37.Ra1 Re7 38.Ra2 fxe4 39.fxe4 Nd6 40.Rb1 Rc7 41.Nd7+ Rdxd7 42.cxd7 Rxd7 43.Rc2 Kb7 44.Kf4 Nf7 45.Rc4 Nd6 46.Rc3 a5 4. ± (1.17): 31...h5 32.bxc6 Be8 33.h4 Rh6
5. ± (1.17): 31...Be8 32.bxc6 h5 33.h4 Rh6
6. ± (1.22): 31...h6 32.bxc6 Be8 33.R3c2 g5 34.Nc4 Rh7 35.Rb1 Ka8 36.Bd3 Rg7 37.Be2 Re7 38.Nb2 Kb8 39.Nd1 Rd6 40.Rbc1 b5 41.Nf2 f5 7. ± (1.24): 31...g6 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.Ra1 f5 34.Nc2 g5 35.Bc4 Rhf8 36.Nb4 Rf6 37.e5 Rf7 38.f4 gxf4+ 39.gxf4 Rg7 40.Rc2 Rg4 41.Rd1 Rh4 42.Bf1 Rg4 43.Rb2 h6 8. ± (1.30): 31...Rhg8 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.Ra1 Rge8 34.Nc2 g5 35.Bc4 Re7 36.Nb4 f5 37.Rg1 h5 38.e5 g4 39.f4 h4 40.Rd1 hxg3 41.hxg3 Rh7 42.d5 exd5 43.Nxd5 Nxd5+ 44.Rxd5 9. ± (1.33): 31...Rhe8 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.Ra1 g5 34.Nc2 f5 35.Nb4 h6 36.Rd1 Rf8 37.Be2 h5 38.Rc2 f4+ 39.gxf4 gxf4+ 40.Kf2 Rg8 41.Rb2 Rd6 42.h4 Rgd8 43.Rbd2 10. ± (1.36): 31...g5 32.bxc6 Be8 33.Nc4 Rf8 34.R3c2 f5 35.Ne5 f4+ 36.Kd3 Rg8 37.Bh3 h5 38.Rc4 Rg7 39.Ke2 Nb5 40.Rd1 Nc7 41.Kf2 Re7 42.Rb1 Nxa6 43.gxf4 gxf4 44.Nd3 Rd6 11. +- (1.41): 31...Ka8 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.Nc2 Rhf8 34.Nb4 f5 35.Bc4 g5 36.Rd1 Rf7 37.Rf1 f4+ 38.gxf4 gxf4+ 39.Kd3 Rg7 40.Rc2 Kb8 41.Kc3 Ne8 42.e5 Kc7 43.Bd3 h6 44.Rb1 h5 12. +- (1.59): 31...Rc8 32.bxc6 Be8 33.Nc4 Rd8 34.Rb3 Ka8 35.f4 Rf8 36.Be2 h6 37.h4 h5 38.Rbc3 g6 39.Nd2 Kb8 40.Ra3 Rf7 41.Rac3 Rd6 42.Bf1 b5
13. +- (1.59): 31...Kc8 32.bxc6 Be8 33.Nc4 Kb8 34.Rb3 Ka8 35.f4 Rf8 36.Be2 h6 37.h4 h5 38.Rbc3 g6 39.Nd2 Kb8 40.Ra3 Rf7 41.Rac3 Rd6 42.Bf1 b5 <14. +- (1.61): 31...Nxb5> 32.Nxb5 cxb5 33.Rc7 Rc8 34.Rb7+ Ka8 35.Rxc8+ Bxc8 36.Rxg7 b4 37.Bc4 Kb8 38.Kd3 h6 39.Rf7 f5 40.e5 h5 41.Rf6 Re8 42.Rh6 Kc7 43.Rh7+ Bd7 44.Kc2 Kc6 45.Kb3 b5 46.Bf1 Rd8 47.Kxb4 Kd5 48.Bxb5 Bxb5 49.Kxb5 Kxd4 50.Rxa7 Kxe5 15. +- (1.73): 31...Rdg8 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.Rb3 Rd8 34.Nc4 Ka8 35.Ra1 g5 36.Nxb6+ axb6 37.a7 Rd6 38.Rxb6 Bd7 39.Rb8+ Rxb8 40.axb8Q+ Kxb8 41.cxd7 Rxd7 42.Rb1+ Kc8 43.Rb6 Kd8 44.Rc6 h5 45.Bh3 Re7 46.Rb6 f5 47.Rd6+ Ke8 48.Bf1 Rd7 49.Rc6 Kf7 16. +- (1.73): 31...Rdf8 32.bxc6 Bc8 33.Rb3 Rd8 34.Nc4 Ka8 35.Ra1 g5 36.Nxb6+ axb6 37.a7 Rd6 38.Rxb6 Bd7 39.Rb8+ Rxb8 40.axb8Q+ Kxb8 41.cxd7 Rxd7 42.Rb1+ Kc8 43.Rb6 Kd8 44.Rc6 h5 45.Bh3 Re7 46.Rb6 f5 47.Rd6+ Ke8 48.Bf1 Rd7 49.Rc6 Kf7 |
|
| Nov-05-17 | | brankat: <keypusher> If you had been surprised with Dr.Vidmar's score against Nimzo (which You should not have been), then You may want to check his player's site here at CG.com, page #1 for some additional stats. The first opponent listed there is AAA, but the result is not quite accurate since they also played 9 "friendly" games in Paris, I think in 1934. Alekhine won 5-4. Not many players won 6 games against Alekhine in his prime. Let's not forget that between San Sebastian, 1911 (probably even earlier) until Bled, 1931 (at least) Milan Vidmar was listed amongst the top 6. Not bad for a non-professional master. Capablanca's opinion, and comments, regarding Vidmar are fairly well known too. |
|
Nov-11-17
 | | Pawn and Two: The position before 31.b5!, was our daily puzzle position last Sunday. 
