< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 32 OF 32 ·
|Aug-27-10|| ||Lil Swine: might as well act stupid and deny this game ever took place|
|Aug-27-10|| ||OhioChessFan: <34...g5 allows white to deliver a mate in 12 moves (Hiarcs 12.1MP found it in about 10 seconds). Something like this: 35. e6 Qg7 36. Ng6+ Kg8 37. e7 Qf7 38. e8=Q+ Qxe8 39. Qxe8+ Kg7 40. Ne5 Kf6 41. Nd7+ Kf5 42. Qe5+ Kg6 43. Qe6+ Kg7 44. Ne5 Kh8 45. Qf7 Bxb2 46. Ng6# >|
Surely 34..g6 keeping the diagonal closed to the Queen is better than g5.
|Oct-21-10|| ||Tigranny: What was the real plan with Qe3? How many ?'s was that move?|
|Feb-11-11|| ||Llawdogg: The Blunder of the Century! So, that's what it's called. I guess I don't have to worry about all my mistakes for the next 89 years.|
|Mar-10-11|| ||Tigranny: TheChessVids, you are absolutely right. This wasn't even game 6 of the Kramnik-Fritz match. Why isn't this The Blunder Of The Century as its pun?|
|Mar-12-11|| ||YourNickname: Rybka says 34... Kg8 is better :)|
|May-03-11|| ||IRONCASTLEVINAY: vladimir virus infected|
|May-03-11|| ||Damianx: must of been a compuer with a screw loose?|
|Jun-20-11|| ||ROO.BOOKAROO: I was wondering what kind of name this mate deserves.
It's obviously a Queen mate, and also a Queen-Knight mate, and more specifically a h7Q-f8N mate. It is a kind of corner mate also. Perhaps a "Deep Fritz Q-N corner mate" in honor to this game. Couldn't find any other satisfactory idea.|
|Jun-30-11|| ||Richard Taylor: I've got a book by Reshvesky about blunders by GMs and everyone -himself (he gives examples of his own tragedies!), Fischer, Capablanca, and all the other "great players" have committed terrible blunders like this one.|
If we didn't make such errors (very bad or minor) we would be machines.
I myself once overlooked mate in one in a correspondence game in the NZCCCs about 1986.
|Aug-21-11|| ||Tigranny: 34...Qe3??, in my opinion, doesn't look as bad as a blunder in this game - Short vs Krasenkow, 2004.|
|Nov-21-11|| ||Snehalshekatkar: The blunder of the century!!|
|Nov-23-11|| ||serenpidity.ejd: No comment! Harharharharharhahahahahahikhikhikhikhikhikhihih-
|Dec-05-11|| ||notyetagm: |
click for larger view
Ah, the good old days of the Topalov-Kramnik rivalry. :-)
|Dec-11-11|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <Tigranny: What was the real plan with [34. ...] Qe3? *** >|
Well, but for the inconvenient <35. Qh7#>, black's 34th pretty much forces an exchange of Q's, after which the 2-to-1 pawn majority on the a- and b-files should easily have gotten black the full point in the minor piece ending.
|Sep-22-12|| ||vinidivici: <YourNickname: Rybka says 34... Kg8 is better :)>|
I BET IT IS!!
|Oct-12-12|| ||wildrookie: What did Kramnik try to achieve with his last move?|
|Oct-12-12|| ||RookFile: He must have been preoccupied with the queen trade and pushing the a pawn, and calculating how white would push the e pawn. The ending may be good for him. |
Instead, he got a different kind of ending.
|Nov-29-12|| ||Nightsurfer: A very interesting snapshot - that photo that has been taken just before <Vladimir Kramnik> will have executed his famous all-time goof <34. ... Qe3???>.|
By having a close look at every mikro-inch of <Kramnik>'s face I have - for some endless hours ... ;-) ... (... well, just kidding ... :-D ...) - tried to find out what <Kramnik> might have considered when he had been about to get <"executed"> by that cruel killing machine named <Deep Fritz>, only a few heartbeats later!
I have to confess that this very fascination might be that same kind of fascination that makes some people look at photos (or video clips, just check out Youtube.com!) that have been taken of people that were going to be executed sometimes later ... it is disgusting, I know, but photos like that are thrilling no matter that they are that disgusting!
|Jan-24-13|| ||andyatchess: Blunderful|
|Feb-09-13|| ||perfidious: < notyetagm: <square dance: ... at least our world champion saves his horrible blunders for exhibition games rather than choking at the biggest moment in his career.>
This wasn't just a blunder. 34 ... e3???????????? was off the -scale- on the blunder chart.>|
<Sellstein: <notyetagm:> Of course it was a horrible blunder but I don't understan why that makes you happy....>
To understand that, one would have to comprehend <notyetagm>'s frustration and inability to get satisfaction in any other way than by poking fun at others' errors.
You've blundered, so have I-we all have, even that paragon <notyet>, amazing as that may sound to the uninitiated.
For my money, he can get his rocks off in iggy-land.
<notyet: Did the WC forget how the little horsie moved? Sure seemed like it! LOL.>
Here's to juvenilia.
|Mar-18-13|| ||hedgeh0g: <perfidious> Maybe we can all pool together and get <GM> Kramnik to play a match against <notyeta<GM>>. Afterwards, <notyet> can enlighten us mere mortals about all the tactical themes and ideas Kramnik used to demolish him in 20 moves.|
|Mar-18-13|| ||perfidious: <hedgeh0g> Tell you what-there's a chance us itty-bitty planktons in a sea full of barrycudies could learn a thing or three from thet there match. Skeery to think about, like.|
|Feb-15-14|| ||PJs Studio: Kramnik is the man for even getting this far against fearless super computer. Hats off to him for trying...period (although the 500k euro sheckles made it worthwhile ;)|
There was speculation that interest in human-computer chess competition would plummet as a result of this Kramnik–Deep Fritz match. According to McGill University computer science professor Monty Newborn, "the science is done".
Can't argue with that. Although, how do these stud machines do with their (highly illegal for tournament) openings and ending programs removed? That's a far better test! (If I remember correctly, the GMs kick their butts.)
|Apr-10-14|| ||kingkuya: We really need a real annotation mark for "unimaginable ultra-blunder" or " move that fails to avoid obvious mate"|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 32 OF 32 ·