< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
|Feb-05-12|| ||paladin at large: No. 29 Capablanca vs Alekhine, 1927|
|Feb-07-12|| ||drukenknight: a very hard fought game, in his book (whose comments are sometims illuminating and sometimes not) Alek. suggests 31 Rb7 and says "comparatively better.." not exactly a ringing endorsement; which is typical Alek. He at least suggests somethign whereas most dont give a clue. could capa play 31 Qc4 which aligns the Q w/ the K and temp blockades the pawn?|
|Feb-07-12|| ||King Death: <drukenknight> When do you suggest Rb7? You must have misnumbered it in your note, in any event I agree that Alekhine's "comparatively better..." implies that White was just worse off no matter how he played.|
|Feb-07-12|| ||offramp: <paladin at large: <offramp><This means Capa only won one game after No. 7.> True, but this was a tense match for a long time and Capa did not throw in the towel. He had No. 27 won but drew due to a blunder. He had a decent game in No. 28, and in spite of drawing this too, still won a long No. 29. After all this, he was down only 4 to 3.> |
But at game 7 Capablanca was DEFINITELY not expecting a "tense match for a long time..." He was expecting a match of 15 to 20 games.
Alekhine was 2-1 down at game 7 but he did not lose faith!
He kept the faith and won the match!!
|Feb-07-12|| ||drukenknight: " When do you suggest Rb7? You must have misnumbered it in your note, in any event I agree that Alekhine's "comparatively better..." implies that White was just worse off no matter how he played.|
KD: I did not suggest Rb7, Alekhine in his famous volume II of my Memorable games, offers this as an alternative move. However instead of proving that the position is better by a forced set of moves, all he says is "comparatively better" which is hardly a strong logical case. If you read ALekhine when he makes a strong case he makes it. Therefore I offered a different move, thanks for your interest. Look forward to u looking at my move..
|Feb-07-12|| ||King Death: <drukenknight> At which move is Rb7 suggested? White can't play it at move 31.|
|Feb-07-12|| ||drukenknight: 32 Rb7; sorry I am going really fast and trying to convert to algebraic notation. My suggestion is instead 32 Qc4 in order to better position the Q. have not analyzed it; just a hunch.|
|Feb-08-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <drunkenknight> Have you ever looked at my web page for this game? (Maybe it would answer your question.)|
|Feb-08-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: http://www.angelfire.com/games3/lif...|
My analysis is the most complete ever attempted on this game.
|Feb-09-12|| ||KKDEREK: Oh my god..I just read that?
<"Its probably a bad idea to nominate yourself for an award, but I may as well go ahead and do it. This may be the finest and most thorough job of annotating a chess game anywhere on the Internet. If you know of a better job ... one where the author was at least a Master and spent perhaps 2000 hours (or more) working on the game ... be sure to let me know!! Otherwise, until I see proof of a better job, than I nominate this game as:
The Best Annotated Chess Game on the Internet! ">
Whatta a pompous arrogant person..
|Feb-09-12|| ||tpstar: <The Best Annotated Chess Game on the Internet!> Congratulations. ;>D|
|Feb-10-12|| ||drukenknight: this is dumb, I suggested a move and 20 banter posts later it is buried...|
|Feb-10-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <dK> If you are serious about the move, send me an e-mail.|
|Feb-10-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: He did not have a super-tough match mentality like Alekhine, however. (Larsen was like that.)|
|Feb-10-12|| ||drukenknight: life master, how about we save time and I suggest 34 Qc4? (sound familiar?)|
|Feb-10-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: Not really.
Did I analyze this move on my web page? (I worked for a year on that analysis.) Is this a computer move?
Its been so long since I looked at that game ... maybe 15 years.
|Feb-10-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: 34.Qc4?? Black just took a rook on d1 ... did you get the numbering wrong?|
|Feb-11-12|| ||drukenknight: 32 Qc4. Gee sorry about that, I am going fast obviously. It looks intersting to me, and didnt use the pc. God knows I have made some bad moves over the years...|
|Feb-11-12|| ||LIFE Master AJ: Everyone makes mistakes. (Its why there are erasers on pencils.)|
|Feb-12-12|| ||TheFocus: <AJ> Did you miss this? You are wrong about the inventor.|
<This is the, "Cambridge Springs Defense." It is named after one of the very few International Tournaments played in the U.S. prior to 1950.
(Cambridge Springs, 1904.)
(The variation is so named because it was first introduced by Harry N. Pillsbury and played for the first time at that tournament.)
I also propose that this variation be referred to as the, "Pillsbury Variation" after its creator. A.J.G.>
Well, Pillsbury did not introduce this move. It was introduced by Emanuel Lasker in this game, in 1892, a full 12 years before Pillsbury played it:
A Hodges vs Lasker, 1892
|Feb-26-12|| ||The Curious Emblem: I believe it was safer and better to have played 60. Rc2. 60. a5 is a bit too ambitious.|
|Mar-01-12|| ||tpstar: The remaining marker posts look a little funny without the background context, but at least any real chess content was preserved here. There have been other instances where legitimate discussion and helpful analysis get swept away along with the squabbling, which is frustrating when you want to review it later.|
Great major piece endgame.
|Apr-04-12|| ||rjsolcruz: In the Asian Youth 2011, the continuation 5 cxd5 was played in Tachaplalert of Thailand vs Sol Cruz of Philippines.|
|Dec-12-12|| ||CanteurX: An obviously faked game.
Checkmate with pinned queen?
|Dec-12-12|| ||aliejin: One of the more exciting games
of chess history .... that race
pawn, trying to crown, both of
opponents pressed for time ....
and the spectacular mate
In a way, Capablanca's fate changes
forever with this game.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·