< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·
|Nov-09-11|| ||leonie: thank you. what would your recommendation be. which games to start with italian opening? thank you agiain.|
|Nov-10-11|| ||JoergWalter: 25 Rxh7+.
‘But Bardeleben didn’t resign. He stared at 25 Rxh7+, shot a glance at Steinitz, and without a word got up from his chair and left the room. He didn’t come back. Tournament officials searched and found Bardeleben pacing angrily. No, he wouldn’t return to the board so that outrageous Austrian could mate him.
So Steinitz had to wait for Bardeleben’s time to run out before he could claim the win. Not only claim it – he demonstrated the final ten-move mate and the crowd cheered.’
Well, and this is a professional chess video. The girl has a pleasant voice, narrates well, gets the names right etc. etc.
|Nov-10-11|| ||Marmot PFL: <JoergWalter> That was Soltis's version, who of course wasn't there. Winter's article has several diverging accounts.|
One thing they got right was Steinitz claiming that "God almighty couldn't give me pawn and move", rather than claiming he could give God such odds, as so many other writers do incorrectly.
|Nov-11-11|| ||Domdaniel: <Marmot> Yes, Winter's research seems to demonstrate conclusively that (a) 25.Rxh7+ was played, after which Von Bardeleben left the hall, and (b) Von Bardeleben's "offence" was not thought scandalous at the time (and if anyone had a nose for scandal, it was the Victorians).|
His walk-out was, he claimed, a protest against the cheers and applause which had followed victories in earlier rounds. Note that Von Bardeleben was leading the tournament before this game, so that at least part of his problem was the applause that he himself had received for his wins. The organizers agreed, and took steps to enforce silence.
Nor does Steinitz appear to have been annoyed. He waited 50 minutes, claimed a win on time, and demonstrated a mating line to the crowd.
It is true that Von B's protest was also motivated by a dislike of Steinitz, and a desire to avoid giving him the 'satisfaction' of resignation.
I imagine he was in a state of turmoil and distress -- think of Ivanchuk kicking the wall not so long ago. But the 'scandal' of chess folklore is a myth.
Winter's description is apt:
<The author of that apparent exercise in imagination, simultaneously fertile and sterile, is A. Soltis (The Great Chess Tournaments and Their Stories, pages 67-68).>
|Nov-11-11|| ||JoergWalter: <Domdaniel>
v. Bardeleben was from a wealthy family. he was also known to be arrogant and "stylish" - he had a courier to get his butter from a particular deli in Berlin. And his surrender to Steinitz was allegedly delivered by his messenger boy.
BTW, the girl is annotating chess games only as second job - she is more into the field of navigation systems. "in 100 m turn right"
|Nov-11-11|| ||Domdaniel: <Joerg> Navigation systems, eh? I've heard of them. I could say something about easing back on the joystick - technical talk, I believe, among navigators - but I won't.|
|Nov-11-11|| ||Domdaniel: In the end, the jokes, puns, flames and counterflames will fade away. The irruptions by idiots and miscellaneous extrusions of ego will weather into the landscape.|
The game remains an astonishing work of art. Not just one of the finest combinations on record, with a beautiful aesthetic power, but one of the great human statements of defiance in the face of time and fate. I rank it with anything by Leonardo or Goethe or Shakespeare: the King Lear of chess games, the Gioconda of the Giuoco.
|Nov-12-11|| ||Domdaniel: <Ohio> I recently figured that what CG needed was some kind of sandpit or virtual play area -- a well-shielded romper room where those so inclined could thump each other with inflatable hammers ...|
Aha, each *other*. To some of these aggressive types, the enemy is the Other. So what we need is an Other Containment Facility ... an OCF, in fact.
Then I remembered we already had one. Not that I'd suggest anyone should use your place for fighting with inflatable hammers.
|Nov-12-11|| ||OhioChessFan: http://www.threestooges.com/news/im...|
|Nov-12-11|| ||Domdaniel: Curly, Larry and Moe were among my childhood heroes. And more mature than certain 'internet people' ...|
How do you find such appropriate pics?
|Nov-29-11|| ||IRONCASTLEVINAY: all the whites pieces are under attack|
|Dec-17-11|| ||Penguincw: The final position, I think.
click for larger view
|Mar-01-12|| ||shepi13: Why do people keep saying that c6 was a bad move in earlier pages. It prevents Qxe7 Qxe7, Rxe7, Kxe7, Rxc7+, K moves, Rxb7, when white has two pawns for the exchange and should win more. I think it is only bad because of d5, which he couldn't have predicted.|
|Apr-09-12|| ||shakespeare: from move 16 on it went downhill - Kf7 going out of the pin with an almost equal position but c6 gives white the opportunity to open lines for his rooks - bad positional mistake|
|Mar-14-13|| ||IndigoViolet: Does anyone know what the time control at this event was?|
|Mar-14-13|| ||thomastonk: <IndigoViolet: time control> I quote from the tournament book: "Thirty moves for the first two hours, and fifteen moves per hour afterwards."|
|Mar-14-13|| ||FISCHERboy: <shepi13: Why do people keep saying that c6 was a bad move in earlier pages.> |
It makes sense (Qxe7 Qxe7, Rxe7, Kxe7, Rxc7+, K moves, Rxb7 plus winning two pawns.)
|Aug-12-13|| ||LIFE Master AJ: My (updated) web page for this game:
My new "You-Tube" video for this game:
|Aug-13-13|| ||JoergWalter: <LIE Master AJ: My (updated) web page for this game>
<15. Qe2!?, (Maybe - '!')
