|Sep-02-07|| ||Phony Benoni: An enjoyable game, in which Bronstein makes Black's pieces look like idiots. In particular, the rooks distinguish themselves by doing nothing but shuffle around the back two ranks. It gets so bad that Bronstein refuses to win the exchange just so Black will have to keep them.|
|Sep-25-11|| ||Everett: Bronstein eschewed his oft-used strategy of shedding material vs computers <in order to throw off their evaluations>, and instead gets out of book relatively quickly with 4.Qb3, wins a pawn and positionally destroys his opponent.|
If 20..Qc7, White has 21.e5 followed by a4, highlighting the N's lack of squares.
34.Ne7! is an effective in-betweener, gaining time and preventing a central past pawn for Black. After 36.Rd3, Black pieces are all terribly placed <looking like idiots> as <PhonyBenoni> astutely observes.
Black's loss can be blamed on the waste of time and loss o harmony of N and Q on the Q-side.
|Apr-04-14|| ||offramp: Dark and Deep were sisters.|
|Apr-04-14|| ||ajile: This was before computers became strong. I doubt this same result happens much if at all nowadays.|
|Apr-04-14|| ||RookFile: Shot in the Dark - the first Pink Panther movie. :)|
|Apr-04-14|| ||al wazir: Doesn't 22. Nd6 win immediately?
If 22...Qa5, then 23. Nxb7. If 22...Qb6, then 23. d5 c5 (23...Qb4 24. Bc5) 24. Nc3 Qa5/Qa6 25. d6.
|Apr-04-14|| ||moi: what is wrong with 26...Nxc8 ?|
|Apr-04-14|| ||Eduardo Leon: <al wazir> 22.♘d6 ♕b6 23.d5 c5 24.♘c3 ♕xb6, me thinks. Maybe 22.♘d6 ♕b6 23.a5 ♕b4 24.e5 ♗xd6 25.♖a4 was worthy of consideration, but IMO Bronstein was justified in trying to give up less material in exchange for Black's queen.|
|Apr-04-14|| ||Eduardo Leon: <al wazir> Sorry, I meant 24...♕xd6, not 24...♕xb6.|
|Apr-04-14|| ||moodini: "A Shot in the Dark" was the first Pink Panther film that was based only on Clouseau. There was a film before it, the surprisingly named "The Pink Panther", which gets forgotten (because it was not based only on Clouseau).|
I suggest you count your bees, you may find that one of them is missing.
|Apr-04-14|| ||Jim Bartle: When it came out "A Shot in the Dark" was definitely regarded as a sequel to ""The Pink Panther."|
|Apr-04-14|| ||siggemannen: Great Ozzy song :P|
|Apr-04-14|| ||kevin86: Black is tied down like Gulliver. BTW, was Gulliver the last "big man" ever called for traveling? lol|
|Apr-04-14|| ||RookFile: "The Pink Panther" - is that the one with David Niven?|
|Apr-04-14|| ||Jim Bartle: Niven, Robert Wagner, Claudia Cardinale.|
|Apr-04-14|| ||al wazir: <Eduardo Leon: Sorry, I meant 24...Qxd6, not 24...Qxb6.> And *I* meant 24. Nc4, not 24. Nc3. After 24. Nc4 there is no white piece on d6, so no capture is possible. If 24...Qd6, then 25. Nxd6. |
Here is the corrected analysis: 22. Nd6 Qb6 (22...Qa5 23. Nxb7) 23. d5 c5 (23...Qb4 24. Bc5) 24. Nc4 Qa5/Qa6 25. d6. But I completely overlooked 22...b5, which may not be save black but at least is complicated.
|Apr-04-14|| ||JointheArmy: Cannot believe Bronstein was 72 (!) when he slaughtered Dark Thought (not to be confused with Deep Thought).|
|Apr-04-14|| ||BOSTER: <PB> <Bronstein makes Black's pieces look like idiots>.
In 1996 computers didn't have the feeling, and it means that Dark Thought could not answer you.
Today they can.
But even in 1992 year Bronstein lost the game vs Deep Thought II.
This is the final position where white king was checkmated.
click for larger view
So, please respect computers.
|Apr-04-14|| ||gars: What surprised me most was taking 22 moves to develop his Queen Knight to c3!
From then on it seems to be a positional masterpiece.|
|Apr-04-14|| ||Willber G: <al wazir:
Here is the corrected analysis: 22. Nd6 Qb6 (22...Qa5 23. Nxb7) 23. d5 c5 (23...Qb4 24. Bc5) 24. Nc4 Qa5/Qa6 25. d6.
What about 24. Bxc5 Qa5 25. b4
|Apr-04-14|| ||al wazir: <Willber G: What about 24. Bxc5 Qa5 25. b4> Yep, that works. So black has to play 22...b5. Somebody else can analyze that; I seem to be error-prone.|
|Apr-05-14|| ||Mendrys: With all due respect <BOSTER> blacks pieces are reduced to a laughable level of ineffectiveness in this game. That being said, Bronstein did lose a lot of games against computers back then. He like to probe their weaknesses and their strengths as well and would often willfully get into positions that others avoided against computers.|