< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Sep-30-06
 | | LIFE Master AJ: <RV> Your diagram looks wrong, the Black Bishop should have been on c8, not a6. |
|
Sep-30-06 | | tor2ga: Bc1 seems sufficient -- no need to calculate any lengthy mate-in-N variations. (I must be missing something.) |
|
Sep-30-06 | | tor2ga: Oh, D'OH! Silly me :-P |
|
Sep-30-06
 | | GoldenKnight: <LIFE Master AJ: One of the most spectacular examples of line clearance I ever had the pleasure to behold ... no, I did not get it. (I was sure it had to be a Rook sac on f6, I saw Ng4, but I also saw that it failed. I never even considered 31.Nd7!!)> I appreciate your humility. Yes, the rook sac looked most obvious, and I considered it for a while before looking for other means. That's why I didn't solve it "right away" as others did. As I mentioned in my post, remembering Tal's quote to Botvinnik (actually, keeping strong fixation on it) really helped me with this one. That quote really made quite an impression on me, as it gave great insight into Tal's playing for position and not material like most of us do. |
|
Oct-02-06
 | | LIFE Master AJ: <GoldenKnight>
I wonder how many people say they got it, when in truth, they didn't have a clue. (And not just this puzzle ...) |
|
Oct-10-11 | | CustardTart: marcwordsmith:
I guess if 29... B*d6, then 30 Qg5+ Kh7 31 Ng4 hg (Ng4 Qg7++) 32 B*fg Rg8 (to save Qg7++) 33 Qh5++ |
|
Sep-04-12 | | LoveThatJoker: GOTD: Razor's Edge
LTJ |
|
Mar-25-20
 | | al wazir: Is there a bug in Olga?
After the third repetition of the position (which Olga announces after move 28) the game continued because neither player claimed. But thereafter I can't do any analysis of alternative lines. The only moves I can make are the ones actually played. I don't see any way to override this restriction. |
|
Mar-25-20 | | BxChess: <al wazir:> I think this is a long standing idiosyncracy of the otherwise brilliant Olga. |
|
Mar-25-20 | | Walter Glattke: Black has a bishop for a pawn, after change in f6 black had a rook for knight and pawn, so 31.Nd7 (31.-Nxd7 32.Qg7#) Bxd7 32.Rxf6 Bxf6 (32.-Rg8 33.Qh6#) 33.Bxf6 Rg8 34.Qxh5# 32.-Rxc4 33.Qh6+ Kg8 34.Rg6+ fxg6 35-Qg7# So they played 31.-Qxd7 and 32.Rxf6!? allows Qg4 to parry the mate. 32.Rxd7 Bxd7 33.Bxf6 Bxf6 34.Qxf6 (Rxc4? better Be6) was white advantage only |
|
Mar-25-20 | | agb2002: The knight blocks the bishop. This suggests 31.Nd7: A) 31... Nxd7 32.Rh6#.
B) 31... Bxd7 32.Rxf6 Bxf6 33.Bxf6 Rg8 (33... Bg4 34.Qg7#) 34.Qxh5#. C) 31... Qxd7 32.Rxf6 Qd6 33.Qh6+ (33.Rxd6 Bxg5) 33... Kg8 34.Qh8+ Kxh8 35.Rh6+ Kg8 36.Rh8#. D) 31... Rg8 32.Nxf6+ Bxf6 33.Qxh5+ Kg7 34.Bxf6+ Kf8 35.Qh6+ Rg7 36.Qxg7#. E) 31... Bxd6 32.Nxf6+ Kh8 33.Qh6#.
F) 31... Rh8 32.Nxf6+ Bxf6 33.Rxf6 (33.Qxf6 Qf8) 33... Qf8 (33... Rc6 34.Qh6+ Kg8 35.Qxh8+ as above) 34.Qxh5+ Kg8 (34... Kg7 35.Rg6#) 35.Qxh8+ as above. |
|
Mar-25-20 | | agb2002: Still sleeping: I missed the obvious 32... Qg4 in my line C. |
|
Mar-25-20 | | trnbg: <ganesh957: Sorry I think that 32.Rxf6 has to be played followed by ...Rc6 (32...Bxf6 33.Bxf6) 33.Qxh5+ Kg7 34.Qh6+ Kg8 35.Qh8+ Kxh8 36.Rh6++ Kg8 37.Rh8#. Right?>
After 32...Rc6, White can mate faster: 33.Rh6+ Rxh6 34.Qg7# |
|
Mar-25-20 | | saturn2: Without the two knights Ne5,Nf6 white could mate by Qg7 and Rh6.
So came the idea of 31. Nd7 |
|
Mar-25-20 | | malt: Gone for 31.Nd7 Rg8
(31...B:d7 32.R:f6 B:f6 33.B:f6 Rg8 34.Q:h5# )
(31...B:d7 32.R:f6 Rg8 Rh6# )
32.N:f6+ B:f6 33.Q:h5+ Kg7 34.B:f6+ Kf8 35.Qh6+ and mate follows. |
|
Mar-25-20
 | | chrisowen: But the brain! |
|
Mar-25-20 | | saturn2: Still worth mentioning (as by others many years ago) the other clearance move 31 Ng4 fails to Bxg4 covering the pawn h5. The following Rg8 saves black. (31.Ng4 Bxg4 32 Bxf6 Rg8 0-1) |
|
Mar-25-20
 | | chrisowen: Nod on quixote! |
|
Mar-25-20
 | | takchess: A short look and not even close. Nice puzzle . |
|
Mar-25-20 | | Walter Glattke: The option is 21.Nf5 Bc5 22.Nh6+ Kh7 23.Nexf7 Rxf7 24.Nxf7 Qxf7 (Qxc8? Bxc8!) if this will be recycled one day, we should look at 21.-Bc5. |
|
Mar-25-20
 | | chrisowen: It comes to this point? |
|
Mar-25-20 | | Everett: Missed three-fold in here someplace e? |
|
Mar-25-20
 | | chrisowen: Keep on going! |
|
Mar-25-20 | | petemccabe: I've never been involved in a game that ended in 3-fold repetition draw. I don't even know the fine points of the rules. Do you have to claim it at the time? Or could Lputian have claimed a draw instead of resigning? |
|
Mar-25-20
 | | chrisowen: Beginner doh no! |
|
 |
 |
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |