< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Dec-10-08|| ||OBIT: Yeh, but Shamkovich is no fun, just resigned on the spot. Now, Reshevsky played it out!|
|Dec-10-08|| ||Nullifidian: I just won a game only a week ago with this trap, so this puzzle was easy for me. 10. ♗xf7+ My opponent tried to save his queen by playing ♕b6, forgetting about the bishop on the e3 square.|
|Dec-10-08|| ||Riverbeast: <(Its a shame that the game is only really known because of Fischer's brilliant move. Reshevsky deserves a great deal of credit for his resourceful play after what must have been a shocking setback.)>|
Reshevsky played it out because he was too embarassed to resign on move 10...he hung in gamely but the outcome was never in doubt.
And Fischer's move was not so brilliant, because he had seen this game in the 'Shakhmatny Bulletin'.....What the Fischer-Reshevsky game really showed, is how theoretically up to date the young Fischer was...There was barely a stitch of printed chess information that he didn't know about.
Reshevsky on the other hand, was known to be a bit lazy in keeping up with theory....and that's why he got bit!
|Dec-10-08|| ||YouRang: Great puzzle, but I must admit that I have not only seen this before, but I remembered the right move!|
|Dec-10-08|| ||A.G. Argent: <sfm>< I wouldn't have resigned when Black did.> Well said. Say's a great deal about the sometime questionable King toppling. Especially about maybe finding a swindle or an escape and those few times when you do and pull a win out of the hat, it's that much more intensely satisfying. But usually when I'm down in material or looking at seeming doom, alas, I'm just a little too easily cowed.|
|Dec-10-08|| ||Phony Benoni: <Riverbeast: Reshevsky on the other hand, was known to be a bit lazy in keeping up with theory....and that's why he got bit!>|
At the 1983 U.S. Open in Pasadena, I helped Jim Marfia produce the daily bulletins. We would get scoresheets from the directing staff after the results had been recorded, take them up to our room, and get to work.
One morning, there was a timid knock on our door, and who should be there but Reshevsky. He had figured out who he would be playing in the next round, and asked if he could look at their game from the previous night.
Of course we couldn't say no, and dug out the appropriate scoresheet. He studied it for a few minutes, thanked us and left.
This became a regular morning ritual. I don't know how much it helped him prepare because (1) the player would have had a different color the night before; (2) He had an infallible knack of picking the wrong player to study.
|Dec-10-08|| ||Riverbeast: To be fair, Reshevsky held a full time job while he was playing chess, so he didn't have time to read as much as Fischer did|
|Dec-10-08|| ||Once: <Phony Benoni> Great story, thanks. |
Fairly straightforward puzzle today. A white bishop on the a2-g8 diagonal calls out for a sac on f7. Add in the advanced white knight and the pinned d7 pawn and we have a queen trap or a king hunt, depending on whether black recaptures with king or rook.
As always <Dzechiel> helps to keep us honest. We do need to calculate Kxf7 and Kh8 to make sure that black doesn't wriggle to freedom.
|Dec-10-08|| ||chopbox: <Eggman: Black would be up material (R+2P vs 2N), and then goes on to discuss why White nevertheless has the edge. The point of the book is to discuss unusual material imbalances (e.g. Q vs N+N+B), and the contexts that affect the evaluations of such situations.>|
That would be a good read for me, Eggman, as such a position seems to me to be good for Black. Just to whet my appetite for the book, would you go on a bit from that position and explain how White would show himself to be better?
|Dec-10-08|| ||Woody Wood Pusher: Looks like somebody dropped a dead-horse in the water hole at e8. It poisoned Black's whole army.|
|Dec-10-08|| ||whiteshark: <10.Bxf7+> and the rest is history.|
|Dec-10-08|| ||njchess: <Riverbeast Reshevsky played it out because he was too embarassed to resign on move 10...>|
Respectfully, I disagree. Reshevsky "played it out" for three main reasons. First, it was the US Championship. Second, he was playing a 14 year old and he hoped that Fischer might make a mistake to let him back in the game. Three, it wasn't in his nature to simply give up without a fight.
