< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
|Feb-13-13|| ||sfm: Incredibly with those people who believe that they have the ability to tell if the game wasn't really played, but an analysis.|
There is not a single authenticated first-hand statement quoted, not a suggested original game score. Just mere suspicion.
I think many of us could have found the last 6 white moves on an inspired day.
|Oct-19-13|| ||Eggman: Crud. I just thought of a pun for Game of the Day for A Bryntse vs G Osterling, 1968, but something told me I might be plagiarizing, so I Googled "Chessgames" and "Take My Wife", and sure enough I was led to this page. Oh, well, it suits this game much, much better anyhow.|
|Apr-23-14|| ||Rookiepawn: I have no idea about the authenticity of this game, but I don't think the combination is such an amazing thing.|
I'm a patzer, but this combination, as impressive as the chain of Q sacs may seem, is not really difficult to conceive. My point is that the entire sequence goes after a pretty straightforward aim, which is deviation of the back rank defenders. The first Q sac doesn't strike me as particularly obscure, and from there you cannot get lost.
So I think the game can perfectly be a real one from that point of view. It is also true that Mr. Torre seems not to be in a normal day.
|Apr-23-14|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Rookie...
The beauty of this game is the many lessons and patterns you are getting free all from one game.
Also the humour of it all, the White Queen throwing herself on the sword all over the board. You never forget it. All your future backrank mates, and may you have many, will stem from the ideas you picked up in this one game.
Fact or fiction - who cares?
Call it the Adams - Torre study.
|Apr-23-14|| ||Rookiepawn: Hi Sally...
While I still think it's kind of "easy" so to say (compared with those crazy ones of Tal, or Nezhmetdinov, for instance), you are very right in making me see it is indeed very curious, thanks :).
I knew the crazy tower endgame, but this is the crazy queen in the middlegame.
|Jul-08-14|| ||Romantichess: 20. ... De7
21. Qxc8 Rxc8
22. Rxe7 Bxe7
Black avoid mate, but is almost lost.
Also 22. ... Bd4 sacrifice seems a posible option.
That's All Folks!
|Apr-01-15|| ||Phony Benoni: A spurious game for April Fools Day.
You know, I don't care if the whole thing is analysis. That's a lovely finish.
|Apr-01-15|| ||newhampshireboy: What great fun! The white queen is the greatest in history! Thanks for this. Fake or real, it is a great departure from the ordinary!|
|Apr-01-15|| ||mruknowwho: The white king never really had a good relationship with his wife.|
|Apr-01-15|| ||piltdown man: An appropriate game for April 1st.|
|Apr-01-15|| ||morfishine: Of course it was "created", what-with master-strength Torre graciously letting unknown Adams enter Chess-lore with his "brilliant" play...|
Torre won the other "constructed" game, also a shorty: Carlos Torre vs E Z Adams, 1920
With 1 win apiece, their lifetime record is a Mexican standoff
|Apr-01-15|| ||Honza Cervenka: 15...Rc8 was a mistake, which got black into troubles. Black should have played 15...h6 16.Bh4 Qd7 17.Rae1 Bd8 or 15...Qd7 with 16...h6 after 16.Rae1. Instead of 17...Bxf6, which allows beautiful finish based on weak back rank, it was better to retake the piece with Pawn 17...gxf6, of course, with bad and maybe lost position anyway.|
|Apr-01-15|| ||Honza Cervenka: Btw, after 17...gxf6(!) Torre's suggestion 18.Rxe7 with idea 18...Rxe7 19.Rxe7 Qxe7 20.Qg4+ and 21.Qxc8 would be a mistake for 18...Qxe7! and the Queen cannot be taken for back rank mate to white (17...gxf6 18.Rxe7? Qxe7 19.Rxe7?? Rc1+ etc. But simple 18.g3 leaves black with bad Bishop and shattered Pawns in ending.|
|Apr-01-15|| ||Honza Cervenka: < Romantichess: 20. ... De7
21. Qxc8 Rxc8
22. Rxe7 Bxe7
23. Rxe7 >
After 20...Qe7 white can play 21.Rxe7 Bxe7 (what else?) 22.Rxe7 with back rank mates tactics still at work.
<Also 22. ... Bd4 sacrifice seems a posible option.>
Instead of 23.Nxd4, which is good enough for win, white can play also 23.b3 to prolong weak back rank grilling of black.
|Apr-01-15|| ||kevin86: I read that this is a contrived game between teacher and pupil. A good one for April Fool.|
White's queen is sacrificed six times; the last MUST be accepted!
|Apr-01-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: Let's not forget the pun. It is a famous "one liner" by the master of one liners, Henny Youngman|
Also, the culminating combination does appear in the "Encyclopedia of Chess Middlegames", also known as the black book.
