< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·
|Mar-10-12|| ||kingscrusher: One of my most favourited Youtube videos ever is on this game:|
|Mar-10-12|| ||Tigranny: <kingscrusher> I watched your video on this game. Its on my favorite videos list along with your other instructive games.|
|Mar-11-12|| ||kingscrusher: <Tigranny> Cheers :)|
|Jun-13-12|| ||OhioChessFan: <Check out this quote from the book "Super Nezh", by Alex Pishkin, after Black's 11th move!|
"Long ago this position was known to be drawn because White could choose between 12.Qh6 Bg7 13.Qh4 Bf6 with a repetition of moves, or 12.Qg5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5 Nxb3 15.axb3 Bxc3 with a drawn endgame. If 12.Qg3 or 12.Qf4, Black would reply 12...Qxc3!">
<Tigranny> I assume the second line is supposed to be 12. Qh6 Bg7 13. Qg5 Qxg5 14. Bxg5 Nxb3 15. axb3 Bxc3
click for larger view
I am hard pressed to see how that can be called a drawn endgame though.
|Jun-23-12|| ||Everett: I haven't looked at the comps, but after the sac, I see a human suggested 14..d4! And why not? It hopes to activate not only the Bc8 but the Ra8 as well. The Rf8 does should not have priority in such situations. |
How many times must Black suffer a mortal lack of development of his q-side forces before he realizes that this is of some import?
|Jul-26-12|| ||Girkassa: Wow, that is an amazing queen sac. I thought I had seen most of the greatest games from the past, but apparently not this one.|
|Jul-26-12|| ||Girkassa: <OhioChessFan>, it is not a dead draw, but between two strong GMs, it is very likely that it will end in a draw. Since this line is well known among players who play this regularly, it is unlikely that White would go into such an endgame if he is looking for a win.|
|Jul-26-12|| ||perfidious: One wonders about the translation, or the usage. The position in the diagram provided by <OCF> looks level, but I agree with him-that isn't the same as saying it's drawn, though there must be better ways to play for a win than to go in for this.|
|Apr-18-13|| ||Rookiepawn: I think a lot of people misses the point not between human and computer analysis but between mere analysis and a real game.|
Performing analysis, regardless you do it with a program or not, implies a whole different scenario. Starting with the fact that you know you are not risking anything, you can take moves back, etc. It's like comparing driving a real race and playing Daytona.
Here Nezhmetdinov plays an astonishing sac, which proves sound enough to resist analysis during decades, and even computers cannot really refute it but arrive to a draw. That proves the sac is an incredible move for a real game.
A real game implies the rival doesn't have all the time in the world to analyze the variants (as neither have you), so even choosing a move that can lead to one or two loosing variants is a strong move from a practical perspective if they are counterbalanced by many winning variants, which often occurs in complicated and tactical positions.
Of course, after the game there will be a crowd of geniuses that after hours of analysis carried out in the living room, with or without Houdini, will boast this "comedy of errors" is not worth their sharp eye.
This is simply lack of perspective: what Nezhmetdinov did is not what you did, guys. Prove is simple: you cannot do the same.
|Sep-28-13|| ||Phony Benoni: If Spassky's ...Qxf3 yesterday was jaw-dropping, Nezh's Qxf6 is its Big Brother. To conceive such an idea, and then have the guts to actually try it ... mind-boggling.|
Perhaps it's not sound in the sterile, antiseptic sense of the word. But if ever a player had to be suffering from "Sacrificial shock", it was Chernikov.
|Sep-28-13|| ||devere: "Perhaps it's not sound in the sterile, antiseptic sense of the word."|
Most amazingly it seems to be sound. If Black defends perfectly perhaps he can achieve a draw. It is a grand conception by a legendary player.
|Sep-28-13|| ||morfishine: Nezhmetdinov was a great imaginative player|
|Sep-28-13|| ||scormus: Whenever I see a Nez game is GOTD I get a bit excited, and whenever I play through I'm in awe of his vision. What is so amazing in this gane is the follow up to his Q-sac are several quiet moves - no +'s, no attacks on BQ, no breakthrough moves.|
I must have been a privilege for anyone to play agianst him
|Sep-28-13|| ||Abdel Irada: As shocking as 12. Qxf6! may be, it's interesting to ask if it was not also Nezhmetdinov's only practical way to avoid a draw or worse. |
The queen is under attack. If it moves to h6, Black merely retreats the bishop and harasses it again.
