< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Nov-22-03|| ||FeArMySkiLLz: <Bears092> Its was a mistake..like people make All the time |
|Nov-22-03|| ||Eggman: <FeArMySkiLLz>: I don't believe that 27.Qxe2 was a mistake. Uhlman almost certainly saw what was coming, but he was lost anyway (e.g. 27.h4 Nh3+ 28.Kh2 Qxf1 29.f3 Bxf3) and decided upon what he thought was an artistic finish.|
<Bears092: "How can allowing your opponent to mate while down down the exchange and a queen undermine the beauty? Sheer madness.">
The ALLOWING is what undermines the beauty. Surely a forcing combination is, all other things being equal, far more beautiful than a sequence that isn't forced. As it stands the game ends with White PURPOSELY making the WORST move available (27.Qxe2), because it leads to a prettier finish than a better, but nonetheless losing move like 27.h4. What undermines the beauty is the precise fact that 27.Qxe2 is bad and unnecessary. This is why White should have just resigned.
And how can resigning in a position in which the opponent's Queen and Knight are hanging not be beautiful? Sheer madness.
|Nov-22-03|| ||thesonicvision: that's genius. |
|Nov-22-03|| ||Dick Brain: This problem isn't too tough if they tell you white to play and win. I'd miss it otherwise though. |
|Nov-22-03|| ||dalilama: yea dick brain, it was so easy to see whites win here right? I mean just look at how white dominates the game... |
|Nov-24-03|| ||kevin86: Sudden death |
|Nov-25-03|| ||Dick Brain: Ah dalilama yeah I meant black to play and win. That would be even better. |
|Feb-02-04|| ||Catfriend: <Eggman> Surely a quiet, non-forced move that wins 100% nontheless is better than a forced one-lined attack!|
|Feb-02-04|| ||Catfriend: <IMO> at least of course..
And if you"ll remember Taimanov vs Petrosian, 1953 ,♔f2!! is extremely appealing, isn't it?|
|May-14-09|| ||WhiteRook48: 27 Qxe2?|
|Jul-18-12|| ||Wyatt Gwyon: Black's 25th move would make a nice Wednesday or Thursday puzzle. Nice combo.|
|Jul-07-13|| ||wingpawn: Wow! White pieces never came out on time to do anything meaningful - especially his c1-Bishop. This attack was classy, though it was provoked by pointless White maneuvers starting with 7. ♕a4?. The final position reminds me of another brilliant game: Kotronias vs D King, 1990|
|Jul-07-13|| ||erimiro1: <aulero: Liebert played like Morphy> Yes indeed. Amazing how Uhlmann was paralyzed in most of the game. It seems that the concept of the pressure on c5 pawn, using the bishop on g2 as an X-RAY weapon was a result of a misjudgement. 10. b4 was horrible, and the white queen started to tour the world, while the black bishops started to show their power. Great game.|
|Jul-07-13|| ||moi: <drunkenknight> 16 Qxb8 ? Bb7 17 Qxf8+ Kxf8 because black has a huge attack against the white king (bishop+queen battery, black bishop and the f,g and h pawns!)|
|Jul-07-13|| ||morfishine: Libertarian:
1. a person who advocates liberty, especially with regard to thought or conduct
2. a person who maintains the doctrine of free will
|Jul-07-13|| ||Domdaniel: The idea that Uhlmann deliberately allowed his opponent to finish with a pretty mate doesn't really ring true. I've been an Uhlmann fan for years -- I got my basic French + English repertoire from him -- and he was always a tough competitor. I suspect that he was concentrating on the danger of ...Nf3+ and simply missed the mate on h3.|
Incidentally, the strongest reply to 27.h4 is ...Nf3+.
|Jul-07-13|| ||vsiva1: clean hole for Black's queen-bishop to attack White's King is a issue when White losses his king-bishop. It requires extra efforts as I have faced in my games. Whole issue is this, through attacking Rook, then making white to loose his king-bishop and finally winning.|
|Jul-07-13|| ||backrank: Another rather unknown old favorite of mine, which now finally has become GOTD.|
|Jul-07-13|| ||Abdel Irada: In which a bottle of ketchup thrashes a gang of wolves. ;-)|
Incidentally, I disagree with <Domdaniel>. Allowing so simple a mate strikes me as a way of resigning in a hopeless position while allowing one's opponent the glory of a pretty combination. Surely so strong a player is unlikely simply to have overlooked it.
In a G/90 game against a 2150ish player 14 years ago, much the same situation arose. I don't think my opponent overlooked the mate (which used exactly the same mating pattern); he allowed it to happen because the alternative was mere torture.
|Jul-07-13|| ||Gregor Samsa Mendel: Anyone ever ask Uhlmann whether he allowed himself to be mated deliberately? Even world champions have been to overlook mates in one.|
|Jul-07-13|| ||OhioChessFan: Yeah, Kramnik's loss to Deep Fritz came to mind. I could miss this once since I have a strange blindness sometimes to pieces a long way from the action, and could just forget about the a8 Bishop over in another county.|
|Jul-08-13|| ||Abdel Irada: <the a8 Bishop over in another county.>|
That bishop, staring balefully across the county line, could never have left Uhlmann's mind in such a situation. I suppose it's conceivable that he focused so intently on the ...Nf3† threat that he forgot that the knight could also go to h3, but this too seems unlikely.
To me his move spoke in clear tones of the old sportsmanship, most prevalent in the 19th century, when players who found themselves lost after a brilliancy would on purpose permit the intended victory in its most dramatic and picturesque form as a sort of tribute to their opponent's ingenuity: a matter of noblesse oblige.
That, at least, is what I like to think Uhlmann did here.
|Jul-08-13|| ||kevin86: White has gained a queen...oops!|
|Mar-25-17|| ||bkpov: What about 27. f3|
|Aug-12-17|| ||ALKINAN: < bkpov: What about 27. f3> you cant See Nh3+ Qxf1+ Nf2#|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·