< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
|Oct-15-11|| ||luzhin: A 19th century player would have had the good taste to play 22...bxa6 and after 23.Bxa6+ Kc7 24.Bf4+ Qd6 25.Rb7+ Kc8 26.Rxc6+ Qxc6 27.Rc7+ Kb8 28.Rc8 mate followed by shower of gold coins onto the board from appreciative spectators.|
|Oct-15-11|| ||bronkenstein: <A 19th century player would have had the good taste...> Ah, good old times...|
I just saw the miniature , it inspires you to simply sit and play .
|Oct-15-11|| ||notyetagm: <luzhin: A 19th century player would have had the good taste to play 22...bxa6 and after 23.Bxa6+ Kc7 24.Bf4+ Qd6 25.Rb7+ Kc8 26.Rxc6+ Qxc6 27.Rc7+ Kb8 28.Rc8 mate followed by shower of gold coins onto the board from appreciative spectators.>|
|Oct-15-11|| ||pericles of athens: fritz gives 22. Qa4 +7.5 and the move played in the game 22. Qa6 +0.6|
|Oct-16-11|| ||luzhin: Computers have no taste whatsoever.|
|Oct-16-11|| ||whiteshark: TY <luzhin> |
click for larger view
|Oct-25-11|| ||Ezzy: 22...Bc3+!!|
|Nov-16-11|| ||Don Cossacks: <Ezzy:22...Bc3+!!>A nice intermezzo in which Black can still hold on.|
|Dec-14-11|| ||whiteshark: <a remarkable game>|
IM Malcolm Pein enthuses about a 24 move win for Vugar Gashimov against Robert Kempinski from Round 2 of the Schachbundesliga match between Bremen and Hamburg with some quite remarkable variations. http://www.chess.co.uk/twic/malcolm...
Enjoy the read! :D
|Feb-29-12|| ||sofouuk: hmm. of course gashimov knew he had the game won as he sat considering his 22nd move, and must have seen that 22 Qa4 would win easily, immediately and without fuss (he did put it there on the next move, after all). instead he decided to try and win 'in a more interesting way' (aka 'showboating') and it's a shame kempinski didn't make him pay for it|
22 Qa6 is a pointless blunder. end of.
|Feb-29-12|| ||xthred: Why not 22 ...bxa6 ?|
|Feb-29-12|| ||fokers13: ^<sofouuk>,try changing your username to <killjoy> chess is not all about playing the most objectively good move(Tarrasch attempted that with Lasker and see how well that worked out for him),if anything it's exactly this occasional flashiness that makes chess this wondrous game it is.I mean you don't see lots of people hating on Tal and i am pretty he has <<blundered>> much worse than that.|
|Feb-29-12|| ||Once: Let's be honest here. Which of us would find 22...Bc3+ OTB, either as white playing 22. Qa6 or as black looking for a way to defend against the threats?|
It's all too easy to sit here with Fritz advising us and feeling wise after the event. But chess is played in real time by flesh and blood players who do make mistakes.
So can we find it in us to be a little more generous about a nicely played attack? And let's not get too excited about a computer-discovered defence which both players missed.
I doubt I would have spotted it either.
|Feb-29-12|| ||sofouuk: <fokers13><chess is not all about playing the most objectively good move>try changing your name to <wilfully perverse>? :) that is exactly what chess is about|
<Once> but the point is that 22 Qa4 is obvious, wins immediately and without any need to calculate anything. white must have chosen 22 Qa6 because he thought it was a more aesthetic way to win, but it isn't because there is an unexpected defence (of sorts - white is probably still winning anyway). this means the combination is simply flawed (i.e. aesthetically unsatisfying), and the fantasy mate after 22 ... bxa6?? was only ever a fantasy anyway
|Feb-29-12|| ||sevenseaman: I liked <luzhin>'s dramatic way of putting forth a technical thought! Tops.|
|Feb-29-12|| ||reilouco: 22... bxa6 leads to mate.
If 22... Bc3+ 23. bxc3 bxa6 still leads to mate.
|Feb-29-12|| ||JohnBoy: I am totally with <sofouuk>. White walked away with a nice win because black didn't spot the resource 22...Bc3+. Now the million dollar question is why MY opponents always find the holes in MY "brilliancies" ;-).|
|Feb-29-12|| ||ventricule: <reilouco> 22. ... Bc3+ 23.bxc3 Ne5 !! with a very strong mating threat on f3 (coupled with Qd3)|
|Feb-29-12|| ||Penguincw: 8.g4 the novelty.
|Feb-29-12|| ||goodevans: I'm mostly with <sofouuk> on this one. <22 Qa6> was a little on the flashy side and could have met its comeuppance.|
Would I have found <22... Bc3>? I doubt it, but the fact that I could instantly see why this resource worked means that a Bundesliga player might well find it. Gashimov was lucky Kempinski didn't.
In my opinion the fact that Gashimov played <22 Qa6> adds to the game's interest and my enjoyment of it, but it also turns an absolute gem into a <flawed> masterpiece.
|Feb-29-12|| ||noctiferus: From a quick Houdini2.0c blunder analysis (18 plies),it seems that:|
first, black blundered playing 21...Qd7(eval 8.25) instead of Qxb5(ev 0.78)
then white blundered Qa6(ev 0.78) instead of Qa4 (ev 8.25)
then black blundered Qc7(ev 5.60) instead of Bc3+ (ev 0.78).
According to Tartakower's law, the result :)
|Feb-29-12|| ||LoveThatJoker: Stockfish gives 2 lines after 22...Bc3+!!
One in which White retains a (+1.13) advantage and the other one where it gives a dead equal eval.
a) (+1.13) 23. bxc3 Ne5 24. Bb5 bxa6 25. Bxd7+ Kxd7 26. Rcb1
b) (+0.00) 23. Rbxc3 bxa6 24. Rxc6+ Kb8 25. Bxa6
|Feb-29-12|| ||Xeroxx: Fire on the board|
|Feb-29-12|| ||kevin86: "remarkable" has two meanings-both can be used here. |
First,the play is brilliant at times.
Second,the play is definitely open for discussion.
In some way,it IS a comedy of errors.
|Feb-29-12|| ||Julian713: <sofouuk: <fokers13><chess is not all about playing the most objectively good move>try changing your name to <wilfully perverse>? :) that is exactly what chess is about>|
Some people do play for the joy of the game and the excitement of making mistakes OTB, regardless of who wins the game. As <fokers> pointed out, Tal seemed to play this way(although somehow I doubt he was a gracious loser, haha). It's why he's still such a popular player.
It's fine to think chess is exactly about the most objective move, but that doesn't exclude others from getting their own enjoyment out of the game in their own way :)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·