< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jun-23-09|| ||JaneEyre: Heck, why am I only the 8th kibitzer since 2004 in this masterpiece, and it's now already 2009?|
|Jun-23-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: Although Dus Chotimirsky lost, he went down swinging. The entire game has a very modern look to it.|
|Jun-23-09|| ||sfeuler: Why not simply 23...Nxd3 killing the whole concept?|
|Jun-23-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: Well, he didn't see e5, etc. from Capa coming, obviously. But he may well have reasoned that exchanges would only help Capa round up the d pawn. Do you really want to try to defend something like that in an endgame against Capablanca?|
|Jun-23-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Obviously, Dus Chotimirsky had analyzed the possible visitations arising from 23...Na4?, which turned out to be a mistake, and had concluded that it was his best option. Why play it at all? It turned out that Capablanca had seen double what he did, and in fact was baiting him to make that move.|
|Jun-23-09|| ||visayanbraindoctor: <AnalyzeThis: Although Dus Chotimirsky lost, he went down swinging. The entire game has a very modern look to it.>|
I actually cannot distinguish if a game is 'modern' or not even if it has been played in the early 20th century if I did not know that.
I tend to see a game as looking more 'modern' if it has an early fianchettoed bishop in the opening, I guess because these types of games hardly existed before WW1. By the 1920s however, early fianchettoes were coming into the vogue. The top players started adopting these openings; Capablanca himself for example started playing the Queen's Indian. Most of the games by top players in the 1920s and onwards look completely modern to me.
|Jun-23-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: Modern also refers to things like the acceptance of pawn weaknesses (or square weaknesses) for the sake of dynamic play. True, guys like Tarrasch were doing this back in the day, too.|
|Aug-18-09|| ||LIFE Master AJ: What a game!!! (I am not certain, but I don't think I had ever seen this one before.)|
|Aug-18-09|| ||birthtimes: "The queen of course cannot be taken because of 31. Nxe7+. Notice how the knight exerts an enormous pressure (f5 is one of the strongest places for a knight when attacking the king castled on that side).|
White's queen move accomplishes three things: it unpins the knight, it gains time by forcing the black queen to move, and it brings the queen in line with the white bishop (after the bishop takes the b-pawn), controlling the diagonal a4-e8.
Later on, as a result of the manoeuvre, when the queens are exchanged on d7, the white bishop will remain there, controlling the square e8, thus protecting the advance of White's passed e-pawn which will queen at e8.
If the reader will carefully consider all these moves and combinations he will find not only the beauty of the whole thing, but, what is far more important for his progress, the underlying principle of the middle-game: co-ordinating the action of the pieces."
Some of Capablanca's wonderful annotations on his game against Dus-Khotimirsky (Black) in St. Petersburg on December 13, 1913, after 30. Qc6, in "A Primer of Chess, 1995, p.69.
|Aug-18-09|| ||WhiteRook48: wonderful example of Capablanca's natural talent|
|Aug-19-09|| ||LIFE Master AJ: If there enough interested persons, maybe I will annotate this game for one of my web pages.|
|Aug-19-09|| ||birthtimes: Capablanca writes, "If 27...fxe6 then 28. Qg4, threatening both Bxg6 and also Qxe6+. Black probably wanted to have his queen on the second line for the possible defense of his king. (It is easy to see that by removing the bishop Black's queen would be defending the whole kingside). Also he wanted to exchange queens after ...fxe6. The reader should notice the enormous force exerted by the entrance of the white knight into the fray. This knight will be the deciding factor."|
ibid., p. 68
|Aug-29-09|| ||birthtimes: Listen to the Master himself as he annotates this game...anyone else would do it a disservice...|
"Had Black played [16...Rfc8] he now would have his two rooks in the open lines, and the plan that White evolves from his next move on would not have been so effective, if at all possible. This position should be carefully studied.
It is evident to White that Black wants to play Nd7, followed by Ne5 or Nc5, and Na4 forcing the advance of the [White] b-pawn in some cases, and then through the combined action of the dark-squared bishop at f6, the pawn at d4, and the knight ultimately at c3, cramp White's game so as to make it impossible for him to hold out. It is against this plan that White must evolve another that will meet it at every point. If this can be done, then White must come out on top, as he will be able in the long run to concentrate sufficient forces against the pawn at d4 or the pawn at b5, and take either one or the other."
After 22...Nc5, Master continues, "White has not only led on Black to this manoeuvre, but what is more he will now induce him to go with the knight to a4."
"Had now Black played [23...] Nxd3, then 24. Qxd3 Rc3? 25. Rxc3 dxc3 26. Ne3 Bf6 27. Nc2 followed by Ra5, and White has the better game. Probably the best line of play for Black would be 23...Nxd3 24. Qxd3 Bf6."
After 25...g6, "White threatened Qf5. Had Black played Rf8, he would later on be forced to play g6."
