< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jul-06-11|| ||psmith: <DWINS> and <pandi>|
By move 39 there is no possible defense for White. It doesn't matter what he plays, 39... Qxa2 will win easily (and wins just as decisively as 39... Nb2 in the game line). As Keene says, White is helpless against Black's plan, and there is no reason for Black to deviate from that plan in the game line.
|Apr-29-12|| ||CharlyNY: <Sneaky> <Refutor> After Ng4 there is a threat like Bh6 winning the exchange. Then Qe3 there is no threat anymore|
|Oct-19-12|| ||Garech: Crushing positional play - beautiful!
|May-20-16|| ||Phony Benoni: In case you're wondering, "Why not the obvious <Mannheimer Steamrolled> as a pun, that was used when this was GOTD back in 2004. |
The game is worth reusing every dozen years or so, and the new pun has its points.
I suppose White was a bit jealous of Black's Handsome Horsie on e4, and played 21.f4 to stabilize his own outpost on e5. And once he got there, he didn't want to trade it off for the equally Stalwart Stallion on c4.
Pride goeth before a crunch. And surely nothing is more humbling than being steamrolled by an a-pawn.
|May-20-16|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: White played *much* too passively starting with his fourth move. Even as late as move 21, he could have tried something 21.Qb5,b6; 22.Qxd5,Nxc3; 23.Qf3 and at least annoy Black a little, even if his position remains poor.|
|May-20-16|| ||RookFile: Maybe it's just my style, but on move 16, I would have played Rfe1 and hit the clock after about about two seconds.|
|May-20-16|| ||offramp: I really admire White's manoeuvre 30.Ne5-f3-g1.|
|May-20-16|| ||AlicesKnight: At move 38 we have not only a 'bad Bishop' for White but a bad Knight (alternative title?). The attempts it makes to escape lead to its stalemate at move 43. Meantime other White pieces are glued to g3 as if magnetised. It's not quite the Saemisch zugzwang but the paralysis is almost as complete. Fascinating.|
|May-20-16|| ||offramp: This shows the kind of opposition that Nimzowitsch showed his "System" against.|
In this position the maths teacher played
click for larger view
30.Nf3 and shortly thereafter
click for larger view
Nimzo is to be admired for making a system of how to play against totally garbage players.
|May-20-16|| ||Godwin R G: nice game|
|May-20-16|| ||YetAnotherAmateur: Suggested alternate pun: "My Mann-witsch!"|
|May-20-16|| ||kevin86: Black will queen the pawn...trust me!|
|May-20-16|| ||offramp: Nimzowitsch could play like this against Joe Schmos. But his System was a load of hooey and he wasn't a very good player against the World's best.|
This is a game between a strong A-class player (Nimzowitsch) and a fairly talented amateur.
|May-20-16|| ||thegoodanarchist: <Phony Benoni: In case you're wondering, "Why not the obvious <Mannheimer Steamrolled> as a pun, that was used when this was GOTD back in 2004. >|
Yes, I was wondering. Thank you for the 'splanation
|May-20-16|| ||RookFile: <offramp: I really admire White's manoeuvre 30.Ne5-f3-g1.>|
Had to smile when I saw this. White did play like a dead fish in this game.
|May-20-16|| ||morfishine: I thought this was the famous zug-game, but thats this one: Saemisch vs Nimzowitsch, 1923|
|May-20-16|| ||morfishine: <offramp> Wow, pretty harsh for you, though very funny and sarcastic initial comment. Tough week?|
|May-20-16|| ||Domdaniel: <offramp> - "Garbage, amateur, hooey... usw" - Do you *have* to insult Nimzo's opponents like this? Yes, of course, most of them weren't in his class (few players were, other than Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine -- all world champions).|
You make it look as if Nimzowitsch deliberately published games vs much weaker opponents to make himself look better. But a thorough scrutiny of his books would show that a great number of strong opponents were included.
|May-20-16|| ||newhampshireboy: offramp has confused his opinions with facts, a very common mistake humans make. Nimzowitsch was fully capable of beating top class players and he did on several occasions. I have always admired his System as it has helped me a lot and many others.|
|May-20-16|| ||perfidious: Nimzowitsch employed the amusing touch of rival Alekhine's Gun as a tactical exploitation of his positional advantage|
|May-20-16|| ||offramp: I find Nimzowitsch tiresome. He used his system against much weaker players, but when he beat players his own strength he did so by playing normally. See Kevin Spraggett (kibitz #151).|
|May-20-16|| ||Domdaniel: <offramp> Aha. What, please, is 'normally'? How exactly does one play 'normally'?|
Have I been playing non-normally ever since I first read Nimzowitsch, almost 40 years ago?
And which is better, Normally or Gormally?
|May-21-16|| ||RookFile: I think normally means you take advantage of a tactical opportunity and that's it. Chigorin is a good example, it was said that some of his wins were like lightning from a clue blue sky.|
|May-25-16|| ||Domdaniel: <Rokfile> Chigorin is certainly a good example of something, but nobody is sure exactly what. I've been reading about him recently, and looking at some games.|
Some people saw him as the founder (with Petrov) of the Russian/Soviet school. Others saw him as the last great Romantic, still successfully playing gambits in the Steinitz era. Yet others saw him as a great anti-dogmatic player, who repudiated the notions of Steinitz and Tarrasch in favour of concrete analysis of the position to hand.
And so on.
|Nov-07-17|| ||Swedish Logician: Nimzo's instructive play for and on the white central squares reminds me of Botvinnki's in one of my favourite games: M Stolberg vs Botvinnik, 1940
e.g. the stunning positions after Black's moves 23, _ Ne4 and 32. _ Rc4.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·