< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
|Mar-17-14|| ||LIFE Master AJ: This is game # 91 in the Soltis book.|
|Apr-11-14|| ||Whitehat1963: I can't believe I've never seen this Tal brilliancy before. Is it me, or does Tal love to present his opponents with "simultaneity problems"? That is, "If you threaten this, I'll threaten something of yours that's even bigger, while at the same time giving you two targets to choose from, both choices being bad."|
|Nov-29-15|| ||Mehem: The marvellous combination that leads to nothing if met with 21... Ba6! Besides, Hecht's 21... Nxh4 wasn't bad either - he lost the (almost) equal endgame because he was the much weaker player than the freshly dethroned World Champ.|
|Jul-11-16|| ||clement41: Spectacular game, with a great number of zwichenzugs by Tal. 5 in a row (!) at moves 17 to 21, and (I love) moves 23-24 whereby white switch squares for his knight and bishop, and the attacked knight attacks via the c4 bishop the a6 bishop in a kindof desperado fashion; optimal use of the piece. 25 g3 brings about a (ghost) threat of ...Ng6 Nf5+ Kmoves Nxg7 Bxc4 Nh5+ (?) Etc.
There is a famous Korchnoi-Fischer game (1962, Curašao) where white is tactically outplayed by a tactic very similar to the idea of moves 23-24 (32 Rc1? Qa7! )|
|Aug-29-16|| ||offramp: This has previously been Game of the Day with the title Walking Tal.|
It's a brilliant game, although I think Tal was winging it. I mean the whole combination wasn't planned from A to Z, he had a speculative punt and managed to find a way through to a won ending.
In fact the game is fifty percent rook ending, but since Tal was very good at endings Hecht didn't have much of a chance.
|Aug-29-16|| ||Rubenchik: Tal, Genius.|
|Aug-29-16|| ||morfishine: And a special Brilliancy prize should be awarded to: <Davolni: WOW!!!!!!|
what a game... GOD!!!!
B E A U T I F U L!!!!!> for his infectious enthusiasm imparted while describing this game, combined with his keen ability to avoid using the worn-out and thoroughly trampled on adjective 'amazing'
|Aug-29-16|| ||kupton: Tal easily disposes of Mr Hecht in the 2 other games they played.|
|Aug-29-16|| ||kevin86: Poor black queen...no where to go!|
|Aug-29-16|| ||HaydenB: Amazing number of Tal brilliancies seem to end with the mushroom cloud parting only to reveal a stock won endgame.|
|Aug-29-16|| ||Eggman: This gem was never game of the day until now?? Gosh!|
It's a shame that Black didn't play on a few more moves, because the finish would have been quite pretty:
click for larger view
49...Rxg5 50.Kxg5 d3 51.g7 d2 52.g8/Q d1/Q 53.Qb3+, trading queens and winning the pawn ending!
|Aug-29-16|| ||Ironmanth: Agree with so many of the comments already here. A truly brilliant game. I kept saying, merely, "wow" throughout. Bravo, Misha!|
|Aug-29-16|| ||jith1207: Amazing!|
|Aug-29-16|| ||tonsillolith: <Whitehat1963: I can't believe I've never seen this Tal brilliancy before. Is it me, or does Tal love to present his opponents with "simultaneity problems"? That is, "If you threaten this, I'll threaten something of yours that's even bigger, while at the same time giving you two targets to choose from, both choices being bad.">|
In go they have a term for similar situations: <miai>. What it refers to precisely is two locations A and B on the board, so that if either one of the players plays at A, then the other will play at B, or vice versa, and each possibility has (roughly) equal result.
Often miai will remain on the board for many moves, since neither player has the need to collapse the wave function yet. Perhaps it's comparable to the tension present in a 2x2 square of 4th and 5th rank pawns in a chess game.
|Aug-29-16|| ||PawnSac: yes agreed. Game of day is great.
but whats with the player of the day? If someone is worthy enough to be player of the day, can't we dignify him/her with a picture?
shouldn't there be a rule?... one can't be made player of the day without a picture! I mean, if you contact said player and tell him you wish to honor him as "player of the day" i'm sure most would be willing to provide a photo.
|Aug-29-16|| ||morfishine: BTW: There's nothing "amazing" about this game. "Enchanting" yes....|
Sorry, as usual, a resounding: NO
|Aug-29-16|| ||newzild: I remember seeing this many years ago in Tal's book "Life and Games".|
It was just as astonishing today as it was back then.
I love the fact that Tal's extraordinary attack peters out into an endgame where he has a positional advantage (Black's weak pawns), which is nicely converted.
|Aug-30-16|| ||offramp: <Eggman: This gem was never game of the day until now?? Gosh!>|
Incredible isn't it? Never once before, apart from the time I mentioned.
|Sep-01-16|| ||Moszkowski012273: Black played most of this game quite well.....|
|Nov-05-17|| ||Andresiano: Why not 16... Qxc3?|
|Nov-06-17|| ||Nerwal: <Why not 16... Qxc3?> This looks possible but very risky. White has a choice between 17. ♘c4 (17... ♕xd3? 18. ♖d1 +-) and 17. ♗a6!?.|
|Nov-06-17|| ||RookFile: Black played a good game too. Very interesting game.|
|Nov-30-17|| ||Senk: Annotations by Hans-Joachim Hecht (in German) can be found in Helmut Pfleger's book "Partien deutscher Schachgro▀meister" (1983). Hecht's autobiography "Rochaden - Schacherinnerungen" (2015) has this game with comments by Hecht and Tal (also in German).|
|Oct-16-18|| ||jonjoseph: A very absorbing game but it was spoiled by the double moves when I pressed the play button and when I switched back to check what had happened there were some moves where 4 pieces jumped at once. Certainly not the way to see such a complicated brilliant game by Tal
Pieces moving in sync on distant parts of the board can lose the flavour of the game. The youtube version does not stop to consider when I do , but it resisted 4 piece moves at once .|
|Oct-18-18|| ||jonjoseph: When I looked to see if there was a Logic Puzzle to compare with Brexit it seemed to me that there is something equally illogical about too many references to computers when analysing Chess . It`s more about right and wrong (just like on an internet forum ) than appreciating the game as a human activity .Computers calculate millions of possible combinations and most of those combinations are wrong too .Humans can make a few mistakes in a 30 move game . A computer can make several million wrong moves and very fast so I don`t think I want to be a computer .|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·