< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
|Aug-08-17|| ||devere: <<cro777> 20.exd6? This was the decisive mistake.>|
I think that 23.Qxd6 was the decisive mistake. If instead 23.Nd2 d5 24.Nb3, White's game is a bit ugly but it looks defensible to me.
click for larger view
|Aug-08-17|| ||bien pensant: Scotch on the Rocks|
|Aug-08-17|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: <Nf8>, sounds like you're talking about late in the Anand-Carlsen game when Black had a-pawn plus three vs. three. That position is a known draw dating back to Rueben Fine's Basic Chess Endings. Carlsen erred before then; even if the silicon monsters rule that Anand had a miracle draw in every line, Black could have made his life tougher--45...c4 made the draw inevitable.|
|Aug-08-17|| ||Nf8: <An Englishman> I don't see in what way you think Carlsen did err - what should he have played instead of 45...c4, so that White would need a "miracle"? 45...Rc6 46.Rb6 and Black hasn't made any progress.|
|Aug-08-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Thanks CRO:
"I take on b2 and hope for the best."
If only they could program that into computers, chess played by instinct. Though he does admit by saying wondering what he had missed he did a bit of calculation.
Does indeed look like Wes missed 20...Bxd6 or under simply estimated it.
The quickly played 'winning' move has spun around many games.
|Aug-08-17|| ||devere: <Nf8: <An Englishman> I don't see in what way you think Carlsen did err - what should he have played instead of 45...c4, so that White would need a "miracle"? 45...Rc6 46.Rb6 and Black hasn't made any progress.>|
I agree. Anand defended well and it was just a draw.
|Aug-08-17|| ||cro777: <Sally Simpson: Wes only took a handful of minutes on his last few moves but spent 20 minutes before playing 21.Rxe8+ that was the sign something had gone wrong. It's not a disaster but it can undermine your OTB confidence when you miss something during a game.> |
Position after 20…Bxd6
click for larger view
Here, spending 20 minutes before playing 21…Rxe8+, Wesley most probably was aware that his idea 19.Bf4 followed by exd6 had been wrong. At this moment a player usually experiences a difficult psychological problem:
after throwing out his advantage, how to program himself to aim for a draw.
That might be the reason why Wesley, as Carlsen remarked, afterwards didn't really put up much resistance.
After 21.Rxe8+ Qxe8 22.Bxd6 cxd6 Wesley still had reasonable chances to save the draw by playing 23.Nd2, suggested by <devere>, instead of 23.Qxd6:
23. Nd2 d5 24. Nb3 Qe7 25. Bxd7 Qxd7 26. Nxc5 Qd6 27. Qd4 h5 28. Rd1 Rxa2 29. Qxd5 Qxd5 30. Rxd5 Ra3 31. f4
click for larger view
|Aug-08-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Cro,
I said as much when I said: "It's not a disaster but it can undermine your OTB confidence when you miss something during a game."
But Wes, despite his age, is a seasoned professional. He should have admitted he was wrong and gathered himself for a fight.
Sometimes you just have a bad day at the office and that's all really anyone can say.
Of course such things don't happen or affect me.
I'm that crap I don't know when I've made a mistake...I think I'm always winning.
When I get mated I still think I'm OK and wonder where my opponent has gone.
And who is this strange controler type geezer putting the pieces back in the box....and he's run off with the clock.
Where has every gone....Who put the lights out?
|Aug-08-17|| ||Nonnus: Seasoned like a turkey before it enters the oven?|
|Aug-09-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Epistle
"...in remembrance of Mary Queen of Scots who was beheaded by the British forebears of... "
It was the English who beheaded Mary. Britain did not officially exist until 1707. Mary was beheaded in 1587.
Do I now qualify for a nit-pickers dog biscuit?
I'm sure all the Scotch Whisky puns have been used up by now.
It does appear Wes missed a way to capture on d6.How about 'Scotch Mist' although that one too has probably been taken.
|Aug-10-17|| ||epistle: I did not say Great Britain beheaded Mary. I said the British forebears did it.|
If the people there are British now, their forebears can be called British also. Oranges could not have come from apples no matter how many generations had passed.
America was named after the Genoese mariner Amerigo Vespucci who had travelled to what is now known as South America around 1500 and called it nuevo mundo (new world). Yet people there who had lived and died long before Amerigo was even born, going as far back as 3000 B.C. are called now the "First Americans," "Native Americans", etc.
I've heard no one complain that they can't be called Americans at all because the place became America only sometime after Amerigo visited it sometime 1500. Lol.
