< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Dec-09-06|| ||Rubenus: This isn't worth to be a 'notable game'. Black made an incredible stupid blunder (for his strength) and white saw that he could win a piece. The rest of the game is very boring.|
|Mar-24-09|| ||WhiteRook48: ...Kxd6 Bf4+|
|May-18-09|| ||WhiteRook48: and a skewer.
Nakamura beat the guy who started Islam!
|Jul-27-09|| ||True2theGame: Dead even at move 27! Not bad for an IM playing the black pieces against arguably the strongest tactician of modern day chess. I am surprised he (Muhammad)missed the last one though, it was quite elementary in nature.|
|Oct-21-09|| ||jovack: black must have lost focus.. odd that an IM would not feel the danger of skewers with his king out in the open with 2 enemy bishops free|
|Oct-21-09|| ||sleepyirv: Today cg.com tries to rectify the problem of not having enough bishop puns. Good show!|
|Oct-21-09|| ||dannygjk: Question: Are the ratings on the scoresheets always ELO?|
|Oct-21-09|| ||TITIKIZA: this game is boring. black just made a terrible blunder|
|Oct-21-09|| ||dannygjk: oops, i mean Elo :) not the band XD|
|Oct-21-09|| ||RandomVisitor: 4 minutes per move:
Hikaru Nakamura (2620) - Stephen Muhammad (2387)
Chessmaster US Championships 2005 San Diego USA (1), 24.11.2004
[Rybka 3 ]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 b5 6.Bb3 Bb7 7.c3 Nxe4 8.d4 Na5 9.Bc2 exd4 10.Nxd4 c5 11.Nf5 d5 12.a4 last book move
13.f3 0.16/18 Nd6 0.75/17
[Rybka 3 : 13...Qxf5 14.fxe4 Qd7 15.exd5 Be7 16.axb5 axb5= 0.16/18 ]
14.Re1+ 0.53/18 Kd8 0.59/16
15.Ne3 0.53/17 Ndc4 0.53/16
[Rybka 3 : 16.Na3 Nxa3 17.Rxa3 c4 18.Nf5 Nb3 19.Be3 bxa4 20.Bb6+ Kc8 21.Nd4 Nxd4 22.Qxd4 Bxa3 23.g4 Kb8 24.bxa3 Qd6 25.Bf5 0.53/16 ]
[Rybka 3 : 17.Na3 Nxa3 18.Bf5 Qd6 19.Rxa3 Kc7 20.Ra2 Bc6 21.Bh3 g6 22.b4 Nc4 23.Nxc4 dxc4 24.Rxa8 Bxa8 25.Qe2 Bg7 26.bxc5 Qxc5+ 27.Be3 Qa3 0.50/16 ]
18.Bxd7 -1.09/21 Nxd1 -1.07/20
19.Bxb5 -1.08/19 Bd6 -0.56/21
[Rybka 3 : 19...Nxb2 20.Re8+ Kc7 21.Rxa8 Bxa8 22.Rxa5 c4 23.Be8 Nd3 24.Be3 Bc5 25.Bxc5 Rxe8 26.Bf2 Bb7 27.Kf1 Nxf2 28.Kxf2 Kb6 29.Ra2 Bc6 -1.08/19 ]
20.Rxd1 -0.56/21 Kc7 -0.37/19
[Rybka 3 : 21.Be3 Nb3 22.Rxa8 Rxa8 23.Nd2 Nxd2 24.Bxd2 Bc6 25.Bd3 h5 26.Be3 h4 27.Bg5 Ra2 28.Rd2 Ra1+ 29.Kf2 h3 30.gxh3 Bxh2 31.Bf1 Bd6 -0.37/19 ]
[Rybka 3 : 21...c4 22.Ba4 Nc6 23.b3 Bc5+ 24.Kf1 -0.76/18 ]
22.Bd3 -0.55/18 Rhe8 -0.34/19
[Rybka 3 : 22...g6 23.h4 Nb7 24.Rxa8 Rxa8 25.Bc2 Ba4 26.b3 Bc6 27.Re1 Bf4 28.Kf2 Nd6 29.Bb1 Re8 30.Rxe8 Bxe8 31.g3 -0.55/18 ]
23.c4 -0.43/20 dxc4= 0.00/22
[Rybka 3 : 23...d4 24.Ne4 Bxe4 25.Bxe4 Nc6 26.Bd2 g6 27.Bd5 f5 28.f4 Reb8 29.Rxa8 Rxa8 30.Kf2 Ra2 31.Rb1 Kd7 32.Ke2 Bc7 33.Bg8 h6 34.Bf7 g5 35.fxg5 hxg5 36.Bxg5 Bxh2 37.Kd2 Kd6 38.Kc2 Nb4+ -0.43/20 ]
24.Nxc4 0.00/23 Nxc4 0.00/24
25.Rxa8 0.00/24 Rxa8 0.00/23
26.Bxc4 -0.01/21 f6 0.00/21
27.Be3 -0.05/19 Rb8? 3.95/23
[Rybka 3 : 27...g5 28.Rc1 Re8 29.Bf2 Rb8 30.Bd3 h6 31.Bxc5 Rxb2 32.Bd4= -0.05/19 ]
