| Jan-23-06 | | who: Very nicely played by black. It seems like the two cities most famous for being of the turnpike decided to play against each other. |
|
| Jan-24-06 | | who: Fritz thinks the 11.Bxg5 sac wasn't sound, and it seems that the game bears this out. |
|
| May-31-06 | | dakgootje: zugzwang at last isnt it? |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | apple pi: <dagootje> yep
I don't understand why Kings Gambit is played in correspondance, with both sides playing soundly (which is the assumption in corr) it shouldn't be as good for white as mainstream options. |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | Funicular: Yeap. Total zugzwang. Whatever move white makes, a pawn or a piece is lost. Nice game. I also found the 11. Bxg5 sac not so useful. I'd have gone for it in a lightning game, but only after my queen's knight is on e4, or also after Kg2 -> Rh1 |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | think: If I was going to sac on g5, it would have been with the Knight, e.g. 11. Nxg5 hxg5 12. Bxg5 and now Black's Knight is pinned, f6 cannot be played because of d6+, and the Queen can invade on the light squares. In the game continuation, Black's Bf5 and Bg6 totally shut down White's attack. I also think 13. d6 is an improvement, aiming at f7 and freeing the light-squared bishop. |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | D.Observer: Doubled ♙s stopped white from winning. |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | mistreaver: what is the point in sacrificing the piece and then exchanging queens? |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | evenua: could anybody kindly explain what the pun means? :( |
|
Jan-20-08
 | | OBIT: <evenua>Well, it is a game between two Connecticut clubs, I suppose. To really turn this into a stretch, it could be a play on Mark Twain's "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court", this being a King's Gambit, but that's not the worst stretch we've seen on a pun for one of these games. :) |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | evenua: <OBIT> Thanks for your insightful comment! :) |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | LoxRandom: Good accurate play by black |
|
| Jan-20-08 | | black knight c6: <mistreaver> My only guess is that white saw after the sac that he didn't have as big an attack as planned (as is so often the case) and his best move then was the queen trade. I think this is one of the best refutations to the king's gambit (which is sad because I like playing it, 98% of the time it will always be a very interesting game), after black gets his advanced kingside pawnchain there's not much white can do to smash it without coming under some pressure himself. Otherwise black is just up a pawn |
|
| Jan-22-08 | | kevin86: I wonder if the mayor of Hartford "ensured" (or insured) this victory. The game is not exactly zugzwang as black threatens 38...♗e4+ winning the g pawn.. |
|
| Jun-17-08 | | offtherook: Absolutely terrible play by New Haven. If you want to sac a piece, you don't then go and trade off all your heavy pieces! What kind of attack were they hoping for? Honestly, even a patzer like me wouldn't fail so miserably against the Fischer defense, even in internet blitz, much less a correspondence game. I presume it was also a consultation game? New Haven couldn't find any decent chess players at Yale to help them out? |
|
| Aug-26-11 | | Elrathia Kingi: This game was played about two years after Bobby Fischer's "A Bust to the King's Gambit" article appeared, and follows the logic of the Fischer defense entirely. The move 7...Ne7 was recommended by Fischer as a winning move, and the variation that he highlights is the one followed in this game, up until 11.Bxg5. It would appear that the New Haveners had thought that they found a way to bypass Fischer's defenses, but it didn't quite work out. Perhaps a more daring way to go would be, instead of 21.Rxf8, either Be1 or c4 to try to make the bishop a more active part of the game and make use of the extra pawns. |
|
| Aug-26-11 | | AGOJ: I would have tried 13.Rxf5, followed by 14.Qh5. Probably all wrong. |
|
Aug-28-11
 | | perfidious: The profusion of games with 7....Ne7 was a mystery to me, as I'd never seen the line, having always played 7....Nc6, till reading the kibitz by <Elrathia Kingi>. Despite Fischer's endorsement, I'd likely play 7....Nc6 today. <AGOJ: I would have tried 13.Rxf5, followed by 14.Qh5. Probably all wrong.> Maybe not-I believe White has chances after 14....Bh6 15.Ne4, and even if my judgment is incorrect, your idea certainly gives a fighting chance, which is more than one can say for White's supine play in the actual game. |
|
Aug-28-11
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Well, this doesn't say much for the ability of New Haven chess players, but I have visited this city and can vouch for their hospitality. The local college American football team has quite an impressive history, and the local beverage company ("Foxon Park") produces soft drinks for the local restaurants which have a curious tradition. They spell "pizza" as "apizza" and pronounce the word "a-BEETS." No one there could explain to me why, but their version of the Americanized delicacy is magnificent. |
|
Mar-22-13
 | | Tabanus: I suspect this game is from 1863, not 1963.
According to http://www.chessarch.com/excavation... there was a telegraph match between the two cities in the 1860's. |
|
| Mar-24-13 | | Abdel Irada: I tend to agree with <Tabanus>. Not only is this game played in 19th-century style and with an "opening book" to match, but contemporary records (as also reported by <Tabanus>; see preceding post and also here: City of Hartford) suggest that that was when the civic matches between these communities most probably occurred. In a 1960s correspondence game, one would be more likely to see a *Queen's* Gambit, and not a bishop sacrifice whose unsoundness can be easily calculated. This is the kind of game I'd expect to see listed as, e.g., <NN vs. Morphy>. |
|
Mar-24-13
 | | Phony Benoni: <Abdel Irada> Over at Biographer Bistro, <FSR> has pointed out that this game follows the analysis of Fischer's "A Bust to the King's Gambit", which was published in 1961. It's easy to imagine correspondence games being organized to test his ideas. However, that doesn't prove that players of a century before couldn't have found the moves; it happens all the time. And a match between cities would certainly be anachronistic in 1963. On the other hand, the article cited by <Tabanus> notes that chess activity in Hartford peaked soon after the Morphy Boom in 1857-1858, and ceased during the American Civil War. Also, stylistic differences between eras don't disqualify this from being a 20th century game; again, we can all think of examples. My view is that the date, and for that matter the players, are as yet undetermined. I think I'd favor 1963 but with different players. However, the original publication needs to be found; all else is conjecture. |
|
Mar-25-13
| | Tabanus: From http://chesscafe.com/urcan/urcan.htm:
<The two cities clashed yet again in 1863, during the Civil War. Three Philadelphia players, including Reichhelm himself, took on three members of New York's Paulsen Chess Club, F.E. Brenzinger, E. Chamier, and W. Johnston, in yet another telegraphic encounter.> So (if true) it's not totally unthinkable. |
|
Mar-25-13
| | Phony Benoni: <Tabanus> Sure enough. We won't settle this until the original publication is found. |
|
Kibitzing
