< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Apr-30-03|| ||Sneaky: Either way, Black is down a piece. |
|Jun-27-04|| ||get Reti: Have you ever seen a game where white only makes pawn moves? I think black played very poorly. I think black should have took the pawn with his knight at move 4. This reminds me of this game: Marshall vs H Rogosin, 1940 . They were both knight chases and both games started off with a lot of pawn moves. |
|Jun-27-04|| ||Knezh: The finish could be 10.. Qd8 11. Rxa7 Rxa7 12. bxa Qa5+! 13. Nc3! Nxc3 14. axbQ Nxd1+ 15. Bd2!! and white is up a piece.. Very cute game |
|Dec-08-06|| ||Milo: 8...Nb4, perhaps?|
|Nov-14-07|| ||OhioChessFan: Chernev claims Black resigned after White's 10th move.|
|Nov-14-07|| ||OhioChessFan: Hmmmm. Reading the kibitzing, apparently this game originally appeared in the form where Black resigns after White's 10th, along with the resignation after White's 16th.|
|Oct-07-09|| ||GrahamClayton: <Milo>8...Nb4, perhaps?|
8...♘b4 9.♕a4 with the threats of both 10.♕b4 and 10.b6+ looks pretty strong.
|Sep-24-10|| ||GrahamClayton: Kujoth wrote a letter to "Chess Life and Review" about this game, which was published in the August 2009 issue under the heading "The hoax is on us?".|
Here are excerpts from Kujoth's letter:
"First, John Fashingbauer was a real person, whose name appears in the 1950 Milwaukee City directory...In 1950 he worked as a shipping clerk at the Allen Bradley Co...The second game, involving ten consecutive pawn moves in the Wing Gambit, was presented by expert Averill Powers, in his regular Sunday chess column in the 'Milwaukee Journal', titled 'The Game of Kings' on May 21, 1950.
Without consulting me, Mr Powers abbreviated the game to ten moves, perhaps seeking to equal the feat of former US Champion Frank Marshall, claiming that Black resigned on move 10. In reality, Fashingbauer found a way to keep the game going, resigning on move 28.
Oddly enough, had the game been reported accurately, there were eleven consecutive pawn moves by White, who played in response to 10.b6 ♘b6 11.cb6.
Here is the complete score of the game, based on Kujoth's original handwritten scoresheet:
1.e4 c5 2.b4 cb4 3.a3 ♘c6 4.ab4 ♘f6 5.b5 ♘b8 6.e5 ♕c7 7.d4 ♘d5 8.c4 ♘b6 9.c5 ♘d5 10.b6 ♘b6 11.cb6 ♕b6 12.♘f3 e6 13.♗d2 ♘c6 14.♕a4 d5 15.♗b5 ♗d7 16.0-0 ♗e7 17.♘c3 0-0 18.♖fb1 ♕d8 19.♕d1 a6 20.♗d3 b5 21.♘e2 ♕c8 22.♘g3 b4 23.♘g5 ♗g5 24.♗g5 a5 25.♗h7+ ♔h7 26.♕h5+ ♔g8 27.♗f6 ♘d4 28.♕g5 1-0
|May-24-11|| ||Kittysafe: Averill Powers was my grandfather, and I'm literally shocked that not only did Kujoth make no attempt to contact Averill about why he posted the game, but shows genuine malice towards him in this article, disheartening really... I understand being upset about the game being published without his consent, but not saying anything, wondering if he should sue anyway, and then saying something hateful that Averill Powers was revered by his family as if that were undeserving, and saying all this after he had died sounds very cold to me. Maybe I'm wrong but that kind of blew my mind to read that. |
It makes me wonder if my grandfather ever knew Kujoth felt this way...
If you would like to read the entire article, it is available in PDF form online here: http://www.4shared.com/get/bRFSN4ib...
|May-24-11|| ||Kittysafe: Also he didn't need his consent for the article, and when writing the article Averill Powers was focusing primarily on the 10 pawn moves, which is why he did not post the entire game, it's called using a magnifying lens to discuss a strategy in chess that he wanted to discuss in the article that week. |
Kujoth here seems to be angry about the abbreviation but also the posting it at all, but never actually asked Averill Powers directly ever. Chess between these two was very competitive on the State level and it seems even chess masters are not beyond pettiness.
|May-27-11|| ||Kittysafe: The information in Chess Life also appears to be incorrect as I have the original newspaper from that date and Averill Powers never even wrote of this game, and we have every single Game of Kings article grandpa wrote over those 17 years. |
Kujoth either is mistaken on the date Averill Powers wrote about the game, or he outright lied about the whole thing.
