|
< Earlier kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Dec-06-05 |
| stephenw: what? |
 |
Dec-06-05
 |
| Eric Schiller: <Stephenw> Played in jr. HS, where Black had just lost a few games to the old ...g6, Qxe5+ trap. A real nice guy, splendid human being, but never did get the game down. |
|
| Dec-12-05 |
| Akavall: Is this the shortest game in the database?
I don't understand 2...Ke7?? it a makes absolutly no sense, even for a complete beginner. |
|
| Dec-12-05 |
| Akavall: On the similar note, after 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5!? Is the position considered roughly even!? (It seems like that to me), or is white considered worse? |
|
Dec-12-05
|
| Eric Schiller: <Akavall>Despite Nakamura's patronage, the position is considered even after 2...Nc6! White's at no disadvantage, as the queen could return home and then it is just a reversed Vienna Game, and that's considered dead even in any case. |
|
| Dec-12-05 |
| Akavall: <Eric Schiller> Thanks, Is Vienna Game considered dead even? I also don't see how 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 can transpose to return Vienna, after 2...Nc6, Queen can't go back, because black would be up a tempo, there is no 3. Nf3, because then Queen can't go back to d1. What am I missing? |
|
Dec-12-05
|
| Eric Schiller: <Akavall>1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 Nc6 3.Bc4 g6 4.Qd1
click for larger view
compare 1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Bc5 3.g3.
click for larger view
Yes, Black has an extra tempo, but even so it isn't a big deal. Of course the queen is unlikely to go back to d1, but in any case it is hard to say Black has any significant advantage. |
|
| Dec-12-05 |
| HannibalSchlecter: Eric Schiller, what do you think about 2. Nf6!? in this position with the idea of gambiting the e-pawn for a big lead in development, and punishing that early Queen manoever? |
|
| Dec-12-05 |
| Akavall: <Eric Schiller> I see now, Thank You. |
|
Jun-08-06
 |
| alexmagnus: <Hannibal>I'm not that good as you both (about 1500), but let me tell my opinion... I sometimes play 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5 as white and it seems to me, the best resopnce to 2...Nf6 is 3.Qxe5+ Be7 4.d3 Nc6 5.Qg3 0-0 6.Be2, preventing Nh5 ideas and threatening Bh6. In these variations White has some problems with developing his king's knight (since on Nf3? comes Nh5!) but it is quite playable (don't know how the results on higher levels would be, my impression is black has a compensation for the pawn but not more than it). |
|
Apr-29-07
 |
| Peligroso Patzer: <Akavall: *** I don't understand 2...Ke7?? it a makes absolutly no sense, even for a complete beginner.> Maybe Black had studied some early Steinitz King's Gambit games (in which he played Ke2 in response to ... Qh4+), and was proceeding by vague analogy. Or maybe he adopted 2. ... Ke7 as the ultimate way to avoid the "four-move checkmate" (aka Scholar's Mate). With this "defense", the game never reaches move four. ;-) |
|
Apr-29-07
|
| Peligroso Patzer: Further to my recent comment, here is Steinitz's most famous game with Ke2 in reply to ... Qh4+ (which actually opened as a Vienna Game, not a KGA):
Steinitz vs Paulsen, 1870. By move 18, Steinitz has completed a rather extended "castling by hand" process, specifically having achieved a normal K-side castling position after the King has made an excursion through the f3- and e3-squares. |
|
| Jul-08-07 |
| openingspecialist: I heard a rumour about this game that black touched his rook and if you touched a piece you couldnt move you had to move your king. I'm not sure if it's true but its a reasonable explaination. |
|
Jul-08-07
 |
| SwitchingQuylthulg: <openingspecialist> This game is just genuine bad play. Perhaps you're confusing it with this one: Lindemann vs Echtermeyer, 1893? |
|
Oct-07-07
 |
| whiteshark: The true story behind this game:
After white has moved 2.Qh5 he asked <Does your king also have a magnet?> Black turned his king around to look. <Er, no!> White: <touch-move rule!> And so black played 2...Ke7. :D |
|
| Jan-28-08 |
| RookFile: How come this didn't work when Boris Becker tried this against Kasparov? |
|
Jan-31-08
 |
| just a kid: Tsk tsk tsk how can a guy lose when he plays the great Wannabe gambit with colors reversed with 2..Ke7!!!!!! |
|
| Mar-07-08 |
| D.Observer: <Wannabe Gambit> with colors reversed! That was a real blunder! Would a beginner ever consider this? |
|
| Mar-08-08 |
| deadlysin: lol this guy sucks |
|
| Mar-08-08 |
| mistreaver: <whiteshark> LOL |
|
| Apr-01-08 |
| jovack: Disappointing.
This game was a pure let down.
If you wanted a good fools mate, it is possible for black to mate in 2. |
|
| Apr-01-08 |
| t3hPolak: whoa. |
|
| Apr-01-08 |
| mynameisrandy: I feel twitters up my arms at this game. |
|
| Apr-01-08 |
| Confuse: <tommy boy> watch your possibly suggestive language : ) an excellent example of how to lose without dignity. well played! |
|
| Apr-01-08 |
| dumbgai: Is this supposed to be some sort of really bad April Fool's joke? Either way this is a really lame GOTD. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
