< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Feb-28-08|| ||mworld: althought i saw the first move instinctively I still didn't see how to end it with mate - great play and puzzle!|
|Feb-28-08|| ||Samagonka: <UdayanOwen>,Samagonka, this is not very nice. I threw my words without partiality, hoping that the liars would expose themselves. If you're not one of them, why feel offended? I know I'm not a brillant chess player but what I know is that even Grandmasters like Kasparov,Fischer etc. have lost games too because they're only human. That's why I found it hard to believe some comments after I failed to solve the puzzle.. but hey, who the crown fits, let them be King! So I hail whoever got every move and despise whoever claims to have done so, when they failed just like me! End of the matter.
P.S. At least >JG27Pyth< and <znprdx> got me. Respect! To the real, all things are real. No false pretence. Bless up.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||FSR: Poor Vladimirov is a strong GM (2627) and I'm sure was a decent player even back then. He must have thought he had Black in trouble -- threatening Nxe6! as well as Black's knight. Surprise!|
|Feb-28-08|| ||JG27Pyth: Udayan, it's not so much a matter of toughness, as of tolerance. |
<Udayan: I like the fact that I can solve a 6 move deep combination with a queen sacrifice without too much trouble. These things make me feel good about myself, as they should.>
Indeed... and this actually makes you like the very people who've been p*ssing you off. You, like they (and myself), have an emotional investment in the game. Our egos are wrapped up in it.
It was quite the brutal shock to me to come here and find people happily posting about positions I found impenetrable. My ego took quite a pounding... and despite the carefully guarded illusion of emotional balance I've contrived to present I can assure you many is the day when I've been tempted to post:
OH BS I HATE YOU ALL YOU'RE ALL FRAUDS!!! FRAUDS!!!! YOU DID NOT SEE THE SOLUTION. NO. NO. NO. MAY YOU CHOKE ON A PAWN AND DIE. SEVERAL PAWNS. etc...
I'm exaggerating, but truly, I've had my days. It's just wounded vanity of course and I eventually get over it.
But my point is if you can make allowances for -yourself- and the demands of your own emotional issues, this should let you recognize and make allowances for the very same forces operating on others.
In short, examine the board from your opponents perspective. ;)
|Feb-28-08|| ||Frito: Although it may make one feel better to re-bash the bashers, it seems best to quote that famous rabbit in Bambi "If you dont have anything nice to say, dont say anything at all".
To those with Skill or no skill, anger or glee,who are solvers and kibitzers alike:
This was a constructive puzzle from a chess game.Congradulations if you were one of the lucky solvers and i wish you all better luck on the Friday puzzle. Ill need that luck because i didnt solve this one because of a tactical oversight.
Chess, art,and math are all the same to me, they all have profound beauty and id rather not allow anyone to muck that up with feelings of angst and frustration.
If you think that people lie on here: Let them (you cant make them stop). If you feel insulted, tell CG.com admins. Above all enjoy beauty where and when you can. Nothing lasts, not even anger.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||FSR: These attacks on people's integrity are ridiculous. It's perfectly possible to see ...Qxg5+. I saw everything up to that point and am a little embarrassed that I missed that. And yes, there is a wide range of players on here, some of whom are quite capable of solving this problem.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||ConstantImprovement: |
It was quite remarkable reading such an open and honest description of one's motivation and about the cause for one's anger.
Don't let some silly comments distract you. It is possible that especially the one comment which started your anger had the same motivation, which was coupled with a deep frustration.
Some don't know they are trolls and therefore don't deserve even the usual red herring.
I can't speak for the other regular writers, but I for my part am looking forward to your future contributions.
Don't let such incidents discourage you!
|Feb-28-08|| ||wals: Noting think .'ware of sheep in wolf's clothing
look at board
Black unable to castle short because of Bb4
Nh4 enprise pawn attacks by black look the go
17. ...h3 18.Nf7...Kxf7 (Nf3...Nxf3) (Nf3...Ne4+) No go
17. ...a5 18.Bc5 ..a4 19.Qd3 No go
17. ...Nh5+ 18.g4xh5 ...Nf5+ 19.Kg2
first move OK but way off after that. Pathetic effort.