<And Fischer's move was not so brilliant, because he had seen this game in the 'Shakhmatny Bulletin'.....What the Fischer-Reshevsky game really showed, is how theoretically up to date the young Fischer was...There was barely a stitch of printed chess information that he didn't know about.>
I agree. However, you misunderstand. I did not mean to imply that when Fischer played it, that it was original. But rather, the move in and of itself is brilliant regardless of who plays it.
|Dec-10-08|| ||muralman: I missed Monday's, and forgot to look at Tuesdays. Usually my luck begins with Saturday anyway. This time Wednesday's puzzle presented a fairly obvious trapped black queen. Now, if only I could get her pawn to vacate it's station when I attack with my knight. Ah yes! take out the other defending pawn with my bishop checking the King.|
|Dec-10-08|| ||bugeyes3: Kibitz!|
|Dec-10-08|| ||Check It Out: The first thing I saw was a possible sac on f7, and then I saw that black's queen was unprotected, therefore black's d7 pawn is pinned by possible white moves to e6. So putting it all together I came up with: |
and if 10...Rxf7 then 11.Ne6 and the black queen is lost.
so then, if 10...Kxf7 I began looking at a mating net against the exposed black king as follows: 11.Ne6 Kxe6 (to save his queen) 12.Qd5+ Kf5 (only move) 13.e6+ Kf6 14.Bd4# (If 13...Kg4 14.Qg5#)
Shamkovich probably resigned after 10Bxf7+ if I've seen everything correctly - what a disaster!
|Dec-10-08|| ||SamAtoms1980: I recognized this theme from reading about this game which is mentioned in the Chess Traps Pitfalls & Swindles book|
W Von Holzhausen vs Tarrasch, 1912
|Dec-10-08|| ||Sleepyworker: I think almost every tactics chess book has this position in it.|
|Dec-10-08|| ||dzechiel: <Check It Out: 10.Bxf7+ ... and if 10...Kxf7 I began looking at a mating net against the exposed black king as follows: 11.Ne6 Kxe6 (to save his queen) 12.Qd5+ Kf5 (only move) 13.e6+ Kf6 14.Bd4# (If 13...Kg4 14.Qg5#)>|
Close, but black can play 13...Be5 and mix it up.
|Dec-10-08|| ||EdwardT: isnt 13 g4+ better than e6?|
|Dec-11-08|| ||Check It Out: <dzechiel and EdwardT> Thank you for the comments.|
Yes, 13.g4+ seems to work better. Here are the lines I came up with:
A) 14...Kh5 15.Rg1
A1)15...g5 16.Qxh7+ Bh6 17.Rxg5+ Kh4 Qxh6#
A2) 15...d6 16.Rg5+ Kh6 17.Qh4#
B) 14...Kh3 15.Rg1
B1) 15...d6 16.Qg2+ Kh4 17.Qg3+ Kh5
B2) 15...h5 16.Qg2+ Kh4 17.Qg3#
Seems like long-winded answer to an obvious mating net but since I don't use a chess computer engine it's good exercise.
|Dec-11-08|| ||Check It Out: Nevermind, I just read <Funicular's> note at Fischer vs Reshevsky, 1958|
a) 14... Kf5 then 15 Rg5#,
b) 14... Kf3 then 15.Rg3#
c) 14... Kh3 then 15.Rg3+ Kh4 [15... Kxh2 16. Qg2#] 16. Q(d4/e4)+ Kh5 17. Qg4#>
|Jun-05-12|| ||KKsystem: This game and specifically the idea used by the winner was made famous by Bobby Fischer in one his game's against Sammy Reshevsky.|
I just finished reading the book "Psychology In Chess". On page 221 the author wrote "Fischer had diligently studied Bastrikov's idea and decided to try it out" ------- Bastrikov's second victim was thus Reshevsky himself.
|Nov-06-14|| ||FSR: This game played a big role in Fischer's second U.S. Championship. Having seen the game in a Russian-language publication, Fischer used 9.e5! to beat Reshevsky in the first round. He went on to win the tournament by a point. Who knows what would have happened if Shamkovich had played 8...d6! and thus Fischer had not had this game to follow.|
|May-17-15|| ||m.okun: Shamkovich claimed that on the 9-th he played differently, and the 9. ... Ne8 arose in the analysis of this party and got to "Шахматный бюллетень" №10, 1958 which was read by Fischer.
|Sep-12-15|| ||zanzibar: Here is a video of Mato analyzing this game:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·