< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Nov-21-05|| ||hayton3: <An Englishman> Never heard of the nomenclature either but it looks like a Rubinstein Variation with colours reversed. It's a plan Black usually pursues in the Symmetrical English as follows:
1. c4 c5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. g3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. Bg2 Nc7 so that e5 can played at some stage and supported by f6 for a cental pawn bind a la Maroczy.|
However in this instance white has already played the Knight to c3 (to support an eventual e4) and black simply throws the spanner in the works destroying white's pawn structure and attempted bind by taking on c3 with the fianchettoed bishop!
Interesting to note is that when black plays the Rubinstein his knight is not prematurely developed to c6 and so white's king bishop can't carry out the same strategy.
|Nov-21-05|| ||who: <An Englishman> the "Great Snake Variation" is 1.c4 g6. See http://www.csm.astate.edu/~wpaulsen...|
|Nov-23-05|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Thanks for the feedback. And after White's fourth move, does 4...Qa5 turn the game into a Pterodactyl?|
|Nov-23-05|| ||al wazir: wazir: Can't black simply play 24...Nf8 and try to hang on? If 25. Bh6 or Bg5, then 25...Bxd5; if 25. Nf6, then 25...exf6 26. Qxf6+ Kg8 27. Bh6 Rc7; if 25. Nxe7, then 25...Rxe7 26. Qf6+ Ke8 27. Bg5 Nc6 (or Rc7). What does white have in return for his material?|
|Nov-23-05|| ||Boomie: <al wazir> The problem with 24...Nf8 is 25. Rf1+, which seems to win. There are some amazing lines after 24...Nf8. In one the black king becomes a fighting piece and gets to d5, taking the knight! But alas black must give up the store to protect him there.|
24... Nf8 25. Rf1+ Bf5 26. g4 Rxc4 27. Qh3 Rxg4+
(27...Ke6 28. gxf5+ Kxd5 29. Bd1 )
28. Bxg4 e6 29. Bh6 Qe4 30. Nf6
|Nov-23-05|| ||TheAlchemist: I don't know if it's all bullet-proof, but 26.Bh6+ would indeed have been better, it seems:|
26.Bh6+ Kh8 27.Nxc8 Qxe2 28.Nd6 Rg8 29.Qe7 Qxe5 30.Qxd7! Nxc4 31.Nf7+ Bxf7 32.Qxf7 Qxc3 <and not 32...a5 33.Rf1! (with the threat of Qxg8) Qd6 34.Bf8!> 33.Rf1 Qd4+ 34.Kh1 Qd8 35.Qxa7 with a likely draw
|Dec-04-05|| ||Boomie: <The Alchemist> White has an improvement on move 29 in your line which gives him the edge.|
26. Bh6+ Kh8 27. Nxc8 Qxe2 28. Nd6 Rg8 29. Re1 Qd3 30. Qe7 Qxc3 31. Re4 Nxc4 32. Qxe6 Qa1+ 33. Kf2 Nxd6 34. Qxd6 Qxa2+ 35. Kg3 (2.40/13)
|Apr-30-06|| ||Grega: A famous Lasker-Napier comes to mind.
Quinteros conducted fine attack, but he messed it a little bit. To bad.
|Apr-30-06|| ||Pawn and Two: <Boomie & TheAlchemist> In the line you suggest, 26.Bh6+ Kh8 27.Nxc8 Qxe2 28.Nd6 Rg8 29.Re1, now Black should play 29...g5 (.63) (18ply) (Fritz 9).|
This will lead to a difficult Queen + Pawn endgame with drawing chances for Black, after 30.Bxg5 Qc2 31.Bf6+ Nxf6 32.Qxf6+ Rg7 33.g3 Qxc3 34.Re2 Bxc4 35.Nf5 Qc1+ 36.Kf2 Qg5 37.Nxg7 Qxg7 38.Qd8+ Qg8 39.Qxa5 Qf7+ 40.Ke1 Bxe2 41.Kxe2 Qd5.
|May-09-06|| ||zev22407: 20)..N-c6 looks better,its attack the pawn on e5 and the knight at c5 controls the e4 point.
22)..N-f8!prevets the next sac.
25)..R:c4 26)Q-h6+ Kh8 27)N:g6+ Kg8
|Dec-28-06|| ||Richard Taylor: Great game by Fischer|
|Dec-28-07|| ||whiteshark: Bookmarked, worth doing a deeper look !!!|
|Jun-20-09|| ||Keith Dow: As pointed out by John Silver, Dvoretsky analyzed this game.|
"Quinteros failed to find the right path, and
lost the game practically in one move,
which allowed his opponent to give up his
queen for rook and bishop, with a decisive
26 Bh6+ wins.
26 Qh6 loses.
|Aug-26-10|| ||Al2009: Fischer was not ad good as Tal in tactics.
