< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Jul-13-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: This game was quite a Trip.|
|Jul-13-09|| ||playground player: I don't think this is quite what Henry Bird had in mind.|
|Jul-13-09|| ||Kasputin: 4 ... Qh5+ then sac the d6 bishop for the pawn that moves to g3 and watch as checkmate happens.|
My guess is that the moves were:
1. f4 e5
2. fxe5 d6
3. exd6 Bxd6
Am I allowed a triple question mark?
There is nothing wrong with playing the Bird but how can anyone past beginner stages so sadly neglect king safety?
Okay, I have to see when this game was played, by whom, etc...
|Jul-13-09|| ||FSR: I played this exact game in an offhand game about 1974. In 1977, I won a tournament game against a 1677-rated player that went 4.Nf3(!) g5 5.h3?? Bg3#. Unfortunately for us From's Gambit fans, Tim Taylor in his book on the Bird's a couple of years ago demonstrated that with precise play by White, 5.g3! is very strong. See A Muzychuk vs V Solovjova, 2009 and J Wuttke vs J M Matisson, 1999. But Black can still play 4...Nf6, leading to truly unfathomable complications.|
|Jul-13-09|| ||Phony Benoni: <backrank> The average kibitzer can understand this game. That's why there are so many comments.|
Of course, not understanding the game has never stopped kibitzers in the past...
|Jul-13-09|| ||stacase: backrank wrote, "What I find slightly annoying is the fact that there are 3 pages (!) of kibitzing below this nonsense game, while, on the other hand, there are lots of great games between some of the greatest players with no kibitzing at all ..."|
My personal rule; if I don't get the first move, I don't post.
|Jul-13-09|| ||felixd: Haha that was very very easy. How does someone like Magusar can have some of his games here? Is he something like 600 elo?|
|Jul-13-09|| ||lzromeu: "The Big Brother"
|Jul-13-09|| ||MaczynskiPratten: <Blacksburg, Fouard, etc> Books I have seen in the past - some quite old - have always shown this as From's Gambit (and Bird's Opening). Likewise Alekhine's Defence, Petroff's Defence. So have chessplayers just got grammatically sloppier over the years with things like Benko Gambit?|
On the other hand one can think of a lot of ancient gambits with no apostrophe; Kieseritsky, Cunningham, Allgaier, Muzio .... Plus Marshall Counter Attack, etc.
But we don't say King Gambit or Queen Gambit :-)
(end of pedantic dissertation ;-)
|Jul-13-09|| ||MaczynskiPratten: <Waitaka> Agree the lack of detail about the players does make this game look a bit suspicious - but from page 1 comments it's been in the DB over 5 years - so it's not a plant by chessgames.com (unless they planned it a very long way in advance!)|
|Jul-13-09|| ||Domdaniel: Oh, this is cute. M. Trippe must have thought he was hallucinating ... a mate in 3 in the opening, with optional Queen sac.|
Is this a Reversed From's Gambit, a Reversed Swiss Gambit, a cross between a Nimzo-Larsen and a Neo-Lisitsyn, or what?
It's curious how Bird's Opening (1.f4) can lead to opening blunders. I've won a few quick tournament games, both with it and against it.
Here, no need to waste a nano-second contesting the long diagonal. Just check on h4, take on g3, and mate.
I'd sac the bishop, to be different...
|Jul-13-09|| ||WhiteRook48: this is weird...
4 b3 deserves 81945 question marks
4...Qh4+ 5 g3 Qxg3+!!!! 6 hxg3?? (0-1) Bxg3#
|Jul-13-09|| ||Sicilian Dragon: A very tame Monday puzzle...|
|Jul-13-09|| ||Marmot PFL: this puzzle is for the birds|
|Jul-13-09|| ||ShouldBeWorking: Just joined Chessgames today, and I'm pleased to announce that so far I have solved every puzzle presented on the site. |
And I'm gonna save this post, because tomorrow it will no longer be true . . . .
|Jul-13-09|| ||thezimboman: b3 was just a useless move: aiming at g7 hahahaha!!!|
I would have preferred 4. Nf3 of course!
|Jul-13-09|| ||Chlipchlop: <WhiteRook48 6 hxg3??>
An error ? Do you see any improvement ?|
|Jul-13-09|| ||fyad reject: *thinks a monday puzzle is too easy*
*disparages anyone who couldnt get it*
*is a haughty prick about chess*
|Jul-13-09|| ||Sicilian Dragon: <<WhiteRook48 6 hxg3??> An error ? Do you see any improvement ?>|
better was to not move at all
|Jul-13-09|| ||Benzol: <AnalyzeThis> <This game was quite a Trip.>|
Yep, trip of a lifetime.
|Jul-13-09|| ||Checker2: This may be the first Chessgames puzzle where the entire game move history is evident from the position. <Kasputin> was right but there is no other move order or sequence that gets to this position by move 4.|
|Jul-14-09|| ||eternaloptimist: I love the From's Gambit & play it some myself. It can be very dangerous for white if he/she is not careful.|
<Phony Benoni: <backrank> The average kibitzer can understand this game. That's why there are so many comments.
Of course, not understanding the game has never stopped kibitzers in the past...> :D
|Jul-16-09|| ||FSR: What's suspicious? The players were probably two fish who played this one entertaining game that got published somewhere and thereafter made it into CG's database. I've played the From's many times (including this precise game, as mentioned above) and weak players do sometimes play ridiculous moves like 4.b3?? and get mated.|
|Jul-16-09|| ||whiteshark: Mogusar walked right into a trippe.|
|Jul-22-09|| ||Archswindler: <OK, I'll start the discussion. You sac the queen. 100%. The bishop sac is for wimps.>|
No, no, no. It's not a proper queen sac unless it's the ONLY way to deliver mate. If there is an equally viable alternative to the queen sac, then it loses all its impact, and becomes slightly sad.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·