Savielly Tartakower vs Henry Atkins (1922) Atkins' Diet

Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players ·

Kibitzing

Savielly Tartakower vs Henry Atkins
"Atkins' Diet" (game of the day Oct-09-2004)
London (1922), London ENG, rd 9, Aug-11
Four Knights Game: Italian Variation (C46) · 0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	1,522 more games of Tartakower
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can make these tips go away by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page. Simply check the option "Don't show random tips on game pages." and click the Update Profile button at the bottom.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE. [CLICK HERE]

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 · Later Kibitzing>
Oct-09-04		patzer2: <Catfriend> A strong "deflection" move forces (i.e. deflects) your opponent to a square that weakens their position and strengthens yours. In this case, 19...Ra6!! initiates a whole series of deflection moves to weaken the White position and give Black an overpowering attack. Note that if 20. cxb4? then 20...axb4! 21. Qc2 Bxa2+ 22. Kc1 Rxb6 is immediately decisive.

Oct-09-04		Catfriend: thanks a lot!

Oct-09-04		patzer2: <Mack> I've changed my mind and will defer to conventional useage and your suggestion of "Atkins Diet." "Atkins Diet" without the apostrophe is apparently the singular trademark name. If it were not for the trademark, I suppose it could be Dr. Atkins's Diet or Dr. Atkins' Diet if you think it sounds less clumsy that way. I've even seen it on the internet as the ridiculous "Atkin's Diet." Best I think is to refer to it by the official trademark or trade name "Atkins Diet."

Oct-11-04		Sadgrinner: Can someone please tell my why Atkins doesn't play 20. ...b5 to win the queen?

Oct-11-04		Swindler: The Queen can escape to the c2-square.

Oct-11-04		Willem Wallekers: <Sadgrinner> Qc2

Oct-11-04		Zaius: <Granite> I completely agree with your assessment. Since this is a pun that refers to a man that did not come up with the well known diet, you should be allowed to say that it is his diet. The connection between "Atkin's Diet" and "The Atkins Diet" is to be made by you, the reader. The writer of the pun is simply making you "pronounce" the title in your head and letting you make your own connection.

Oct-14-04		Hanada: <Zaius> Exactly what I was trying to convey as well, in my own primordial way.

Oct-14-05		Averageguy: Dr Atkins died while on the Atkin's diet. Understanably, this wasn't good for business.

Jan-23-06		Timothy Glenn Forney: A very fun game to move through.Great Tactics by Atkins,he really understood the Zwischenzug tactic.19...♖a6!! brilliant move.

Aug-11-07		sanyas: 38...♗f5+ mates in three.

Jun-07-11		jerseybob: Atkins' handling of the whole game reminds me of Lasker: the opening unpretentious but effective, the middlegame deadly. White's whole idea of castling long with the center lines open couldn't have been more wrong. There was never any chance of a kingside attack.

Jun-08-11		FSR: Atkins is a remarkable player - an amateur who won the British Championship 9 times in 11 attempts. He tied for first in 1904 (his first championship) but lost the playoff to William Ewart Napier. Then he won every year from 1905 through 1911. Then he took 12 years off, and won again in 1924 and 1925. In 1937, he finished equal third at age 65. Oh, and then there was Hanover 1902, where he finished third, behind Janowski and Pillsbury but ahead of Marshall and Tchigorin. There is no doubt that if he had devoted himself to the game he would have been one of the world's top players.

Jun-08-11		SteinitzLives: Some good advantage trading by Atkins, but Tart should have gotten the better game from the opening. What is wrong with 8. Bxc6+ destroying blacks Q side pawn formation permanently? Black can have the two bishops. Tarts'. Q side castling was very ambitious considering how unsettled the center of the board was. Atkins was a great British player. Tarts' lack of pragmatism in the opening helped him a bit.

Jun-08-11		keypusher: <SteinitzLives: Some good advantage trading by Atkins, but Tart should have gotten the better game from the opening. What is wrong with 8. Bxc6+ destroying blacks Q side pawn formation permanently?> It's been an unpopular move, rightly or wrongly -- only two in the database. Here's an example featuring a cg.com kibitzer. Smejkal vs J Cervenka, 1994 Tartakower won some good games after 8....exd4 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Qxd4. Tartakower vs Reti, 1920 Tartakower vs Bogoljubov, 1922

Jun-08-11		parisattack: <jerseybob: Atkins' handling of the whole game reminds me of Lasker: the opening unpretentious but effective, the middlegame deadly. White's whole idea of castling long with the center lines open couldn't have been more wrong. There was never any chance of a kingside attack.> I think that is a good comparison! The book of his games is a bit HTF but there are some real gems in it. <FSR> is correct - devoted to the game he would have been a chess power in his day.

Apr-09-14		Conrad93: Why would one of the Founding Fathers of Chess castle queenside in that postion... Bizzare!

Jul-15-17		Muttley101: Not sure that 000 was the real problem, playing at a rook odds probably was :)

Oct-27-22		GrahamClayton: <Conrad93> Why would one of the Founding Fathers of Chess castle queenside in that postion... <Conrad93>, 12. O-O Be5 and 13...Bb2, so maybe Tartakower thought 12. O-O-O was the best option.

Oct-28-22		fredthebear: Perhaps Siegbert wrote about it: Tarrasch vs Marshall, 1912

Aug-03-23		VerySeriousExpert: Yury V. Bukayev in his old analytical articles has invented that after 8.Bxc6+! White stands better: https://chessproblem.my-free-games.... .

Aug-09-24		keypusher: <VerySeriousExpert: Yury V. Bukayev in his old analytical articles has invented that after 8.Bxc6+! White stands better: https://chessproblem.my-free-games.... .> He's worse per SF 16.1: 9.d4 (Bukaev's move) e4! 10.Ne5 0-0! and (-0.66) at 38 ply. If 11.Nxc6?! Qf6 12.d5 Qg6 13.g3 Bg4 14.Qd4 Bf3 15.Rf1 e3! 16.fxe3 Bg2 17.Rf2 Qxh2 ∓ for example. Of course White doesn't have to play this way but Black has two strong bishops no matter what.

Aug-09-24		Nasruddin Hodja: Of course 8. Bxc6 would have given white a slightly better position, which is why black should have played 7. ... Bd7; 7. ... Bd6 was his only inaccurate move in the game I think. But the real killer was 14. Qa4? He was already going to lose one tempo retreating the Bd5; the two additional tempi that he subsequently lost retreating the queen (and on the same side of the board as his king) are usually catastrophic in a game with an open center such as this. 14. Qe3 looks more prudent, though I don't have a silicon sidekick to confirm that. The entire variation beginning with 4. Nc3 is not best for white, but neither is it as bad for white as I have heard some people say.

Aug-09-24		gezafan: < patzer2: <offramp> From the site you gave "Some words sound awkward when an apostrophe 's' is added: Jesus's disciples. The accepted form here is to just use the 's' apostrophe: Jesus' disciples."?> I think both are considered correct. To me Jesus' disciples sounds more awkward than Jesus's disciples, which I prefer.

Aug-09-24		gezafan: This kind of position, in which black accepts a broken pawn structure is very interesting. It comes about in the Scotch fairly often. The great masters seem to prefer the two bishops with the broken pawn structure. M Czerniak vs Unzicker, 1956 Spassky vs Fischer, 1972

search thread:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 · Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.