|Aug-02-15|| ||offramp: From the days when computers cheated by getting human help.|
|Aug-02-15|| ||Penguincw: Hmm, I guess I should put off that idea of buying a new computer (7 year old computer is nothing, right?).|
The last GOTD to feature a computer (or rather, 2) was not that long ago: Jonny vs Komodo, 2015 (Jul/09/2015).
|Aug-02-15|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: How many "Marshall Gambits" are there?|
|Aug-02-15|| ||offramp: <An Englishman: Good Evening: How many "Marshall Gambits" are there?>|
I believe there are at least five:
There is a Marshall Gambit in the Scandinavian Defence: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6
There is also one in the Tarrasch Defence: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.e4
A rarely used one in the Semi-Slav Defence: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2
And there's one in the French Defence, 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 c5.
Then there is the one in this game, which has the name "Four Knights Game: Spanish. Classical Variation Marshall Gambit".
But oddly enough, the famous pawn offer in the Spanish, the one he used against Capablanca, is normally called the Marshall Attack, not gambit.
He was a fantastically inventive player. But some large losses in matches maculated his record.
|Aug-02-15|| ||offramp: offramp: <...A rarely used one in the Semi-Slav Defence: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2...>|
Less rare than I thought; there was one yesterday. R Pert vs J Burnett, 2015.
|Aug-02-15|| ||morfishine: <offramp> Thanks for this game: R Pert vs J Burnett, 2015|
|Aug-02-15|| ||Abdel Irada: <An Englishman: Good Evening: How many "Marshall Gambits" are there?>|
It is definitely characteristic of Marshall that almost every opening line that took its name from him is a gambit. Not only inventive, he was also an inveterate attacker, who always seemed to prefer the initiative to a material advantage.
|Aug-02-15|| ||G10: I wonder whether 40. Nf5 is possible or am I missing something.|
|Aug-02-15|| ||Abdel Irada: It's possible, but why should White give up the d-pawn so easily — particularly when it's the pawn that ends up winning the game for him?|
|Aug-02-15|| ||Chess Is More: I've always found 4...Nd4 to be a dubious move in the Spanish Four Knights. 4...a6 is more reasonable.|
|Aug-02-15|| ||Jimfromprovidence: The dark-squared black bishop moved 13 times.
Why so jumpy?
|Aug-02-15|| ||rodchuck: <G10> if 40. Nf5 Rxd5 probably|
|Aug-02-15|| ||Once: It's 1992. That means that the popular movies are the Bodyguard "And I ... er I ... er I will always love you.. ooo.... ooo. ooo."|
We are into the adjective-noun phase of movie names. Basic Instinct. Lethal Weapon. Kevin Costner can do no wrong.
The computer at work is running MS-DOS, or if you are really lucky that newfangled Windows 3.1 which is released this year.
The entire computing power of NASA is roughly equivalent to a modern day Playstation.
Frankly, skynet was just getting started.
|Aug-02-15|| ||BOSTER: 26..Nh4 this is a move , even for computer.|
|Aug-03-15|| ||kevin86: The bishop will fall first, then the game.|
|Aug-06-15|| ||hedgeh0g: <Chess Is More: I've always found 4...Nd4 to be a dubious move in the Spanish Four Knights. 4...a6 is more reasonable.>|
It's mainline theory; what exactly is "dubious" about it? The Rubinstein Four Knights is one of Black's best-scoring and most respected continuations against 4.Bb5.
|Aug-06-15|| ||perfidious: Now, 4.....Nd4 against the Four Knights is of questionable value.|
Wish Ah had known thet when Ah was sort of a playah.....