< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Mar-09-05|| ||soberknight: This is Item Number 1 to support Dan Heisman's advice to always examine the consequences of checks, captures and threats. For white, the game ended before it had begun. |
|Apr-01-05|| ||Catfriend: <rochade18> You have also Na3..
Honestly, though, in a blitz, f.e., couldn't anyone here do something similar? How about 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nd4 4.Nxd4 cd 5.d3?? A very natural move to make, if you remember the Bird variation of Spanish, but losing a piece after 5..Qa5+|
|Jun-22-05|| ||Averageguy: All beginners are taught to look for forks and tactics. But when one becomes more experienced, he sometimes doesn't bother to look, especially in the opening. This is probably what happened here.|
|Sep-02-05|| ||Eggman: <<This site on the subject of "Chess Records" claims that this is the "shortest decisive game ever played in a serious tournament." (Not including forfeits, etc.)>>|
Actually, wouldn't the record have to belong to Fischer vs Panno, 1970?
|Nov-27-05|| ||Chopin: White just played carelessly.|
|Jun-07-06|| ||RookFile: White must have thought that 2....c6 was a prelude to the ....Qb6 lines, i.e. where white plays Nbd2 and gambits the b2 pawn. However, there was a slight tactical drawback.|
|Apr-03-07|| ||technical draw: If I were playing white I would have just calmly move my Bishop to d2. Black might argue or he might think he made some mistake. It's worth a try anyway. I actually did this once in a game. I moved a bishop that had been captured! I palmed the captured piece and casually moved it from c1 to g5. The game went on with my opponent none the wiser. I couldn't finish the game cause after a few moves I burst out laughing!|
|Apr-04-07|| ||piroflip: I remember reading once of a player castling (when he had aleady lost the relevant Rook) by using a captured Rook from the game going on next to him. It was a serious tournament game and his opponent never noticed.|
|Aug-22-07|| ||pacorrum: <technical draw> A shame you weren`t able to hold back a bit longer and save that game for inmortality!|
|Aug-25-08|| ||JonathanJ: i always play 3. ... c6 in internet games, it's amazing how often white plays 4. e3|
|Dec-24-09|| ||mysql: <technical draw: If I were playing white I would have just calmly move my Bishop to d2. Black might argue or he might think he made some mistake. It's worth a try anyway. I actually did this once in a game. I moved a bishop that had been captured! I palmed the captured piece and casually moved it from c1 to g5. The game went on with my opponent none the wiser. I couldn't finish the game cause after a few moves I burst out laughing!>|
lol. gotta try this one of these days.
|Jan-08-10|| ||Fusilli: 2...c5 is a much more common move than 2...c6. My guess is that White "guessed" that Black had played 2...c5 after seeing Black touch the c pawn and didn't even look at it.|
|Feb-02-11|| ||rich187113: white should have played 3.Bxf6.|
|Mar-26-11|| ||Llawdogg: I guess you really should develop your knights before your bishops.|
|Aug-11-11|| ||ulysses ganesh: excellent mini miniature!!!!!!|
|Sep-05-11|| ||MaczynskiPratten: This was one of the entries in "Blunder of the Year" in the immortal spoof "Not the British Chess Magazine" written by Murray Chandler and Philip Alan Clemance, among others. I thought it was unlucky not to win, though the winner (White resigning after having been offered a draw) was also hilarious.|
|Sep-05-11|| ||swordfish: I don't think White is necessarily losing here. I believe he has compensation for the piece and other masters have played this position without Black always winning. I'll check|
|Oct-06-11|| ||FSR: <swordfish> White has nowhere near enough compensation for a piece, but you're correct that White players who've played on haven't always lost. 365chess.com shows five wins for Black and 2 draws (!). You can see the games by going to www.365chess.com, using "Search Position," entering the moves, and then using "Opening Explorer" and clicking "Search." I once looked the position up on ChessBase, which showed something like 18 White wins and 2 draws. For something similar, see the astonishing game Shumov vs Jaenisch, 1851.|
|Oct-06-11|| ||FSR: <MaczynskiPratten> I have a copy of that very amusing magazine somewhere. The "Blunder of the Year" competition was a real doozy. I vaguely remember the winning entry: one of the players (Black, I think), on move, offered a draw; White said "play your move and I'll consider it"; Black then saw, and played, a winning sacrifice (...Qxb2+!! IIRC); and White, in shock, resigned - evidently forgetting that he could still accept the draw offer.|
|Apr-01-12|| ||BlackSheep: I bet white was disgusted with himself for such an oversight .|
|May-21-12|| ||Abdel Irada: Shades of Old Jim, <technical draw>! We had a player in Santa Cruz whom one had to watch verrry carefully because he'd make mistakes (or "mistakes") like this all the time: Having opened with something akin to the Colle System (with queen's bishop undeveloped and pawn on e3), he'd suddenly acquire unexpectedly strong pressure by developing the bishop on g5 with a pin. To cement this tactic's effectiveness, if you called him on it, he'd argue until proven incontrovertibly in the wrong — and then he'd find some reason why it was his opponent's fault.|
If being a menace as an opponent wasn't enough, he was also dangerous to have on an adjacent board, because he wasn't at all averse to castling with someone else's rook.
|Jan-30-13|| ||FSR: As to the Blunder of the Year competition I mentioned, and the winning entry, see http://www.kingpinchess.net/?p=1979.|
|Jan-30-13|| ||FSR: White's resignation was decidedly premature! See C Latino vs S R Dumas, 2010. There have also been a couple of draws in this line.|
|Apr-27-13|| ||DoctorD: Are the strengths of the players known here and the tournament level? Given they only have one game in the database, I would think this game would not supplant the shortest supposed game at the international level, which would be Combe-Hasenfuss, 1933.|
|Apr-27-13|| ||whiteshark: You don't mess with the Zoran. Uh, no, wait a sec..|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·