< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 74 OF 74 ·
|Dec-06-15|| ||zanzibar: Good eye <Focus>.
You apparently don't need to visit the eye exam place also pictured.
That picture is a shot right from the heart of Ha(r)vard Square, and shows the offices of Click & Clack, of Car Talk fame.
There's even a wiki page about it:
|Jan-13-16|| ||bunbun: where is the joke game annotated in the style of Nimzo.."all these moves are my intellectual property", "you cannot be faulted for not understanding" lol|
|Jan-13-16|| ||disasterion: <bunbun> The immortal overprotection game:|
Nimzowitsch vs Systemsson, 1927
|Jan-13-16|| ||bunbun: YES!!! thank you disasterion :)|
|Mar-16-16|| ||TheFocus: Rest in peace, Aron Nimzowitsch!!!|
|Mar-16-16|| ||Granny O Doul: Now you've gone and woken him up.|
|Jun-20-16|| ||bamonson: keypusher: <WhiteRook48: Nimzowitsch once played a game of live chess against Capablanca. The pieces were humans, and Capablanca's queen was a comely film actress. He sensed that the Cuban wanted to retain her on the board at all costs, so he would have a chance to meet her later. Slyly, Nimzowitsch constantly tried to force an exchange of queens, to which the the champion spurned at great disadvantage. It may have been the only time "Nimzo" ever had "Capa" on the run.>
Assiac tells a similar story, but with unnamed chess masters. Supposedly whoever is smitten with the chess queen notices that the "pieces" are leaving after they are removed from the board, so he decides to keep the queen on at all costs, moving her to and fro and getting a worse position all the time. He finally resigns and runs to the queen and asks her out for dinner. She says, no, she's "dead beat" from moving around so much and is going home to bed.|
The only living pieces game of Capablanca's I know of is this one, which was apparently pre-arranged.
Capablanca vs H Steiner, 1933"
I'm curious where Whiterook48 found this anecdote. I found the same anecdote, worded a little differently, by George Koltinowski in one of his Chess Chat columns from September 1966. He also claims it was Nimzovich and Capablanca in the living chess match, but does not cite where this information came from, just that it was a "pre-war" game. Kolty was entertaining but not known for getting his facts straight.
Assiac, by contrast, is a much more reliable historian. He cites the story as from the "NEW STATESMAN AND NATION" but does not give a date, though clearly it was pre-1951. Presumably he would surely have mentioned Capa and Nimzovich had they been mentioned in the article.
Anyone have additional information?
|Jun-20-16|| ||TheFocus: It is a hoax. Aron and Jose did not play that live game.|
|Jun-21-16|| ||bamonson: TheFocus: It is a hoax. Aron and Jose did not play that live game.|
I'm not sure 'hoax' is the right word. I agree Nimzo and Capa didn't actually play *this* game. I think it's more apt to be two different stories meshed together. What I'm looking for are the original sources. I cited one, the "NEW STATESMAN AND NATION" but there must be something else.
|Jul-09-16|| ||Ron: <The great mobility of the King forms one of the chief characteristics of all endgame strategy. In the middle game the King is a mere 'super', in the endgame on the other hand - one of the 'principals'. We must therefore develop him, bring him nearer to the fighting line> - Aron Nimzowitsch.|
Ron says: Steinitz was making that point decades before Nimzowitsch.
|Aug-17-16|| ||whiteshark: <The Life and Chess of Aron Nimzowitsch> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GISE...|
|Sep-29-16|| ||Ron: Back in the 1990s, one of the coffee houses where I played chess got a new patron, and he read _My System_. That new patron then proceeded to overprotect in each of his first couple chess games! That seemed kinda silly to me.|
But I got useful ideas from Nimzo. For example, the way to play against a hyper-modern defense is to occupy the center and over-protect it.
I was known as being skillful with my knights. When analyzing over the board, I look to see what I can achieve by moving the same knight in each of my next two moves. Or even in each my next three moves. I think that was in the spirit of Nimzo (and Petrosian).
|Sep-29-16|| ||brankat: Steinitz: "I make my King fight."|
|Nov-07-16|| ||parisattack: Happy Birthday, Herr Nimzowitsch.
Tempus fugit but the ideas of the Stormy Petrel of Chess live on.
|Nov-07-16|| ||TheFocus: Happy birthday, Stormy Petrel!!
One of my favorite players!!
And Player of the Day.
|Nov-07-16|| ||dashjon: Happy Birthday Herr Grossmaster|
|May-27-17|| ||whiteshark: <Hypermodern Poem>|
I bought a book by Nimzowitsch
But to me it made no sense
For I thought that a prophylactic
Was a form of French Defence.
Source: http://www.kingpinchess.net/2013/10... :)
|May-27-17|| ||RookFile: You can get all the benefits of Nimzo without the baloney just by studying Petrosian's games. Petrosian was stronger tactically and played more dynamically - but of course, prophylatic play, overprotection, etc. are very much to be found in Petrosian's games.|
|May-27-17|| ||Ron: You know, I always get a kick out of reading <RookFile>'s posts on Nimzowitsch.|
|May-29-17|| ||whiteshark: <Quote of the Day>|
"The <old dogmas>, such as the ossified teaching on the center, the worship of the open game, and in general the whole formalistic conception of the game, <who bothers himself today> about any of these? "
|May-29-17|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi Rookfile,
The irony is that Petrosian picked up loads from Nimzovitch.
From an Edward Winter review of 'The Games of Tigran Petrosian, Volume I, 1942-1965,' compiled by Eduard Shekhtman
" His reminiscences repeatedly stress the influence of Nimzowitsch, whose Chess Praxis was the first serious chess book which he studied.
For Petrosian, that volume was ‘not a work of reference but a book kept under my pillow – a bedtime story for a chess child’"
I've thumbed through 'Chess Praxis' only playing over a handful of games.
But that kind of proven endorsement is encouraging. Here we have a player who we know got to be one of the greats and that book, in Petrosian's own words, helped a great deal.
Much better than a review on any recent primer book on chess. How will we ever know if it is any good till someone 40-50 later says "Yes, this book helped me tremendously."
I know Nimzovitch liked using 'baloney' but in some cases it does work.
I know I got the fact that it's not good to shed what imitative you may have by creating a weakness in the enemy position unless you can attack it.
His explanation that how will you know a man sitting down has severe limp unless you can throw something at him so he chases you. Finally sunk that one in.
|May-29-17|| ||Gypsy: If I were to believe in re-incarnation, I would by now have a strong suspicion that <Rookfile> is in fact a Nimzo re-incarnate.|
|May-29-17|| ||Nietzowitsch: |
People who create their own drama deserve their own <karma>.
|Jul-17-17|| ||RookFile: The threat is always stronger than the execution.|
|Jul-18-17|| ||RookFile: So I know that Petrosian studied from Nimzo. He did a good job of taking what was useful, and also adding a more dynamic content to his game than what Nimzo had.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 74 OF 74 ·