< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jun-01-05|| ||Shams: <iron maiden> not sure, but 17...Rg8 18.Rxh7+ Qxh7 19.Qxf6+ is very interesting. black can force the queens off (or white may have a perpetual?) but white looks like he gets 4 pawns and play for the rook.|
|Jun-01-05|| ||iron maiden: Instead of Rxh7+, which allows Black at least a perpetual, White can pull back the queen and then put all the major pieces on the h-file.|
|Jun-01-05|| ||Shams: pull her back where? black threatens to play Bc6-e8-g6, and white needs several moves to treble the heavy pieces. |
you have judged the 4 pawns for the rook insufficient, I take it?
|Jun-01-05|| ||mack: 6.c5 is appalling though.|
|Jun-01-05|| ||iron maiden: Without the queens on the board, yes. <pull her back where?> Maybe to e4 to keep watch on the e-pawn? That way if Lasker wants to bring the B to g6, White gets at least three pawns for the piece.|
|Jun-01-05|| ||Shams: 17...Rg8 18.Qe4 Be8 19.Qxe6 (19.Bxe6?? Bg6 ) ...Qxe6 20.Bxe6 Rxg3 and two white pawns hang. you need to find an improvement for white's 19th, I think.|
|Jun-01-05|| ||Boomie: 17...g8 leads to a playable game, but not with 18...e8?, which fails miserably.|
17... g8 18. h6 g7
(18... e8? 19. d3 xg3
(19... g4 20. e2 g7 21. xh7+ xh7 22. xh7+ g8 23. xc7 g7 24. xg7+ xg7) with 5(!) pawns for the piece.
20. f3 g7 21. g4 f7 22. g5 e7 23. h2) and the attack on the h-file cannot be stopped.
This line gives one answer to the question "Why a5"?
19. f3 a5 20. d3 a4 21. dg1 b3+ 22. b1 d8 23. g4 xc5 24. c4 xg4 25. dxc5 c6 a1 a5 27. e2 g7 28. xg7+ xg7 29. h6 g6 30. xg6 hxg6 31. g4
|Aug-03-05|| ||dac1990: This game should go into that "Picteresque Positions" collection as the "flying v" of pawns.|
|Aug-04-05|| ||iron maiden: Unfortunately that collection probably won't be added to in the near future.|
|Nov-30-05|| ||KingG: This is a fantastic game by Steinitz. Who said that Queen's Gambit Declined had to be boring? It's a shame that Capablanca and Alekhine didn't take a leaf out of Steinitz's book for their match.|
|Nov-30-05|| ||Guest1825: If lightning, blitz terms are used for games faster than 40 minutes. What do they call games that take 8 hours to finish: Steinblitz, Lightninglasker?|
|Jun-03-06|| ||shutupimthinking: At the risk of sounding foolish: is the sac 10...Nxd4 playable? After 11.exd4 Qxd4 12.Be3 Qe5 black threatens f5, but after 12. Bxc7 I'm not so sure. Can someone give me a solid refutation?|
|Jun-03-06|| ||beatgiant: <shutupimthinking>
<After 11.exd4 Qxd4 12.Be3 Qe5 black threatens f5>
After the above, White has 13. Ne2 preventing f4 and in turn threatening Bd4. It looks like White is on top there.
|Jun-03-06|| ||shutupimthinking: <beatgiant>
|Jul-10-08|| ||AAAAron: Steinitz harnessess all of his deep down power from the midst of his beard. And a swell beard it is indeed.|
|Sep-07-09|| ||WhiteRook48: the revenge of steinitz|
|Nov-10-09|| ||timothee3331: Ne4?? is the decisive mistake and it has been proved since Tarrasch-Von Scheve.
After N takes pawn takes, the plan is to attack e4 with the pieces so to force f5 and then play f3 to open the g-file.
Then the sacrifice played by Steinitz is nice.|
|Mar-11-10|| ||keypusher: <timothee3331: Ne4?? is the decisive mistake and it has been proved since Tarrasch-Von Scheve. >|
Don't believe everything you read. When I was just starting out, someone played ...Ne4 against me in a position like this. I knew about Tarrasch-Scheve, so I figured the game was in the bag...I got crushed. And ...Ne4 is still very much with us.
The funny thing is, in this game Lasker's "blunder" is preceded by Steinitz' c4-c5 -- and there are books that make that move sound like a decisive error too. But what do Steinitz and Lasker know? They're only the first and second world chess champions.
|Oct-07-10|| ||igiene: "Don't believe everything you read".
A very wise advice.
|Oct-07-10|| ||igiene: 4..Be7 is probably too slow after 4.Bf4, while is good after 4.Bg5. Perhaps is better 4..c5 to stop c5-advance by White, as suggested by Nunn|
|Feb-02-11|| ||timothee3331: Well actually do not believe I am the one to believe everything I read. But clearly in this instance, the plan developped by Tarrasch applies straightforwardly. Strange you did not say a word about it, that was supposed to be the point of my comment....|
And if you had studied the classics a little more, you would know that c5 has often been played and from very long ago when Black had already played a6... So here it may be an experiment, a strategic risk by Steinitz: Try the same structure in a less favourable instance
|Feb-02-11|| ||timothee3331: Then Of course if somebody is stupid enough to believe that White is winning for instance in the Lasker Defence or some other serious opening where the very same move occurs, that is another story...|
|Sep-23-11|| ||Kasparovsky5: Steinitz had: 28.Bxh7 (Threatening:29.Bg6+,Kg8.30.Rh8#),Re7. 29.Be4+,Kg8.30.Rh8+,Kf7.31.R1h7+,Ke8.32.Bg6+,Rf7-
|Mar-24-12|| ||LoveThatJoker: Guess-the-Move Final Score:
Steinitz vs Lasker, 1896.
YOU ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF STEINITZ.
Your score: 65 (par = 53)
|Mar-28-12|| ||Anderssen99: LoveThatJoker: Find a good line for Black after: 28.Bxh7! .|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·