< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Oct-31-09|| ||ROO.BOOKAROO: Interesting matching of historical memories, but all this sounds like historical wheel-spinning. What about the game itself?
Why not 21. ...Ba2? putting pressure on the pinned Bb2 instead of collecting the Na5 and playing Ba2 a move too late? And what's the protective value of 24...c6? at a time when Black's house is afire? Protecting Rd8 and allowing the Q to come to the rescue, abandoning his own attack? Marshall is losing control of the game right there. White's pieces are all well positioned and working towards delivering some crushing blow.|
|Oct-31-09|| ||playground player: Beating on Frank Marshall is like beating on Sir Gawain. In Sir Thomas Malory's "Morte D'Arthur," there's an interesting passage that lists the knights "who had the better of Sir Gawain." These were Sir Lancelot, Sir Tristram, Sir Lamorak, Sir Bors, Sir Pelleas, Sir Marhaus, Sir Gareth, and Sir Percival. (Sir Galahad is not on the list because he had no concern for worldly things, and was in a class by himself.) Sir Gawain had nothing to be ashamed of, in being outclassed by those eight. |
Like Sir Gawain, Marshall was one of the greats, but never the greatest. Nevertheless, throughout his career he was always ranked among the top players in the world and his credentials and career stand on their own merits.
I gather from what I've read by him and about him that Marshall was his own worst enemy on the chessboard. He simply couldn't turn chess excellence into an all-consuming passion: and I think you probably need that to become world champion. Also, he quickly became bored with tedious, fanny-about games, a la Lasker.
I have a feeling that a Marshall-Fischer match would be better than most people expect. I think Fischer would have brought out the best in Marshall. This was something that Marshall, it seems to me, was not always able to do on his own.
But it is his best, on those occasions when it was displayed, that keeps his memory alive.
|Oct-31-09|| ||redmaninaustin: Kasparov would be "Space Odyssey 2001..." - man vs. machine|
|Oct-31-09|| ||20MovesAhead: well, i just saw " Richie Rich" with Macauly Culkin and i remember hearing something about G. Kasparov being the highest-earning chess player of all time...|
|Oct-31-09|| ||FSR: <ROO.BOOKAROO> Marshall was completely lost after losing a piece with 10...0-0?? Your suggestion 21...Ba2 was more aggressive than Marshall's 21...Qxa5 (regaining a little bit of his huge material deficit), but would have been easily parried by 22.Qe4.|
|Nov-01-09|| ||RandomVisitor: 4 minutes per move:
Wilhelm Steinitz - Frank James Marshall
simul Montreal, 1893
[Rybka 3 ]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nd2 Ne7 4.Bd3 last book move
