|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-07-12 | | ajile: 4.d4!?
Never saw this before in this line. Black appears to get an equal game though out of the opening. |
 |
| Feb-07-12 | | King Death: <ajile> This 4.d4 has been played some and here's a crazy piece sacrifice after 4...fe 5.Ne5 Ne5 6.de c6: http://www.365chess.com/search_resu... |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | Phony Benoni: Just to save you the trouble, the position is the same after Black's 39th, 41st, and 45th moves, so he could have claimed a draw before making his 45th move. Now we can begin discussing why he didn't. It's possible he was confused because there was a difference in the intervening moves. Or maybe Schliemann players don't think about draws. |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | vinidivici: <ajile> means u are very rarely to meet schliemann defense, actually 4.d4 is enough common to answer the defense. Its more aggressive than 4.d3 and wilder than Nc3. Whats the pun referred to? is there any unclaimed 3-fold repetition? which moves? |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | ZeejDonnelly: <vinidivici>I believe Mr. <Phony Benoni>'s post clears up your question. I am disappointed by this GOTD selection. Neither the game itself nor the pun seem particularly satisfactory. Perhaps as a 1500 rated player I am missing out on something spectacular... but I usually expect at least a firecracker if not fireworks in a GOTD. Also, I admire black specifically for NOT claiming repetition. After viewing the most recent WCC, thinking about playing for a draw makes me feel a bit sick. Cheers
ZeejDonnelly |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | DanielBryant: Though the game itself isn't too exciting, the chance for this pun just couldn't have been passed up. |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | hedgeh0g: This pun made me lol. |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | Sho: This pun bothers me. Bad form CG. |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | vinidivici: <ZeejDonnelly> Actually this not so bad for GOTD. Show good ending though. Black so unfortunate that didnt claim the 3-fold repetition but that just due to the final end. |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | JimmyRockHound: Another pun I don't get. Maybe I don't watch enough movies. |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | reisanibal: < Phony Benoni: Just to save you the trouble, the position is the same after Black's 39th, 41st, and 45th moves, so he could have claimed a draw before making his 45th move.> In addition to this, the positions after White's 41st and 45th moves and Black's 48th move are the same. Black could have claimed a draw before his 48th move as well. |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | FSR: <reisanibal: ... In addition to this, the positions after White's 41st and 45th moves and Black's 48th move are the same. Black could have claimed a draw before his 48th move as well.> That's an invalid claim. In the first two instances, Black is on move. In the third, White is on move. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threef... |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | reisanibal: <FSR: That's an invalid claim. In the first two instances, Black is on move. In the third, White is on move. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threef>... Oh, I didn't know that. Thanks. |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | Annie K.: My pun. :D
Thx, <cg>! :) |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | kevin86: An interesting addendum (not for this game). If the position is repeated three times and the castling status is changed,the positions are not the same.After 1 e4 e5 2  e2 e7 3 e1 e8. The position after move 1 is NOT the same as after move three. |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | apple scruffs: Another addendum (not for this game). If the option to capture en passant was present at the first position, it wouldn't be present at the 2nd and 3rd, which would make a claim invalid. |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | apple scruffs: And so the claim for a threefold would be invalid, as FSR tells us. But the pun is godawful horrible...and I just love it! |
|
Jun-30-12
| | Annie K.: The claim would be invalid for moves 41, 45, 48 - <reisanibal>'s suggestion, corrected by <FSR>. The claim <would> have been valid for moves 39, 41, 45, as <Phony Benoni> pointed out. :) For those who don't get the pun:
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/y-u-n... |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | erimiro1: About 40 years ago, that variant was called The Jaenisch gambit (for example in Paul Keres "Spanisch bis Franzosisch" from 1974) . Why the name was changed? No idea. BTW it is not a rare case: The Benko gambit was called "Lundin gambit" during the 50s and the 60s and many called it "Volga gambit" during the 70s. Why Lundin? Because he probably was the father of the general idea; Why Volga? Don't know |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | Shams: <Annie.K> And a fine effort it is! |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | Edeltalent: <kevin86: An interesting addendum (not for this game). If the position is repeated three times and the castling status is changed,the positions are not the same.> Here's a game to illustrate that, with Karpov claming a draw by repetition that was refused by the arbiter. (The game was drawn at this point nevertheless (by agreement)). Karpov vs Miles, 1986 |
|
Jun-30-12
| | Shams: <erimiro1><Why Volga? Don't know> Well, this one is easy: Pal Benko defected, and the Soviets weren't going to have his name on their players' lips after that. I forget his name but a minor Russian master lived near the Volga and did a bit of analysis on the gambit, so that's what they went with, the Volga. |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | Infohunter: <ajile: 4.d4!?
Never saw this before in this line. Black appears to get an equal game though out of the opening.> For analysis on this line see e.g. Tibor Florian, _The Schliemann Variation of the Ruy Lopez_ (1970), pp. 33-35. In keeping with your observation, the author does indeed call this "The 'Inferior' Variation". <erimiro1: About 40 years ago, that variant was called The Jaenisch gambit (for example in Paul Keres "Spanisch bis Franzosisch" from 1974) . Why the name was changed? No idea.> Well, it's not really a change of name in this case; it just depends on where the commentator is from. Walter Korn explains this in the introduction to the "Ruy Lopez" chapter of _Modern Chess Openings_, eleventh edition (1972), p.25: "The line deservingly attributed to Schliemann as its Western pioneer is on the Continent known as the Jänisch Defence, in just deference to the early Russian's research." |
|
Jun-30-12
 | | AylerKupp: <Annie K.> An inspired pun. Thank you. |
|
| Jun-30-12 | | bischopper: the lasker system with rook and a pawn v.s only a rook what happen |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
