Nov-15-09 Taubenhaus vs Alapin, 1914 
| |
|
Chessical: Alapin misses a win in the endgame.
[DIAGRAM] <58...Bd5!> wins the <e> pawn and the game due to the threat of <Rc2+> as if the Rook is taken the Black <d> pawn will queen with a decisive effect. <59. Bxd5> Rc2+ 60. Rxc2 dxc2; or <59. e7> Kxe7 ...
|
|
| | Nov-14-09 Matulovic vs M Schoeneberg, 1972
| |
|
Chessical: [DIAGRAM] If <15... Bd8?> then 16.Qd2 Kh8 17. Qh6 Rg8 18. Ng5 Rxg5 19. Qxg5 Bxf6 20. Bxf6 mate
|
|
| | Nov-11-09 P F Johner vs Salwe, 1907
| |
|
Chessical: [DIAGRAM] <29. Qg8+> must have seemed to both players to be no more than a random check which achieved nothing after 29...Kh6. <30. e4!!>, however, leaves Black without a defence, for example: <30...Qe7> (<30... Qd1+> is even worse 31. Kh2 Bg4 32. Qf8+ Kh5 ...
|
|
| | Nov-09-09 H Luik vs Boleslavsky, 1957
| |
|
Chessical: With the surprising <30.R(1)g6!> White could have forced a draw.
|
|
| | Nov-01-09 Burn vs Halprin, 1898
| |
|
Chessical: <FSR> I do not understand why "After <128...Ka6!> White could not force a win". [DIAGRAM] After <128... Ka6> 129. Kc3 Ra1 (not <129... Rxa5?> 130. Rxa5+) 130. Kd4 Rd1+ 131. Ke5 Rd7 132. Rd5 Rg7 133. Kd6 Rg1 134. Kc6 White is surely winning?
|
|
| | Oct-24-09 Alapin vs Marshall, 1901
| |
|
Chessical: Marshall innovates as Black in the Albin, but careful play by his opponent denies him the tactical game he seeks. He misses his chance to equalise, and then is always on the back foot going into an ending two pawns down. <7. Nbxd4> Bb4+ 8. Bd2 Nge7 9. a3 Bxf3 10. Nxf3 Bxd2+ ...
|
|
| | Oct-17-09 E Scholl vs Hartston, 1966
| |
|
Chessical: Scholl appears to have settled for a draw whilst having a winning position: [DIAGRAM] The passed and connected Q-side pawns can be pushed to victory. <45... Nd7?> 46. a5 Nc5 47. Kd5 or
<45...h6> 46. a5 g5 47. a6 Kb6 48.Bxd6 Nd7 49. Kxe4 or <45...g5> 46. a5 h5 ...
|
|
| | Oct-17-09 Teichmann vs O Tenner, 1910
| |
|
Chessical: Black could have gained equality from out of the opening by playing: <20... Bxf3!> 21. bxa4 (which is better than 21. Rxf3 Rxf3 22. gxf3 Nb6) 21... Be4 22. Rxf8+ Rxf8 23. axb5 Bxd3 24. bxc6 =
|
|
| | Oct-13-09 De Vreugt vs Glek, 1999
| |
|
Chessical: <18... a5!?> looks strange as after White's next move the Black King is trapped, but after: <19. Bd6> b5 20. Rfe1 b4 21. Nxe4 Bxe4 22. Qh4 g5 23. Qxe4 Black emerges with a sound position.
|
|
| | Oct-13-09 Yates vs Kmoch, 1927
| |
|
Chessical: [DIAGRAM] <14.Rf3> is a only a paper tiger, the consolidating move <14.c3> is better e.g. <14. c3> Qa5 15. Ne2 O-O-O 16.
Qf4 f5 with advantage to Black.
In the actual game, the sacrifice <15. Rxf7?> would not work <15... Qb4+> 16. Kc1 Nxe5! 17. Bxg6 ...
|
|
| | |