[Rybka 3 : 5.Ngf3 g6 6.0-0 Bg7 7.c3 0-0 8.Re1 Re8 9.e5 b6 10.Nf1 Bb7 11.Ne3 h5 12.Ng5 Bh6 13.h4 0.48/20 ]
[Rybka 3 : 5...e5 6.Ngf3 exd4 7.cxd4 dxe4 8.Nxe4 Nf5 9.0-0 Be7 10.Bb5 0-0 11.d5 Nb4 12.Bc4 c6 13.dxc6 Nxc6 14.Re1 h6 15.Bd2 Be6 16.Bxe6 fxe6 17.Qe2 Rc8 18.Bc3= 0.07/19 ]
[Rybka 3 : 6.Ne2 dxe4 7.Bxe4 f5 8.Bc2 Bd6 9.0-0 0-0 10.Nf3 e5 11.dxe5 Ngxe5 12.Nxe5 Nxe5 13.Re1 Qf6 14.Nf4 Re8 15.Bb3+ Kh8 0.51/19 ]
[Rybka 3 : 6...a5 7.a4 dxe4 8.Bxe4 f5 9.Bc2 b6 10.Bd3 Bd6 11.Nf3 0-0 12.0-0 Nce7 13.Re1 Nd5 14.Bb5 h6= 0.09/19 ]
[Rybka 3 : 7.Nf3 exd4 8.Nbxd4 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Bc5 10.0-0 0-0 11.Re1 dxe4 12.Bxe4 Re8 13.Bd2 c6 14.Qb3 Bd7 15.a4 Qb6 16.a5 Qxb3 17.Nxb3 Bd6 18.a6 b6 19.Nd4 Rac8 20.Rad1 h6 21.f3 0.40/18 ]
[Rybka 3 : 7...Be7 8.Nf3 exd4 9.Nbxd4 Nxd4 10.Nxd4 0-0 11.exd5 Bf6 12.Bc4 Bxd4 13.cxd4 Re8 14.Be3 f5 15.0-0 f4 16.d6+ Be6 17.Bxe6+ Rxe6 18.dxc7 Qxc7 19.Qg4 Re4 20.Rac1 Qf7 21.Bd2 Rxd4 22.Bc3 Rd5= 0.19/19 ]
[Rybka 3 : 8.f4 exf4 9.exd5 Qxd5 10.Be4 Qg5 11.Nf3 Qe7 12.Nc5 Bd7 13.Nxd7 Kxd7 14.0-0 Kc8 15.b4 Kb8 16.Re1 a6 17.Rb1 Nd8 18.b5 Qd6 19.a4 1.30/16 ]
[Rybka 3 : 8...Qd7 9.h4 exd4 10.Nbxd4 0.40/16 ]
9.exd5 0.69/21 Bxd5 0.69/20
10.dxe5 0.46/19 0-0? 2.46/19
[Rybka 3 : 10...Ngxe5 11.Nxe5 Bxe5 12.0-0 0-0 13.f4 Bf6 14.Be3 Qe7 15.Rad1 Rfd8 16.Rfe1 g6 17.Qf2 Bg7 18.Nc5 Rab8 19.c4 Be6 20.Nxe6 fxe6 21.Be4 Rxd1 22.Rxd1 Rd8 23.Rxd8+ Qxd8 24.h3 Qd1+ 25.Kh2 a6 0.46/19 ]
11.Bxg6 1.92/18 Re8? 3.78/18
[Rybka 3 : 11...Nxe5 12.Nxe5 hxg6 13.0-0 Re8 14.f4 b6 15.Rd1 Bb7 16.Nd4 Qe7 17.Ndf3 Rad8 18.Be3 f6 19.Qc4+ Kh7 20.Rd3 Bxe5 21.fxe5 Bxf3 22.gxf3 Qxe5 23.Re1 1.92/18 ]
|Nov-01-09|| ||RandomVisitor: continued:
[Rybka 3 : 12.Bg5 Be7 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Bxh7+ Kxh7 15.Qd3+ g6 16.Qxd5 Rad8 17.Qe4 f5 18.Qh4+ Qxh4 19.Nxh4 Nxe5 20.0-0 Nc4 21.Rab1 b6 22.f4 c5 23.Nf3 Kh6 24.Ng5 Rd3 25.Kf2 Ne3 26.Rbe1 3.78/18 ]
13.Nxe5 2.28/17 Rxe5 2.69/18
14.Be3 2.56/16 Qh4 2.93/19
15.0-0-0 2.73/17 Qa4? 5.05/18
[Rybka 3 : 15...Bxg2 16.Rhg1 Qh3 2.73/17 ]
[Rybka 3 : 16.Rd4 Qc6 17.Na5 Qa6 18.Qxa6 bxa6 19.Nc4 Bxc4 20.Rxc4 5.05/18 ]
[Rybka 3 : 16...g6 17.f4 Bc4 18.Qf3 Re7 19.Rhe1 3.18/18 ]
17.f4 4.36/19 Bc4 4.40/18
18.Qf3 3.53/17 Ra5 4.65/19
[Rybka 3 : 18...Re6 19.f5 Ree8 3.53/17 ]
19.Nxa5 4.45/20 Qxa2+ 4.65/18
20.Kc1 4.65/19 Qa1+ 4.72/18
21.Bb1 4.39/18 Qxa5? 7.03/15
[Rybka 3 : 21...Ba2 22.Qe4 Bxb1 23.Qxb1 Qxa5 24.Qe4 Qb5 25.Rhe1 Re8 26.Qf3 Rb8 27.Qd5 4.39/18 ]
22.Qe4 6.64/14 Ba2? 12.06/14
[Rybka 3 : 22...Bb3 23.Qxh7+ 6.64/14 ]
23.Qxh7+ 5.79/8 Kf8 8.17/15
24.Rd4 6.63/13 c6? 11.61/13
[Rybka 3 : 24...Ke8 25.Bxa2 6.63/13 ]
25.Rhd1 9.90/13 Qc7? #13/7
[Rybka 3 : 25...Bd5 26.Qh8+ 9.90/13 ]
[Rybka 3 : 26.Bxa2 Qa5 #13/7 ]
|Nov-01-09|| ||RandomVisitor: 8.f4! would almost be winning.|
|Nov-01-09|| ||RandomVisitor: Ater 8.f4!
