< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 11 ·
|Sep-12-04|| ||Knight13: 12. P-QR4! A clever preventive move! It stops an unwelcome instrusion by 12 ... Q-R6, and also prepares to meet 12 ... Kt-B3 with 13. KR-Kt1, and if then 13 ... Kt-R4 14 P-B5 undobles the Pawns by force, since continuation 14 ... PxP 15 R-Kt5 is to white's advantage.|
15 Q-R3 Another preventive move. Black cannot free himself by 15 ... P-K4 as 16 BxP would follow. The Queen's move also makes it possible for white to play 16 P-B4, giving him a grip on the square K5.
|Sep-12-04|| ||Brian Watson: Nice plagiarism! |
|Sep-13-04|| ||offramp: <Knight13: 12. P-QR4!> We prefer standard notation here.|
Personally I am equally fluent in both descriptive and standard.
|Sep-13-04|| ||Minor Piece Activity: Brilliant deduction Watson! =) |
|Sep-14-04|| ||Giancarlo: I must say that when I say this game, the opening looked in favour of Black, especially after Botvinnik had not Finachettoed the KS. Then, b6 :-) and finachettoing the QS for Black and it seems like a direct assault to come.|
According to Robert Bellin, sometime British Champion and longtime Dutch defender, Black has the advantage because of his better pawn structure after moves 14.
After move 14, it seems lik . I really thought Tartakower wins this game if he plays it well enough.
|Oct-30-04|| ||aw1988: I don't mind different notation, just none of this '5652' crap, please. |
|Nov-22-04|| ||LIFE Master AJ: This game is deeply analyzed on my web site ... the link is given on the first page of kibitzing. |
|Dec-24-04|| ||MonsieurL: This is Game One in Chernev's The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played, and is fully annotated with analysis. Chessmaster 9000 doesn't include it in their database. Glad to see it is here! I'm new here. :) |
|Dec-24-04|| ||iron maiden: <MonsieurL>, hello, welcome, and Merry Christmas. This is probably my favorite Capablanca game, and one of the most instructive endgames of all time. |
|Dec-24-04|| ||tpstar: <MonsieurL> Bonjour! Welcome to the group! Yes, this is an all-time classic, with incisive kibitzing (these pages of comments) plus clear annotations (in the box under the board). See you around. |
|Dec-24-04|| ||MonsieurL: Thanks for all the welcomes. Read my profile, and you'll understand where I am at. Two things...|
#1. Nimzovitch's MY SYSTEM looks great... It is a great help.
#2. Chernev's book is in the older, King James-like algebraic notation, so this site helped me out!
|Jan-29-05|| ||aw1988: I would like to correct an earlier post - I knew the method of protecting the king against checks via the enemy pawn already before studying it in the endgame manual- a rather hastily written post. |
|Apr-08-05|| ||Boomie: <clocked> wrote where is the win after 31...b3 Here is one possibility.|
31... b3 32. d7 xc3 33. xg6 xd4 34. xd5 e6 35. f5+ e7 36. e5 d6 37. e4 d5 38. f5 d4 39. e5+ d6 40. g5 xf5 41. xf5 e6 42. f6+ e7 43. f5 c4 44. e6+ f8 45. f3 xa4 46. g6
|May-08-05|| ||clocked: <Boomie> How about 31... Nb3 32. Rd7 Nc1|
|May-08-05|| ||Boomie: <clocked> Nice find. 32...Nc1, a move only a mother could love today. I tried to crack it without any success. So I went back to tackle Nb3 again and also failed to find any winning line. Here are the lines I looked at which all come out more or less equal.|
31... Nb3 32. Rd7
(32. c4 dxc4 33. d5 Rf6 34. Bxc4 Nd2 35. Rxc7 Rxf4 36. Bb5 Rxg4+ 37. Kh3 Rd4 38. Rxa7 Rxd5 39. Ra6 Rg5 40. Rxb6 Ne4 41. Bd7 Kf7 42. Be8+ Kg7 43. Bc6)
(32. Bb1 Rxc3 33. Bxg6 Nxd4 34. g5 a6 35. Rf7+
(35. f5 Ne2 36. Bf7 Nf4+ 37. Kh2 Rh3+ 38. Rxh3 Nxh3 39. g6 Nf4 40. Kg3 Nh5+ 41. Kg4 Nf6+ 42. Kf4 c6 43. Ke5 Kg7 44. Kd6 b5 45. axb5 axb5 46. Kxc6 b4 47. Bxd5 Nxd5 48. Kxd5)
35... Kg8 36. Re7 Nf3 37. Re8+ Kg7 38. Bh5 Nh4+ 39. Kf2 Nf5 40. Rd8 Ng3 41. Rd7+ Kf8 42. Bf3 Ne4+ 43. Ke2 Rc4)
32... Nc1 33. Bf1 Rxc3 34. Rxd5 Nb3
|May-09-05|| ||beatgiant: <clocked, Boomie>
Very interesting material. After move 30, White's biggest advantage is that Black's king is cut off on the back rank. But in a line like 31...Nb3 32. Bb1 Rxb3, White's king also is cut off on the 3rd rank.