click for larger viewThe tournament book, <Groningen International Chess Tournament, 1946>, with notes from various contemporary sources, noted 31.b5! was the beginning of a fine combination, a beautiful break-through, but according to the tournament book notes, winning only because Vidmar played to win the exchange with 33...Rc8?, instead of the correct move, 33...Bc8!. Botvinnik in his book, <Half a Century of Chess>, gave an exclamation mark for 31.b5!, but he also noted Black could have obtained good practical chances for a draw with the move 33...Bc8. My Houdini 3 program agrees with these evaluations. Houdini indicates 31.b5! was clearly White's best choice: (1.05) (27 ply) 31...e5 32.dxe5 fxe5, or (1.07) (27 ply) 31...Rhf8 32.bxc6, with Black still having fairly decent drawing chances. Houdini indicates White's other top choices at move 31, 31.f4 & 31.h4, would have provided White with a much smaller advantage than the move played by Botvinnik, 31.b5!. Vidmar missed the best continuation at move 31; 31....e5! or 31...Rhf8!, with fairly decent chances for a draw. Instead, Vidmar played 31...Nxb5?, and it was at this point, White appears to have a winning game. Botvinnik continued with 32.Bxb5?, but this move was an error. As noted in the tournament book, Black could have had a draw, or as noted by Botvinnik, Black had good practical chances for a draw after 32...cxb5 33.Rc7 Bc8!. Houdini indicates Black should be able to draw after: (.60) (29 ply) 32.Bxb5? cxb5 33.Rc7 Bc8! 34.Nxb5 Bxa6 35.Nxa7 Bb7 36.Nb5 Rc8; (.53) (28 ply) 37.Kd2 Ba6; with a likely drawn ending of Rook & 5 Pawns vs Rook & 4 Pawns, with all the Pawns on the king-side. Houdini indicates White was probably winning if he had played 32.Nxb5!: (1.76) (29 ply) 32.Nxb5! cxb5 33.Rc7 Rc8 34.Rb7+ Ka8 35.Rxc8 Bxc8 36.Rxg7 Bxa6; (1.98) (30 ply) 37.Re7 Rc8 38.Bd3 h5 39.Rxe6 Rc3 40.Kd2 Ra3 41.Rxf6 b4 42.Bxa6 Rxa6 43.Kc2; or (2.08) (31 ply) 37...Bc8 38.Bxb5 Kb8 39.h4 h6 40.g4 a6 41.Bc6 Rd8 42.Rb7 b5 43.d5 b4 44.Rxh6 b3 45.Kd3. Another line, very favorable and probably winning for White was: 32.Nxb5! cxb5 33.Rc7 Rc8 34.Rb7+ Ka8 35.Rxc8 Bxc8 36.Rxg7; (1.78) (30 ply) 36...b4 37.Bc4 Kb8 38.Kd3; (1.75) (29 ply) 38...f5 39.e5 h6 40.Rg6 h5 41.Bxe6 Bxa6+ 42.Bc4 Bxc4+ 43.Kxc4, or 42.Ke3 Bb7 43.Bxf5 or 43.d5. In the paragraph above, after 36...b4 37.Bc4 Kb8 38.Kd3, Black could also try: (1.81) (29 ply) 38...h5 39.Rg6 Rf8 40.Rh6 e5 41.Rxh5 exd4 42.Rh6 Rd8 43.Rxf6 b3 44.Bxb3 Bxa6+ 45.Kd2, but White is winning after: (2.75) (27 ply) 45...Rc8 46.h4 Rc3 47.bd5 Rd3+ 48.Kc2 Re3 49.h5. This was a difficult and instructive game by Botvinnik & Vidmar, and Houdini's analysis, especially regarding the move choices 32.Bxb5? and 32.Nxb5!, is also very instructive. |
|
| Dec-05-17 | | Howard: This game not only made Chernev's TMIGOCEP, but it also made Soltis' best-100 list in that book he wrote back in 2005. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 35.Rxd7