However it is not listed in the index under Carlos Torre, nor even under Repetto. Since it has been some time since I studied from the black book, it will take me time to find it.
|Apr-01-15|| ||ADDADZ: I have ever seen.|
|Apr-01-15|| ||ADDADZ: After a long time A reporter asked Torre for the best game all time he replied this game
he loved chess|
|Apr-01-15|| ||scormus: whatever, the pun is worthy of the day|
|Jun-21-16|| ||johnkr: I'm in the "made-up game" camp. One thing that arouses suspicion is the turkey move 14...a5?. Either a6 or the much more logical 14...h6! avoid the forcing moves that follow; Fritz assesses as "=" (and a lot of folks might prefer Black's position after 14... h6 15 Bxf6 Bxf6).
Even so, this is a good lesson for everyone -- about bank-rank weakness!|
|Mar-13-17|| ||Duracell: Edward Winter is also in the "made-up game" camp. |
And I've a question here: should this game be removed of this database? Because, if we look at the pgn submission guidelines, there is the point 9:
9. No games of which the authenticity is questionable.
And the authenticity of this game IS questionable!
|Mar-13-17|| ||morfishine: This game is a fake, a complete fabrication, a construction, if you will|
With that said, it is instructive from the "back rank weakness" point of view
|Mar-13-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi All,
"9. No games of which the authenticity is questionable."
Evidence is pointing towards it was played but the Queen sacs were analysis. So keep it in. The Queen Sacs are analysis.
From Edward Winter's site:
'The Life and Games of Carlos Torre' by G. Velasco.
"...the game in fact was never played; rather the whole idea had occurred to Torre after analysing a skittles game."
If you read just the first part of the Edward Winter link you will see a photo-copy of the game with notes by Torre himself. (rare to find a loser submitting a game, not unheard of, but very rare.)
Note C after 15...Rc8.
click for larger view
"...White will now <demonstrate> in a manner that is masterly as is it pleasing. The coming moves are a <study>."
A demonstration...A study...? (Winter too query's the <study> thinking it is a clue. I've gone a bit further.
Now the note D after 17...Bxf6
"After 17...gxf6 18.Rxe7 But of course aside from this the game could not be held."
Some are reading this as Torre's mistake in analysis. Let's look at it if Black had played 17...gxf6.
click for larger view
18.Rxe7 Rxe7 19.Rxe7 Qxe7 20.Qg4+ spears the c8 Rook.
18.Rxe7 Qxe7!. White cannot take back on e7 because of Rc1+ mating.
Torre does not give any further analysis after 18.Rxe7 and his note:
"But of course aside from this the game could not be held."
Can be read as the only way Black can win or save the game is if White plays 18.Rxe7.
The main theory runs is that Adams lost the skittle game, Torre showed him how it could have been won.
It's not impossible to think that 17...gxf6 was played and Adams played 18.Rxe7 and Black played 18...Qxe7 and went onto to win.
Torre then showed Adams, or more likely discovered later, the win if he had played 17...Bxf6.
Would Torre have played 17...gxf6. Well he was a tricky player, this was skittles game and he liked to set traps v weaker players. 17...gxf6 does invite the blunder 18.Rxe7.
Is the blunder 18.Rxe7 a plausible blunder? Yes I've seen similar blunders in the same set up. And the blunder with the wrong analysis has gone into print from another author.
Chernev in "The Bright Side of Chess" gives the full faulty line. If 17...gxf6 18.Rxe7 Rxe7 19.Rxe7 Qxe7 20. Qg4+ winning the c8 Rook.
No mention of the 18...Qxe7 resource so Chernev fell for it....as well?
|Mar-13-17|| ||tpstar: <Duracell> This provision is taken to mean, "No <new> games of which the authenticity is questionable." People have tried to submit famous miniatures of the past as their own brilliancy.|
If this classic game was removed, someone would wonder where it was and submit it again. Then someone else would ask for it to be removed, etc. I believe "probably analysis" up top covers it.
Game Collection: The dirty dozen
|Mar-14-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi tpstar,
I'm with you, let us leave it in.
It is reading like it was a thank you from a great player to a player who he owed a great deal to. Torre as the loser published it.
I'm sure we can all go along with that and it's instructional value, including the 17...gxf6 variation and the trap which tripped up Chernev is priceless.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·