|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-29-06 | | DP12: It doesn't trap the bishop(Bc2) and yes it weakens the queenside. But perhaps most importantly it loosens blacks control over the center and gives white a free hand to play for e4 without having to worry about black destroying the center by taking on d4. |
|
| Mar-29-06 | | DP12: Patzer2, about 19... Nf4. Let's follow your line because I have a question. 19...Nf4 20. Qe3/Qd2 Ne6 21.Bd6 Rc8 22.b3... Why b3? the plan e5 and Nd2 seems much more sensible to the uniniated. |
|
| Mar-29-06 | | Chicago Chess Man: DP12: good point, i must be blind today or something |
|
Jul-10-06
 | | Eggman: Immediately after the game Boleslavsky revealed to Dzindzichashvili that the whole thing had been home preparation. It had been prepared for Petrosian for his 1966 title defense against Spassky. Spassky never played the QGA in that match, however, and so it was Dzindzi who became the innocent victim here. |
|
| Sep-29-11 | | DrMAL: Seems big fish tale. After earlier mistakes it looks like Roman missed 20...Qc7 and blundered with 20...Rc8? losing (23...Kd7? lost faster, 24..Kc6?? mate in 3). In his video (Roman Lab #2) he states after 14.Rxd5 it was all played hundreds of times before, here is OE tab you decide Opening Explorer LOL. |
|
| Sep-29-11 | | DrMAL: Roman claims in his video that 17.Rd2 was well known theory and 17.Rad1 was part of an opening preparation for 1966 WC match. Look at OE Opening Explorer proving this fish tale as Boleslavsky is not talking. Everyone has their worst games it's only human, no need to make up BS for it. |
|
| Sep-29-11 | | Everyone: I can't remember something of the like. |
|
| Sep-29-11 | | DrMAL: It is in DVD Roman's Lab #2 a friend recently gave me, parts on positional sacrifice and ambitious opening are very good video I recommend http://www.amazon.com/Romans-Lab-Ch... |
|
| Sep-21-13 | | johnkr: According to Fritz Black could get away with 17...Nd5 18 ed5 h6! (not however 18...f6) 19 Bh5 Kf8!? and Black is  . But maybe Boleslavsky had n something in mind to meet that. |
|
| Feb-12-15 | | bengalcat47: Nice game by Boleslavsky. So how do you pronounce his opponent's surname? |
|
| Feb-12-15 | | Granny O Doul: Roman himself pronounces it something like "JIN-jee-hash-VEE-lee", at least in talking to Americans. |
|
| Dec-26-18 | | Cibator: According to a report of this game in the UK's "Chess" magazine, it was played in some kind of student event. Which makes Boleslavsky's participation a little odd, to say the least. He was nearly 48 at the time. |
|
Dec-26-18
 | | plang: Still don't understand why Boleslavsky (and Lilienthal) are not listed in the players under Advanced Search - they are better than most of the players listed and deserve more respect. |
|
Dec-26-18
 | | perfidious: Recency bias and all that; the players named were not 2600 in the FIDE-rated epoch, so presumably never existed--never mind that they were dang tough, and two of Botvinnik's opponents from the 1941 match tournament, as well as participants in Budapest Candidates (1950), which featured Boleslavsky coming first ex aequo before losing a playoff to Bronstein. Yes, they could play a little; who could forget Lilienthal vs Capablanca, 1935? |
|
Dec-26-18
 | | SwitchingQuylthulg: While it is more than a bit strange that Boleslavsky and Lilienthal aren't in the short list of players, they are both included in the longer list of players that appears if "Longer list of players on homepage" is selected in the User Preferences. |
|
Dec-26-18
| | perfidious: Dayum, they <do> exist after all! |
|
| Jun-23-24 | | Cecco: After the spontaneous 19. ... Nf4 White's attack seems like nothing special. |
|
| Jun-23-24 | | Granny O Doul: This game accompanies Boleslavsky's bio in Golombek's Encyclopedia. |
|
Jun-23-24
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: It appears that we had only 10 or 11 puzzles this week. Flubbed this one and another; not complaining |
|
| Jun-23-24 | | mel gibson: I couldn't see any good move.
Stockfish 16.1 is calling it close to a draw:
18. Bxe7
(18. Bxe7 (1.Bxe7 Nxd5 2.Bxc5 Nf4 3.Qe3 Ne6 4.Bd6 f6 5.Nd4 Nxd4 6.Rxd4 Qc8 7.Qf3 Kf7 8.e5 Qe6
9.h4 Rad8 10.exf6 g5 11.Qd1 Rhg8 12.Qd3 Qxf6 13.Rd5 gxh4 14.Rf5 Rxd6 ) +0.27/56 633) score for White +0.27 depth 56. |
|
| Jun-23-24 | | cocker: The final (unplayed) position after 25 ... Kxc5 26 Qd6+ Kc4 27 Ne5#, is worth seeing. |
|
Jun-23-24
 | | chrisowen: I'm pry it is hunt q cake dig v fuzzy it is Bxe7 it is a cig mug eel advance dank buck await Bxe7 chi x :) |
|
| Jun-23-24 | | Allderdice83: Multiple sacrifices here. The position after 21 ... Rc7 could be a separate puzzle. Black could have held out longer with 23 ... Kc8 24. Nd6+ Kb8 25. Nxb7 Kxb7, but after 26. b4, Black's position is close to hopeless. It's just a matter of time before White will ram the e pawn, and the threat of the passed pawn along with mate threats will force Black to give up one of the rooks. |
|
| Jul-17-24 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: Should not black have played
23... Kc8 ? |
|
| Jul-18-24 | | Granny O Doul: <Should not black have played
23... Kc8 ?>
I suspect Roman preferred to lose more artistically. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 18.Bxe7