Stick with chess and leave history to me.
|Aug-10-17|| ||epistle: Moreover, <Wesley Queen of Scotch> is not a play upon the drink, but upon Mary's people the Scots. <No one> but yours truly had ever come up with this brilliant and novel pun.|
|Aug-10-17|| ||donjova: <epistle>, "British" (which, judging by your analogy with America, you use as "inhabitants of the island of Great Britain") are broader term then "English" or "Scottish". In the sense of the word as you use it, it is true that British beheaded Mary (it is also true that some humans beheaded her), but it is imprecise. In case of Mary, it is very important to know that English British, not Scottish British, were the ones who beheaded her.|
Therefore, stick with So bashing (you don't seem too interested in chess) and leave history, logic and names to other people.
|Aug-10-17|| ||epistle: And who said the Scottish British beheaded her? It was upon the order of Queen Elizabeth,although she later said she signed it without really meaning to order Mary's execution. Besides,at that time, Scotland was entirely independent from England although the European monarchies intermarried and were often close relatives as was Elizabeth and Mary.|
|Aug-10-17|| ||donjova: <Besides,at that time, Scotland was entirely independent from England>|
This is true. Having this in mind, do you understand why saying "British beheaded Mary", although not strictly wrong, isn't good enough? :)
|Aug-10-17|| ||keypusher: <<devere >|
<john barleycorn> described Carlsen's play as Lasker-like, and that seems accurate. Lasker was famous for sometimes playing inferior openings and then punishing an opponent who tried for too much too soon. >
Lasker played bog-standard openings, some of which Tarrasch (who had some very eccentric notions about openings, viz. his annotations to their 1908 match games) happened not to like. This whole Lasker-psychology nonsense needs to die once and for all.
|Aug-10-17|| ||perfidious: Years ago, I made a post in which I averred that Lasker was Carlsen's stylistic antecedent, though not for the reasons noted by <davoid>:|
<Carlsen reminds me, more than any other past great, of Lasker.
For a first-class master, Carlsen's openings are nothing special, but he handles middlegames with a fine understanding and the ending with a special virtuosity. Combine this with the tenacity of a bulldog in all phases and a superb practical player, and the result is someone well nigh impossible to defeat.>
Biel Chess Festival (2012)
|Aug-11-17|| ||epistle: saying "British beheaded Mary", although not strictly wrong, isn't good enough>|
Good enough for what? You think I was writing a historical treatise?
It is enough that you admit I wasn't wrong.
|Aug-11-17|| ||Domdaniel: <epistle> You're also wrong in some other ways. Queen Elizabeth I, who was ultimately responsible for Mary's execution, had no children, hence no descendants - and thus was nobody's 'forebear'.
Also, you mention MF as one such 'British' descendant. From his name, it is likely that his ancestors ('forebears' in your antique lexicon) were actually Irish.
And try to understand that 'Scotch' now denotes a drink or a chess opening: it is not now appropriate to use it to describe people from Scotland.|
|Aug-11-17|| ||epistle: How could I have been wrong when I never said that it was actually Queen Elizabeth who decapitated Mary Stuart? The designated British (English for you) executioners did the beheading. When Mary knelt down on the cushion in front of the block, she recited the Latin Psalm <In te Domino confido, non confundar in aeternum>, then laid her head upon the block, stretched out her arms and legs and cried: <In manus tuas, Domine, confide spiritum meum> 3 or 4 times as the main executioner raised the axe while his assistant executioner put his hand on her body to steady it for the blow. But the first blow missed the neck and cut into the back of Mary's head. So there had to be a 2nd blow which finally severed the head reminiscent of the 1-2 blows delivered by MVL and Carlsen in that order. These two guys were the British (English for you) forebears of Mark Finan who did the execution upon the orders of the childless Elizabeth. |
Scots, Scottish, Scotch what's the difference. They're all people from Scotland.
|Aug-11-17|| ||donjova: I have to admit my mistake: I was wrong for thinking that discussion with a person whose posts have that infamous tolengoyish vibe can be fruitful in any way.|
|Aug-11-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi epistle,
The British did not execute Mary. The English did. It's like saying Columbus discovered New York. Britain did not then officially exist.
"Scots, Scottish, Scotch what's the difference. They're all people from Scotland."
Scotch is a drink not a people.
|Aug-11-17|| ||Domdaniel: <epistle> Now you've done it - you've annoyed the Scots. And may your Laird have mercy on your miserable soul.|
I suspect that your knowledge of these islands is minimal.
"An epistle is a letter
But a thistle is much better."
|Aug-11-17|| ||Domdaniel: <donjova> True, too true ... the relentlessness of the obsession is ultimately overwhelming. One can *try* to have a little fun at the expense of the delusional -- but they will never really understand, will they? And it gets tiring.|
|Aug-11-17|| ||epistle: Then rest!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·