< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Sep-19-07|| ||ughaibu: I wonder why Tal varied from Kliavin vs Tal, 1959|
|Sep-19-07|| ||whiteshark: After <20. Kb1> the game is full of crude moves on both sides.|
I can't believe that this radio broadcast game is equivalent to a corr game, where you have serveral days thinking time per move.
|Aug-08-08|| ||dTal: omigosh, indeed what a game! A double Q sac ending in a draw! Euwe was a very good tactician, and as <erimiro1> says, a very worthy WC. Cant help but think that Tal must have been grinning as he made his own Q sac to force a draw. Even if he had anything better, he would have been hard pressed not to play it, being Tal!|
|Aug-08-08|| ||OneArmedScissor: Why not <15. ...gxf6 16. Bxa8 d5>?|
|Apr-12-10|| ||Fanques Fair: Interesting to see also is Keres x Fischer 1959 , that itīs same opening and a similar idea... White sacrifices his queen...
The difference is that Tal here played
10 - ... , h6 11-Bh4 , b5 . 12- e5 !?, Bb7 , exf6 ! , while Fischer played imediately 10 - ..., b5 , 11- Bxf6 , Nxf6 , 12- e5 !? , Bb7 , 13 - exf6 !? , and then, after a very complicated battle, Black won.
|Sep-09-16|| ||Stonehenge: <Deze partij werd in een aantal afleveringen gespeeld in het radio-programma Strijk en Zet>.|
=This game was played in a number of episodes in the radio program Strijk en Zet.
|Sep-09-16|| ||Honza Cervenka: 20...Ne5 was a mistake, which could have been followed by 21.Rhe1! Qf2 (21...Qb6 22.Ne4! ) 22.Re2 Rxg2 (22...Qb6 23.Nxg7+ Kf8 24.Nd5 Qa7 25.f6 ; 22...Qa7 23.Ne4 ) 23.Rxf2 Rxf2 24.Ne4 (threatening Nxd6+ or Nxf2) 24...Rcxc2 25.Nxf2 Rxf2 26.h3 and with extra piece white wins without much troubles.|
Correct continuaton would have been 20...Rg8 21.Rhe1 Rxc3!! 22.Nc7+! (22.Rxe3 Rxe3 ) 22...Kd8 23.Bxf7!! Qf2 24.Ne6+ Kc8 25.bxc3 Rxg2 26.Nd4 Rxh2 and now white has nothing better than draw after 27.Re8+ Kc7 28.Re7 Qh4 29.Ne6+ Kc8 30.Re8+ Kb7 31.Nd8+ Kc7 32.Ne6+ etc.
|Sep-09-16|| ||clement41: Interesting tactics overall in this rare game|
|Sep-09-16|| ||Honza Cervenka: <ughaibu: I wonder why Tal varied from J Klavins vs Tal, 1959>|
I guess that he had done some homework and that he figured then that 17...Qc5 is better than 17...Rxg7. Despite of result of that game white was clearly better after 17...Rxg7 18.Nxe6 Qc4 19.Rhe1 Rxg2, where he could play 20.Rd4! with advantage, for example 20...Qc6 21.Bf3! Qxf3 22.Ng5+ Qe2 23.Rxe2+ Rxe2 24.Nxe2 hxg5 25.fxg5 and white has pure extra Pawn with all chances to win.
|Sep-09-16|| ||kereru: OTB chess is different of course, the object is not to make the technically best moves per komodo or stockfish, it's to win, and everyone makes mistakes at the board. "Chess is a fight!" - Lasker.|
With that proviso, my Stockfish doesn't like the Q sac initiated by 12.e5, though having played it, 13.exf6 is the best reply to 12...Bb7. 20...Ne5 looks like an error, either 20...Rg8 or 20...Rxc3 gets a "draw" assessment on sf. White missed a win with 23.Nf5! instead of 23.Na4? However Black missed 23...Qf2, forking c2 and f6. 24.Rhe1 gave white excellent winning chances whereas 24.Nf5 allowed Black his brilliant drawing resource.
|Sep-09-16|| ||goodevans: White got three pieces for his Q so I wouldn't really call that a sac. I thought the piece sac <17.Bh5> was more impressive.|
At first glance <24.Nf5> looks like a mistake that concedes the draw but after looking at the position for a while I can't see any way of keeping the black Q off the a1-h8 diagonal.
|Sep-09-16|| ||yadasampati: Who is tricking whom?|
|Sep-09-16|| ||Ironmanth: Entertaining game! Was this really correspondence?!|
|Sep-09-16|| ||Stonehenge: <Was this really correspondence?!>|
Why the @#$% do I even bother?
|Sep-09-16|| ||ughaibu: Thanks for your earlier explicatory comment, Stonehenge.|
|Sep-09-16|| ||kevin86: Too old vs two young? Neither played their best and this crude game ended in the draw.|
|Sep-09-16|| ||RookFile: Very interesting game, full of surprising tactics.|
|Sep-09-16|| ||morfishine: <RookFile: Very interesting game, full of surprising tactics> I agree, its hard to understand such comments about "crude moves" or this "crude game". Of course, there's bound to be errors in a game like this, and modern engines will expose these soon enough, but to write this game off as "crude", is missing the point entirely, not only about this game, but chess in general|
|Sep-09-16|| ||thegoodanarchist: OMG great game, exciting tactics, nice pun. Best GOTD in a long long time, from an all around perspective. Two World Champions showing quality correspondence chess.|
|Sep-10-16|| ||yiotta: Not to get too technical, but there seems to be a certain joyousness to this game, I can almost see the combatants grinning as they play.|
|Sep-10-16|| ||Olavi: Of course, this famous game was not a serious one. The world's a better place with it.|
|Sep-10-16|| ||perfidious: It is amusing, though to see Euwe essay 6.Bg5 against Tal's Najdorf.|
|Sep-11-16|| ||kereru: The game was probably pre-arranged but no less fun for it.|
|Sep-11-16|| ||plang: pre-arranged?! why would you say that?|
|Sep-11-16|| ||Sally Simpson: It was a radio game.
Sometimes, for the sake of entertainment, these display games were pre-arranged.
Having gone though it I'd say no. I'm sure the two imaginative minds here could have jointly created a draw masterpiece.
This was a let's switch into comedy club mode and give the listeners a treat game.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·