|Dec-28-03|| ||talchess2003: vienna games are usually more peaceful :P this was pretty chaotic for the opening choice. |
|Dec-28-03|| ||talchess2003: there were many winning variations on move 14.. a few caught my eye but Steinitz's was most concise. |
|Dec-28-03|| ||kaptajn4: 15 sec that's all folks! |
|Dec-28-03|| ||Catfriend: <kaptajn4>
I'm sorry.. But I have to say it!
U continually bust about how swiftly u solve these puzzles.. (BTW I solved it absolutely immediately)
But the point is that
a) The puzzles aren't only for strong players (and I'm not...)
b) as <talchess2003> said somewhere, chessgames.com starts the week with an easy puzzle, emphasizing a sacing idea, and then raises the level, keeping that tactical motive
|Dec-28-03|| ||patzer2: Black got into trouble early in this game with the dubious 3...Bxg1?! 4. Rxg1 Qh4+, allowing White to develop and gain tempo with 5. g3 while chasing the Black Queen back to the first rank.|
Much better was quiet development with 3...d6 as in R Forster vs Smyslov, 1998 However, even with solid development Black must be careful not to get outplayed in the middle game as in McShane vs Koneru, 2003 since the Old Vienna still has some sting left in it.
|Dec-28-03|| ||talchess2003: yea black played horribly... but since this game was in 1891 we can cut him a little slack because back then the term "development" probably hadn't even been coined yet... |
|Dec-28-03|| ||kevin86: Black made three classic blunders in this game:
1 he captured two undeveloped pieces with his developed ones.
2 he stopped Steinitz from castling--big deal,with his aggressive king,did WS ever castle?
3 he went after pieces on the queenside,Steinitz went after black's king.
DELELOPMENT had been coined-Paul Morphy took advantage of his opponents lack thereof,but using gambits and attack!
The puzzles are made for fun and are not a speed exam. After all,tournament chess is most often played at an average allowance of nearly five minutes per move.
|Dec-28-03|| ||patzer2: <talchess2003> Development was well understood by 1891. Look at this Evans Gambit and notice how White scalped a future World Champion by sacrificing a pawn for development in J Mortimer vs Lasker, 1891 Lasker tries to give material back to develop his own pieces, but falls short due to a forced queen exchange for a winning passed pawn at the end. |
|Dec-29-03|| ||kaptajn4: Catfriend, if you don't have anything smart to say then don't. I'm sorry if I solve these puzzles more swiftly than you - that's life, get used to it!|
|Dec-29-03|| ||Catfriend: <kaptajn4> In fact, If u would read what I said, U'd see the opposite...
And I had the b)paragraph as the smart part...
Now for the smart part again: What about 4..Q:h2? It seems wierd but interesting
|Dec-29-03|| ||JungleBoy: against a player as strong as steinitz black was lost as early as 4. Qh4+. just look at the development after 5. Qe7. |
|Jul-21-06|| ||Longbrow: <patzer2> Thanks for highlighting J Mortimer vs Lasker, 1891.|
|Jul-21-06|| ||thesonicvision: this....was not very impressive.
also, it's instructional value is
pretty low for any player above 1400.
after 6. fxe5 black can resign due
to a SEVERE lack of development.
i'm surprised hodges played so poorly
here, considering who he was facing.
i would imagine he would rise to the
occassion and play his best against
the famed original chess champ.
i should note that hodges was a
very strong player in his own right, as a "many times Champion of the Manhattan Chess Club."
|Mar-10-12|| ||Phony Benoni: A minor point: this game was actually played at Lexington, Kentucky, during the 4th Congress of the USA Chess Association in early August, 1891. Steinitz played and won two simultaneous blindfold games, his other opponent being Abel Edward Blackmar.|