|Jul-06-03|| ||gilk: very nice endgame. |
|Apr-02-04|| ||ughaibu: Is this the perfect game of chess? Had black not resigned we would soon have had a position of minimum material equality, K+P on each side, but maximum positional disparity, a-pawn against h-pawn. In the ensuing race white would win by one move or, to put it another way, by virtue of the fact that white gets the first move |
|Jun-13-05|| ||patzer2: It's a well played game by White in a closed Ruy Lopez. However, to suggest this is the "perfect game" is a bit of a stretch. Black had numerous opportunities to vary his play, which might have made for a different result. For example, Black might have drawn or even gained winning chances by playing the Marshall attack with 8...O-O 8. c3 d5!?|
|Jun-13-05|| ||patzer2: White's 32. Nd7! is a neat tactic, using a double attack which threatens to win a piece or to wreck Black's pawn structure as in the game|
|Jun-14-05|| ||aw1988: I think ughaibu meant the purity of it.|
|Nov-17-05|| ||Albertan: The critical mistake seems to have been made by Stein on move 67 in this game. The move 67...Kd6 would have drawn: 67...Kd6 68.g5 Ke7 69.g6 hxg6 70.hxg6 Kf8 71.Kg4 Kg8 72.Kh4 Kf8 73.Kg4 Kg8 74.Kh4 Kf8 75.Kg4 Kg8 =
|Dec-04-05|| ||beatgiant: <Albertan>
At first I thought White was winning in your line with 67...Kd6 68.g5 Ke7 69.g6 hxg6 70.hxg6 Kf8 <71. Ke4!> so that 71...Kg7 72. Kc5 Kxg6 73. Kxb5, so White's king catches Black's pawn after 73...f5 74. a4 f4 75. Kc4, etc.
But the Nalimov server found that Black still draws in the above line with the surprising 73...Kf7! so if White pushes the a-pawn, Black's king catches it or if White blocks Black's king, Black pushes the f-pawn. Very instructive!
|Dec-04-05|| ||ughaibu: Beatgiant: In your line the white king moves e4-c5.|
|Dec-04-05|| ||beatgiant: <ughaibu>
<Beatgiant: In your line the white king moves e4-c5.>
Right, I missed a beat there: it is actually 67...Kd6 68.g5 Ke7 69.g6 hxg6 70.hxg6 Kf8 71. Ke4 <Kg8> <72. Kd4> Kg7, etc. Black cannot play 71...Kg7? 72. Kf5 because of the zugzwang. Thanks for this correction.