< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-16-10|| ||Phony Benoni: <kevin86> Sorry, but your observation doesn't work because the dates on the PGN for games in this match are screwed up. This game was actually played in Montreal on Saturday, May 26, 1894.|
|Dec-31-13|| ||keypusher: Verdicts quoted from Phony's link:
<This may be pronounced the feeblest game of the match.—Gunsberg.
Herr Lasker's average play throughout the match is to be admired. In accuracy, originality, and profundity, as well as in sustained power, there has been nothing equal to it since the days of Morphy.—Mason.
If any confirmation were required as to Steinitz's present form, this, the last game of the match, would furnish it. Such a tame, insipid game, which might have been given up as a draw after the exchange of Queens, and which is without a redeeming feature throughout, Steinitz loses by a blunder. Lasker did not make a single forcing move, not a combination of any sort, he simply waited till his opponent practically made him a present of the match.—Hoffer.>
|May-05-16|| ||keypusher: Gunsberg's annotations. He really hated this game!
<Play proceeded along the same lines as in one of the previous games. On the eleventh move Black varied his tactics by playing R--Q sq ch, which drove the White King where he wanted to go.>
<Steinitz stowed away his KB on B sq., presumably for fear lest he should do his opponent some harm.>
13.Bb2 Bd7 14.Rhd1 Rac8 15.Bb3 Ne7 16.Nd4 Ng6 17.Rd2 e5 18.Nf3 Bg4 19.Rxd8 Rxd8 20.h3 Bxf3+
<He proceeds to get rid of his Q B by exchanging it for his opponent's K Kt, after a few useless moves.>
21.gxf3 Be7 22.Rc1 Kf8 23.Na4
<Then came a period where neither player knew what to do, therefore Lasker, probably thinking that a whale has before now been caught with a sprat, amused himself by playing Kt-R4.>
<This is a triumph for the modern school, because it weakened the pawns. >
<At the 24th move it must have occurred to Black that he was playing minus his K B that had been resting on K B sq all the time, he therefore ventured on playing B-Q3.>
25.Rd1 Ne8 26.Nb5 Rd7 27.Bc2 Ke7
<Mr. Steinitz must have remembered that the modern school says "the King is a strong piece," he therefore played K-K2. >
<Black could not defend his RP and his timid bishop at the same time, so he gave up the exchange, and after extending his feeble resistance for over 20 moves, he resigned.>
His closing comment I have given already.
|Jun-07-18|| ||OrangeTulip: Mediocre players and Morphy fans giving their lowheels comments|
|Jan-06-19|| ||thegoodanarchist: <keypusher: Gunsberg's annotations. He really hated this game!|
<<Then came a period where neither player knew what to do, therefore Lasker, probably thinking that a whale has before now been caught with a sprat, amused himself by playing Kt-R4.>>>
Thanks for posting them, Scott. Gives me the opportunity to pronounce a general rule about chess annotations:
One shouldn't pay too much attention to chess annotations that use the word "sprat".
|Jan-06-19|| ||thegoodanarchist: < OrangeTulip: Mediocre players and Morphy fans giving their lowheels comments>|
Hi <OrangeTulip>! I found this in your bio:
<What a nice surprise you are reading this. Welcome! I’m Sicco Reeskamp and member since 2005 ( although the system thinks otherwise) Although my chess rating has not been above the 1600 yet, I really can appreciate a good game.>
So I guess you fall into the "Mediocre player" group, and your comment was meant to be autobiographical?
Personally, I am BOTH a mediocre player AND Morphy fan.
|Jan-11-19|| ||Check It Out: I am neither a mediocre player nor a Morphy fan. But lowheeled comments? You bet!|
|Jan-11-19|| ||ughaibu: Aha! Perhaps this explains the otherwise mysterious and apparently excessive value that Lasker so unashamedly purported to place on Mason's opinion.|
|Jan-12-19|| ||Penguincw: < iron maiden: ... Interesting stat: Lasker is the only player in chess history to win more than half of the games in an official WC match, and he did this five times: twice against Steinitz, twice against Janowsky and against Marshall in 1907. >|
Technically he only beat Janowski once (since they only played in 1 WCC match). ;)
But incredible stat.
|Jan-12-19|| ||Saniyat24: Two Knight's not the night...!|
|Jan-12-19|| ||thegoodanarchist: <Check It Out: I am neither a mediocre player nor a Morphy fan. But lowheeled comments? You bet!>|
<CIO>, What is your playing level, then?