After the uncorrect White's sac 23.Rxf7?!, it seems Fischer missed an immediate winning line (23...Kxf7? is losing), with
23...Rxc4!!, and White was quickly losing in any line, e.g.:
a) 24. Bxc4 Qxc4! 25. Qxc4 Nxc4 and now White has 3 pieces (Nd5, Bd2, Rf7) under attack and is losing a piece without compensation.
b) 24. Nxe7+ Kxf7 25. Bxc4 Qxc4 and now White cannot attack anymore by playing Qh4 and is simply remaining a piece down...
Can someone tell me how White could avoid the rapid collapse of his position after the blow 23...Rxc4!!
|Sep-11-10|| ||Sastre: <Can someone tell me how White could avoid the rapid collapse of his position after the blow 23...Rxc4!!> |
After <24. Bxc4 Qxc4 25.Qxc4 Nxc4> White has 26.Rxe7 Rxe7 27.Nxe7+ Kf8 28.Bg5 Ndxe5. I can't see any compensation for the exchange.
|Sep-16-10|| ||Al2009: After the line your computer suggested, Black has still a good compensation for the exchange.|
Moreover, you shouldn't say "I can't see", you should say : "my software engine can't see", my dear patzer Sastre...
|Sep-16-10|| ||Sastre: Stockfish didn't suggest that line. I saw it myself. How do you know I'm a patzer if you don't know who I am?|
|Sep-16-10|| ||Al2009: Sastre, if you are not a patzer, you should have yourself proposed another winning line for Black, |
23...Nc5! 24. Qh4 (forced), Bxf7 25. Nxe7+ Rxe7 26. Qxe7 Ne6! 27. Rf1 (27. Bg4 Qxc4 ) Rc7 and Black can defend everything keeping his piece more...if 28. Qf6 Nc6 (with idea Ncd8)...
May be you are not a patzer, but it seems you are just interested to show me what computers can do, and find my mistakes, and that's usually what patzers try to do: use computers against human players.
Normally a real strong player is also interested to find the best moves/ideas from other human players, not just trying to find mistakes.
23.Rxf7 seems not correct.
If you are a strong player you should help me to prove it.
|Sep-16-10|| ||Sastre: I don't have to propose anything to prove whether or not I am a patzer. All I did was answer your question about how 'White could avoid the rapid collapse of his position after the blow 23...Rxc4!!'. I am not using computers in an effort to find your mistakes. As I said above, I saw the line I posted myself. I have no idea why you decided to insult me because I simply answered your question.|
With regards to the latest line you posted above, Mark Dvoretsky agrees that 23...Nc5 is the best response to 23.Rxf7. See http://www.chesscafe.com/text/dvore... (in case you haven't already seen it).
|Oct-06-10|| ||Al2009: Sastre, your comment clearly proves that you were just interested in finding my mistake, rather than suggesting the best move for Black in the above position.|
You knew the analysis by Mark Dvoretsky (while I did not know it at all, and I find 23...Nc5 + Ne6 alone, without help), but you said nothing.
Moreover, you now are saying that you don't use computers to find my mistakes, but it is not true, because when you posted your reply to my analysis of the game Flohr - Fine, you posted two analysis from computers, while I am ALWAYS analysing without computers, and many times I'm just posting quick analysis, having not so much time to spend to analyse, and there could be mistakes, of course.
So I did not "insult" you at all, I was just saying that I realize here many "patzers" (i.e. weak players) are posting analysis coming from computers, and you did the same with the game Flohr - Fine, that's all.
|Jul-05-11|| ||Damianx: Al your kidding aren,t you Fisher missed something and you didn,t how about Rf1x Qe3 nothing of what you stated was forced|
|Mar-27-12|| ||Garech: Despite the inaccuracies on both sides, it was an awesome game, and definitely worthy of GOTD in my opinion - I will recommend now. Cheers, |
|Nov-11-15|| ||keypusher: When I lived in the D.R. I tried this line for Black once, and of course I got killed. Afterwards some of my Dominican friends were going over the game with me and one said 6....Bxc3+ was crazy. I pointed out that Fischer had played it. They all responded in unison, <Tu no es Bobby Fischer!>|
|Dec-28-16|| ||hoodrobin: Fischer is the best teacher ever, but Quinteros is no patzer.|
The two were good friends.
|Nov-30-17|| ||varnick: AI2OO9 You are a rude patzer!!!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·