|May-29-14|| ||perfidious: Old friend Tony Albano won a game thus in his student days.|
How well I recall coming back from a tournament and having Tony relate the tale of his hapless opponent's conditional sequence which brought him to grief, as Black was caught out here.
|May-29-14|| ||offramp: Yes! First of all, to understand the game, one has to know that it is a correspondence game. Some people may not recognize the ICCF monicker in the game header.|
Secondly, non-corres players may not know that in order to save time and postage corres players sometimes include conditional moves.
These are normally along the lines of <"34.Rg5xg7+. IF 34...Kxg7 then 35.Qh4-g5+">
(Note that top-class corres players might use Uedemann code to communicate).
Sometimes they go right out on a limb and use the word "ANY".
This means that one player is reckless as to what his opponent plays.
Eg: "1.e4 c6 [ANY] 2...d5."
Black saves $0.02 postage and hurries the game along.
In J Campbell vs A Ehrlich, 1990 Mr Ehrlich, evidently a dyed-in-the-wool Modern Defence exponent, received his opponent's first move. "1.e2-e4".
(In Uedemann code this is <"1st row - Sl.1, k. to end. 2nd row - Sl.1, * p.2, k.2. Rep. from * finishing k.1.">)
Now black drops his nickel-saving bombshell. He writes back. "1...g6. 2. [ANY] ...Bf8-g7."
He was expecting, of course, a standard move such as 2.d2-d4.
When he opened the next letter he found that he had save himself nearly a buck and a half.
A funny episode. It shows why intelligent people and correspondence chess are soon far apart.
|Dec-11-14|| ||Domdaniel: I've also heard of this happening on the other side of the board:|
1.e4 b6 [2.Any, 2...Bb7]
|Dec-11-14|| ||Penguincw: 1...Nf6 against 1.any (1...d5 also works). Of course, it's better if white doesn't play 1.e4, but it's still playable.|
|Dec-11-14|| ||Domdaniel: <Penguincw> That's different, no? 1...Nf6 actually is playable against any White 1st move, as long as Black is willing to play Alekhine's or an Indian System. A few other first Black moves also can be played against anything: 1...e6 (which I used to play regardless of White's 1st), 1...d6, 1...g6, 1...d5, 1...c6, 1...b6, 1...Nc6, and maybe a couple more like 1...c5 and 1...a6.
The real problem only arises with a conditional on the 2nd move, as here, when Black may be asking for trouble.|
|Jan-30-17|| ||offramp: <Mr Ehrlich's Tragic Bullet.>|
|Apr-12-17|| ||offramp: One of the shortest games ever...and it was a correspondence game. THAT is post-modernism.|
|Apr-12-17|| ||Doniez: The "if" move made a grin appear on my face but had not the same effect for Black player, "if" I understand the way he intended his smart move|
|Apr-12-17|| ||green ink: A similar correspondence chess failure from the 80's: 1. d4 f5 [2. ANY e6] 2. Bg5 e6 3. Bxd8 1-0|
|Apr-12-17|| ||Ratt Boy: This would be a great April 1 GOTD Game.|
|Apr-12-17|| ||sfm: I'd rather lose 10 games than having a proven record of being unsportsmanlike by taking a win this way. There's no excuse in 'the heat of the moment', this is a correspondence games. James Franklin Campbell, cheap fellow.|
Chess is to be won on the board. Usage of technicalities elsewhere is to be avoided.
|Apr-12-17|| ||clement41: <offramp> in your may 29, 14 kibitz you stated that black was mailed 1 e2-e4. But it was 1 d2-d4 and that makes a world of difference because 2 Bh6 is impossible after 1 e4.|
|Apr-12-17|| ||catlover: <offramp> Thanks for your 2014 explanation of correspondence chess. Without that background information, this game doesn't make much sense.|
|Apr-12-17|| ||mjmorri: <sfm> Why is it unsportsmanlike? Black should have been more careful or entirely avoided the IF move scenario.|
I remember playing on-line with an opponent who always instantly replied 3.Bb5 to my 2...Nc6 initialing a Roy Lopez. I became annoyed with this, and one game played 2...a6 and sure enough his Bishop instantly appeared on b5, and I snapped it off. We continued playing many more games, but he never again played "Blindly".
|Apr-12-17|| ||scutigera: <sfm>: I'm with <MJMorri>; it may be unchivalrous, but it's hardly unsportsmanlike and really quite a good joke and valuable lesson. Perhaps the best way to reconcile sportsmanship and humor would have been "2 h6 Bg7 3 Bxa7, and, if Black resigns, then 1 e4, and if then '1 .. g6, 2 any except Ba6 because I've learned my lesson, 2 .. Bg7', then..." followed by some normal move.|
|Apr-12-17|| ||Gottschalk: I can not add important games to the database, but this "pearl" is part of it.
|Apr-12-17|| ||OhioChessFan: I think it was really bad form by White, and definitely unsporting.|
|Apr-12-17|| ||Howard: Alex Dunne mentioned this "game" in a column of his many, many years ago. I'm assuming it's the same game as is here---unless, someone else made the same careless "if" move!|
Incidentally, I agree that it's hardly "unsporting" to take advantage of someone's slip-of-the-pen. If someone sends such an "if" move, he's takin' his chances. If he gets burned as a result, that's just part of the risk of sending such an "if" move.
Geez, I can still remember several cases in my correspondence play where I lost a game because I had the wrong position set up on my board, or something of that nature. That's just part of the bargain of correspondence chess, as I see it.
|Apr-12-17|| ||AylerKupp: <offramp> Post modernism indeed. I think that this is carrying the idea of a "Modern Defense" a bit too far.|
|Apr-12-17|| ||sachman19: That is ridiculous!!!|
|Apr-12-17|| ||morfishine: Funny, amusing, almost hysterical for its numb-skullness|
But totally out of place as a "GOTD"
|Apr-17-17|| ||syracrophy: Apparently, this "petite" trick may be as old as correspondence chess itself: |
<Item #8963. Correspondence chess trick (C.N. 8942)>
|May-07-17|| ||offramp: |
Guess-the-Move Final Score:
Campbell v Ehrlich 1990.
YOU ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF CAMPBELL.
Your score: 65 (par = 47) <Par is now 48>.