chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Richard Taylor vs John Pakenham
New Zealand Chess Congress Major Open (2014), Alexandra Park, Auckland,NZ, rd 1, Jan-05
Scandinavian Defense: Main Lines (B01)  ·  1-0
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening
find similar games 99 more games of R Taylor
sac: 19.Nxe5 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
Jul-02-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  Benzol: Richard showed me this game just a couple hours after he played it. It features a nice trap.
Jul-02-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: Ho Benzol! I'd forgotten! The opening is preparation to move 12 using Komodo. As far as I know 5. Qf3 is a novelty (Duras vs Mieses played Bd3, is the only other example so it seems that 4. ... Bf5 is not the best in the position arising.

The "trap" was forseen but there is another line where Pakenham gets mated. But he had to take on e5 when it is better for White but not so easy to win

Ironically I think Pakenham did better than me in the tournament.

Jul-16-14  tranquilsimplicity: <Richard Taylor> For someone who defended "ultra-positionists"(with you decrying this term and philosophy) in a discussion with me previously on this site, this game against Pakenham is a demonstration of your incredible tactical acumen and possibly predilection to combinations (like myself).

Well done!! Impressive and exhilarating stuff!

Jul-18-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: Thanks. I like combinations but they are like tactics in general just part of the machinery of chess. I admire say Smyslov and Rubinstein as much for their great combinative games and tactical analysis as for their planning. At the age of 12 or so I and my father had a book of Tal's games but I also learned a lot from Capablanca's 'Chess Fundamentals'

I have played some nice attacking games - many more than are on here. I have beaten most of the top NZ players at one time or another.

But I have also played a lot of incredibly bad games.

The best and most ingenious tactical calculations I worked out in my last game in this tournament, but a few moves after I suddenly "collapsed" with a weak move (wrongly thinking I was lost) and I lost the game.

But I did play some good positional (or primarily "positional" games) in Correspondence Chess. My win over a very strong player of those days, Dave Cooper I was proud of.

I think you are talking about Karpov. I am currently playing over his games: all his games from about 1974 to 1982 or so. I have greatly enjoyed his games. Against Velmirovic he just outplayed him in a game where that "attacking player" adopted a very sharp line. Velmirovic annotated the game.

Karpov also praises Fischer for what he brought to chess in that book. In those days, with the absence of Fischer (who, if you think about it carefully, had a similar style: a fighting style, but classicist in basis -in other words, like Fischer and maybe unlike Tal he played practical chess and also chess with great plans and logic: while of course they both could play great attacking games)he was the best player in the world, until Kasparov played so many games against him he learnt from Karpov.

But this game was not in that league for sure! I had dropped my rating some 180 points or so over 2 to three years and my confidence dropped. But I have played the odd combo: but those are really only the "stock in trade" of any reasonably good wood pusher.

The mate is quite nice though, not many of those double check mates for sale!

Preparation for about 12 moves courtesy of my chess program and then instead of he check on a5 simply Nf3 is better for White. Qf3 seems to be a TN. His early Bf5 is not right. c6 instead I think is the safest course...

Jul-20-14  tranquilsimplicity: <Richard Taylor> You are no wood pusher...the combo is very revealing; notwithstanding assistance from software for the first 12 moves. I believe you are right about 4...Bf5 being a mistake; unfortunately I no longer analyse positions as I had become totally consumed by Chess a year or 2 ago, as a result of which I gave away my Fritz 11/12 and 13 programs to my nieces.

And yes. I had Karpov in mind when I previously launched my diatribe against "ultra-positionists". Owing to your advice along with another member on this site, <Perfidious>, I have 'seen the light' and softened my approach even discarding the separation of Chess masters according to the distinct styles of either positional and tactical. I have lately been enjoying (not studying) the games of Emmanuel Lasker. Lasker had a universal style (even though I am no longer hang up about style) and was also years ahead of his time!

Anyway, I am of the opinion that the fact that you learnt and enjoyed Chess with your Dad since the age of 12, and your involvement in correspondence chess, is responsible for your strength in the game including an ability to 'chastise' NZ Masters! The dropping of 180 rating points means that you have been a stronger player in the past than you have been possibly aware of. I have a feeling that some very strong players by virtue of their ratings are only so because of exposure and playing in tournaments with several IMs and GMs.

This game against Pakenham is in my opinion, the best Scandinavian as white on the site. Well done! #

Jul-25-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: Thanks for your comments. I also like Lasker's games, and all the other masters. I played through all the books of Alekhine's games I have. I actually found that his great ability was in positional ideas.

Playing through his second match versus Bogoljubov though, a careful look at that shows that he only played about 2 really good games in that match. Bogoljubov lost won positions (he had got into good positions in many games due to preparation and what looks like a superior understanding of chess - BUT as Alekhine knew, he used up a lot of time (like Korchnoi). Alekhine played one great combination but it was one one would expect any competent player of his level (Bogo himself) to play.

I don't know about the first match. But in that match there were some fascinating games, Bogo lost won games, drew won games. In one he took a draw due to time pressure only. AA was quite lucky to win.

I didn't see a huge difference between Capablanca and Alekhine. Alekhine avoided a rematch with Capa.

So chess is beautiful because of combinations but also the way players deploy their pieces and pawns etc etc I have had great difficulty in that area as in fact I used to play very attacking games: I have made many many sound and unsound combinations and sacrifices! I must upload more of my Q sac games.

But we all need to study or enjoy a range of styles. I haven't played competitively for a while as am busy elsewise also lack a car just now....

But thanks again!

Dec-31-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  Richard Taylor: Ironically today I studied one of the Gligoric-Fischer games (this one was a draw) from 'My 60 Memorable Games' ...fascinating lines. He was certainly not afraid of risky lines, but like Karpov they had to have a positional justification. Perhaps fairer to say he was more dynamic. But his more subtle games show a deep positional nous which is in fact why he said he 'castled into it' against Gligoric. The point is that the so-called positional transforms to active piece play - Tarrasch would have understood Karpov and Fischer and also he should have realised Nimzovich's contribution which (along with such as Steinitz and Lasker and Capa) have been taken on board by Petrosian, even Keene and others (players of many styles)...
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collection[what is this?]
DrChopper's good games 4
by DrChopper


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC