May-31-07 | | zev22407: A wild game. |
|
May-31-07 | | eyalbd: it should be Qe6# in the game listing.
|
|
Feb-06-17 | | ChessHigherCat: It's very rare to see GMs play on to mate. Larsen must have been in incredible time trouble or something. I always criticized stupid chess movies like "La Diagonale du Fou" where two GMs are playing and one of them suddenly shouts "Checkmate!" to the other's absolute amazement. I've never seen a GM even remotely surprised by checkmate, they usually know at least 5 moves in advance. |
|
May-14-17 | | Howard: Yes, I've heard that beef too about professional players exclaiming, "Mate!" at the end of a game. "Chess Life", incidentally, gave the moves to this game back in a mid-1980 issue. It was one of the tournament's crucial games, as it took place in the penultimate round. |
|
Aug-25-24
 | | HeMateMe: I recommend ACT mouthwash. Fluoride, non alcohol. Floss, rinse with 10 mL. But will it improve your chess? Dunno. |
|
Aug-25-24
 | | offramp: Fixodent contains fluoride, but it's too late. |
|
Aug-25-24 | | Granny O Doul: Annotating B Larsen vs Korchnoi, 1968 , Korchnoi mentioned a "rule" that having passed the right moment to resign, the loser is obliged to play on till mate. Larsen passed up an obvious perp in game 6 vs. Fischer that would have averted a whitewash. I doubt that he was particularly afraid of checkmate. Korchnoi, on the other hand, once asked a stubborn simul opponent "don't you know it is the greatest shame to be mated?" |
|
Aug-25-24
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Nice pun! |
|
Aug-25-24
 | | FSR: Quite a king march by Dzindzi. |
|
Aug-25-24 | | goodevans: We all have our own ideas about what makes a good pun and I've ceased to be surprised when the dullest and least clever win plaudits. Whilst I think it's really a touchy-feely thing, the criteria enumerated by User: Teyss in Schlechter vs W Napier, 1902 make for a good yardstick. By them and by my own gut feel this is a mediocre pun at best. I'm guessing in doesn't rate too highly at the <HISPIDU> either. But it's a terrific game so I'm happy. |
|
Aug-25-24
 | | offramp: I went over to Telegram (using the pseudo @VladKram🦷) and discovered that a huge flame war was going on at HISPIDU at <www.pgn4chan.web.ru>.
They have been invaded by <Gingivitis Sufferers>. I mean, that is the name for their forum. I enjoyed myself hugely pretending to be @VladKram🦷. I'm afraid I skewed their results. Here is one <genuine> comment: From <@KHarris4EVA🙃LULZZ💩>: <Hey LivBlockade ya gonna needa coupla bottleza Corsodyl Mouthwash Gum Disease Bleeding Gum Treatment Mouthwash AND BETA BLOCKAZ DUDE LULZZZZ! u IS dropin off da RICHTER scale dude. Fo sho <eat sheet metal> time 4 a NU Mark Lamarr 1950s hairstyle DUDE LOL👄😮🎱💯> LivBlockade must be quite happy. |
|
Aug-25-24
 | | Fusilli: At which point did Dzindzi calculate, correctly, that his king would be safe and he is winning? Before playing 29.Nf3? Before 30.Ra7? Before 31.h4? Before 32.Rxc7? If I had been trying to calculate this moves ahead, I think I would have failed to see that in the position after 36.Kf4:  click for larger view... the knight on f3 is stopping the otherwise lethal Qh2+. There are too many advantages that GMs have over a mere mortal like me, and people like to emphasize things like strategic understanding, evaluating positions correctly, knowledge of positions and pattern recognition, and so on... somehow neglecting that calculation counts too. Jan Gustafsson has a series of great videos on chess.com. In a number of them, his guest is Loek van Wely. Van Wely, as GMs always do, focuses his lesson on strategy and ideas. Yet at some point he simply says something like, this is a crucial point and we need to calculate. Sometimes it just comes down to calculation. There's no way out of it. (Incidentally, it's a great series to watch because you can see how Gustafsson, GM, respects and defers to Van Wely, elite GM. He is not just the series host but also a humble student. And you feel like you are taking a lesson with a GM as your classmate.) The absolutely wonderful Artur Jussupow says something similar in his own chess.com video series on strategic thinking. Something like, and here I stopped and gave this a long think because this is the moment when you have to calculate, and calculate right, because if I get this wrong there's no comeback. Perhaps it's not just that GMs are amazing calculators (in addition to everything else), but that they spot the moments in the game when calculation matters the most. |
|
Aug-25-24
 | | perfidious: <Fusilli: At which point did Dzindzi calculate, correctly, that his king would be safe and he is winning? Before playing 29.Nf3? Before 30.Ra7? Before 31.h4? Before 32.Rxc7?> That question is far from easy to answer, but the position is insanely complicated, with branches of analysis well beyond even your diagram at move 36. Even <fishie> would have a field day with this game. |
|
Aug-26-24
 | | Fusilli: <perf> <the position is insanely complicated, with branches of analysis well beyond even your diagram at move 36> Very true. There is a practical aspect to calculation that is the eval at the end of any line. I suppose that for Dzindzi decision-making may have been based on just not spotting a clearly losing line. After all, the c-pawn is not going away. |
|