|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-31-12 | | VincentL: "Easy".
14. Qxh7+ Rxh7 15. Ng6#.
The power of two knights. |
 |
Jan-31-12
 | | kevin86: White sacs the queen for a mere pawn...and the crucial square g6. The beautiful two knight mate follows. |
|
Jan-31-12
 | | FSR: Weird idea that I don't recall ever seeing before: 14.Qxh7+! and 15.Ng6# (whether or not Black takes the queen). |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | BlackSheep: Horrific play savagely punished (and rightly so) . |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | psmith: This is very pretty, and I saw it almost instantly. BUT -- I suspect I only saw it because it was a puzzle. Without that setting I might not have seen it at all. |
|
Jan-31-12
 | | Gilmoy: Ooh, protected Nd6 acting like a very short-range bishop, K trapped in a 2x2 box: This <bodes ill> for Black!! cackle ... Must be a book trap in this line of French. |
|
Jan-31-12
| | FSR: <Gilmoy: ... Must be a book trap in this line of French.> Book traps involve plausible play by the side who gets trapped. This, on the other hand, was practically a helpmate. What sort of maniac invites White's knight to settle on d6 with check? |
|
Jan-31-12
 | | chrisowen: Double trouble kopeck lance nd6 I recce ng6 approach unlikely it dread 14.qxh7 rxh7 as well sherbet dip it narrowed own labour of love harvest crab skin c6 over and a6 board level o dill eyes dally it amusing ramble havent the foggiest who Couvee thinks he is tadder the wiser I hope try dish of the day for now night souffle good game in store but beats me laud eer d8 what ties c6 ar I on la pellet wooden b5 nonnie d6. |
|
Jan-31-12
 | | Phony Benoni: I got this instantly simply because I've seen it before, but for the life I me I can't remember where. Chernev's <1000 Best Short Games of Chess> keeps ringing a bell, but that was published several years before 1955. Perhaps it was one of Horowitz's revised editions of <The Golden Treasury of Chess>. He was still doing those in in the 1960s. Or perhaps <Nostrils> is right and the game was actually played by Abraham Speijer in 1902. |
|
Jan-31-12
 | | Once: <newshutz, amaurobius> Twas meant as a little piece of deliberate irony - claiming to be gender neutral and then calling the protagonist "she" and saying that if you're too dumb to play the French you should take up the sicilian. It was all intended to be part of the joke, as in "I've told you a million times never to exagerate" or "I would give my right arm to be ambidextrous". But I guess if you need to explain a joke it isn't funny. Sorry about that. |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | k.khalil: 14. Qxh7 ouch!
The poor king gets asphyxiated after 15. Ng6 |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | MaczynskiPratten: Lovely and unusual mating pattern, a sort of smothered mate but with Black's King in the middle of the board and with all 8 flight squares instead of 3. However, 4 of those squares are blocked by his own pieces and 3 more by White's Knights, leaving d6 which is covered by White's e pawn. As for Couvee, he seems to be a NN, just a patzer, like A Stephan yesterday (both with only one game in CG DB). Maybe he was a good player who had a mental aberration when playing c6 that d6 was still covered by the "retained image" of the c7 pawn - but I doubt it, it just looks like an inept move by a weak player. |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | MaczynskiPratten: In the interests of gender fairness, maybe we should remember that perhaps the classic computer helpdesk story was the guy (yes, male) who was demanding a refund of his broken computer and threatening to sue. He had put the floppy disk in (yes, the story is that old) and it wouldn't come out. He had tried pulling it with pliers but it wouldn't come, so he poured in fat from the turkey baster and eventually wrenched it out. "Sir, did you press the eject button?" "The what?" .. the overall conversation is too long to repeat in full, but much funnier - google it! |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | ajile: I laughed when I figured it out. Mated by 2 knights for the win! |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | newton296: <Tigranvp: 8. ... c6 is a positional blunder; 7. ... Nb6; followed by 8. ...a6 is better than 7. ...Qd8. By the way Black played the French he couldn't have been very familar with it.> couve just vomits out a french defense! 7...Qd8? 8...c6?? are beginner errors. just awful! event?
site?
rating?
pretty much says it all. |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | BOSTER: <FSR> <What sort of maniac invites white's knight to settle on d6 with check?>. It is always possible to explain move 8...c6.
First reason-common visualization error a "retained image". Second. The rule- <touch-move>. Third. The desire to break our routine chess life.