If it goes to g4 or h3, Black discovers an attack on it with 12. ...d5, gaining a very useful tempo and angling to win the e-pawn.
And if it should happen to move to f4 or g3, Black can simplify with 12. ...Qxc3 13. bxc3, Ne2† 14. Kh1, Nxg3† 15. hxg3, Bxc3, and again Black is a pawn ahead, with a superior position.
I'm tempted to classify this as a <forced brilliancy>. :-)
|Sep-28-13|| ||Kikoman: position after 33. Ke2
click for larger view
<12. Qxf6> :OOO a jaw dropping Queen sac.
|Sep-28-13|| ||tatuviejo: Soneto:
Cuando la Reina se me vino encima/
con sus torres alfiles y caballos/
escoltada por todos sus vasallos/
pensé: ¡mi Dios!,¡esto será mi ruina!/
Me vi copado en todos los escaques/
por diagonales lineas y columnas/
la amenaza lucía tremebunda/
ya parecía no tener escape/
Zanjé el dilema de este juego ciencia/
a fuerza bruta opuse inteligencia/
con mi respuesta lo dejé sin habla/
La diosa Caissa iluminó mi mente/
rápido de reflejos... ¡de repente!/
paré el reloj y le propuse tablas.
|Sep-28-13|| ||Penguincw: What a great queen sacrifice. In the end, black only has a rook and 2 isolated pawns (2 of them connected but still likely to fall).|
|Sep-28-13|| ||kevin86: This game reminds me of the Petrosian-Spassky game (1966?)|
|Sep-28-13|| ||pericles of athens: Amazing game|
|Sep-28-13|| ||blunderclap: In this particular way Nezhmetdinov must be the greatest chess genius that ever lived. Not even Tal would conceive of something like it.|
When you look at the position after 13 ..exf6, which he knew would arise, who on earth would think: "Aha, that looks like I can win this a queen down for two pieces". I can't think of any game that seems so inhumanly awesome:)
|Sep-28-13|| ||tjipa: I watched the computer evaluations a bit in this game - it said, OK, the sac is not correct - yet the position remained playable for a time, the black in the game making a number of inferior moves (while white kept making near perfect moves), until on move 21 the black is finally finished (while the queen sac was on move 12!!). I see NEZHMETDINOV as a visionary PLAYER. Maybe he could not calculate as well as Kasparov, but he had an equally astounding tactical vision. All this reminds me of how I use to check my games with Fritz and how stunned I constantly am of the simple things I keep missing OTB. Yet, a player like Nezhmetdinov, of bygone times, still makes computers think hard.|
|Sep-28-13|| ||dark.horse: 12.Qxf6 unbalances the position, doesn't it? :)|
|Sep-28-13|| ||sofouuk: <blunderclap: In this particular way Nezhmetdinov must be the greatest chess genius that ever lived. Not even Tal would conceive of something like it. When you look at the position after 13 ..exf6, which he knew would arise, who on earth would think: "Aha, that looks like I can win this a queen down for two pieces". I can't think of any game that seems so inhumanly awesome:)>I can immediately think of at least one example of Tal sacrificing his queen for two minor pieces, and for equally dubious compensation (M Bobotsov vs Tal, 1958) - what's the difference?|
|Sep-29-13|| ||Abdel Irada: Note that there are lines in the King's Indian* in which it is "book" for Black to give up queen for two minor pieces. |
In some kinds of positions, the pieces get so much scope for play, and the queen so relatively little, that practical chances resulting from the positional queen sac are excellent.
*I learned this firsthand when NM Gjon Feinstein played one of them against me. Interestingly, almost all the resulting games ended in draws, but one could not, with the worst will in the world, call them "grandmaster draws." More like fighting on a tightrope suspended over an active volcano.
|Sep-29-13|| ||blunderclap: <sofouuk> I don't know all the games that Tal has ever played, so my statement may be dubious in that regard. Yet it was more intended as an expression of my admiration for Nezhmetdinov rather than any doubts about Tal's prowess.|
As for the game you mention (which is surely quite beautiful), IMHO it's not quite as far out as this nezhmetdinov game. Black ends up an exchange down and a pawn up shortly after the initial combination and the compensation seems less vague. But it's a matter of taste no doubt.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·