After 27. Ng3, "If 27...fxe6 28. Qg4 threatening both Bxg6 and also Qxe6+. The White knight comes in with tremendous force in all these variations."
After 28...fex6, "28...Kh8 was best, but then Qe4 should win. Black has been wanting to take this pawn all the time, and thinks the time has come, but it only hastens the result."
After 30. Qc6, "The object of this move is to control the square at e8 with both queen and bishop, so that after the queens are exchanged at d7 the bishop remains there to protect the advance of the passed pawn."
From "My Chess Career" by J.R. Capablanca, 1966, pp. 91-94. This book, like "A Primer in Chess" (see above) and "Chess Fundamentals", contains many more annotations by Capablanca of several of his games...
|Aug-29-09|| ||WhiteRook48: Capablanca was so hard to beat around here|
|Oct-26-09|| ||RandomVisitor: 3 minutes per move:
Jose Raul Capablanca - Dus Chotimirsky
St Petersburg exhibition St Petersburg (2), 1913
[Rybka 3 ]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 Na5 9.Bc2 c5 10.d4 Qc7 11.Nbd2 last book move
[Rybka 3 : 12.d5 Na5 13.b4 Nb7 14.a4 cxb4 15.cxb4 Bd7 16.axb5 Bxb5 17.h3 0-0 18.Ba4 Qc3 19.Rb1 Qc7 20.Bb2 Rfc8 0.39/18 ]
[Rybka 3 : 12...exd4 13.a4 b4 14.cxd4 Bg4 15.dxc5 dxc5 16.h3 Bxf3 17.Qxf3 0-0 18.Be3 Qe5 19.b3 Bd6 20.Rad1 Nd4 21.Bxd4 cxd4 22.Qd3 Rfd8 23.Bb1= -0.12/17 ]
13.cxd4 -0.08/16 Bg4= -0.04/20
[Rybka 3 : 13...exd4 14.a4 b4 15.Ng3 0-0 16.Bf4 Bg4 17.Nf5 Nh5 18.Bd2= -0.08/16 ]
14.d5 -0.04/20 Nd4 -0.04/19
15.Bd3 -0.04/16 0-0 -0.04/17
[Rybka 3 : 16.Ng3 Bxf3 17.gxf3 g6 18.Be3 Rfc8= -0.04/17 ]
[Rybka 3 : 16...Nxf3+ 17.gxf3 Bh3= -0.14/17 ]
17.Bxd4 0.17/18 exd4 0.27/18
[Rybka 3 : 17...Bxf3 18.Qxf3 exd4 19.a4 Nd7 20.axb5 Ne5 21.Qe2 axb5 22.Bxb5 Bg5 23.g3 Rb8 24.f4 Qc5 25.fxe5 Rxb5 26.exd6 d3+ 27.Qf2 Qxd6 28.Qd4 Rfb8 29.Qxd3 Rxb2 30.Qd4 R2b4= 0.17/18 ]
[Rybka 3 : 18.Be2 Bxf3 19.Bxf3 Qb6 20.Qd2 g6 21.Red1 Rfe8 22.a4 Bd8 23.axb5 Qxb5 24.Be2 Qb3 25.Ra3 Qb8 26.f3 Bb6 27.Kh1 0.27/18 ]
[Rybka 3 : 18...Nd7 19.axb5 axb5 20.Ng3 Qb6 21.Nf5 Bf6 22.h3 Bxf5 23.exf5 Ne5 24.Bf1 Rc5 25.Qb3 Nxf3+ 26.Qxf3 Rc2 27.Re2= 0.00/16 ]
19.axb5 0.31/17 axb5 0.32/18
[Rybka 3 : 20.N1d2 Nd7 21.Qb3 Nc5 22.Qxb5 Qxb5 23.Bxb5 Rb8 24.Bf1 d3 25.e5 Rfd8 26.Reb1 Rb4 27.h3 Bc8 28.Ra8 g6 29.Re1 0.32/18 ]
21.Qxf3 0.07/18 Nd7 0.23/16
[Rybka 3 : 22.Red1 h6 23.Qg4 Ne5 24.Qe2 Bg5 25.Bxb5= 0.23/16 ]
[Rybka 3 : 22...Rxc1 23.Rxc1 Qa5 24.Qe2 Nc5 25.Bxb5 g6 26.Rb1 Qb4 27.Nd2 Bg5 28.Nf3 Bf6 29.Bd3 Qb3 30.Rd1 Rb8= 0.09/17 ]
[Rybka 3 : 23.Ng3 g6 24.Ne2 Nb3 25.Rxc8 Rxc8 26.Ra3 Nd2 27.Qf4 Nc4 28.Qc1 Qc5 29.Ra2 Kg7 30.Qd1 Bf6 31.b3 0.27/18 ]
[Rybka 3 : 23...Nxd3 24.Qxd3 g6 25.Ng3 Bf6 26.Ne2 Rc4 27.Kh2 Rfc8 28.f4 Qb7 29.Rcb1 Bg7 30.Ra5 h6 31.Qa3= -0.24/17 ]
24.Rxc8 0.43/21 Rxc8 0.43/20
25.e5 0.43/19 g6 0.43/19
26.e6 0.39/19 Rf8 0.39/18
27.Ng3 0.39/16 Qb7? 2.20/19
