|Feb-19-08|| ||FSR: Hey, this is freaky! I submitted this game to chessgames.com a long time ago. chessgames didn't post it. I re-submitted it around Christmas 2007, adding the players' ratings and some notes, thinking that might induce chessgames to post it. I checked periodically, and it wasn't posted. Last night I dreamed that I had checked again and chessgames had posted it. (Yes, I realize that this makes me a total geek.) And here it is! Thanks, chessgames!|
|Feb-19-08|| ||FSR: I have some notes to this game at Frederick Rhine As I mentioned there, I think this is a wonderful game, much more because of my opponent's play (he sacrificed, or offered to sacrifice, literally every possible piece: P, N, B, R, and Q) than mine.|
|Apr-03-08|| ||piever: Wow! what a game! tactical games in correspondence chess are often very exciting to watch...|
This could be a nice puzzle at move 23: black to play and draw...
First of all congrats for the good defense (also in CC it's easy to make a mistake) and thank you for having uploaded the game...
I've read your notes at your page on this site and found them quite useful (I always miss something when calculating variations..). However I still can't understand some of your moves in the opening: wasn't your idea of winning a pawn with 16 exf5 Nxf5 17 dxc6 a bit too risky? Did you also analyze something like 16 Ne6 Bxe6 17 dxe6 with the idea of cxd6 and now black can't keep the e-file closed with the bishop?
Btw, I agree with wannabe: I'd like to see more of your games (especially if they're all as exciting as this one..)
|May-21-08|| ||FSR: Thanks, piever! It's been a long time, but I don't recall analyzing 16.Ne6. At the time, I didn't think 16.exf5 Nxf5 17.dxc6 was that risky, but I obviously underestimated his tactics. Most of my other games are a lot more boring than this (for example, my five draws in five games at the 1982 Midwest Masters). The three games of mine at chessgames.com are my best, I think. I also composed a chess problem I'm quite proud of, which you can find at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:K...|
|Jan-14-11|| ||FSR: Here are a few notes: 15...c6!? (theoretical novelty) 16.exf5 Nxf5 17.dxc6 Qxg5 18.cxb7 Bxb7 19.Bxb7 Rab8 20.Ne4 Qh4 21.Ba6 dxc5 22.bxc5 Rbd8 23.Qb3 Ne3!! (Threatening to win with either 24...Nxg2! 25.Kxg2 f3+ or 24...f3! 25.g3 Qh3 26.Bf1 Nxf1.) 24.g3 (If 24.fxe3, f3 with the triple threats of Qxh2+, Qxe4, and f2+ is strong.) 24...fxg3 25.hxg3 Rxf2!! 26.Kxf2 (If 26.gxh4, Rg2+ 27.Kh1 Rh2+ draws by perpetual check. And if 26.Nxf2??, Qxg3+ and mate next.) 26...Bxg3+!= 27.Nxg3 [Forced. If 27.Kxe3??, Qf4+ 28.Ke2 Qxe4+ 29.Kf1 (or 29.Qe3 Qg2+) Qh1+ 30.Ke2 Qg2+ 31.Ke3 Qf2+ 32.Ke4 Qf4#. 27.Ke2?? Qg4+ 28.Kxe3 Qf4+ is the same.] 27...Qf4+ 28.Ke2 (28.Kg1?? Qxg3+ and mate next) 28...Qg4+ 29.Kxe3 Qxg3+ 30.Ke2 Qg2+ 31.Ke3 Qg3+ 32.Ke4 Qg4+ 31.Ke3! (31.Ke5?? Qf5#) 1/2-1/2 A brilliant game by Boerkoel, who played like a tactical genius, sacrificing, or offering to sacrifice, literally every kind of piece possible -- pawn, knight, bishop, rook, and queen. Who says draws have to be boring?|
The tactics in this game are strikingly similar to those in H Westerinen vs Sakaev, 1992, a game that I discovered after our game.
|Jan-22-12|| ||Fusilli: <much more because of my opponent's play (he sacrificed, or offered to sacrifice, literally every possible piece: P, N, B, R, and Q)> I have the feeling that those playing the orthodox KID with the black pieces have to be willing to go all the way like that. Energetic play with White is usually needed. Give black an extra-tempo and you can be obliterated.|
Of course, if you are Viktor Korchnoi, you can do with White whatever you want and black has no chance!
(Kidding! No need to look for Korchnoi's 0-1 KIDs!) :-)
|Jan-22-12|| ||King Death: <Fusilli> It's true, the Orthodox is something I played once in awhile with both Black and White. In practice I think it's easier to handle for Black though at the board.
Of course I never got to play Korchnoi in it either. He made it look so smooth, just like he used to in the fianchetto variation back in the 60s.|
|Jan-22-12|| ||rilkefan: Looking a bit with stockfish, 23.Qc2 would have retained a large advantage (because it holds the second rank and the critical g2 square). The at first mysterious 23...Ne3 shields f3 from the queen, threatening ...f3 and ...Qh3. Anything else (e.g. ...Bd4) is too slow/ineffective and is met by simply c6. 24.fxe3 is equal after ...f3 25.g3 Qxe4 26.Rc2. 24.Be2 f3 25.g3 Qxe4 26.Ba6 is evaluating at +0.5 at a depth of 28.|
|Feb-18-13|| ||FSR: Draw, Pardner!|