|Jan-12-19|| ||Ilkka Salonen: Yeah, didn't Lasker's family pretty much perish in the holocaust? I mean that's what came to my mind about the pun. And Steinitz sort of went insane too. Maybe it came to my mind as I've been thinkig about darker side's of fates of people involved in chess as I learned about the deaths of cg founders too.|
|Jan-12-19|| ||keypusher: This is the game in which Lasker won the title he held for the next 27 years. <Call no man happy while he lives> and all that, but the pun seems ok to me.|
|Jan-12-19|| ||ChessHigherCat: <keypusher> Just as a side note, a much better translation is <Call no man fortunate while he lives> because I'm sure Croesus had a lot to keep him happy before he lost to Cyrus.|
|Jan-12-19|| ||Count Wedgemore: <CHC> "Deem no man happy, until he passes the end of his life without suffering grief" may be the more elaborate translation and even more in sync with Herodotus' intentions. He attributed the quote to Solon, but you're not wrong when mentioning King Croesus; it's from a conversation Solon had with the legendary king of Lydia (or so Herodotus claims, I wasn't around at the time, so I can't be 100% sure about the provenance).|
|Jan-12-19|| ||Check It Out: <tga> That was tongue-in-cheek. I'm a mediocre player with a good understanding of the game.|
|Jan-12-19|| ||Check It Out: And I love Morphy.|
|Jan-12-19|| ||Count Wedgemore: <Check It Out: <tga> That was tongue-in-cheek.>|
Unfortunately tongue-in-cheek is a foreign concept for that kibitzer..
|Jan-12-19|| ||cormier: |
click for larger view
Analysis by Houdini 4 <d 25 dpa done
1. + / = (0.33): 18...b6> 19.Ng5 Be8 20.Rxd8 Rxd8 21.Rd1 Rxd1 22.Bxd1 Bd6 23.Bb3 Kf8 24.Nge4 Nxe4 25.Nxe4 Bb8 26.a4 Bc6 27.f3 Ke7 28.a5 Bxe4 29.fxe4 Bd6 30.Bc3 Nf8 31.axb6 axb6 32.Kd3 Ne6 33.Be1 Nc7 34.Ba2
2. + / = (0.40): 18...Bc6 19.Rxd8 Rxd8 20.Ng5 Be8 21.Rd1 Rxd1 22.Bxd1 Bd6 23.Bb3 Kf8 24.Nd5 Bb8 25.Nxf6 gxf6 26.Ne4 Kg7 27.Nc3 f5 28.f3 f6 29.Nd5 Bd6 30.f4 Bc6 31.Kf2 Nf8 32.Ba1 Kg6 33.Kf3 h6
|Jan-12-19|| ||Check It Out: <Sargon: Inasmuch as there are 365 days in every year, I'm sure the game you linked to will make a fine Game of the Day at some point...>|
C Woojin Yoo vs L Cernousek, 2018
It has come to pass.
|Jan-13-19|| ||ChessHigherCat: <CW: That passage is one of my Greek textbooks:|
ὁ δὲ Κροῖσος τοὺς λόγους τοὺς τοῦ Σόλωνος (of Solon) τοῦ Ἀθηναίου ἐϕρόντιζεν· οὐδεὶς (no one) τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὄλβιος πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου.
Betts, Gavin. Complete Ancient Greek (Complete Languages) . Hodder & Stoughton. Kindle Edition.
Here's the author's note: Solon was an Athenian statesman who had visited Croesus and, in conversation with him, had enunciated the very Greek sentiment: Call no man happy before he dies (only then can a true and full judgement be made);
I still think "lucky/fortunate" would be a much better translation, because he must have been happy (=getting his rocks off) while he was the all-powerful king and he obviously can't be happy once he's dead, but you can tell whether he was favored by fate when you see how he ended up. I don't know about Norwegian but there's the same confusion between luck and happiness in German (Glück/glücklich) but there's a clear distinction in English.
|Jan-13-19|| ||keypusher: Don't forget, the pun/game title in question was "Happily Ever After." If I couldn't have used <happy> in my post, I wouldn't have bothered.|
Anyway, as long as we're wheeling out references, my Liddell & Scott gives "of persons, <happy>, <blest>". :-)
<I don't know about Norwegian but there's the same confusion between luck and happiness in German (Glück/glücklich) but there's a clear distinction in English.>
Then the Germans comprehend happiness better than we do.
|Jan-13-19|| ||ChessHigherCat: <Keypusher>:
<Anyway, as long as we're wheeling out references, my Liddell & Scott gives "of persons, <happy>, <blest>". :-)>
On the contrary, the reference I gave supports "happy" but I don't think it makes sense for the reasons I mentioned (for me happiness is a state of mind so you don't have to wait until somebody's dead to judge whether they were happy).
I just looked up the etymology of "happy" and it meant "lucky" in Middle English so I guess it's okay:
Middle English (in the sense ‘lucky’): from the noun hap1 + -y1.>
|Jan-13-19|| ||thegoodanarchist: <Count Wedgemore: <Check It Out: <tga> That was tongue-in-cheek.>|
Unfortunately tongue-in-cheek is a foreign concept for that kibitzer..>
Not true. You must take responsibility for when your "tongue-in-cheek" posts don't meet standards.
|Jan-13-19|| ||thegoodanarchist: <keypusher:
Then the Germans comprehend happiness better than we do.>
Because they can have beers for lunch when they are at work.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·