| Oct-30-03 |
| Javid Danowski: An outrageous swindle. Yates overlooked 60 ...Kb2 which allows the BK to get inside the F-Pawn's "square", because of the threat of 61 ... a3. The idea is similar to that in a famous endgame study by Reti. Correct for white was 58 Qc2 a3; 59 Kc3 Ka1; 60 Kb3 b1Q; 61 Qxb1+ Kxb1; 62 Kxa3 Kc2, 63 f4 and the pawn cannot be stopped. |
 |
| Oct-30-03 |
| drukenknight: OKay you demonstrate a nice way for white to win, very nice, but if that is the case where did black lose? Okay back up, there is such a thing as "distant opposition" where the Ks are even number of squares apart and it is YOUR move. (unlike regular opposition where it is your opponents move). Note also that opposition can involve the diagonal. A thing that Capablanca showed. Okay now armed with these two ideas, look at black's 54th move. He had a chance to get the distant opposition. Suggestions? |
|
| Oct-31-03 |
| Javid Danowski: The opposition, distant or otherwise, is irrelevnt where there are pieces on the board, such as rooks, bishops, or, as here, a queen which can 'lose' a move. Black's only other possibility is 54 ... Ka1. Then 55 Qa5 b1Q; 56 Qa4+ Kb2; 57 Qb4+ Kc2; 58 Qxb1+ Kxb1; 50 f4. Black actually got a lost position out of the opening when he lost the d-pawn. |
|
| Oct-31-03 |
| drukenknight: Okay you are right on Ka1, however black did not lose the game in the opening. Clearly one has to be a little more inquisitive than that. Look at black's 39th move, why is he doing that? |
|
| Oct-31-03 |
| Javid Danowski: He is doing that in order to attempt to get some counterplay in lost position. Otherwise, by, say, b2, a3 nd b4 white can completely tie the Black K down, munch the doubled pawn and promote one of his King-side pawns, pretty well what happened in the game, except that Black was able to create two passed pawns by advancing his K nd attacking White's Q-side pawns. Alternatively, Black could play Ke6 to protect the doubled f-pawns when White can eventually use his 3-2 majority on the a- b- and c-files to create a passed pawn. Black has then to divert his K in order to stop it and must allow white to capture the other pawns with his K and promote one of his remaining pawns. |
|
| Oct-31-03 |
| drukenknight: Hmmm I was thinking 39...f4 but this is problematical. Perhaps the black K is on the wrong side to begin the endgame. What if 34...Kd7? As you say the passed pawn is likely to form on the q side due to the majority. Shouldnt blacks K be over there then? |
|
| Nov-01-03 |
| Javid Danowski: 34 ... Kd7; 35 Qd4+ wins the R on d8. |
|
| Nov-01-03 |
| drukenknight: yes, and what's more it's worthless to study the line at move 34 because blacks K is already on the K side and thus if being on the K side loses then it's already lost. he really did butcher the opening, didnt he? |
|
| Dec-30-07 |
| Cibator: For another example of the drawing resource used by Black at move 60, check out: Lasker vs Tarrasch, 1914
Bob Wade once wrote an article on this theme (in the long-defunct UK publication Junior Chess), which he called "The Lasker Manoeuvre". |
|
| Dec-31-07 |
| Cibator: Here's an even more extravagant version of the theme. Study by L Prokes, 1947:
click for larger view
Draw
Solution: 1.Kc8 Kc6 2.Kb8 Kb5 3.Kb7! Kxa5 4.Kc6, etc. |
|
| Apr-06-09 |
| squizz: It is very rare when a player gets a pawn promoted to a queen but does not win. This game was very interesting for a draw. |
|
| Apr-06-09 |
| WhiteRook48: 60...Kb2! moves onto the a1-f6 diagonal, where the King hopes to catch the pawn and does! |
|
Jun-13-09
 |
| David2009: An amazing and instructive escape. However, White Q wins simply against RP + NP. Thus 49 Qg4! and blockades the Pawns
click for larger view e.g. 50 Ka3 Qd4 etc; or 50 Kb3 Qd4 etc.
The f2 pawn is a distraction: it is not needed to win. Black is mated if
he avoids the Pawn blockade, e.g. 49 Qg4 Ka3 50 Qd4 b3 51 Qa1+ Kb4 52 Ke6 a3!? 53 Qd4+ Kb5 54 Kd5 b2 55 Qc5+ Ka4 56 Kc4 b1=Q 57 Qa7 mate. |
|
Jun-14-09
 |
| Peligroso Patzer: <Cibator: For another example of the drawing resource used by Black at move 60, check out: Lasker vs Tarrasch, 1914
*** >
Marshall, of course, was a participant at the famous St. Petersburg 1914 tournament (and one of the five finalists who thereby earned the original designation as "grandmasters" conferred by Czar Nicholas). Marshall was no doubt impressed by the way Lasker saved half-a-point against Tarrasch, and he was able to make use of the "Lasker Manoeuvre" some 15 years later. |
|
| Aug-05-09 |
| WhiteRook48: Marshall the swindler |
|
| Aug-21-09 |
| Zzyw: This is a pretty well known game between great players with an interesting and instructive end. I would like to see more games like these for GOTD in stead of random boring games between patzers, one of whom has a name that puns well. That is, if GOTDs are supposed to be interesting games. If GOTDs are just the daily means for us to pretend puns are funny, I've said nothing. |
|
