< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 13 ·
|Jun-13-09|| ||johnlspouge: < <patzer2> wrote: [snip] I'm sure your sister will be happy to know you made an exception for her in your generalization about psychiatrists (i.e. they become psychiatrists because they have psychological issues of their own). That speaks well of you and your entire family. >|
Actually, <patzer2>, my sister describes our family of origin as "dysfunctional". Since she is the psychiatrist, how can I disagree? To make your statement precise, as only a mathematician would ever want to, my exception speaks well, only of me and her ;>)
Thank you for your kind comment. Keep well :)
|Jun-13-09|| ||Imposter: |
<It's a fine line between pleasure and pain
You've done it once you can do it again
Whatever you've done don't try and explain
It's a fine, fine line between pleasure and pain.>
- Lyrics from "Pleasure and Pain" by the Divinyls
|Jun-13-09|| ||WhiteRook48: nice decoy|
|Jun-15-09|| ||Chessmensch: <kevin86> Most stores are stationary unless they are on a ship or something like that.|
|Oct-20-09|| ||holy tramp: A person should pay a Fine for playing this badly... my apologies.|
|Aug-02-10|| ||Damianx: that,s another Fine mess you got into!|
|Aug-02-10|| ||Eggman: We all lament the loss of Fischer and Morphy, but Reuben Fine is another American GM whose career was cut short. He stopped playing serious chess before he was forty (and long before this very unserious game was played), and unlike Fischer he never got to contest a World Championship Match.|
|Aug-02-10|| ||Marmot PFL: Fischer was unbeaten in 1963. Fine might have played longer but maybe got discouraged at losing to Reshevsky most of the time.|
|Aug-03-10|| ||Eggman: Fine may have lost a lot of US Championship Titles to Reshevsky, but in terms of head-to-head encounters, the record, from Fine's perspective, was -4 =12 +3, which is nothing to get discouraged about.|
|Aug-27-10|| ||echever7: May be is just me, but I don't like this selection of games to be named 'remarkable', They're just amazing. Fischer had a lot better games..|
|Aug-28-10|| ||TrollKing: <WhiteRook48: 7...dxc3 is very bad>|
It's fine. 8... Qe7 is the lemon.
8... Qf6 is much better, keeping
e7 open for the Ng7.
|Aug-29-10|| ||Eric Schiller: I have a video of this game at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhNH...|
|Sep-09-10|| ||sevenseaman: There is a time warp. You hardly know if the game is really over, yet you make one logical move and thats it, the end!|
|Dec-26-10|| ||alimuzzaman: I love Evan's gambit! And this was the first Evan's gambit game that I came accross. Such a beautiful little gem!! I think, here, Fischer was able to put a particular variation of Black to be burried for ever.|
I have played almost a hundred off-hand Evan's gambit games in my club/Federation. Unfortunately, I did not get any opportunity to play it in a serious tournament. Recently, my seniour partner is adopting a defense with 7...Nge7 and then ...d5 push. I have tried 8.Ng4 followed by exd but it seems, he is quite comfortable with the resulting play (in fact he is now winning more games!). Doing some research, it reveals that this line is actually quite good for Black. It may even turn out to be winning for him if White is not careful.
Can it be the refutation??!!
I hope not.
I know, many players, with the advent of powerful chess Engines, started to like the compromised defense. However, I am not convinced. On the other hand, this 7...Nge7 seems much flexible and a very hard nut to crack.
|Feb-07-11|| ||redorc19: <TrollKing: It's fine. 8...Qe7 is tthe lemon.>
Actually, Black's seventh and eighth moves are ok, even if they are not the best;with accurate play, Fine could have utilized his material advantage. 14...Qxh4 was bad, however: better, as said by Fritz, is Qg4 Qe3+, with a perpetual on move 22(I only had the engine analyse for a bit, please suggest improvements).|
|Feb-23-11|| ||HeMateMe: Pretty game. Can the Evans Gambit be used at the super GM level, or is it "busted" for this strata of players?|
|Mar-25-11|| ||redorc19: <HeMateMe> Most opening's can't be claimed to be "busted" no one can know for sure. However, in my opinion, with advances in chess theory and strength used by masters, it is not often played. Mostly, it is considered drawish at best, while open-game openings such as the Ruy Lopez "seem" (only seem) to give more of an advantage. Still, we probably won't know until at least the next century.|
|Mar-25-11|| ||fab4: <HeMateMe: Pretty game. Can the Evans Gambit be used at the super GM level, or is it "busted" for this strata of players?>|
Essentailly you're saying super grandmaster's of today, of now, could wipe the floor with the young Fischer of '64.
|Mar-25-11|| ||HeMateMe: Not at all. The Fischer of '64 was 21, already one of the world's best players. He would know the level of his opponents' skill and would know, based on examination of results (Bob carried a suitcase of Informants), whether or not the Evans Gambit could be played against Geller, Tal, Spassky, et. al. Personally, I don't think he would ever play it against the very best players. |
Somehow, he must have thought Fine was no longer an elite player, or that Fine did not play such positions all that well.
|Mar-25-11|| ||wwall: The Chess Informants came out in 1966, two a year, 150 pages softcover, about 460 games. A suitcase of Informants does not sound right. Perhaps some Shakmatny Bulletins and 64, and some Russian chess books (or comic books) to fill his suitcase.|
|Mar-26-11|| ||TheFocus: <HeMateMe> <Personally, I don't think he would ever play it against the very best players.>|
Bobby never played it in a tournament, but there a lot of examples in his 1964 simultaneous play.
|Mar-26-11|| ||fab4: Fine was world championship class in the 30's.. and would've been in the 40's and possibly 50's too..|
|Mar-31-11|| ||JoergWalter: About Morphy after losing the first game to Anderssen - Evans Gambit- :
"Morphy was charmed with Anderssen's defence throughout, and has frequently cited it as an admirably conducted strategy. It proved to him that the Evans' is indubitable a lost game for the first player, if the defence be carefully played; inasmuch the former can never recover the gambit pawn, and the position supposed to be acquired at the outset cannot be maintained."
That was the last first and last time when he tried the Evans against a master of the first rank.|
|Mar-31-11|| ||goldenbear: Lasker gives his (rather complex) view of the gambit in his "Common Sense in Chess". It is a great read. If I were to superficially summarize his view about the gambit and about all openings in general it would be this: there are a multitude of equally good openings, in that the game of chess works out to a draw. From a practical point of view, a player (especially with the White pieces) should try to avoid heavily analysed openings since the other player will be less likely to be fooled in those openings. Makes sense to me...|
|Jun-05-11|| ||Llawdogg: This was very instructive, even if it was a casual game. And the comments here were very helpful. It's nice to have all my questions already asked and answered!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 13 ·