|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-08-04 | | vonKrolock: Impressive article and documentation about this game here http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess/r... The polish game appears clearly as authentical and anterior to M Ortueta vs J Sanz, 1933 |
|
| Oct-08-04 | | patzer2: <Chessgames.com> This game would make a good Sunday puzzle (30...?, Black to move and win). <Honza Cervenka> Thanks for pointing it out. |
|
| Oct-08-04 | | Gypsy: Wow! What a combo!
It may be good to note that 35.Ra4 c1Q+ 36.Kh2 Qc2 also wins the knight (and game). |
|
| Oct-08-04 | | kevin86: A rook and knight cannot stop black's three POWERFUL pawns! |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | notsodeepthought: Very nice puzzle for anyone who has not seen this game before (though it's so famous that there may be not too many experienced kibitzers who haven't). |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | notsodeepthought: Even worse would be 37 Ra4 Qh5+ followed by 38 ... Qd1+. |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | Capa15: Got it. Rxb2 and the pawn queens |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | fgh: To well known (but not according to the amount of chess collections that include this game). |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | syracrophy: This is one of the most famous endings of the chess history. This game is exactly the same as the game <M. Ortueta-J. Sanz, 1933> I wanna notice some points of this game:
28.Rg3? <This was a big mistake. I think this is the decisive mistake, because white is changing his defensive rook for a black rook, after that, white will be attacked by the other rook massively. Correct was 28.Rf2!> After <30...Rxb2!!> there was nothing better than accepting the rook: <31.Nxb2 c3!!> with the following variants: <A)> 32.Nd3 c4+ 33.Rxb6 cxd3 34.Rc6 d2 winning After <32...c4!!>:
<A)> 33.Nxc4 c2
<B)>33.Re6 cxb2 34.Re1 c3 |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | psmith: This is very beautiful. I had not seen it before and guessed 30... Rxb2 but did not at all see 32... c4. However, Fritz finds that White should play 33. Nxc4 c2 34. Rc6 c1/Q+ 35. Kh2 when Black is better but does not have a clear immediate win. The position seems certainly more complex than that in the game continuation. Any ideas about that? |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | psmith: Note that in the twin <M Ortueta vs J Sanz, 1933; the above suggestion does not work because of the possibility by Black of Qf4+. (Fritz again.) |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | witty: yahoo, i got it on the new year. shayad this is the first time i solved (Itwaar) Sunday puzzle. good new year beginning for me :) |
|
Jan-01-06
 | | Sneaky: I read somewhere that Petrosian really got interested in chess after seeing this game's twin, M Ortueta vs J Sanz, 1933. |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | makaveli52: I got it and im drunk... must be not thereh arderst sunday puzle |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | Timothy Glenn Forney: This was an easy one. |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | melianis: Does 30... c3 straightaway win also? Happy to be among those who thought that The Move needs serious calculation. I cannot say i solved this, since i've seen this before. This is the solution which has inspired me to try (even dubious) exchange sacrifices over the board. It's amazing to find out that pawns on the starting position may decide the whole game. |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | dkulesh: wow my first solved sunday puzzle, my chess addiction starts to pay dividends. anyone else get this relatively quickly. I knew it wouldnt be obvious so i just started looking for "brilliant" moves. |
|
Jan-01-06
| | Sneaky: I hope everybody who says they "got it" saw the critical defense 32.Rxb6 and also saw 32...c4!! (and not 32...axb6?? or 32...cxb2?? or 32...c2?? which all lose). |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | dkulesh: yes, thanks for your concern. i think anyone who got to c4 should consider himself solvent. |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | Averageguy: I looked at 30...Rxb2 but couldn't see what to do after 32.Rxb6. |
|
Jan-01-06
 | | Richard Taylor: I overlooked 32.Rxb6 but once I saw that I went back and calculated it all but still missed 35. Nxa5 - I thought I 'had it' as I got the main concept of the rook sac etc (pat on my back for me by ME - <Sneaky> or no <Sneaky>) it as it was a Monday problem -well its Monday here in NZ...lol - last week I solved all the problems except Sat and Sunday instantly - this one was more like a study! Very beautiful in its way.
BTW <Sneaky> if people got the main idea that is pretty good - there is no competition going on here!! If we all solved everything we would soon get bored... |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | vonKrolock: <appears clearly as authentical and anterior> This i wrote above in 2004 - is my own belief and understanding; then i would accept the possibility of a coincidence, now i'm more ceptic. For me, the decisive point is that such a duplication is quite suspicious, one of the games SHOULD be composed - How could such rare combination occur in two very diferent games so near in time?! - Tim Krabbé is more circunspect, i'm sure he would not assert against the autenticity of neither of the games - and even myself , i would not conclude against this or the other without further proofs - but in this little truth i trust: one of the games is composed |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | dkulesh: that is a pretty serious allegation. |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | avidfan: This ending is the last one discussed in P.C. Griffiths book "The endings in modern theory and practice" for Ortueta vs Sanz, 1933 except for a few pawn positions on the king side. 32...c4!! is the critical winning move that denies d3 to the knight so that the c-pawn promotes. |
|
| Jan-01-06 | | Saruman: hmm, have I ever seen this position before? =) |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
+ sac: 30...Rxb2