Here is the article in question.
|Feb-03-14|| ||FSR: Correction submitted: per <GrahamClayton>'s September 24, 2010 comment, the complete score of the game, taken from Kujoth's original handwritten scoresheet, is 1.e4 c5 2.b4 cxb4 3.a3 Nc6 4.axb4 Nf6 5.b5 Nb8 6.e5 Qc7 7.d4 Nd5 8.c4 Nb6 9.c5 Nd5 10.b6 Nxb6 11.cxb6 Qxb6 12.Nf3 e6 13.Bd2 Nc6 14.Qa4 d5 15.Bb5 Bd7 16.0-0 Be7 17.Nc3 0-0 18.Rfb1 Qd8 19.Qd1 a6 20.Bd3 b5 21.Ne2 Qc8 22.Ng3 b4 23.Ng5 Bxg5 24.Bxg5 a5 25.Bxh7+ Kxh7 26.Qh5+ Kg8 27.Bf6 Nd4 28.Qg5 1-0.|
|May-02-16|| ||clement41: The pgn that's given for this game in chessbase is much, much more thrillling, a genuine tactical flurry!|
|May-02-16|| ||Albion 1959: The "wing gambit" has never been considered as sound. Capablanca used to play it early in his career. It has the air of a Mickey Mouse gambit. The gambit is akin to the Smith-Morra gambit, which gives white plenty of open lines for the pawn, but is not sound against correct play. It is popular at club level, but hardly ever surfaces at master level and above. On move seven black should content himself with Nb4, though even the humble Ng8 is playable. A more tenacious defence on move 22 as Qd8. After b4? The White attack is in full flow with those bishops and open lines aimed at the black king. How often do we see these types of positions, where the attack drives through with force !!|
|May-10-17|| ||Phony Benoni: In case you can't quite remember, you're thinking of Marshall vs H Rogosin, 1940|
|May-10-17|| ||offramp: <Albion 1959: The "wing gambit" has never been considered as sound. Capablanca used to play it early in his career. It has the air of a Mickey Mouse gambit.>|
Alekhine was going to play it in his first meeting with Botvinnik,
Alekhine vs Botvinnik, 1936, but thought better of it. He was going to play a delayed version.
|May-10-17|| ||ChessHigherCat: White violated his principle of "move pawns not pieces in the opening" with 12. Nf3 but black failed to capitalize on the tactical inconsistency :-)|
|May-10-17|| ||AlicesKnight: Interesting similarity in the threatened mate with the POTD today.|
|May-10-17|| ||morfishine: Kujoth had a rabid fan base
|May-10-17|| ||TransfiniteCardinal: LOL a go and @#$% yourself game.|
|May-10-17|| ||perfidious: <morf: Kujoth had a rabid fan base>|
Irving Chernev was Kujoth's cheerleader; I had never heard of him before reading Chernev's book, which had a mess of Kujoth's early efforts.
Always wondered what became of Kujoth after all those gamelets in the late 1940s-early fifties.
|May-10-17|| ||morfishine: <perfidious> Interesting mention about Chernev. Kujoth had a lock on Wisconsin chess for awhile. Between 1947 - 1958 he was the Wisconsin champ 6 times, the last time when he was 27 years old. He lived til he was 80, so what happened for the next 53 years?|
|May-10-17|| ||Bigfoot713: Very dumb play from black in the opening.|
|May-11-17|| ||TheBish: I don't get the original comments (from Apr-30-03) referring to 13. Nc3 and 13...Nxc3. Curiously, these moves seem to refer to a line given over a year later (Jun-27-04) by Knezh! Was time travel involved?|
|May-11-17|| ||OhioChessFan: <TheBish> I had no memory of posting here 10 years ago, but reviewing what I said back then clarifies that the game at one point listed just 10 moves, and then was updated to 16 moves. I am pretty sure the 16 move version included 13. Nc3.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·