I haven't had time to study this line in more detail, but if you are right that it holds, it suggests 31. g4 may have been premature and perhaps White should have first advanced the king with 31. Kh3.
|Aug-23-05|| ||kevin86: Capablanca at his best---and that's saying something!!|
|Aug-23-05|| ||gauer: Call a risky strategy one which is where the player is only playing for a win or a loss in a tournament, and that a draw is the same cross-table final standings resulting worth as an overall loss. Otherwise, call the player's strategy to be conservative, if he separately accepts the individual values of a win or draw as being moderately helpful, in both cases. Otherwise, call such a strategy to be murky if a computer cannot definitively produce a checkmating win or drawing fortress in a certain horizon number of forced moves - ie a mere being up a queen is insufficient to be called a checkmating win, if a mate is not forcing, as seen by an automaton. So a murky strategy is necessarily not necessarily risky and not necessarily conservative, based on the horizon of current analysis.|
Let's say that black may have been playing with only the risky strategy in mind, after a certian point in the game. At which point can we say that black definitively erred at - not knowing whether or not white was playing for the risky, conservative, or murky strategy? Similar question, but for black playing only conservatively?
I'm wondering, in particular, if there are many good examples of games where the strategy of switching from one strategy to another at various points in a game, will affect how optimally or sub-optimally a player might seem to play.
Much of the black play only seemed to be ground down by a dubious black strategy-switching in-decisiveness, and not so much based on many outright losing errors - at least, not at low horizons...
Does anyone else use this type of analysis breakdown for their games? It's too bad that Deep Fritz and other engines of my own only report back in centipawns, and not based on the different strategy types available to one or either player.
|Aug-23-05|| ||teme: Very good game by one of my favorite players.|
|Aug-23-05|| ||Boomie: <beatgiant> <clocked> 31. d7 appears to be white's best chance, but I can't find a win. We need a brilliancy for white like <clocked's> 32...c1!|
31. d7 c4 32. g4
(32. h3 e3 33. h4 e8 34. h7 f5+ 35. g5 xc3 36. xf5 gxf5 37. xf5 xg3 38. xc7 e3 39. xa7 e4 (0.51/18))
32...b2 33. c2 xc3 34. xg6 d3
(34...c6 35. h2 d3 36. xa7 g8 37. h7+ f8 38. g3 e5+ 39. h4 f3+ 40. h5 xd4 41. f5 (3.88/13))
35. xd3 xd3 36. xd5 a3 37. g5 xa4 38. f3 a5 39. e4 c5 40. d8+ (0.60/15)
|Aug-23-05|| ||aktajha: Reti certainly hits the hammer on the head.
This is one of those games in which you can see why you'll never become a master. It's just to difficult for a 1900 player not to defend the queenside and have all the trust in your own attack. (may be, it's because i am a positional player, not an all-out attacker).
One thing I do wonder: why does Tartakower give up his good bishop (light-squared) with 12 ... Bxf3 ?? Was he to afraid of the possible threats of this knight by going to e5?
Although his knight MIGHT be better in the closed game, i'd prefer to keep my bishop on the board a bit longer, develop my knight to a better square and eventually try to create some threats of my own on the long (a8-h1) diagonal. Tartakower only is defending his position with pieces, not by trying to expand himself.
Ah well, may be that's why I am no master.
|Aug-23-05|| ||Boomie: <aktajha> You're right. 12...xf3? (0.58/14) makes no sense at all. 12...f6 (0.15/15) seems to be black's best here. The game might have continued 12...f6 13. e4 fxe4 14. xe4 xe4 15. xe4 c6 with an equal game.|
Tartakower was off form in this great tournament, finishing in 8th place with only 8 points out of 20 games.
|Aug-23-05|| ||BishopofBlunder: Capablanca was trying to build a slow steady attack but Tartakower was having none of it. After 9.Qe2, Tartakower decided he'd had enough of the opening and tried to skip the middle game and go straight to the endgame. Four moves later, 3 of the 4 minor pieces, for each side, are off the board!|
Brilliant endgame by Capablanca. Oblivious to the fact that he might get overrun on the Q-side, he builds a devastating attack on the K-side, then methodically picks off Black's pawns like apples in an orchard. To have the patience and foresight to play the game like that is something we should all hope for.
|Oct-20-05|| ||AlexanderMorphy: Capablanca is a genius!|
|Oct-22-05|| ||avidfan: Position after 39...Rf4-e4
click for larger view
Note the use of enemy pawn at f5 as shelter from checks!
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 11 ·