Is this the most aggressive here?
Kasparov questions this ... but his analysis is based on old analysis that was done by Igor Zaitzev. (But I have punched holes in that work.) [ Interesting is: 15.Qa4+!?, " " - Soviet Master, Igor Zaitzev. ]. >
<Nov-02-11 JoergWalter: Geller found the correct continuation 16.Ne5 to Zaitsev's 15.Qa4+ on the train Moscow to Murmansk 11-24-1983. Mainline: 15.Qa4+! Kf7 16.Ne5+! fxe5 17.Rxe5 Qd6 18.Qc4+! Kf8 19.Rae1 Ng8 20.Rd5 Qc6 21.Qb4! etc. (see also the Mammoth Book of The World's Greatest Chess Game >
<... But Nunn is also a hypocrite... >
So much for the "update" which happened according to your website
<Game first posted on my web site, March 28th, 2002.
(Last updated August 25th, 2003.)>
|Aug-13-13|| ||MarkFinan: This is so clever and smart especially the last few moves with the rook, and all the different lines to look at with whites rook being on c1, but how does 14.Re1 deserve an exclam when its the most natural looking move to anybody rated 1200+?? I wouldn't contemplate any other move.|
|Aug-21-13|| ||JoergWalter: From the tournament book:
<This day sees Steinitz at his best. His game v. Bardeleben is a
gem of the first water (afterwards awarded first prize for sound
brilliancy), and the final picture is a chef-d'auvre of an old
Notes by Dr. Tarrasch.
- Kt, ch, Q x Q ; 18. R x Q, ch,
K X R ; 19. R X P, ch, followed by R x Q Kt P, and Black has still a
prospect of a draw.
[7. Nc3]' This move is mentioned by Greco, and Steinitz has again recommended
it in his ' Modern Chess Instructor' ; this variation was also
played by him against Schlechter in this Tournament.
[7....d5]' Schlechter here played Kt x K P, which is the correct move,
following it up : 8. Castles, B x Kt ; 9. P x B, P to Q 4 ; 10. B to R 3
(Steinitz's ne *r move, on which the whole variation depends), B to K 3
II. B to Kt 5, Kt to Q 3, with an equal game.
[9....Be6]3 If Kt (or B) X Kt ; 10. P x Kt, B x P, White gets a dangerous
attack by 1 1. B x P, ch, K x B ; 12. Q to Kt 3, ch, &c.
[10.Re1]* The point of all the exchanges, as by this move White obtains
command of the board, prevents Black from Castling, and initiates a
most powerful attack on the King.
[16....f6]^ It would have been preferable to play the K to B 2, as White
had then nothing better than 17. Q >
[17.d5]" A nice sacrifice of a Pawn, making way for the Knight to powerfully
strengthen the attack.
[22.Rxe7+]' Here begins a grand combination. (See diagram.)
[22....Kf8]* The position is most interesting, all the White Pieces being en
prise. If K X R, then follows 23. R to K sq, ch, K to Q 3 ; 24. Q to
Q Kt 4, ch, K to B 2 ; 25. Kt to K 6, ch, K to Kt sq ; 26. Q to K B 4,
ch, and wins.
[25.Rxh7+]" The checks by the Rook are delightful, as Black cannot take
with King or he loses his Queen with a check, nor can he take with
Queen or he is mated.
[10 For now if K to Kt sq, Mr. Steinitz (at the time) demonstrated
the following brilliant and remarkable mate in ten moves :
26 R to Kt 7, ch K to R sq (or if
K to B sq ; 27. Kt to R 7,
27 Q to R 4, ch K X R
28 Q to R 7, ch K to B sq
29 Q to R 8, ch K to K 2
30 Q to Kt 7, ch K to K sq
31 Q to Kt 8, ch K to K 2
32 Q to B 7, ch K to Q sq
33 Q to B 8, ch Q to K sq
34 Kt to B 7, ch K to Q 2
35 Q to Q 6, mate.]>
(the moves 7, 9,14, 16, 17, 22 and 25 in [...] were inserted by me)
The complete tournament book can be downloaded here:
|Dec-16-13|| ||MarkFinan: If there's a forced mate in 10 at the position black resigned, my engine can't find it! Got to a depth of 36plys and gives white +13.20. Strange.|
|Dec-21-13|| ||maverickx: it says the mate can only be averted by ruinous loss of material; analysis follows: ...Kh8 25. Rxh7+ Kg8 26. Rg7+ Kh8 27. Qh4+ Kxg7 28. Qh7+ Kf8 29. Qh8+ Ke7 30. Qg7+ Ke8 31. Qg8+ Ke7 32. Qf7+ Kd8 33. Qf8+ Qe8 34. Nf7+ Kd7 35. Qd6#|
|Jan-13-14|| ||CblP: I'm a bit newbie in chess, but why not 22.. Ke7 or Qe7? Don't see the reason after several minutes of deep thinking... What's the trick?|
|Jan-13-14|| ||keypusher: <CblP>
22....Kxe7 23.Re1+ Kd6 24.Qb4+ Kc7 25.Ne6+ Kb8 26.Qf4+ (from JoergWalter's post)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·
A free online guide presented by Chessgames.com