brain score L 0.25 R 0.00
|Feb-28-08|| ||wals: Evgeny Vladimirov - Vladislav Vorotnikov, Leningrad 1974|
Analysis by Fritz 11:
1. (-3.20): 17...Nf6-h5+ 18.Kg3-h2 Qd8xg5 19.Ra1-c1 0-0-0 20.Rc1-c5 Rd8-d5 21.Rh1-c1 Rd5xc5 22.Rc1xc5 Qg5-f6 23.f2-f4 Nh4-f3+ 24.Kh2-g2 Nf3xd4 25.Qb3-d1 Nh5xf4+ 26.e3xf4 Qf6xf4 27.Bb4-a5
2. = (-0.16): 17...Nf6-d5 18.Ng5-e4 h7-h5 19.f2-f4 Nh4-g6 20.g4-g5 Qd8-d7 21.Ra1-c1 b7-b6 22.Bb4-a3 Rh8-g8 23.Kg3-h2 Ng6-h4
|Feb-28-08|| ||Zygote: <UdayanOwen> I certainly was not referring to you in my comments... Your posts provide the analysis required for the position devoid of comments such as " i got this move immediately" or " this is a very easy version of so and so's mate", which are comments that, like it or not, do not help... But the unhappy truth is that, unlike you, many people post their solutions not for the benefit of other users but to show off the fact that they got them.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||whiteshark: Only with the wisdom of hindsight...|
|Feb-28-08|| ||whiteshark: Additionally: <18.Kh2 Qxg5> should be the main line.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||012: This week Mon-Wed puzzles:
Feb-25-08. 26. ? S Karjakin vs T Metsalu, 2001
Feb-26-08. 29. ? Alekhine vs Flohr, 1931
Feb-27-08. 29. ? Tal vs Botvinnik, 1961
|Feb-28-08|| ||desiobu: Very cool puzzle. The pin looked like it would be very handy, but I didn't see all the mate threats black had so the line didn't look as convincing as it really is and I wasted time on other things.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||johnlspouge: Thursday (Medium): Black to play and win
Material: N for B. The White Kg3 is exposed, with many weak squares nearby. His Ng5, the only piece nearby, is unprotected. White threatens
18.Nxe6 fxe6 19.Qxe6+ Qe7 20.Qxe7#
Black therefore needs to play forcefully to prevent 18.Nxe6.
Candidates (17...): h6, c5, Nd4, Nh5+
White can decline both Nh4 and Nh5, accept Nh4, or accept Nh5.
(1) 18.Kh2 Qxg5 19.gxh5 [else, drop an N] Qg2#
(2) 18.Kxh4 h6 (threatening Qxg5#)
19.f4 hxg5+ 20.fxg5 Nf6+ 21.Kg3 Ne5+
White wins a clear P, Pg5, next move.
(3) 18.gxh5 Qxg5+ 19.Kh2 Qg2#
The candidate 17...Nh5+ derives its force from the threat of 18...Qxg5, so it requires the Ng5 to be at g5 and not e6. It is therefore unlikely the line can be strengthened by any gentle zwischenzug like 17...c5.
Time to peek. I figured there would be a better line, but I burned a lot of time trying to make the threat
1...Ne4 (threatening 2...Qxg5# and 2...h6 3...hxg5#)
work. I really wanted to move ...Ne4 sometime, so I was blind to 17...Nh5+ for a long time. Time to check the kibitzing.
Wow! I will read everyone's posts carefully before commenting.
|Feb-28-08|| ||johnlspouge: Further, in re <UdayanOwen>/<Samagonka>:|
There is a wide range of skill among the contributors to this site. I certainly understand that a weak player who lacks faith in the boundlessness of human ability could only believe that <UdayanOwen> peeks before posting. In answer to his appeal, however, I will categorically state that his past analyses do contain occasional minor errors of a type indicating: (1) he does not use a computer, and (2) he does not move pieces on a board. Moreover, I can also state that they demonstrate that he has more than enough chess skill and visualization abilities to to solve today's puzzle without breathing too hard. I personally hope he continues to grace this site with more chess analysis.
I find solutions displaying human thought processes useful for my own improvement. Certainly, I have learned something from several contributors here. Just in case the job occasionally seems thankless - thanks!
|Feb-28-08|| ||crwynn: I see other people also just blanked on the defense 19.f4. I did see that a ...Qg5 sac could be in the air somehow, but of course without seeing the specific need for it I could hardly find it.|
|Feb-28-08|| ||johnlspouge: <<JG27Pyth> wrote: One last note -- saying merely, I got this in 3.1415927 seconds is mostly useless>|
I definitely like your perspective on things, <JG27Pyth>, although myself, I prefer get a puzzle in 2.718281828459045 seconds
No computers were harmed in the production of this message :)
|Feb-28-08|| ||xrt999: why are you all caving in and responding to those posters who choose to just pick fights all day with people? Put them on ignore, and maybe they will just crawl back under the rock where they came from. |
|Feb-28-08|| ||xrt999: Oh, I almost forgot to let everyone know that I solved today's puzzle last week, prior to CG knowing that it would be the puzzle of the day. When I awoke last Monday, I wrote on a napkin: |
1) Buy milk
I wasnt sure what it meant at the time.
|Feb-28-08|| ||johnlspouge: <JG27Pyth>'s post made me realize I was uncertain of the digits of pi I once knew. Just in case anyone really believes that visualization of today's solution is beyond human ability, in the Wikipedia entry for pi,|
I found the following statement:
"A remarkable record was set by the calculating prodigy Zacharias Dase, who in 1844 employed a Machin-like formula to calculate 200 decimals of [pi] in his head."
