|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Apr-07-09
 |
| stoy: What authority assigns names to variations of openings? Perhaps the readers & commentators might have better suggestions. |
 |
Apr-07-09
 |
| savuflorin1983: <andymac: I am sure I am missing something, but what about 21. ... Qf8? If 22. Qh5+ Nh6 and 23. Nf7 no longer works because the Knight can recapture after 23. ... Qxf7 24. Qxf7> 21. ...Qf8 22.g4! or 21. ...Qf8 22.Qg6! |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| braimondi: Barcelona 1935 · Caro-Kann Defense: Karpov. Modern Variation Kasparov Attack ?? How it's possible ?? |
|
Apr-07-09
 |
| kevin86: I love this one: a smothered-type mate is in the works-as the knights surround black's king like a bunch of snakes.
IF...
21... xf7 22  xf7# or if 21...(on diagonal-a4,b5,c6)22 g8+  xg8 23 f7# |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| darook: <braimondi> I guess its Kasparov & Karpov from a parallel universe!.
But seriously, it's just a modern categorization of the opening\variation, nothing more. |
|
Apr-07-09
 |
| Once: There is little rhyme or reason to the naming of chess openings. You say Spanish, I say Ruy Lopez, let's call the whole thing off. But I suppose that chess is not unique in this. Leonardo Da Vinci drew the first ever helicopter. Of course, he didn't call it a helicopter... The terrible loss of life which we now call World War I used to be known as the Great War or "the war to end all wars". BTW, enjoyed today's pun. The nursery rhyme "Humpty Dumpty" usually refers to "All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty together again." But as we have a devastating attack by queen and two knights, it is entirely fitting to talk about "all the queen's horses". Nice one, CG. |
|
Apr-07-09
 |
| al wazir: <kap54, zdigyigy>: Thanks. Yeah, Capablanca wins that endgame. <andymac>: After 21...Qf8, 22. Qg6 wins. What do you suppose the odds are that Capa saw these lines when he played 16. Rxd7 ? |
|
Apr-07-09
|
| Once: Did black miss a win here? How about this?
Position after white's 20. Nh5
click for larger view20... Qxf7 21. Nxf7+ Kg8 22. Nxd8 Bd7 23. Nb7 Bc6
click for larger viewIt seems that white has the unappealing choice of 24. Nxc5 bc (Fritz 11 assesses as -1.7) or 24. g4 Nxh4 25. Nd6 Nf3+ (-1.8). I know I risk being flamed for daring to criticise the great Capa, but I reckon that he missed a killer move in 20. Qg6 and that 20. Nh5 should have lost (with best play). Easy to say with the benefit of Fritz, of course! |
|
Apr-07-09
 |
| Chessical: What was the occasion for this game? I do not think it was a tournament. I can only find references to Capablanca playing in Hastings, Moscow and Margate in 1935. |
|
Apr-07-09
|
| al wazir: <Once>: I think you've answered *my* question. |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| WhiteRook48: what are they feeding these horses? |
|
Apr-07-09
 |
| JaneEyre: Capablanca visited Spain in late 1935 and undertook a series of exhibitions in a number of cities. As he modestly noted in an article for the chess magazine, El Ajedrez Espanol: <I am pleased to have obtained, according to the critics, a much better score than any other master who has visited Spain.> He also mentions the present game: <As usual, I have not kept notes from my performances, but below I give from memory a game that may be of interest to my readers. It is one of ten simultaneous games with clocks, at thirty moves per hour, played in Barcelona on Saturday, 14 December 1935.> His notes are typically perfunctory, even claiming that 11...b6 is <an error which costs the game>. |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| mworld: White got lucky on move 20.Nh5 when black didn't play the super obvious 20...QxQ giving black his life back. |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| Alphastar: <mworld> giving up a rook too. |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| Dr. J: <andymac: I am sure I am missing something, but what about 21. ... Qf8? If 22. Qh5+ Nh6 and 23. Nf7 no longer works because the Knight can recapture after 23. ... Qxf7 24. Qxf7> 21 ... Qf8 22 Qg6 forces mate on h7. |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| mworld: mworld: <Apr-07-09 Alphastar: <mworld> giving up a rook too. > count the rooks, white already sacced a rook to get the attack, giving the rook back, ending the attack, and gaining the iniative is a good thing -- it was a very obvious mistake which is why i pointed it out, although there are probably a lot more subtle mistakes made by both sides given the time period. |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| chillowack: God, that final combination is one of the coolest endings I've ever seen! What a beautiful game--now this is a GOTD! |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| tivrfoa: black should have played 19 ... Ng8! |
|
| Apr-07-09 |
| tivrfoa: forget what I said!!!! |
|
| Apr-08-09 |
| Alphastar: <mworld> regardless, it gives up a rook. |
|
| Apr-08-09 |
| mworld: <Alphastar: <mworld> regardless, it gives up a rook.> I was assuming you weren't just pointing out the painfully obvious in your first post and that you had a point/implication that giving back the rook was bad somehow -- anyone with a basic understanding of chess would see that QxQ leads to NxR. So if you were being captain obvious, fine i misunderstood and thought there was a point, but if you were implying it would be a worse move then at least come up with a good reason other than it gives back a rook (which happens to gain the advantage and doesn't lead to mate lol). |
|
Apr-08-09
 |
| keypusher: Let me summarize two pages of kibitzing.
First: 20. Nh5 was an error. 20. Qg6 would have won. Second: 20....Qe8 was an error. 20....Qxf7 21. Nxf7+ Kg8 22. Nxd8 Bd7 23. Nb7 Bc6 traps the knight, leaving Black a piece up. Third: It is the darnedest thing that this variation is named after two players who weren't even born when this game was played! |
|
Apr-08-09
|
| keypusher: I was too smug: in the second line 24. g4 Nxh4 25. Nd6 saves the piece, though White still has a losing position. |
|
| Apr-08-09 |
| itsankush: Class..Absolute Class.. |
|
| Apr-09-09 |
| Alphastar: <mworld> the point is that black probably didn't consider it because of that, although it would have given him a won game. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
sac: 16.Rxd7
