Sep-13-06
 | | Honza Cervenka: White cannot recapture the piece on e7 in move 19 or 20 because of Qf3 with unavoidable mate. |
 |
Jan-05-13
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Is it my imagination, or is White already in difficulties after 10.Bf4 and 12.Bd2? Also, what is the pun in the title? |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | ZHaNeVa: I think 21. Re3 is better than 21. f4??
CMIIW |
|
Jan-05-13
 | | Gregor Samsa Mendel: <An Englishman>--Maybe the pun refers to the movie "Life of Pi"---menov---(groan). |
|
Jan-05-13
 | | Abdel Irada: <An Englishman>: Not your imagination, unless I'm imagining it, too. Yes. 10. Bf4 was an atrocious move; after that, White's position quickly becomes untenable. (For anyone who doesn't see it: After 10. ...e5 11. dxe5, dxe5 12. Nxe5?, Nxe5 13. Bxe5, Black wins a piece with 13. ...Ng4.) <ZHaNeVa>: I don't think it makes a real difference. For practical purposes, the game is already ever. Note that White is a piece down in addition to having to find answers to a strong kingside attack. |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | UnsoundHero: Instead of 10 Bf4, White needs to play 10 exf5 with an equal game. |
|
Jan-05-13
 | | FSR: A Dutch with a weak Bf4 by White - reminds me a little of H Steiner vs Botvinnik, 1946. |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | morfishine: Interesting, but all-in-all, once White goes down a piece, its over; <UnsoundHero> has a nice suggestion with 10.exf5 vs the blooper 10.Bf4: (1) 10.exf5 exf5 11.Bg5 Ne4 12.Bxe7 Nxe7 13.Nxe4 fxe4 14.Qxe4 or (1a) 12...Nxc3 13.Bxf8 Ne4 14.Bxg7 Kxg7 15.Rae1 Qe8 16.Nh4 |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | Garech: Very nice!
-Garech |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | shakman: White went for 10.exf5 in O Zimmermann vs Tartakower, 1949 |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | trnbg: <Abdel Irada> "(For anyone who doesn't see it: After 10. ...e5 11. dxe5, dxe5 12. Nxe5?, Nxe5 13. Bxe5, Black wins a piece with 13. ...Ng4.)" and 12. Bxe5 fails to 12....Ng4 13. Bf4, Nd4! |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | erniecohen: Why is this GOTD? There's a reason that there was only one comment before today. |
|
Jan-05-13
 | | kevin86: Black will mate soon! |
|
Jan-05-13
 | | playground player: Does <Pimenov> mean <Riley> in Russian? |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | waustad: This is what I alwayst thought of as Pimen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLPd... |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | Willber G: <UnsoundHero: Instead of 10 Bf4, White needs to play 10 exf5> I would have played 10.e5 but I'm sure that someone will refute it! ;-) |
|
| Jan-05-13 | | Gambit All: Whole sequence moves 13-18 (especially moves 13-14 holding off exchanging the Knight) was well executed. |
|
Jan-05-13
 | | Chessmensch: Simple Simon met a Pimen. |
|
Jan-05-13
| | Abdel Irada: <Willber G: <UnsoundHero: Instead of 10 Bf4, White needs to play 10 exf5> I would have played 10.e5 but I'm sure that someone will refute it! ;-)> I also would have considered that move, since it is quite aggressive and, if sound, would leave Black cramped. Unfortunately, the move is a bit *too* aggressive. After 10. e5?!, dxe5 11. dxe5, Ng4, Black attacks the e-pawn twice, and it turns out to be difficult to defend thanks to the potential mate threat on h2. Additionally, White must watch for the threat of 12. ...Nd4 (thematic in some variations of the Sicilian), attacking the queen on c2/e2 as well as the knight on f3, which can't move without allowing mate. This means that 12. Qe2? is not playable, while 12. Re1 is met by 12. ...Bc5, when White cannot parry all the threats. |
|
| Jan-06-13 | | Willber G: <Abdel Irada> Thanks for the analysis, that makes sense. |
|
Jan-06-13
| | Abdel Irada: Glad to be of service, <Willber G.>. |
|
Kibitzing