Something one can only aspire to...
(He must have peeked. :)
|Feb-28-08|| ||UdayanOwen: <Zygote: <UdayanOwen> I certainly was not referring to you in my comments...>|
Hi Zygote, sorry in that case that I wrapped you up in my little skit-fit.
As <JG27Pyth> helped me to realise, I was starting to perceive things as directed at me at times when I shouldn't.
<Samagonka: I threw my words without partiality, hoping that the liars would expose themselves. If you're not one of them, why feel offended?>
I still think it was wrong, because your post clearly stated that anyone who got it was lying.
However, as the final sentence of my initial response to you indicates, I was (and still am) prepared to move on and play happy chess analysis games with you if you are nice about it :)
<xrt999> and <JG27Pyth>: Thanks, I will try to heed your advice.
Thanks to those who have stuck up for me.
I was in a bad way before I got to the site yesterday and I'm sorry for any offense caused. I'm over it, happy to be friends with all despite any grievances I've aired here....
|Feb-29-08|| ||znprdx: Well this has been a fascinating thread. My inoucuous comment was simply that if anyone were to lie it would only be to oneself. As an example I deleted my post about timing out after looking at h6 – because (aside from a King color error) when I saw ----‘s post of the Nxe6 bust I knew I couldn’t keep up the bluff – Mea Culpa. Once again it was < dzechiel: I looked at the queen sac (20...Qxg5+) followed by 21...f6+, but in my mind's eye it looked to me like white could play 22 Kxh5, I forgot that the knight would now be protected by the rook! Nuts!!> who showed us the way. As someone who has endured the ‘slings and arrows’ of kibitzers denigrating his assessments/claims this points to a critical factor with respect to posting ‘honest’ solutions. They ideally should attempt to identify what feature was missed (or risked) by the losing player on the receiving end of the winning line. Not withstanding steadfast claims of prowess I remain skeptical as regards to the likelihood of seeing OTB [at 17...Black to play] the Queen sac at 7 ply considering that it is another 5 ply to mate, which at move 20...could readily be missed (as it was by some). Of course sometimes we can blunder into a winning line just as well as a losing one. I base this assessment upon having followed the world’s top players over the past 9 months. The record shows many took the blows of 3 ply finesses, surprises, or oversights. My main criticism is of those who boast (as shared by others). Personally I allow myself 355/113 minutes to find the key move – which I often do while still missing the truly fine point. The majority of my posts emphasize the synergy of the chessboard (the effects of the changing position) as opposed to those who focus upon strict calculation. My bias is again based upon careful research: look how often even a supergrandmaster misses something: otherwise why do they lose positions that so often can be shown to be drawable? No better example than Kasparov’s self-destructive resignation after the infamous >almost human< Bishop move made by Deep Blue. Chess is a game of relative perceptions, balanced by decision-making probabilities of the risk/benefit matrix, decided by the rigorous mathematical realities of the arithmetic of stages in a sequence of the force deployment geometry within a time continuum. So there :) Intuition, imagination, experience, knowledge, and so-called ‘luck’ round off the other variables at play. Chess of course has one characteristic which sets it apart: our vulnerability and limitations are revealed to one and all, as is our comprehension and genius. But above all it is our capacity to perservere which prevails as the ultimate measure, independent of abilty and talent. Over the long run stonger players win their lost games, while the weaker ones lose their won games. Most of the time it is Caissia herself who is the choreographer as the pieces dance....Q.E.D.|
|Apr-05-08|| ||MaczynskiPratten: I would suggest that Black spotted the complete combination OTB at move 16, as otherwise the threat of Nxe6 would make him either defend with Qd7 or exchange Queens with Qd5+. Because many of White's moves are nearly forced, I think the combination is easier for Black to see than White. Conversely White's choice of 17 Kg3 suggests he had not seen the combination at that point. Black has lots of possible continuations and Nh5+ is an easy one for White to miss or underestimate. We have the advantage on CG.com that we know that as it is a puzzle of the day, there is something that needs to be found! So it is then possible for a 2000 player to see something that a 2600 missed, even several plies deep.|
|Oct-07-09|| ||GrahamClayton: <UdayanOwen>Now the knight again, through its control of g7, proves why it is the star of this performance.|
The mate after 22.g6 h6# is very pleasing - the Black pawn, knight and rook support each other. And don't forget how the Black King prevents Kf7.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·