Feb-16-13 J Gallagher vs Le Quang Liem, 2013
| |
|
Fezzik: Wow, what a game!
|
|
| | Jan-19-13 Borislav Ivanov 
| |
|
Fezzik: The computer match up rate is the equivalent of DNA evidence. Is it enough by itself to prove that someone is guilty in a criminal case? Probably not. Is it enough in a civil case where the burden of proof is simply "preponderance of the evidence" yes. Same here. Borislav Ivanov ...
|
|
| | Feb-14-12 Anand vs Aronian, 2006
| |
|
Fezzik: Both players missed 15.Nxc7!!, but 15.Ne3 was sufficient. Of course, since this was a blindfold game, Anand could be excused for not playing such a tactical line in case Aronian had some surprise up his sleeve.
|
|
| | Dec-14-11 Van der Wiel vs H Olafsson, 1991
| |
|
Fezzik: What's really surprising is that in the final position there's only one move that clearly wins. Congrats to Van der Weil for finding the only move!
|
|
| | Nov-25-11 Tal vs A Vooremaa, 1979
| |
|
Fezzik: I remembered the right move rather than discovered it. But looking at the position, I wonder if I would have had Tal's courage to sac the Q in this way. It may not be a completely sound sacrifice, but to play someone with that sort of tactical vision would be terrifying!
|
|
| | Oct-29-11 Robson vs B Finegold, 2011
| |
|
Fezzik: Btw, if the puzzle had been after White's 27th move, it would have been a "Very difficult" puzzle worthy of today's rating!
|
|
| | Oct-18-11 Naiditsch vs Kramnik, 2009
| |
|
Fezzik: 21.Nd4 Rh4 22.Be3 would have been far more resilient. Black may have had an advantage, but proving it would have been difficult even for Kramnik.
|
|
| | Oct-16-11 Pillsbury vs Tarrasch, 1895
| |
|
Fezzik: This is a classic combination by Pillsbury! Thanks to chessgames.com for helping us to remember it. Even though I remembered that White played Qg3 at some point, I couldn't quite piece it all together. Tal once wrote that Russian schoolboys, by the time they are 11, know how to ...
|
|
| | Oct-03-11 Bosboom-Lanchava vs M Kursova, 2007
| |
|
Fezzik: At first I was surprised that Black, a +2300 player, would continue after 40.Qe3. But then I noticed the move number. The two players were almost certainly in time trouble when this position arose.
|
|
| | Oct-02-11 Benko Gambit (A58)
| |
|
Fezzik: Computers generally don't "get" gambits, but here the ones I've tested suggest that White has a minimal edge for the pawn, usually less than .3. So, by computer standards, the Benko falls very comfortably into the main stream of openings. The idea of giving up a pawn to allow white ...
|
|
| | | indicates a reply to the comment. | |
