< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Mar-10-07|| ||euripides: <al> I think it's cruder than that: if <70...Ka8> then 71.Kf7 and Black can't keep the rooks on without checkmate. If 70...Kc8 then 71.h7 and the pawn gets through.|
|Mar-10-07|| ||al wazir: I'm weak on endgames. How does white finish after 70...Ka8? I figure it's something like 71. Rd7 Re8+ 72. Kd6 Rh8 73. Kc6 (73. Kc7 Rc8+!) Rc8+ 74. Rc7. If now 74...Rxc7, then 75. bxc7 (75. Kxc7? stalemate). |
If instead 74...Rh8, then 75. b7+ Ka7 (75...Kb8 76. Kb6, and the only way black can stop a7# is to trade ♖s) 76. Rc8 Rh6+ 77. Kd5 Rh5+ (77...Rb6? 78. Ra8#) 78. Ke6 Rh6+, etc., and the b-♙ promotes when black runs out of checks.
But there are probably easier ways to win. Does someone know?
|Mar-10-07|| ||al wazir: <euripedes>: Thanks, that works. (I reposted several times, so your answer now precedes my question. I'll leave it up anyway.)|
|Mar-10-07|| ||Domdaniel: <al wazir> -- euripides is right: if 70...Ka8, then 71.Kf7 followed by Re8 wins.|
Keene's book on Nimzo also gives 70...Kc8 71.a7, and 70...Rf8 71.Kd7 followed by 72.Re8+
As for <bad temper> -- anyone who could think this is ugly... words almost fail me. You want ugly, folks, the world is full of mirrors.
|Mar-10-07|| ||kevin86: A strange game. Even two rooks on the seventh rank couldn't get black a draw. By the time we get to R + 2P vs R-black is lost.|
|Mar-10-07|| ||Dr.Lecter: I'm not sure I see the significance of this game, other than a nice endgame.|
|Mar-10-07|| ||ALEXIN: In my opinion the example shown by Euripides is lost after 56.Rb1 Kb5 57.a5 and etc.
Two pawns are too much...|
|Mar-11-07|| ||BadTemper: domdaniel for some reason doesnt like me. twice this person has insulted me in reply to a post, without cause...|
shame on you... i wonder why people stereotype chess players as non-people......
|Mar-11-07|| ||Domdaniel: Dear, dear <BadTemper>...|
(1) I don't remember the other time.
(2) Look again: I took care not to "insult" you; I didn't actually refer to "you" at all. The phrase "you want ugly" is a colloquial one, aimed at the world in general.
(3) I don't "not like you". We probably have different opinions on a few topics, eg Nimzo. And beauty.
(4) It's just possible -- and I say this as *your friend* -- that your name gives people the wrong idea? *Are* you in a bad temper, <BT>? May one ask why? Maybe you're all sweetness'n'light, really, but idiots like me misconstrue your true poetic nature?
(5) Sorry, we don't do shame.
|Aug-14-07|| ||whiteshark: In the long run <8... Bf5?> was decisively wrong.|
|Aug-14-07|| ||ounos: What should have been played at move 8 then?|
|Aug-15-07|| ||whiteshark: <ounos> The odds are that I did bite off more than I can chew.
Let me check it...|
|Aug-15-07|| ||Marmot PFL: 5.Nb5 is a funny move. If black simply kicks it with a6 or ignores it and develops with Bc5 or Be7 what has white achieved? I guess Nimzovich understood Spielman's psychology which is why he played this way but against Capa or Alekhine such ideas usually failed. I lost once to a very strong postal player in this opening but he played 5.Nc3 and after Bc5 6.Nf5!? 0-0 7.Ng3 Re8 continued with a3 and Qc2 building up pressure on e4.|
|Aug-15-07|| ||Pawn and Two: In the Carlsbad 1929 tournament book, Nimzowitsch remarked regarding the move 18...Rhd8; "<Mechanical development". Nimzowitsch recommended instead; 18...Rg8 19.f3 Nd5 20.fxe4 Nxc3 21.dxc3 Rf8. He then stated that such discreet use of a rook, (18...Rg8), is not usual in a gambit, but very necessary when one wants to win first prizes.|
A review by Fritz confirms that 18...Rg8 is indeed Black's best move. However, both moves give Black an almost equal evaluation.
Here are Fritz's evaluations for 18...Rg8 and 18...Rhd8:
(.10) (18 ply) 18...Rg8 19.f3 Nd5 20.Bd4 f5 21.Ra2 Rxb3 22.Bxa7 Kd7 23.Bd4 Ra8 24.Bxg7 Rbxa3.
(.24) (18 ply) 18...Rhd8 19.b4 Nd5 20.Bxg7 Rxd2 21..Rfd1 Rc2 22.Rdc1 Rd2 23.Bd4 Kb7 24.Kf1 h6.
|Aug-15-07|| ||Pawn and Two: Fritz's evaluations at 19 ply, for 18..Rg8 and 18...Rhd8:|
(.11) (19 ply) 18...Rg8 19.f3 Nd5 20.Bd4 f5 21.Ra2 Rxb3 22.Bxa7 Kd7 23.fxe4 fxe4 24.Bc5 Ke6.
(.30) (19 ply) 18...Rhd8 19.f3 Nd5 20.Bxg7 f5 21.Bd4 Rxd2 22.Bxa7 Rd3 23.fxe4 fxe4 24.Rf7 Kb7 25.Bc5.
|Aug-15-07|| ||whiteshark: <Pawn and Two: <In the Carlsbad 1929 tournament book, Nimzowitsch remarked regarding the move 18...Rhd8; <Mechanical development>>> followed by a figurative and very pejorative <aber so spielt man eben, wenn man jahrelang Gambit getrommelt hat!>|
|May-27-11|| ||meppi: the opening is a reversed rubenstein-nimzovitch variation in scillian defence, see move 3. good play by nimzo a chess elder who i learn many tricks from!|
|Nov-04-11|| ||Ulhumbrus: <whiteshark: <Pawn and Two: <In the Carlsbad 1929 tournament book, Nimzowitsch remarked regarding the move 18...Rhd8; <Mechanical development>>> followed by a figurative and very pejorative <aber so spielt man eben, wenn man jahrelang Gambit getrommelt hat!>> The google German to English translator gives the following result <But then we just play, if one has drummed for years Gambit!>|
|Nov-04-11|| ||Calli: Might translate as "Spielmann, who for years has banged the drum for gambits, plays mechanically here."|
|Nov-04-11|| ||whiteshark: <Ulhumbrus> maybe <but so does one simply play, if one has drummed the gambit for years>?|
|Nov-04-11|| ||Calli: <whiteshark> "drummed the gambit" is a bit hard to understand, I think. It was an unnecessary shot by Nimzo, in any case.|
|Nov-05-11|| ||Ulhumbrus: <whiteshark> How about <However people play in this way if they have played gambits for years>. The word "drummed" may however be intended to convey a meaning which the verb "played" does not express adequately. Does it have something to do with playing some tune or being conditioned to something or plugging it or something? Perhaps a German expert can help us.|
|Nov-05-11|| ||psmith: <Ulhumbrus> I sense an untranslatable pun in Nimzo's comment ("spielt man" --> "Spielmann").|
|Nov-05-11|| ||psmith: "Trommeln" can mean something like pound or bang or beat as well as drum. And "eben" can mean "just."|
I suggest "but that's just how you'll play, if you pound away at gambits for years."
|Nov-05-11|| ||Calli: <psmith> Gambits require imagination so it's illogical to say you play mechanical if you like gambits. He chides Spielmann, someone who recommends gambits, for not playing with more flair.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·