28.Rxd6 3.82/21 1-0
|Oct-21-09|| ||belgradegambit: Hey Chessgames used my pun again! Woo-hoo but they don't give prizes anymore :-(|
|Oct-21-09|| ||LIFE Master AJ: <patzer2> 27 ... Rb8??|
As far as I can tell - without using a computer - Black was OK until this move.
|Oct-21-09|| ||kevin86: White sacs the exchange,then gains the rook by skewer to end a bishop up.|
|Oct-21-09|| ||goodevans: <TITIKIZA: this game is boring. black just made a terrible blunder>|
Maybe we're both missing something here, but failing that I'd have to agree with you!
|Oct-21-09|| ||ounos: <Halldor: The black king is overloaded, it can't protect the bishop and the rook at the same time, thus the skewer.>|
lol! Now, lets put the rook on the imaginery square a9. Yeah, the king looks terribly overloaded protecting a9 and the bishop!
|Oct-21-09|| ||soberknight: <The important question is why don't strong masters make blunders like that against me???? AAAARGHHHH!>|
I think the more important question is, when inexperienced amateurs do make those blunders against me, why do I fail to notice? :)
|Oct-21-09|| ||WhiteRook48: archangel variation??|
|Oct-21-09|| ||timhortons: imagine a 2400 uscf master could blunder like these?|
|Oct-23-09|| ||dannygjk: Even the best blunder, pull them off their pedestals already!|
|Oct-12-10|| ||sevenseaman: Let us pontificate!
Coupla points. You will only avoid a blunder if you see it or by chance. The question; what should Black have played instead? In hindsight, better moves can always be found. The more pertinent poser is, 'Did the blunderer have a compelling plan that entailed the blunder creeping in?'
I do not see the point in Rb8. But I do in Rd8 (defensive) or Re8 (attacking). So? Am I a hindsight bully/dope.
The point about analysis is that this time around there is an obligation to be sound and the need to avoid being undercooked.
In an honest review, I think 28. Rxd6 is a context idea worthy of being termed a brilliancy.
|Feb-06-11|| ||Robeson: You mean you don't see the point in attacking an undefended isolated pawn? Okay.|
|Feb-08-14|| ||tranquilsimplicity: I have to agree with Titikiza. I wonder how this game is chosen as one of Nakamura's best. There really isn't anything to make it outstanding. #|
|Feb-08-14|| ||perfidious: <tranquil> Not sure how you define 'best', but notability, as termed here at CG, means that the games on a player's list of notable games appear in the largest number of game collections assembled by <chessgames> members.|
|Feb-09-14|| ||tranquilsimplicity: Ahh! Thank you for that Perfidious. I did not know the criteria utilised in the selection of a player's notable games. Now I do.#|
|Feb-09-14|| ||Jason Frost: <kevin86: White sacs the exchange,then gains the rook by skewer to end a bishop up.>|
Sounds like the Maurice Ashley definition of sac. http://youtu.be/kUr_gdKQ8j4?t=5m53s
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·