|Jun-11-04|| ||Chessical: Tarrasch plays very carefully to secure the point in an instructive K + 3 v K + 2 pawns on same wing endgame. Games such as this built up modern endgame theory.|
<67.h4!> is a swifter win, 67...Kf7 68.h5 Kg8 69.h6 Kh8 (<69...gxh6> 70.Ke6 Kg7 71.g4 h5 72.gxh5 Kh6 73.Kxf6 Kxh5 74.Ke6) 70.hxg7+ Kh7 71.g8Q+ Kxg8 72.Ke6 Kg7 73.g4 Kh7 74.Kxf6
Pushing the h pawn in thses circumstances became the "book" solution. Black's K becomes boxed in, and has to give way to White's K.
|Jun-11-04|| ||seoulmama: This indeed is a powerful display of understanding pawn endings. |
|Jun-11-04|| ||Honza Cervenka: 32...Rc8 was a mistake. Of course, white could not play 34.Qxc8?? Qxc8 35.Ne7+ Kf8 36.Nxc8 for 36...d3 |
|Jul-31-05|| ||Honza Cervenka: <chessgames.com> Tarrasch in his Dreihundert Schachpartien gives slightly different gamescore (after 47...Kb4): 48.Kd4 Kb5 49.Ke5 Kc4 50.Kf4 Kd4 etc. like in the gamescore in your database, of course with a shifted numbering of moves.|
|Mar-11-06|| ||Calli: Does 50...Ke3 51.Kxh4 Kf2 draw?|
|Jul-17-07|| ||Honza Cervenka: <Calli> I think so. 50...Ke3 51.Kxh4 Kf2 52.Kh3 g5 is draw, for example 53.Kg4 Kxg2 54.Kxg5 Kxh2 55.f4 Kg3 56.f5 Kf3 57.f6 Ke4 and white cannot play 58.Kh6?? due to 58...Kf5 59.Kg7 Ke6 and black wins. Of course, 58.Kg4 Ke5 59.Kg5 Ke6 60.Kg4 Kxf6 61.Kf4 is theoretical draw and white has also other ways to force it but the win for him is not there.|
|Oct-22-09|| ||birthtimes: After 13. c3 Nimzowitsch writes, "Not quite timely, it sins against our law: The characteristic position shall be utilized at first in the form in which it is. Therefore, first the knight maneuver f3-d2-c4-e3 should be played. It is interesting that Steinitz also recommends the same maneuver...This deep statement contains the first bud of my system of the characteristic position."|
Blockade, p. 58.
|Oct-22-09|| ||birthtimes: After 31. Qc4 Nimzowitsch writes, "The pieces--according to our law--aim at the entry point [d5]. This indicated maneuvering, indicated through the weakness of d6 and d5 is now apparent, namely Ne3, Qd5, Nc4. This 'change of place' illustrates also our law concerning the alternating occupation of the point of entry by different pieces!"|
ibid., p. 59.
|Oct-22-09|| ||birthtimes: After 32...Rc8 Nimzowitsch writes, "A mistake, which forces the game out of the train of logical development. The latter consisted, as stated, in maneuvering against d6 (which pawn shall be attacked first one way then another way) which would have forced the enemy pieces into uncomfortable positions. If there wasn't anything better, then the d-pawn could be attacked after exchanging the Nd4 by Nd5-c3-e2. Then it only seems that attack and defense hold each other in the balance: queen and rook versus queen and rook. In reality the e-pawn will be the third attacker, namely e4-e5 at the right moment, and wins. And so the threatening advance--made a reality--would have brought about the decision."|
|May-18-16|| ||zanzibar: Was the movelist to this game altered?
I read <Calli>'s comments as valid, but starting on move 51.
That's why I feel, even if not applicable here, that changes to the game should be documented with notes injected into the comment stream.