< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Sep-18-11|| ||Whitehat1963: Monday puzzle after 47...Qd6.|
|Oct-07-11|| ||lostgalaxy: How did he do that?|
|Dec-31-11|| ||sevenseaman: A most telling Q sac!|
|Dec-31-11|| ||newzild: Fantastic notes by Capa, although I'm puzzled by the note to his 27th move. Why did White "get rid of his queenside pawns"? Presumably he thought them to be a target, or he wanted to open the position for his bishop, but neither of these explanations is convincing for me.|
|Dec-31-11|| ||andrewjsacks: Right, newzild, it's probably the latter; but Capa might have mentioned it...|
|Dec-31-11|| ||Oceanlake: Wikipedia gives background for the match.
IMVHO, Capablanca at his best was the slightly superior to Lasker at his best as a match player In tournaments, the reverse was true.
|Dec-31-11|| ||FSR: <Oceanlake> Yes, Capablanca was a <brilliant> match player. Who can forget all of his brilliant defenses of his world championship title? Oh wait, there weren't any. In his 1927 match against Alekhine, he managed to lose six times as many games to Alekhine as Lasker did in his life. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches...|
|Dec-31-11|| ||arnaud1959: Is the pun referring to "Tommy / The Who"?|
|Dec-31-11|| ||JimmyRockHound: The pun is from a Frank Sinatra song. From the line: "When I was 21, it was a very good year...".|
|Dec-31-11|| ||King Death: <arnaud1959> I don't know but the song was a good one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoW_...|
|Dec-31-11|| ||Once: Sinatra, surely. A fabulous game, fascinating (if not always 100% accurate) annotations, a good pun, some silly kibitzing.|
I'd say that was good value.
|Dec-31-11|| ||erniecohen: I'm wondering whether Black could have saved the game with 43...h6, e.g . 44. g2 b5 45. xe6 xd4 46. f5 c4 47. e8 c6+ 48. xc6 xc6:
click for larger view
Can black hold this?
|Dec-31-11|| ||Penguincw: Nice game by Capablanca.|
|Dec-31-11|| ||WannaBe: <<<ANNOUNCEMENT>>> The Annual Caissar Award will commence soon. This is a long CG.com tradition that was started in 2004 by <Nikolaas>. As usual, we will have our regular 11 categories, ranging from serious to the silly, possibly absurd.|
<Best Avatar - Non James Cameron Category>, <Best Profile>, <Best Game Collection>, <Best Historian>, <Best Username/Handle>, <Best Written Post>, <Funniest Kibitzer>, <Most Constructive>, <Best Informed>, <Most Helpful>, <Best Analysis - Non Silicon/Computer Category>
So, please take a moment this weekend, while you are passed out (or recovering) from champaign, to consider who should deserve a nomination.
Who have written some of the most thoughful posts, which member have helped (you) out the most when you posed that 'What happens if 25...Rxd4'?
Who have been most constructive in helping/improving CG.com's community, recommending new feature(s) to the admins.
|Dec-31-11|| ||MyDogPlaysChess: <danderie>, when <perfidious> wrote his remark, he didn't have <DrMal>'s supporting evidence. The Rybka analysis followed his not very diplomatic remark.|
Second, the methodology - presenting a starting and ending point in a game, 28 moves is large gap, gives room for possibilities in between. I found the games strategic ideas instructive. This is a battle between two classical giants. They were making theory at the time, some of which we feed today to Rybka in it's opening book.
As a weaker player than many, <DrMal> included, I find comments like <16. To prevent c5, either now or a later stage. There is no Black bishop and White’s whole plan is based on that fact. He will attempt, in due time, to place a knight on d6.> instructive. It is something that a tool like RYbka won't ever help me understand.
I couldn't help to notice that <DrMal> statements that <very little was accomplished during the next 28 moves>, on a game with 48 moves, and <Capa's annotation at move 13 may not be charming but it is certainly accurate. It is one of the few that is> contrasts with you statement that <This the 11th game is an absolute gem in every way>
The fact that Rybka and other engines exists have changed chess preparation forever. In spite of their many uses, we won't ever remember all of their advise and play them over the board. At the end, we have to integrate their analysis into theory and abstraction that we can remember and use. It is not simply "egos" or "human stupidity"; it is chess at the very top as expressed by Anand, Kramnik and many other GMs. I expect Rybka and lesser engines to find mistakes in both book analysis (I love to run engines against older book analysis!) and game played by the cream of chess - the Kasparov, Botvinnik, Karpov, Fischer, Tal, Korchnoi, etc. It often gets me lost too, specially when learning from a pragmatic Lasker, or understanding a move within the context of a tournament or match development, where the player goal plays a large role.
I wouldn't dare to analyze one of my games without an engine. One last remark: in response to several after the game analysis Fischer used to remark, "yeah, but could you have found it over the board?"
|Dec-31-11|| ||AVRO38: Great game, great match! It's easy to get drawn into the "who was better" debate, but such a debate is pointless in my opinion. |
To me, Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine are equal in strength and in a class by themselves. When they faced each other in 1921 and 1927 the younger man won, as is natural in a long match between two equal talents.
Rather than bemoan all the "what if" matches in chess history, like Fischer-Karpov for example, I'm just extremely grateful that the two ultimate dream matches actually DID happen! i.e. Lasker-Capablanca, and Capablanca-Alekhine. Those two matches not only represent chess at the highest level, but chess at the highest level possible.
Happy New Year!
|Dec-31-11|| ||nathanschulz: <arnaud> that's what I thought too! Got a feeling '21 is gonna be a good year.|
|Dec-31-11|| ||King Death: <MyDogPlaysChess> If you read what <perfidious> said, he might have been taking issue with <DrMAL>'s comment at the end that "Morphy would have clobbered them both." Maybe he or she got a little hot about the rest, but I don't agree with the Morphy statement either even though I respect <DrMAL>'s analysis and contributions a whole lot.|
You say that you wouldn't dare to analyze one of your games without an engine. I have to admit I don't have one but what's the fun in relying on the engine for all of its input? It seems like it would take away from the process of learning unless you had enough understanding of the game.
|Dec-31-11|| ||AlphaMale: Clobber is a vernacular English term for clothes, so I like to think pretty boy Morphy would indeed have pawned Capa and Lasker in the sartorial stakes.|
|Dec-31-11|| ||Oceanlake: I wrote "...Capablanca at his best...."
I don't think he was at his best in 1927, nor, from later history, did Alekine.
|Jan-03-12|| ||kevin86: The fee for Qxf8 is immediate mate.Capa talks a good game as well as he plays it.|
|Mar-17-12|| ||Norbi506: 25. Nxe8
"This Bishop had to be taken, since it threatened to go to h5, pinning the Knight."
The bishop is doing absolutely nothing... Pinning the night had to be a big plan in blacks counterplay = LOL
|Mar-17-12|| ||ephesians: If black can get the bishop to h5 and chop on f3, it undermines white's control of e5. White's control of e5 is his trump in this postion.|
|Mar-17-12|| ||whithaw: This is a beautiful, beautiful game... Extremely clear play.|
|Mar-18-12|| ||Norbi506: You are probably right. Maybe that tempo on the Q (23.Ndb) was the issue. The pin shouldnt be a problem for Capa.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·