|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Oct-26-10
 | | scormus: Fun, I mean pun idea "I KID you not"
Yes, incredible but, I think, an actual game. Brings to mind the famous "Duel in the sun" (Boston, 1982). |
 |
| Nov-03-10 | | hannahbelle: 3Q? terrifying... |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Even if this game proves a fabrication, it still astounds the mind. I feel rather grateful for all of the blunders--really enliven the game, they do. A friend of mine in university was quite the advocate for 9.Bg5 vs. The Death Variation (he claimed that's how Swedish chess players label 7...Nc6--heaven knows if that's true). This game does illustrate why he liked it; White's Queen side assault does benefit from the tempi used by the Black Bishop, as well as Black's inability to play ...Nf6-d7 in some variations. |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | al wazir: What stopped white from playing 41. Nxg3 ? |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | iamsheaf: How on earth did white lose this one ? |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | Once: And when the game ended, with a cluster of onlookers crowded round the board, did both white and black slump back in the chairs, utterly exhausted by the quintuple queenery? And when there were five queens on the board, perchance were three of them upside-down rooks? And did Black swagger a little afterwards and say ... "actually I had it all figured out. It was mostly home preparation anyway." Or maybe the two players were sworn enemies, mortal foes, like Sherlock Holmes and Moriarity, and they were absolutely fixated on ripping the other to pieces ... Great game, as violent as a summer blockbuster. And who said chess was dull? |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | imreker: This game is too crazy to be true. |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | kellmano: Totally nuts.
You've gotta love the Kings Indian. Black looks busted all game, then goes a queen down and still the king is unthreatened in its formation of bishop, rook and pawn. |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | Sastre: <al wazir: What stopped white from playing 41. Nxg3 ?> 41...fxg3+ 42.Ke3 Bg5+ 43.Kd3 Qxg2 44.Qc2 Qxf3+ 45.Kc4 Bxc1 46.Qxc1 Qxe4+ looks good for Black. |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | sfm: "Striking belov..." |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | goodevans: This guy Belov has contributed some interesting losses to the database, including a couple of nice miniatures. Thanks, Belov. |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | The HeavenSmile: I get the impression that after 28...Qg5 black either sensed a win or calculated that he was lost and went for an all out attack. No one in their right mind would enter into an endgame against two queens |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | kevin86: This game had everything! Five queens,including a long period of three queens;it also had a threefold repititititition which neither player claimed. |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | pers0n: this game was certainly worthy of being game of the day. lots of queens, very entertaining. |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | Rob Morrison: This game is incredible! I suspect it really did happen. They might both have been, say, 2150 players, not good enough to be well-known but good enough to create this amazing battle. For sure there were lots of mistakes, particularly by white, who seemed to lose his head in trying to make his two queens accomplish something. |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | WhiteRook48: this couldn't be a crazier game |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | jmactas: 
click for larger view
Really? 5 queens. |
|
Nov-03-10
| | al wazir: <Sastre: 41...fxg3+> 42.Ke2 Qxg2+ 43. Kd1 Bg5 (43...Qf3+ 44. Qe2) 44. Rc2. Now what? |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | bgkuzzy: this is an omg |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | James Bowman: Some sort of recreational chemistry was involved, I felt like white was the best player on blacks team and vice verca. White passed on several opportunities to reduce material and increase his advantage but he had other plans and I use the term loosely. Fun yes instructive only as a bad example I suppose. |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | holland oats: Dearly beloved/We are gathered here today/To get through this thing called "chess" (Let's Go Crazy) |
|
| Nov-03-10 | | picard: wasnt there a 3 fold repetition in there? (moves 34-37) the position after move 34 repeats 3 times. what am i missing? |
|
Nov-03-10
 | | Phony Benoni: <picard> You're right; there was a triple repetition in there. But in most tournaments, the draw has to be claimed by the players themselves; if they don't claim when the repeated position is on the board, the game continues. It's just possible the time control was at move 40, and they were in time pressure, though I can't imagine why. By the way, I think the repetition is an argument in favor of the authenticity of the game. Were it all invented, there would be no reason to have the repetition. |
|
Nov-07-10
| | Sastre: <al wazir: <Sastre: 41...fxg3+> 42.Ke2 Qxg2+ 43. Kd1> 43...Rxf3 44.Qe2 Rf2 is winning for Black. |
|
| Feb-12-11 | | Stjef: It seems that 56. - Qa5+ just wins a piece?! Not that I blame the players for missing a few things along the line in this kind of game.. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
