|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Jul-02-04 |
| zynoble1: < 24...Kh8 25. Bg7+ Bxg7....???? |
 |
| Jul-02-04 |
| Severian596: <Geronimo>
Your idea of a Queen sacrifice, then, would be dropping the piece, or giving her up for reasons unknown. That sounds more like a (??) move than a (!!) move. If you like queen sacs that go (??)...well...you're a dying breed ;) |
|
Jul-02-04
 |
| Annie K.: <zynoble1>, if 24... Kh8 25. Bg7+ Bxg7 then 26. Qd8+, game over. (26... Bf8 27. Qxf8# or 26... Re8 27. Qxe8 Bf8 28. Qxf8#.) |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| zynoble1: allright then.. thanks 4 answering |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| ruylopez900: A very nice mating pattern. I almost got it right, I opted for Rg5+ instead of the queen check. |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| xqdashi: Hi Annie K.
Are you Annie from FICS? |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| uponthehill: Pulling the defender away motive, found it quickly :) |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| lnlver: It's not too hard to find. When you see that if white doesn't check on the next move, black mates on the back rank (ignoring white's pawn moves). That leaves three checking moves with the queen and one with the rook. |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| drukenknight: Oh this is the game (I think) that I sent in and suggested a puzzle. Someone had mentioned the 4 pawns attack and recapture with the e pawn, few weeks ago and this is one from Evans book: Modern Chess Brilliancies. Glad to see it generated a lot of interest. It certainly deserved to be in there, one of rare ones that seems to have no "murkiness" about it. I wonder how deep Vladimirov saw through all this? |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| pawn2E4: <hoozits>...........that unfortunately happens to be my problem too! lol |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| drukenknight: it looks like the last chance for black is to decline the sack w/: 18...Kg7
19. d7 Nxd7
20. Qxd7+ Kh8
21. Rxe5 Qxa1+
22. Qd1 Qxd1+
23. Nxd1 Rxe5
24. Bf6+ Kg8
25. Bxe5 Kf7 |
|
Jul-02-04
 |
| talchess2003: <Geronimo:That's why, in faith, it's called the "offering" or the "preparation of the sacrifice" but not the "sacrifice". Here it's not even a real offering because of the mate in one with ...Bxg5. 25. Rf8#. It isn't just that black declines the offer, he declines it because it's an instant loss. In my book: Not a queen sac. (2 cents)> What's the difference between a mate in 1 and a mate in 12 both following a queen sac? Both lead to an inevitable conclusion, and you cannot define a queen sac by the length or difficulty in the calculation of a following mate because that is a subjective matter. So, I don't really get what you mean, unless you say that a queen sac cannot be followed by a forced mate.. but that would be pointless. |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| Akavall: This could mean this;
Sacrifice is something that can't be declined, for example the only legal move is to accept a sacrifice. Or maybe it is a sacrifice as long as it was accepted (for right or wrong reasons, whatever) in this case black didn't take a Queen, so no queen sac. |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| drukenknight: maybe he was thinking, I dont want the B going to h3 in this. THAT would really be bad, so I'll start calculating when I can safely grab the B. He must have been looking at that possibility for a while. |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| drukenknight: Another interesting aspect is this looks similar to a trap in the Pirc. Compare this game on black's 13th move, to this trap from the Pirc, on about the 11th move... 1. e4 d6
2. d4 Nf6
3. Nc3 g6
4. f4 Bg7
5. Nf3 O-O
6. Be2 c5
7. dxc5 Qa5
8. O-O Qxc5+
9. Kh1 Nc6
10. Bd2 Ng4
11. Nd5 Nf2+
12. Rxf2 Qxf2
13. Be3 |
|
Jul-02-04
 |
| RonB52734: Although it is sorely tempting to call 24.Qg5+, "offering the Queen sac," isn't it even more tempting to call that move "the poisoned Queen" or some such? Thus mooting entirely the question of whether the term "sac" should be used. |
|
| Jul-02-04 |
| mkk: Sorry for nitpicking but ...
< God's gift to man-through the death of His Son,Jesus the Christ. The former may or may not be a sacrifice;the latter clearly is. > ... in chess terms this would be called a "sham" sacrifice, after all he got back his life after a couple of days along with a kingdom in heaven ! |
|
Jul-02-04
|
| RonB52734: <mkk> is that like pawn to h8=Q? I mean, you do actually lose the pawn, right? Ok, now I'm going to hide in the basement and watch out for lightning. |
|
Jul-03-04
|
| Annie K.: <xqdashi>
--- Hi Annie K.
Are you Annie from FICS? ---
No, that's not me. :) |
|
Jul-05-04
 |
| Geronimo: To <my critics>: The real point is that there is NO SAC in this game because both queens are there on the board at the end of it! 24.Qg5+ offers a sacrifice, certainly, which black rightly declines. Therefore: no sac. It's not a sac if nothing gets sacked. If anything it's analogous to a declined gambit. Before anyone responds against this with religious ferver, please go look up "analogous" in a dictionary! |
|
Jul-05-04
|
| Geronimo: In other words, <Kevin86>, <severian596> and <talchess2003> my point was NOT that the offer, if accepted, led to mate. Of course that's the point of most queen sacs. My point was that the offer was not accepted, and therefore it didn't constitute a sacrifice. Sorry if I wasn't clear. |
|
Jul-27-04
 |
| patzer2: Vladimirov's 17. Bxf7+ is given as the solution to number 1705 in Chess Informant's 1980 Encyclopedia of Chess Middle Games/Combinations. It is classified under the theme "Demolition of Pawn Structure" via "Sacrfice on f7 (f2)." Chess Informant follows the text in giving it as a win for White. However, Fritz 8 seems to have cooked this older Chess Informant "White to Win" problem and found a superior line actually giving Black a clear advantage. The Fritz line is 17...Kxf7 18. Rxf5+ Kg7!! (not 18...gxf5??) 19. d7 Nxd7 20. Qxd7+ Kh8 21. Rxe5 Qxa1+ 22. Qd1 Qxd1+ 23. Nxd1 Rxe5 24. Bf6+ Kg8 25. Bxe6 Re8 26. Bg3 with a winning advantage for Black (-1.66 @ 18 ply and 1360kN/s on infinite analysis). I recently upgraded my computer to an AMD 3000 processor, and Fritz 8 now seems to work better and faster than on my old Intel Pentium 4 processor running at 2.0 GHZ. |
|
| Jan-09-06 |
| mr j: What a beautifull check-mate! Nice game :) |
|
| May-17-09 |
| zzzzzzzzzzzz: very nice mate there,I still don't get why this is a notable game |
|
Nov-07-09
 |
| Tubba324: This is the game I was looking for.
Thought that black player was Toth, so no wonder I couldn't find it earlier.Fantastic attacking game. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
sac: 18.Rxf5+