1: Wilhelm Steinitz - Frank James Marshall, simul Montreal 1893
click for larger view
Analysis by Rybka 3 :
[+1.21] d=17 8...dxe4 9.Bxe4 Bd5 00:14:50 143560kN
[+1.24] d=17 8...exf4 9.exd5 Qxd5 10.Be4 Qg5 11.Nf3 Qe7 12.Nc5 Bd7 13.Nxd7 Kxd7 14.0-0 Kc8 15.Re1 a6 16.Qd3 Qd8 17.Bd2 Kb8 18.b4 Qd7 19.Rab1 00:11:42 114348kN
|Nov-01-09|| ||ComboKal: <Once> I think Kasparov is the Godfather, and Fischer is Gone With The Wind! |
Before I get bombarded with comments, I'm refering to his reclusiveness and dissapearance from the game, not his death.
|Jan-12-11|| ||redorc19: <Once et al> Chess players as movies: Morphy is 2012 (such unlikely sucess) Kasparov is Die Hard ( hard core action) Fischer is No Country for Old Men, Karpov is Harry Potter 7 Part 1 (slow and continuously setting up the big picture) and Capablanca is Primal Fear (the only movie coming to mind).|
|Jun-24-11|| ||VladimirOo: Kasparov: Rocky I, II, III (for his matches against Karpov) ;
Karpov: Usual Suspects (Sneaky devilish strategies) ;
Korchnoi : Heat (one on one die hard fight, no system, no trust, no peace) ;
Fischer: North By Northwest (alone against the system and Spy plots) ;
Larsen : Playtime by Tati (excentric situations and plans) ;
Spassky : From Russia with Love (not only for the game but also for the seducing male character of his) ;
Tal : A Matter of Life and Death (for his tragic and witty life) ;
Smyslov : Stalker by Tarkovsky (sublime and mystical) ;
Botvinnik : Metropolis by Fritz Lang (the conflit between science and art) ;
Keres : The Pianist by Polanski (An artist, a man of great humanity in middle of chaos and barbary) ;
Alekhine : White Hunter Black Heart by Clint Eastwood (gifted, ambitious, but obstinated until too late) ;
Rubinstein : Death in Venise by Visconti (refined, passion leading to madness) ;
Steinitz : The Seventh Seal (the ultimate game against death) ;|
|May-04-12|| ||LoveThatJoker: Guess-the-Move Final Score:
Steinitz vs Marshall, 1893.
YOU ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF STEINITZ.
Your score: 54 (par = 47)
|May-08-14|| ||ljfyffe: The Heather Club game continued 26Qh8+Ke7 27Qxg7 1-0.|
|May-08-14|| ||ljfyffe: Saint John NB telegraph match Feb 1, 1894
G. Fisher-R. Short 1-0
J. DeBury-P. Barry 0-1
C. Harding-Bemrose 0-1
A. Porter-F.J. Marshall .5-.5
first and fouth games ajudicated by James Narraway. Montreal wins 2.5-1.5.
|May-25-14|| ||ljfyffe: That should be Robert DeBury, he claimed to be a Belgian count.|
|Jun-05-14|| ||ljfyffe: Marshall -Alfred Porter 1894 Telegraphic - Saint John -Montreal: white -p's on a4,b2,f4,g4,h2;N on d6; B's on e3,e4; Q on c2; R's on a1,f1; K on g1: black - p's on a6,b7,f7,g7,h7; N's on a7,g6; B on c8; Q on e8; R's on a8,f8; K on g8. Black to move.|
|Jun-05-14|| ||ljfyffe: James Narraway's report: I certainly prefer White's game,which is more open and attacking, while his two bishops are very strong; but I do not see any means of obtaining a tangible superiority, and his exposed K-side would be likely to embarrass him later on.
