|Nov-04-04|| ||Marco65: I submitted this game, hoping that some kibitzer can explain that bishop sacrifice to me.|
In the first place, why not 13...♔g8 ? E.g. 14.♕h5 ♕f6 and I don't know how to continue from there.
Then, what if 15...fxe6 ? E.g. 16.♕g4 ♘f6. Again I don't see how to win.
|Nov-04-04|| ||sneaky pete: <Marco65> 13... Kg8 would have been best, the outcome after 14.Qh5 .. is not clear, there's no consensus among the various commentators at this point. After 15... fxe6 the winning line 16.Qd3+ Kf6 (.. Kh5 17.g4+ ..) 17.Qf3+ Bf4 18.Qxf4 Ke7 19.Qf7+ Kd6 20.Qxe6+ Kc5 21.b4+ Kb5 22.a4# was first published by Fred Reinfeld in <Colle's Chess Masterpieces>. Colle himself indicated 16.h5+ Rxh5 17.Qd3+ .. also winning.|
After 13... Kg8 14.Qh5 Ne5 has been suggested (by Reinfeld and others) as a drawing line: after 15.Rxe5 Bxe5 16.Qxf7+ Kh8 17.Qh5+ .. etc. Ottow and Buecker (Kaissiber # 3, 1997) suggest 17.b3! .. winning (to parry a later Ba3+ .. black must blockade the escape route of his king).
After 13... Kg8 14.Qh5 Qf6 Reinfeld continues 15.Qh7+ Kf8 16.Ne4 Qe5 17.f4 Qd5 18.c4 Qa5 19.Bd2 .. "with a winning attack". Smith and Hall copy this line with the more conservative evaluation "white has the initiative".
Ottow and Buecker instead give 18... Qc6 (18... Qa5 loses time) 19.Qh8+ Ke7 20.Qxg7 .. and suggest (with lots of moves and subvariations) white has a dangerous attack.
Maybe another kibitzer can post what Gary Lane writes about this position, I don't have his book.
|Nov-04-04|| ||Dudley: A precondtion for the Bxh7 sac is normallly to have a pawn on e5, so this one may fit in the "don't try this at home" category. The follow up sac on e6 makes it work, mate would follow after 15...fxe6 16.Qd3. Colle was a compulsive sac artist and when it worked it was brilliant but it didn't always work. O'Hanlon sure took a beating from the Colle system-compare Koltanowski-O'Hanlon 1937 in my Colle system game collection. |
|Nov-04-04|| ||Marco65: <sneaky pete> Thanks for the analysis. I should read more. But I'm happy I would choose 13...Kg8 by instinct. |
|Jan-25-05|| ||Halfpricemidge: 13...Kg8 14.Qh5 Qf6 15.Qh7+ Kf8 16.Ne4 Qg6 17.QxQ f7xQ 18.NxB+_ |
|Sep-10-05|| ||seacrow: This game is examined in the Chapter "The Classic Bishop Sacrifice" in Vukovic's "The Art of Attack". |
According to Vukovic, the sac was unsound , but Black did not take advantage of it. :)
|Sep-14-05|| ||mofoman: Vukovic was wrong so as many others. Read "Das Colle-Koltanowski-System" by
Bronznik Valeri, and you will see that this sac acctually works. The best black can do is hope for a draw...|
|Sep-16-05|| ||Averageguy: Why not 17.Nxf7+ ?
|Sep-16-05|| ||sneaky pete: <Averageguy> Because 17.Rxd6 .. is even stronger.|
|Sep-16-05|| ||Dres1: Colle system is caca|
|Sep-16-05|| ||keypusher: <seacrow> my edition of Vuckovic's book has some helpful footnotes by John Nunn, who explains some of the flaws in Vuckovic's analysis of this game.|
Vuckovic's occasional analytical errors shouldn't obscure the fact that The Art of Attack is one of the best chess books ever written.
|Oct-23-05|| ||wwall: Not 16...Rxh5?? 17.Qd3+ Kh6 18.Nxf7 mate.
Or 17.Nxf7+ Kh7 18.Qc2+ Kg8 19.Nxd8 Bxe6 20.Nxe6 and White wins.
Or 19.Nxh8 Kxh8 20.Rxd4 and 21.h6, which should win for White.
If 19...Kh6, then 20.Qb3, threatening 21.Rxf6+ gxf6 22.Qf7 and 23.Qg6 mate.
|Apr-18-06|| ||Deefstes: This game confuses me! Apart from the weird Bishop sac, 17.Nxf7+, winning the Queen still looks stronger to me than the text line.|
|Sep-21-08|| ||just a kid: <sneaky pete>17.Nxf7+ which I have read is also really good.|
|Sep-15-09|| ||RandomVisitor: The critical line appears to be:
12.Bxh7+ Kxh7 13.Ng5+ <Kg8> 14.Qh5 Qf6 15.Qh7+ Kf8 16.Ne4 Qe5 <17.f4> Qd5 18.c4 where it first appears that white can keep up some pressure on either 18...Qc6 or 18...Qa5, but the line 18...Qc6 19.Qh8+ Ke7 20.Qxg7 <Kd8> and now:
a) 21.Nxd6 Qxd6 22.Qxf7 Re7 23.Qg8+ Kc7 24.f5 e5 25.Bg5 b6! 26.Bxe7 Qxe7 27.Qe6 Qg7 28.f6 Qg5 and black has uncoiled and possibly has the initiative.
b) 21.Qxf7 with continuing pressure.
Drawing would be 17.cxd4 Qxh2+! 18.Qxh2 Bxh2+ 19.Kxh2 Nf6 and now 20.Nxf6 gxf6 21.Bd2 goes nowhere.
Because of these outcomes, 12.Qxd4 or 12.Bc2 are solid and worth considering.
|Sep-15-09|| ||Marmot PFL: Often is seems 13...Kg6 is the best (or only) defense, but here f8 is available so Kg8 was correct, and probably would draw.|
|Sep-22-09|| ||RandomVisitor: My complete analysis of the 12.Bxh7+ Kxh7 13.Ng5+ <Kg8> line is posted here:
|Oct-18-11|| ||Domdaniel: A new book all about the Bxh7+ sac, Sacking the Citadel, examines this game all over again.|
A review: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/201...
|Feb-26-12|| ||Gambit All: Great Game! The conceived double sac is a terrific attack.|
|Feb-27-16|| ||luftforlife: <Marco65>: GM Dr. Reuben Fine analyzes the consequences of the alternative line stemming from 13. . . . Kg8 as follows:|
"14. Qh5, Nf6; 15. Qxf7+, Kh8; 16. Re4, Nxe4; 17. Qh5+, Kg8; 18. Qh7+, Kf8; 19. Qh8+, Ke7; 20. Qxg7#."
Reuben Fine, The Middle Game in Chess (New York: David McKay Co. 1952, Tartan softcover reprint, September 1972), at 37 (notation converted, cumulative enumeration substituted).
Best to all, ~ lufty