< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jul-17-09|| ||szachista: Brilliant! I'm proud of being Polish :).|
|Oct-07-10|| ||DarthStapler: This can't be sound|
|Nov-29-10|| ||hedgeh0g: <This can't be sound>|
Then show us a refutation ;)
The idea is similar to the Marshall in that White's pieces in the opening are somewhat awkwardly huddled on the queenside, making it difficult to deal with the centre being opened.
|Mar-09-11|| ||kia0708: this is surprising for me that a 2600 player can play this way|
|Mar-09-11|| ||Kazzak: This has become the Gajewski Gambit, and is extensively dealt with in this book:|
|Mar-09-11|| ||solskytz: Refutation? I don't know... not analyzing with a computer... |
I love this style, of telling white "Shut up!!" with a sacrifice every time he tries to do something active after the opening, such as ...Rxf5, and then
again ...(the other)Rx(another minor piece on)f5.
After that white seems to be somewhat intimidated, not daring to go (for example) 23. Qg4 (with Nbd2-f1, Be3, Re1 or d1), or even 24. fg (returning some material) or 25. Kxg2 (Bxc1 26. Qxc1 Nf4+ 27. Kh2 and 28. Nd2, exchanging some, or developing further)
|Mar-09-11|| ||redorc19: personally I find the marshall gambit to be, in my opinion, more sound, but the idea of d5 in the closed spanish seems playable in both variations. Perhaps one day, in the far future, supercomputers will be strong enough to extensively analyse and judge gambits... even nowadays they have their opinions, but I think that in a hundred years our great grandchildren will be able to trust them with less reluctance. For instance, my fritz engine finds the Danish Gambit to be almost 0.80 winning for black, when even kasparov and Keene think black can get only equality.|
|Apr-11-11|| ||solskytz: No they don't... I remember receiving a copy of Batsford Chess Openings (by these two authors) as a prize in an amateur tourney in Israel, 1989, and it gave a 'new' (then) variation on the Danish, where Black keeps an advantage of a pawn or two (doesn't return the material as Blacks usually do), defends against all of the threats, and gets an evaluation of " " to " ".|
I didn't learn it and no longer have the book... but I bet it could come out useful (if anyone has that book they are welcome to remind me of that variation...)
|Nov-06-11|| ||Corndog2: I ought to try this gambit out in a tournament against a master or something!|
|Aug-05-12|| ||hellopolgar: 26. Qxc1 would ensure at least a draw.|
|Aug-05-12|| ||bengalcat47: Playing the Spanish Game (aka Ruy Lopez) at the Czech Open a Pole beats a Russian.|
|Aug-05-12|| ||sevenseaman: What a game; I am vaulted over!|
|Aug-05-12|| ||SuperPatzer77: Now no more Polish jokes!!!
|Aug-05-12|| ||kellmano: Bravo!
Superb play from Black. Must have been great fun to play. I imagine at a few points White thought he had found a defence, only to face another brilliant move. The under-promotion is nice, though I am fairly sure a promotion to a Queen would be enough, even if it allows White a couple of checks
|Aug-05-12|| ||Garech: A great game and a very interesting gambit - going by the stats it is surprisingly drawish, similarly to the Marhshall.|
It seems that 12.Bxe4, giving up the bishop pair, is best for white.
15.Ne4 is a small inaccuracy that's easy to make (simply centralising) - apparently Nh5 is better, and 18.c6 is better than Bb7, as after 19.Nf5 white has an edge.
21...Rxf5!? though flashy and fun is definitely not best - Qd7/Qd8 was objectively much better, although passive. After 22.Rxd6 white is beyond +2 according to Fritz 12.
26.Rxa5 is where white goes wrong. As others have pointed out above, Qxc1 appeared to hold the balance. The reason that this is hard to play is because black can answer 26...Nf4 where 27.Qxf4 is forced, and after 27...Rxf4 we have this position:
click for larger view
where white has a winning endgame (+1.2) but it's not as straightforward as it looks.
However, 27.Qe1 is the real shocker and game-losing blunder. White had to go for Nd2 instead, which just maintains equality after 27...Bxd2 28.Qxd2 Bxf3
click for larger view
Black executes the final attack excellently and the underpromotion is a nice finishing touch.
Great choice for GOTD and an apt pun!
|Aug-05-12|| ||gars: It took me some time to understand the pun. <SuperPatzer77>'s comment reminded me of an inner joke Polish mathematician Marc Kac was fond of: every time he was asked "Are you THE MARC KAC?" he would answer "I am just a Simple Pole..."|
|Aug-05-12|| ||Riverbeast: Fantastic game|
|Aug-05-12|| ||perfidious: Black brushed up against d6 as he was preparing to play 10....c5.|
The arbiter, quietly standing nearby, said, 'no, you've got to play ....d5' as Gajewski tried to play the Closed main line for about the 1,000,000th time in master play.
Lucky us-the result was a remarkable sustained attack as the f-pawn cried 'Excelsior!', sweeping all before it.
|Aug-06-12|| ||kevin86: The mate will come on one coast after the capture was on the other coast.|
|Aug-08-12|| ||Moszkowski012273: Doesn't 13. Nxh7 refute this whole line?|
|Feb-25-13|| ||vinidivici: 10...d5 is a novelty. Its brand new move, usually black response is 10...c5.|
Now, 10...d5 becomes Ruy Lopez, Gajewski Variation.
|Mar-13-14|| ||hedgeh0g: <Moszkowski012273: Doesn't 13. Nxh7 refute this whole line?>|
Good question. I had to check this with an engine and it turns out Black is doing quite well after 13.Nxh7?! Kxh7 14.Bxe4+ Kg8 15.Bxd5 Qxd5 16.Rxe7 Bxh3!
|Mar-19-14|| ||Moszkowski012273: Ahhhh yes! Thanks!|
|Mar-19-14|| ||Capoue: The question is: why do not play this opening by black more often? There is no significal refutation.|
|Mar-21-14|| ||hedgeh0g: <Capoue> It's certainly playable, although if memory serves, White is supposed to get a good game after 11.d4! (11.exd5 12. e4 Bxe4 is another try, but 11.d4 looks more testing, in my opinion).|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·