< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Dec-14-06|| ||LivBlockade: After 33...♘c2+ White can safely resign. Black will be at least a piece ahead even without the last couple of tricks. For example, after 34. ♗c1 ♖xc1+; 35. ♔e2 gxf5 is certainly sufficient as after 36. ♔d2 White only wins back one of the lost pieces. Is this a case where the losing player lets his opponent play out the beautiful finish to be a good sport?|
|Dec-14-06|| ||Olympos: Excellent!! RIP David, your ideas will remain immortal.|
|Dec-15-06|| ||Fisheremon: <zb2cr: <eblunt>, I think after White played 32. Qe3, Nxe1; 33. Bxe1, Qf4 threatens to win another Pawn for Black.><artemis> After 32. Qe3 Nxe1 33. e4 is stronger but requires a high accuracy. The simplest way is 33. Qb1 Kf1 34. Qxb4.
The best defense for Black was 32. Qb7, but White could have an winning endgame with two pawns up.|
|Jul-30-07|| ||sanyas: 30.♕xb5 would have held easily. Why didn't he play that? Even 31.♔h2 could have saved him. So the combination was not the logical outcome of lengthy positional play, but the result of a sudden collapse by White.|
|Dec-13-10|| ||WhiteRook48: i say even 33 qxg6+ followed by kh2 loses less, but black still wins|
|May-16-11|| ||notyetagm: <karnak64: This game should be placed next to the word "brilliancy" in the dictionary. I'm absolutely stunned.>|
Bronstein was *unbelivably* sharp tactically.
|May-16-11|| ||notyetagm: G Barcza vs Bronstein, 1949|
Unbe-@#$%* -lievable tactical sequence by the genius Bronstein to end this game.
|May-16-11|| ||notyetagm: Game Collection: notyetagm's favorite tactics|
G Barcza vs Bronstein, 1949 31 ... Nf4xd3! Qe4xQf5 Nd3xNe1!!
|May-16-11|| ||notyetagm: <patzer2: The previous web site I gave on chess terminology such as zweischenzug was a bit on the humorous side (eg. blunder -- "the moves I make"). This one is a bit more serious and comprehensive:
Note that the relevance to this game is in the <<<five consecutive "zweischenzug"(!!!!! -.ed)>>> moves Bronstein makes after 31. Nxd3, before capturing the white queen.>
Why is this game not called <THE IMMORTAL ZWISCHENZUG GAME>???
|Sep-03-11|| ||Everett: Oh, here's Bronstein winning a pawn... oh, wait, wow, a whole piece... @#$@%! up two pieces! What just happened?!|
|Aug-24-12|| ||Conrad93: I guess this is what defines a master.
The ability to avoid what seems like the obvious is a trait of Bronstein.
|Sep-13-16|| ||drollere: this is a magical bit of logic where the obvious replies to the obvious threats and the plausible defenses to foreseeable attacks just lead white down the garden path to the guillotine.|
the final queen sac to allow the knight and rook to unleash the final attack is truly brilliant. everything fits together with astonishing precision as white finally loses the rook.
|Apr-25-17|| ||ChessHigherCat: I got the feeling Barcza was afraid of Bronstein from the outset and wanted to trade everything down, maintain the calm and end up with a draw, but it's like trying to ride a dragon.|
|Apr-25-17|| ||schnarre: ...I think White began to lose it with 8. b4?! ; should have finished developing with Be2...0-0 before launching such an attack. The game was still salvageable, but 11. Qa7? was pointless.|
|Apr-25-17|| ||morfishine: Wonderful game by Bronstein!
By <20...h6> White was positionally lost due to his fragmented pawns and awkwardly placed pieces; attacking the Black Queen only forced her to better squares. Ultimately, the superior position generated winning tactics
|Apr-25-17|| ||keypusher: < MrSmith: <morfishine - Ultimately, the superior position generated winning tactics>
Not really, white simply dug his own grave. No tactics required.>|
click for larger view
What is Black's 31st move if not tactics?
|Apr-25-17|| ||offramp: Wonderful chessboard magic. I was totally surprised by Black's moves. What a great player Bronstein was.|
|Apr-25-17|| ||catlover: Wonderful choice for GOTD. 31 Qe4 may not look like a losing move, but Bronstein's reply pulls a thread that makes white's position quickly unravel. |
Bronstein really was a world class player.
|Apr-25-17|| ||ChessHigherCat: <Mr Smith: catlover: Bronstein really was a world class player.>
<MrSmith: Who isn't?>|
I think I can say without fear of contradiction that I'm not a world-class player. Are you referring back to offramp's message, meaning: Who wasn't totally surprised?
|Apr-25-17|| ||keypusher: <MrSmith: <keypusher - tactics> Well, I guess tactics are in the eye of the beholder.>|
No, they're on the board. Particularly when Bronstein is doing his thing, like he did here.
|Apr-25-17|| ||HeMateMe: Bar-none, Bronstein could light up the board.|
|Apr-25-17|| ||botvinnik64: Bronstein is my favorite chess writer (still). I love The Sorcerer's Apprentice. In1952 he was as strong as Borvinnik, but alas, could only tie the Iron Man, my other chess hero. Great game.|
|Apr-25-17|| ||Csabika988: ArmaGedeon.. Good game, but the pun is better.. LOL|
|Apr-25-17|| ||SuperPatzer77: <botvinnik64: Bronstein is my favorite chess writer (still). I love The Sorcerer's Apprentice. In1952 he was as strong as Borvinnik, but alas, could only tie the Iron Man, my other chess hero. Great game.>|
<Botvinnik64> He's one of my favorite chess writers, too. Yeah, a great game!!!
|Apr-25-17|| ||morfishine: Most chess players really don't understand the term "tactic" or "tactics".|
While positional play sets up tactics, the actual tactic may be the most incongruous shift of a Rook or Queen by merely one square or the slightest move by a Bishop or even a backward re-grouping of a Knight.
Tactics don't necessarily have to include lightning moves across the board or even the capture of a piece or pawn
So, to be able to "see the possible tactic" one must first have favorably positioned their pieces/pawns
The switch from positional play to actual tactics can be so subtle that its too late for the victim to react
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·