chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Frank James Marshall vs Oldrich Duras
Quadrangular Masters (1913), New York, NY USA, rd 4, Sep-08
Danish Gambit: Declined. Sorensen Defense (C21)  ·  1-0
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening
find similar games 19 more Marshall/Duras games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: To flip the board (so black is on the bottom) press the "I" key on your keyboard.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
Jan-31-19  sudoplatov: Again, Stockfish thinks that 25.Bd2 would have won material.
Jan-31-19  sudoplatov: Marshall also missed a mate-in-9 with 68.Rh6+.
Feb-02-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  Phony Benoni: And, after <22...Rbc8>:


click for larger view

23.Bd6 would have saved a lot of trouble. Well, I guess it was good practice. (American Chess Bulletin, November 1913,p. 258)

Mar-07-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  fredthebear: This active game between two chess warriors is a joy to watch unfold. It contains plenty of tactical elements. White's occasional less-than-perfect moves were not unreasonable; his game flows smoothly. Who can hint that the White warrior played poorly when he maintains control throughout?

Critics with their silicon brain crutches love to walk all over the graves of the past greats for being imperfect. These same critics never would have found the clever sacrificial interference Bd6 at move 23 or 26 on their own. Hindsight is their shine, which pales in comparison to original creativity. (FTB is willing to bet that whoever back-in-the-day originally suggested 23.Bd6 did so after seeing that 26.Bd6 was played, and then used that enlightening idea to see that it could have been played sooner. Perhaps it was one of warriors who found the improvement in the post-mortem.)

Most of the great cinema movies that people enjoy contain a production film flub somewhere, but we can still enjoy the show! Put that computer away and watch the story unfold first -- the building up of the position against the parry is the true art form of chess -- and see if you can spot the flub for yourself!

Those who understand chess know that the skewer 68.Rh6+ would NOT have resulted in a mate-in-9 like the computer says. The Black warrior would have resigned on the spot.

Mar-07-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  fredthebear: One would be dead wrong to think Frank James Marshall was a poor endgame player. White had the insight to skillfully remove Black's kingside pawns when he could have easily picked off the last Black pawn on the queenside. That difference is huge!

Leaving all the remaining pawns on the kingside would have been drawish. The Black knight would have been in his element one just one side of the board.

White realizes this winning plan on move 39. Thus, about half of the game was committed to it's fruition. Marshall collects two pawns for one on the h-file, leaving himself connected passers protected by the king, and then cleans up the queenside. The realization of this plan and it's execution is outstanding.

The rook ending follow-up was certainly not so clean, but White does have a won game at that point with the two connected passers by design. "It's a matter of technique."

Mar-07-19  JimNorCal: Bravo, FTB.

Still, Marshall missing 68. Rh6+ is glaring enough to make one wonder .... severe time trouble? Momentary chess blindness? An incorrect game score?

NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

<This page contains Editor Notes. Click here to read them.>

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Danish Gambit: Declined. Sorensen Def (C21) 1-0 Interference!
from 7 Come 11 Makes About 187 by fredthebear
Danish Gambit: Declined. Sorensen Def (C21) 1-0 Interference!
from exd4 offers to Fredthebear by fredthebear
An Opium Repertoire for White
by Patca63
An Opium Repertoire for White
by katar
An Opium Repertoire for White
by rickcarnes
Danish Gambit: Declined. Sorensen Def (C21) 1-0 Interference!
from Pins Ins and Outs, ECO C 20s, 40s, 50s, 60s-90s by rbaglini
English saints made hay in old verse form 7
from Bouncy Castle, Tombola, Face Paint... by offramp
Round 4 (Monday, September 8)
from New York 1913 (Quadrangular) by Phony Benoni
November, p. 258 [Game 225 / 2712]
from American Chess Bulletin 1913 by Phony Benoni
Sorensen Defense 3...d5 4.ed5
from C21 Danish Gambit II by listen50s


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC