< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Dec-01-07|| ||patzer2: <Rather than looking for a better move at move 9 for black, I think the real question is at moves 5 and 6. 5. ... Ba5 is a good possibility> Most modern GMs would probably agree. Black did well to win with 5...Ba5 in I Kurnosov vs G Sargissian, 2005 and M Narmontas vs A Butnorius, 2007 for example, though White held the draw in a strong correspondence contest in M Umansky vs G Timmerman, 2005.|
Also solid is 5...Be7 as in Karjakin vs Beliavsky, 2005 or Michael Yeo vs S Haslinger, 2007.
|Dec-02-07|| ||Infohunter: <gauer: is the thread that wins the piece in the line after 4 ... Nxb4!? 5 Nxe5 Qf6 6 d4, and now if 6 ... Bxd4!? 7 Ng4!? Qc6 else Q-moves, c3!? 8 Bd5 Qxc2 9 Qxd4 Qxc1 10 Ke2 Qxh1 11 Qxg7 Nxd5 12 Qxh8 and being the pawn down doesn't add up to being down a piece? The white position doesn't seem to be preferred, but is there a quicker forcing loss than with the cornered Queen that I'm missing? Still learning...>|
If 7. Ng4, then Black need not move the Queen. He simply plays 7...Bxf2+ and after 8. Nxf2 replies with 8...Qxa1, winning.
|Dec-25-07|| ||gauer: Yes, black does win the piece back in my line as well, since even 7 Ng4 Qc6 8 Bd5 Qxc2 9 Qxd4 <Nd3!> had later been enough to convince me that white has nothing. My notes originally looked only at 6 ... Bb6 [the Bishop Try that Dickbrain later endorses in the other variation of an earlier post], with the above as unchecked computer lines. Still though, white had better be prepared to meet both Q-Kt-Pawn captures [as black - if he chooses to allow the Italian Game - can always transpose back to Normal Evans Gambit lines via Nxb4->Nc6 Opening Explorer - 6 0-0, 6 d4 likely lead to the unclear Normal position, or the less tested & low scoring 6 Qb3 ] & the Counter-gambit/Declined lines in the move-order above. Perhaps the original Capt. Evans move order with 0-0 before b4 really is the more correct improvement, if white has determined that he is not at least equalizing.|
|Feb-22-08|| ||wolfmaster: 18.? would be a good Wednesday puzzle.|
|Sep-02-08|| ||crafty: 13. d5 gxf6 14. dxc6 ♕xd1 15. ♖xd1 bxc6 16. ♖c1 (eval 2.83; depth 16 ply; 1500M nodes)|
|Sep-12-08|| ||just a kid: I played a game like this once up to Black's 16th move.If anyone wants to see it I posted in first in here(jessicafischerqueen chessforum)Then in my forum on page 5.|
|Jan-01-09|| ||WhiteRook48: anpther one that was called "Naval Intelligence"|
|Jan-07-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Evans played the Evans Gambit. Hmm.|
|Apr-14-09|| ||WhiteRook48: oh, not the movie!|
|Mar-31-11|| ||JoergWalter: Was this game ever played? What is the source of this game? All I find is an analysis in the "Neue Berliner Schachzeitung" from january 1864 giving the moves without reference.
Walker, Lewis and Staunton do not mention it in their works.
Well, I am not Perry Mason but one more fact raises doubt: in Chernev's "1000 best short games" you find a game (at odds of Sb1) Thorold - NN with the exact same moves except for blacks last move - but no mention of Evans vs. McDonnell from 1829.|
|Mar-31-11|| ||sneaky pete: Thorold vs NN, 1882 is now in this database too, of course without QN odds and maybe, or maybe not, with a wrong date. It wasn't when I tried to find the origins of this spurious Evans game some years ago.|
I believed then that 11.Re1+ .. came from Maroczy in his notes to Morphy vs T Lichtenhein, 1857, but apparently the move had been suggested before. By Max Lange maybe, who also edited a Morphy collection?
|Mar-31-11|| ||JoergWalter: sneaky pete, Chernev gives Yorkshire 1882 for the Thorold-NN game. 11.Re1 is charged to Löwenthal in the Schachzeitung.
Actually, in Staunton's handbook you find after ... 6.0-0 Nf6 7.d4 ed4 8.cd4 Bb6 9. e5 Ng8 "He appears to have no better defence, for if he play 9. P to Q's 4th, you take his Kt. and then check with your Rook;..."
Now, Staunton, Lewis and Walker knew Capt. Evans personally and they did not have this variation that marks 6. ... Nf6 as a mistake almost losing by force?
|Aug-13-11|| ||IRONCASTLEVINAY: you should not play evans against the player who has invented it|
|Dec-01-11|| ||Bishoprick: In recent times, didn't Kasparov play the Evans once or twice, with rather good results?|
|Jun-30-12|| ||e4 resigns: I remember a game with 11.d5, but IMO 11.Re1+ is better.|
|Oct-05-13|| ||Calli: This is game 263 in "Chess Sparks: Or, Short and Bright Games of Chess" http://books.google.com/books?id=oW...|
The book was published in 1895. There should be an earlier publication, but at least we can prove this game is not Evans vs McDonnell.
|Dec-24-13|| ||Oliveira: What do you mean, <Calli>? Who then were the players of this game?|
|Dec-24-13|| ||Oliveira: Whoever the players were this is a very nice miniature.|
|Dec-24-13|| ||Doniez: I didn't know the game, a fantastic miniature. And it was the gift I received for Christmas, so, Merry Christmas to all of you around the world! And lot of peace and harmony and chess!!!|
|Dec-24-13|| ||Calli: <Oliveira> I guess you didn't bother to look at the link. John Henry Ellis gives Thorold vs NN about 1882.|
|Dec-25-13|| ||Oliveira: <Calli>: Well, I did look at the link, but there's no preview of the book there.|
|Dec-26-13|| ||Calli: <Oliveira> Okay, If google blocks the book in your country, then I apologize for my remark.|
|Dec-26-13|| ||john barleycorn: I doubt that the above game is authentic.
the game at odds:
Thorold vs NN, 1882
the game looks like a reproduction of an analysis given by Guretky-Cornitz in 1864.
|Dec-26-13|| ||thomastonk: Maybe someone can consult Harding's "Eminent Victorian Chess Players"; in a review about this book I found "The author has included forty-three games – and two possible others – played by Captain Evans." |
This game is not only here, but also in Chessbase's Megadatabase, and so it is very likely that Harding has checked it, too.
|Dec-26-14|| ||Sargon: There's lots of Kibitzing about this NON-game. should it be deleted?|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·