| Jan-14-07 | | Rubenus: 18...? would be a good puzzle. |
|
| Jan-14-07 | | Nasruddin Hodja: Hmmm. Spielmann resigned one move too soon. He should have played 23. Qd5+ hoping for 23. ... Kh8?? 24. Nf7+ Kg8 (or ... Rxf7 25. Qd8+ mating) 25. Nh6+ Kh8 26. Qg8+! Rxg8 27. Nf7#. Of course, black would have probably put an end to any such fantasies by 23. ... Be6+ 24. Kg2 Qf2#, but it was worth a try. |
|
| Jan-18-07 | | Rubenus: I think it is insulting to hope for a blunder in a lost position. Spielmann is fair. |
|
Oct-07-07
 | | tpstar: An excellent advanced-level puzzle demonstrating the power of Double Check (18 ... Rc1+!) and a nice King hunt ending with a quiet move (22 ... Rf8) where White has no defense. Black must have calculated the winning line starting with 15. Nf3 Qf7 which is quite impressive. |
|
| Mar-04-10 | | siegbert: A nice combination. Would i play Qd5+ in this position? No i think rubenus is right. resigns is correct. |
|
| Apr-04-10 | | Andrijadj: @Nasruddin:
This was move 22,so I don't think there was any time trouble. And of course,good chessplayer like Van Den Bosh can see ...Be6 in about 10 miliseconds... |
|
| Sep-28-11 | | SeanBurdine: It's hard to believe that a great attacking player like Spielmann missed the devastating riposte to 16 N-N5??? [the losing move.] Once he played that, 17 QxNP was practically forced and the Q being out of play allowed the King-hunt. The correct move was 16 N-Q2, and the position holds at least temporarily. Of course, Van den Bosch was really on his game to find 18 R-B8 dbl ch!!! and see that it forced Spielmann's King into a mating net. |
|
| Aug-21-17 | | SpiritedReposte: Cool how in the final position Qd5+ would work, combining smothered and back rank mate threats,but the response ...Be6 is check followed by mate. |
|
Jul-23-20
 | | Retireborn: Is any information about this tournament (no. of players etc) available? |
|
Jul-24-20
 | | Stonehenge: All participants:
https://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=... |
|
Jul-24-20
| | Retireborn: <Stonehenge> Many thanks! Tremendously helpful, as ever. |
|
| Jan-28-21 | | SeanAzarin: Who's The Bosch? |
|
Jan-28-21
 | | OhioChessFan: Oof, is that a groaner... |
|
| Feb-03-21 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: If you just told me this was a Spielmann game, I would assume he was Black. |
|
Feb-03-21
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Wondering if perhaps Black originally intended to play 16.Ng5,Qxa2 but then found something with that move which made him look for an alternative. Much to my surprise, 5...Ne4 fares well in the CG database. 9.0-0-0 might not be the best continuation. |
|
| Feb-03-21 | | V Geriakov: Spielmann defeated a-la-Spielmann. |
|
| Feb-03-21 | | Brenin: At the end, if 23 Kg2 then Qe2+ 24 Kg1 Qxd1+ 25 Kg2 Qe2+ 26 Kg1 Be6, blocking checks and threatening Qf2 mate, is lethal. |
|
| Feb-03-21 | | lentil: 23. Qb3+ also fails to .. Be6+ |
|
| Feb-03-21 | | goodevans: Spielmann clearly had 16.Ng5 in mind when playing 15.Nf3 as the alternative 16.Nd2 just loses a pawn without compensation. I can't believe, as suggested by <SeanBurdine>, that a player of Spielmann's undoubted ability simply "missed the devastating riposte". <16.Ng5> is a very forcing move as it attacks both h7 and the Q on f7. 
click for larger viewBlack's three reasonable defensive tries, <26...Qf5>, <16...Qg6> and <16...Qh5>, all fail quite quickly to <17.Qd5+> and apart from the move played only one other attacking move <16...Qxa2> merits any consideration. <An Englishman> suggests that van den Bosch might originally have had that move in mind. Maybe so. There's also a possibility that Spielmann was so certain that that’s what black would play that he missed <16...Bf5> altogether. Possible, but with so few credible replies to white's forcing Ng5 it seems unlikely that he'd overlook one of them. More likely, it seems to me, was that Spielmann believed that the forcing nature of <17.Qxb7> would yield an advantage. Once again black has the Q on f7 under attack and this time also the R on a8. 
click for larger viewThe play that follows is entirely forced on both sides so I would expect a player of Spielmann's calibre to see it right up to the final position. Did he think that <23.Qd5+> would then win him the game? That to me seems more likely than him simply missing 16...Bf5 but I guess we'll never know. |
|
| Feb-03-21 | | dhotts: <Cheapo by the Dozen> your comment proves this was a great pun for this game! |
|
| Feb-09-21 | | SeanAzarin: Fred Reinfeld's observation on this game:
"A discovered check. no matter how improbable, is ALWAYS worth a second look. No one knew this better than the great tactician Spielmann, but even he occasionally missed the point." [The reference is clearly to Black's 18th move, which is not only a discovered check but in fact a double check.] |
|
Feb-09-21
 | | keypusher: 
click for larger viewFrom here SF11 comes up with 11.f3 instead of 11.g3. If 11....ef 12.Nxf3 the eval is about +1.5. Charmingly unmaterialistic. |
|
| Nov-12-23 | | Ziryab: After seeing this game and looking at the opening book, I am curious why I have rejected 5…Ne4 in hundreds of opportunities over the past 20 years. Clearly the move has some merit. |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 18...Rc1+