And sometimes there is no reason to beat the opponent. Last but not least-create the masterpiece.
Can you play only one game and become so popular?
Maybe it was simple a joke.
I guess that if after 12.Nh3 black would play Qf8, to make his king more mobile, not everybody as white win this game. |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | Penguincw: A really nice two knight checkmate (with the help of black's pieces, of course). |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | 1stboard: Another case of removing the guard, in this case the pawn at H7 ..... |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | amaurobius: <Once> My reference to "your best efforts to keep it secret" was as much tongue in cheek as your claim to gender neutrality. I thoroughly enjoyed the humour of your post. |
|
| Jan-31-12 | | TrollKing: 8 ... c6 is horrible. Make that a howler. |
|
Jan-31-12
| | FSR: <Phony Benoni: I got this instantly simply because I've seen it before, but for the life I me I can't remember where. Chernev's <1000 Best Short Games of Chess> keeps ringing a bell,> Rightly so. The game appears in Chernev's book as game 174 on page 77, <Speyer-Couvee> with no date or place given. <but that was published several years before 1955.> Really? The book's copyright date is 1955, and it was assigned Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 55-5949. I don't think it actually contains any games played as late as 1955, though. Glancing at it, the latest games I see are from 1953, which are near the end of the book (games 993 and 998). Note that CG.com in the game's caption (as opposed to the "scoresheet") gives its date as "? 1955," suggesting uncertainty on this score. Either CG.com or CG.com's source may well have taken the game from Chernev's book and given its date as "? 1955" based on the date of publication of Chernev's book. <Perhaps it was one of Horowitz's revised editions of <The Golden Treasury of Chess>. He was still doing those in in the 1960s.> It's not in Wellmuth's original (1943) edition. As you note, Horowitz revised that book (and removed Wellmuth's name, http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...), but the game is also not in the revised (Horowitz 1978) version that I have. |
|
Feb-01-12
| | Phony Benoni: <FSR> Thanks for looking that up. I used to have a good book collection, but had to sell it and regret that to this day. I even vaguely remember the diagram being at the top of the second column on the right-hand page. I could have checked the date a little more carefully, but I know what I was thinking of. The book is arranged by length of game, except for the last dozen or so which appear to be last-minute additions. You noticed the later date on a couple of those final games. The last game in the book was Casas vs Piazzini, 1952, so I had the idea the book was published earlier than 1955. The publication date of the book may be where the 1955 date for the game came from, but it was almost surely played earlier than that since it was in the "earlier" section, not the later additions. |
|
| Feb-02-12 | | LIFE Master AJ: <Boster> Good points. |
|
| Feb-02-12 | | LIFE Master AJ: <Boster> One you did not cover - nerves. Many times I have played pretty solid players. After the game, they make a poor move and usually the explanation is: "I was a little nervous playing you." Maybe this does not happen in New York, (or Chicago ... or L.A.) where playing masters on Board One is a common experience, but I have heard it many times down here, in my neck of the woods. Sometimes I get nervous, too.
Some more thoughts on this subject:
#1.) I did not sleep well the night before and I am worried that I will make a mistake as a result. #2.) I am trying to play new openings, sometimes playing a new line every time I play. (I have studied opening theory my whole life, I decided to stop playing the same old boring stuff, and start playing more interesting openings instead. Also ---> by constantly varying my openings - it makes you harder to prepare for.) #3.) Sometimes a player will make the pronouncement (before the game), that: "I am going to defeat you." Most of the time, you shrug it off, but every so often your opponent succeeds. #4.) Occasionally, I get the <<hunch>> that I may drop a game. Its NOT rational ... but its real, none-the-less. Call it fututre sight, superstition, bad bio-rhythyms, intuition, whatever ... just a gut feeling that you can't seem to shake. (I had this in the first round of my last tournament ... I have no idea why. I shook it off, and then played pretty well after that.) #5.) I make a lot of people nervous. A lot of that is intentional. If a player likes to attack, I try to go on the offensive as quickly as possible. If a player likes blockaded positions, I make sure that I open up the game as much as possible. (Etc.) A lot of this is psychology in chess ... which I learned from studying the games of Lasker. (Maybe Tal too.) #6.) Chess players do NOT like shocks. Make one surprise move, and you may not win the game. Make five or six of these ... and I can almost guarantee that you will win. Maybe there are others that I did not cover here. |
|
Mar-04-13
 | | whiteshark:  mare on the 6th rank. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
sac: 14.Qxh7+