|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-18-04 | | Calchexas: Here's a game for all of you with the "multiple queens" collections. 5 Queens! Which brings up a question. If you have 3 queens on the board, one on a8, one on h8, and one on h1, and you want to move the Queen on h8 to a1, how do you give the notation for that? Qh8a1? |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | Kenkaku: <Calchexas> I think that your notation is correct, though if there were only one queen on the h file it would simply be Qha1 (which you probably already knew). |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | caseyclyde: There’s some interesting information regarding this game at http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess/a.... Here are a few excerpts: "The moves of this game were actually derived from game played between Alekhine and Grigoriev in Moscow in 1915. The game, as listed here, is a fake. It was never played. It is a pure concoction of Alekhine's. Exactly how Alekhine created this game alone makes an interesting story, unearthed for the first time by the American chess historian Dr. Buschke, in a series of articles in Chess Life in the early fifties. In the original game which this is derived from, Alekhine lost. Alekhine - Grigoriev' one of the most successful hoaxes of chess history, there is also something else wrong with it. It is a case of mass suggestion. The beautiful move 24.Rh6 which has earned Alekhine countless exclamation marks, does not win." |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | kevin86: This game is incomplete!! Here is the proper conclusion:
24 ♖h6 ♕xf1
25 ♕b4+ ♕b5
26 ♕d8+ ♔a6
27 ♕(e3)a3+ ♕(c2)a4
28 ♕(a3)xa4 ♕xa4
29 ♕xa4* |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | ughaibu: How can a fabricated game have a "proper conclusion"? |
|
| Apr-19-04 | | caseyclyde: The line that kevin86 gives is quoted from Alekhine's book My Best Games of Chess 1908-1923. But it's still all fake. |
|
| Apr-19-04 | | Calchexas: Fake though it probably is, it's still very fun to watch. |
|
| Apr-21-04 | | kevin86: <ughaibu> Doen't a novel have a proper conclusion? I'm glad that the game was corrected. By all accounts,the game is a "fake". It sure was fun,though,wasn't it? |
|
| Apr-21-04 | | ughaibu: Kevin86: Yes, that's true (both). |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | austinpablo: I do believe that white could have ended it sooner with a queen(qf7-e7+) sacrifice on move 21 for the bishop on e7. What does anyone think of that! |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | vonKrolock: Yes, this game was composed by Alekhine, and used by him to ornament his Selected games... somewhere in a book by T. Krabbe I saw the score of the original Grigoriev-Alekhine, published in a Russian magazine around 1915... (the story related by Golombeck in the Alekhine - Book (or Böök) page (from Margate 1938) is another sample of the Alekhine fictionist's penchant... |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | Abecedarian: <vonKrolock> is that a "fictionist's penchant" or rather an auto-aggrandizist's confabulism? LOL. |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | Lawrence: <austinpablo>, welcome to the club! At first Junior 8 agrees with you but after about 10 minutes comes to the conclusion that AA played the right move, eval +1.07 versus +0.25 when either Queen takes the Bishop. |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | kevin86: As a small child,i memorized this game-after i found out that it was not a real game,but a composition by Alekhine,my opinion of the game was increased-after all,chess can be an art as well as a scientific game. Heck,even Bobby Fischer attempted to refine the game by changing the opening set-up to a random one. To me,this game is the "Soup Nazi" of chess games-instead of-"NO SOUP FOR YOU"-it's "let's make another queen!" |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | Abecedarian: <kevin86>: Somehow the terms "nazi" and "Alekhine" always crop up in the same breath. Damn fine chess, though. And your point about the art of it all is well taken. |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | austinpablo: So since im new to this can anybody tell me where a good place to play chess online might be? |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | Minor Piece Activity: take a look at chessgames.com's FAQ... |
|
| Apr-23-04 | | vonKrolock: kevin86, Krabbe points out too that 24.Rh6 actually dont wins forcefully as AA, the author, believed, so, as a composition, its flawed anyway. And remains the question of ethics, too, the intention to swindle the public... (and off course he played so wonderfully concealed combinations in actual play that's hard to understand WHY he exposed himself toi this right criticism... is so... obscure...) |
|
| Apr-24-04 | | Zembla: Does anyone know why I don't see any version of this game in my Dover book - My Best Games 1908-1937? |
|
| Apr-24-04 | | WMD: Try game 26, Tarrasch vs Alekhine, in the first section of the book. The continuation is given in Alekhine's note on move 5. |
|
| Apr-25-04 | | Zembla: Thanks, WMD |
|
| Apr-29-04 | | kevin86: Did AA fake this game-or did someone else? You can't blame a person for another's "crime". It was published in Napier's book-PAUL MORPHY AND THE GOLDEN AGE OF CHESS-but the pedigrees of many games in the book were flawed-including one by Naper,himself (!) |
|
| Apr-30-04 | | ughaibu: Kevin86: Alekhine faked it, he published it in the notes to a game with Tarrasch in his first "best games" collection. He also famously faked a game with Tenner. |
|
| May-01-04 | | kevin86: <ughaibu> It sounds like AA meant it as "fiction" since it was his notes. It was however picked up by other sources-one being Napier-and published it as a "game". If it were a "fake",AA would have published it as a "game". Second,to my regret,I found out that the Rh6 move did not win! (see caseyclyde,above)-too bad,it spoiled a good "story" |
|
| May-01-04 | | ughaibu: He said "a game played by the author", it was a fake, the post mortem analysis of a game in which Alekhine was black. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 12.h5