< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
|May-24-09|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: For me, Steinitz' most amazing move was 19...Re8. How did he know what would happen? How did he know?!|
|May-24-09|| ||Andrijadj: Well Re8 is a logical move(from modern point of view,though,so credits to Steinitz),supporting the pawn roller from distance.Nimzovitsch wrote about that sort of 'mysterious' rook moves.|
|May-24-09|| ||Calli: Steinitz wrote about Re8:
"With the object of defending the e-pawn once more, after removing 21...Bf6, should White attempt now 20.g4. The move in the text was, however, also very useful against the line of play actually adopted."
In other words, he didn't know. Steinitz was always honest in his annotations, unlike some who would follow.
|May-24-09|| ||Mikhail Tal fan: Hes just a poor pawn from a poor monarchy-
Spare him his life from this monstrosity-
Easy come easy go-,will you let me go-
Bismillah! no-,we will not let you go-let him go-
Bismillah! we will not let you go-let him go
Bismillah! we will not let you go-let me go
Will not let you go-let me go
Will not let you go let me go
Mama mia,mama mia,mama mia let me go-
Beelzebub has a pawn put aside for me,for me,for me-
R.i.p Freddie (1943-1991)
|May-24-09|| ||randomsac: Nice job of moving his connected pawns down the board to cause panic.|
|May-24-09|| ||newzild: A fine game. Illuminating comments by Fischer.|
|May-24-09|| ||MrMelad: <Mikhail Tal fan> How about BisZugzwang?|
|May-24-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Nice game by Steinitz|
|May-24-09|| ||Mikhail Tal fan: <MrMelad> : what's BisZugzwang? i understand only half of the word! XD|
|May-24-09|| ||zzzzzzzzzzzz: Very good game, that was. Zukertort got owned.|
|May-25-09|| ||MrMelad: <Mikhail Tal fan> BisZungzwang! no-, we will not let you go-let him go...|
|Jun-08-09|| ||Mikhail Tal fan: ah haha!! now Mr <MrMelad> ,i think that i should put a song wich i have written , it s about Misha Tal, i will post it later !|
|Jun-08-09|| ||chillowack: This game demonstrates the march of positional chess. Zukertort, a representative of the "old guard," did not really appreciate the power of the mobile center, but Steinitz knew how to wield it with great effectiveness. (Many years later, Nimzovich would write in detail about the mobile pawn center in *My System*, but as we can see, Steinitz already had a grasp of it in the 1800s.)|
|Sep-21-09|| ||HansLoco: According to this record..Steinitz needed more competition?!!|
|Dec-31-09|| ||DoubleCheck: <<Corwin>: hey, what about 13. c6 ? it hammers black's queenside as far as i can see.|
<<<<<keypusher>>: <<<aragorn69>>> Hey, good point. What about 13. c6 Nxc6 14. bxc6 Rb8 15. Rb1 Bxa3 threatening ...Bb4+. Does that work?>>>>?
13. c6 would be a terrible blunder
13. c6?? Bc4!
Now black arrests Whites queenside pawns
14. Qb1 Qd5
15. b6?? Qxc6!
14. e3?! Qd5
15. Bxc4 Qxc4
14. e3?! Bxf1
15. Kxf1 Qd5
14. b6 Nxc6
15. b7 Rb8(Ra7?!)
14. b6 cxb6
15. Qc2 b5
16. Nb2 Nxc6
17. Nxc4 bxc4
18. Qxc4 Qd7/Qd6/Qb6
19. g3 Rfc8
Black has the lead in development
|Jan-27-10|| ||echector: After 13.c6 Bc4!, the complete refutation of Rb1 is not Qd5, after which there is a swindle by e4!, but Bxa3, when white has already been utterly crushed and obliterated by move 14.|
|Jan-29-10|| ||kibitzwc: (716) Zukertort,Johannes Hermann - Steinitz,William [D53]
World Championship 1st USA (19), 24.03.1886
[Fritz 12 (30s)]
D53: Queen's Gambit Declined: 4 Bg5 Be7: Early deviations 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nf3 0–0 6.c5 b6 7.b4 bxc5 8.dxc5 a5 9.a3 d4 10.Bxf6 gxf6 11.Na4 e5 12.b5 Be6 13.g3 c6 14.bxc6 Nxc6 15.Bg2 last book move 15...Rb8 16.Qc1? [¹16.Nd2!? Qc7 17.0–0µ] 16...d3–+ 17.e3 e4 18.Nd2 f5 19.0–0 Re8 [¹19...Ne5–+] 20.f3?? [¹20.Nb6–+] 20...Nd4! 21.exd4 [21.Kh1 Nb3 22.Qe1 Nxa1 23.Qxa1 exf3 24.Rxf3 Rc8–+] 21...Qxd4+ 22.Kh1 e3 [22...Qxa4?! 23.fxe4 Qc6 24.Qd1 Bxc5 25.Rc1µ] 23.Nc3 [23.Re1 exd2 24.Qxd2 Qxa4 25.Qxd3 Bxc5 26.Qd2–+] 23...Bf6 24.Ndb1 [24.Qe1 exd2 25.Qxd2 Qxc3–+] 24...d2 25.Qc2 Bb3 [¹25...Bc4 26.Nxd2 Qxd2 27.Nd5 Bxa1 28.Nxe3 Qxc2 29.Nxc2 Bxf1 30.Bxf1–+] 26.Qxf5 d1Q Black plans e2 27.Nxd1 Bxd1 28.Nc3 e2 [¹28...Qxc3 29.Raxd1 e2 30.h4 exf1B 31.Rxf1–+] 29.Raxd1 [29.Nxe2 Bxe2 (‹29...Qxa1 30.c6 Qe5 31.Qxe5 Rxe5 32.Nc3–+) 30.Rg1 Bd3–+] 29...Qxc3 [29...Qxc3 30.h4 exf1Q+ 31.Bxf1 Re1 32.Rxe1 Qxe1 33.Qxf6 Qxf1+ 34.Kh2 Qf2+ 35.Kh3 Qxc5–+] 0–1
|Dec-03-12|| ||Conrad93: 6.c5 is a mistake, since it's followed by 6...b6. It just weakens the pawns.|
|Nov-13-14|| ||Ke2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBX...
Source of the annotations.
|Jul-25-15|| ||yurikvelo: Both 7...bxc5 and 8. dxc5 are blunders.
Strange, Fischer didn't make any comments on these moves.
Also 11. ..e5.
Fischer gievs 20. f3 blunder positive feedback.
Full game multiPV:
|Nov-23-16|| ||WannaBe: So, where does 'Galileo Figaro' comes in? 26... d1=Q, is that it?|
|Nov-23-16|| ||Phony Benoni: Anyone want to bet a ChessBuck or two that we'll be seeing Lasker vs Schlechter, 1910 soon?|
|Nov-23-16|| ||WannaBe: <Phony> You're on. (only because I can't figure out why that game would be Game of the Day soon...) |
The two events took place many years apart, the ECO are not close... Were the two combatants from Bohemia? I'd have to look that up.
So, in a nut-shell, sure, why not!
|Nov-23-16|| ||Richard Taylor: Fascinating game by Steinitz with Zukertort helping. |
Fischer is right. 6. c5 is premature. Fischer liked Steinitz. Steinitz, with Tarrasch, Nimzowich et al, helped to develop chess theory as Lasker acknowledged.
I mean he acknowledged Steinitz's importance. He also studied Tarrsch's games and the others of course.
|Nov-23-16|| ||Dave12: black would love 14.b6? Na6 15.Rc1 Qd5 16.Qc2 e4|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·