[Rybka 3 : 27...Qc7 28.Bxb5 Nc3 29.exf7+ Rxf7 30.Qd3 Nxb5 31.Qxb5 Qc2 32.Qe2 Qb3 33.Ne4 Qxd5 34.Qd3 Qe5 35.b5 d5 36.Nd2 Bc5 37.Rd1 Rb7 38.Rc1 Bb6 39.Nf3 0.39/16 ]
28.Nf5 2.05/16 fxe6 3.15/17
[Rybka 3 : 28...Kh8 29.Qe4 fxe6 30.Nxe7 Qxe7 31.dxe6 Nc3 32.Qxd4+ Qg7 33.Qxg7+ Kxg7 34.Ra7+ Kf6 35.Rxh7 Nd5 36.Bxb5 Kxe6 37.Rb7 Rf4 38.Be8 g5 39.g3 Rf8 40.Bd7+ Ke5 41.b5 Kd4 42.Bc6 Rf5 43.Bxd5 Rxd5 2.05/16 ]
29.dxe6 3.14/15 Qc7 3.15/21
30.Qc6 3.15/22 Qd8 3.15/20
31.Nxe7+ 3.15/22 Qxe7 3.15/21
32.Bxb5 3.15/19 Nc3 3.15/20
33.Qd7 3.15/22 Qxd7 3.15/21
34.Bxd7 3.03/20 Rb8? 5.02/21
[Rybka 3 : 34...Nd5 35.Ra6 Rb8 36.Rxd6 Nf6 37.Rxd4 Kf8 38.Kh2 Ke7 39.Kg3 Rf8 40.f3 Nh5+ 41.Kg4 Ng7 42.Rf4 Nf5 43.Re4 Nd6 44.Re5 Nc4 45.Re2 3.03/20 ]
<analysis stopped at this point>
|Oct-26-09|| ||RandomVisitor: After <23...Nxd3> 24.Qxd3 Rc3 25.Rxc3 dxc3 26.Ne3 we have:|
1: Jose Raul Capablanca - Dus Chotimirsky, St Petersburg exhibition 1913
click for larger view
Analysis by Rybka 3 : <23-ply>
<1. = (-0.10): 26...Bf6> 27.Ra5 Rb8 28.g3 h5 29.h4 g6 30.Nc2 Be5 31.Kg2 Bg7 32.Qe3 Qd8 33.Qd3 Qd7 34.Na3
2. = (-0.01): 26...Rc8 27.Ra5 g6 28.Nc2 Rc4 29.Qe3 Qxe3 30.fxe3 Rxe4 31.Rxb5 Re5 32.Rb8+ Kg7 33.Rc8 Rxd5 34.Rxc3 Rb5 35.Kf2 d5 36.Kf3 h5 37.Ra3 Bd6 38.Ra5 Rb7 39.Rxd5 Bxb4
|Dec-08-15|| ||lost in space: Nice game from mater cap.
My first instict would have been 16...Rfc8 and 23...Nxd3 to keep the balance....
|Dec-08-15|| ||Nichth: Black had the option to get rid of whites WSB with 23...Nxd3, but instead chose 23...Na4, plugging the open a-file, but consigning the knight to a sideshow. Did Black miss the e4-5-6 pawn push only moments later, which freed up White's bishop to dominate the board, or am I missing something that makes 23...Na4 the better move?|
|Dec-08-15|| ||kevin86: Why did black continue after white queened?|
|Dec-08-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: FIDC played on far too long. Maybe he needed time to mentally adjust to losing.|
|Dec-08-15|| ||fiercebadger: majestic,|
|Dec-08-15|| ||Whitehat1963: Why on earth does black continue after 44. Kd2? There's nothing left. What was he hoping for?|
|Dec-08-15|| ||offramp: Heck why am I only the 7th kibitzer since 2009 in this masterpiece, and it's now already 2015?|
|Dec-10-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: < offramp: Heck why am I only the 7th kibitzer since 2009 in this masterpiece, and it's now already 2015?>|
I am guessing it's because FIDC is rather obscure. People looking at JRC games likely look at the ones against the great contemporaries, such as Lasker, AA and Rubinstein, or else they look at his game against the "young guns" Fine, Botvinnik, Keres etc.
|Dec-10-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: <Jun-23-09 visayanbraindoctor: Heck why am I only the 7th kibitzer since 2004 in this masterpiece, and it's now already 2009?>|
OK, now I get it.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·