I therefore think that it is best to call this a draw, and I so decide.|
|Jun-06-14|| ||ljfyffe: Count Robert DeBury(Saint John) -Palmerston Barry(Montreal):Telegraphic, Feb.1,1894 -- 1e4 e5 2Nf3 Nc6 3Bc4 Nf6 4d3 Bc5 50-0 d6 6h3 0-0 7c3 Bb6 8Qe2 Be6 9Bxe6 fxe6 10Be3 Bxe3 11Qxe3 Ne7 12Na3 Ng6 13g3 Qd7 14Nc2 Rf7 15Kh2 h6 16Qe2 Raf8 17Nd2 d5 18f3 Na5 19Rg1 Nf6 20Rg2 Nh7 21h4 Qe7 22Rah1 Nf6 23b4 Na5 24Kg1 a5 25b5 Qc5+ 26d5 Qxc3 27Nb1 Qxf3 28Nd2 Qxe2 29Rxe2 Nxg3 30Rg2 Nxh1 31Kxh1 Rf2 32Rxg6 Rxd2 33Ne3 exd4 34Ng2 Rff2 35e5 Rxg2 36Rxg2 Rxg2 37Kxg2 c5 0-1|
|Jun-06-14|| ||ljfyffe: In his prize-winning book Young Marshall, Hilbert doesn't give the results of the telegraphic match so I present them here(Feb. 16, St. JOHN GLOBE). Also see ROBERT SHORT for another game from the match.|
|Jul-20-14|| ||Lossmaster: A contemporary account of this game in a local weekly magazine, with a photo and short bio of the 16 year-old Marshall, can be found in the December 2nd 1893 issue of Montreal's "Le Monde illustré", p. 371 (next to last page):|
The article is in French, including the game score in descriptive notation (with a typo on Black's 4th move). It was the standout game of a 16-opponent simul exhibition given by Steinitz in Montreal on the night of Monday November 13th. The promising youngster, whose style is said to be original, swift and aggressive, got praise from the world champion, who is reported as saying that he had never experienced such hard time from an amateur of that age, and predicting a shining future for him if he keeps an interest in the game.
A higher resolution version of the photo as a paper clipping here:
|Jul-20-14|| ||ljfyffe: <Lossmaster> The game you mention was actually played on Nov.17, Le Monde Illustre mixing the game up with the one played on Nov. 13 which went 4Ngf3. See my remarks under Marshall's chess games. The Montreal Gazette of Nov. 22, 1893 also prints the game revealing Hilbert gives the wrong date in Writings in Chess History.|
|Jul-22-14|| ||ljfyffe: Nov. 13, 1893 Montreal Chess Club simul Steinitz-Marshall 1e4 e6 2d4 d5 3Nd2 Ne7 4Ngf3 Ng6 5c3 Be7 6e5 f6 7exf6 Bxf6 8Nb3 0-0 9Bd3 Nh4 10Nxh4 Bxh4 110-0 Qe8 12Qe2 Nc6 13f4 Be7 14Bd2 Bd7 15Rae1 Bd6 16Bc2 Rf6 17Nc1 Qe7 18Nd3 Raf8 19g3 Be8 20Nf2 Bg6 21Bb3 Bf5 22Qb5 Qd7 23Qxb7 Na5 24Qa6 Nxb3 25axb3 Rg6 26Kh1 e5 27dxe5 Bc5 28Qa4 Qe6 29Be3 d4 30cxd4 Qd5+ 31Kg1 Be6 32dxc5 Qf3 33Nh1 Qh5 34f5 1-0 (Montreal Gazette, Nov. 14, 1893).|
|Jan-21-15|| ||plang: not much of a game even for a Simul|
|Aug-07-15|| ||stillday: Marshall's comments in his book are great. After 15. 0-0-0|
"I am afraid Steinitz saw that one! He castled on the Queen's side and avoided the swindle."
"Undaunted, I transferred my attack to the other side of the board."
Anybody else been there before and had a cunning plan foiled by an uncooperative opponent?
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·