Nov-08-10 Van Wely vs C Hansen, 1992 
| |
|
slapwa: It would be interesting to know whether Black avoided 39. ..., Rb1 because he didn't notice it or because he regarded the game continuation as superior (to 40. Qxd5, Qxd5; 41. Rxb1, Qxa5 with a tough struggle ahead). Much credit if the latter, and if he had a clever answer (what?) to
|
|
| | Jul-24-10 Pillsbury vs J C Halpern, 1894
| |
|
slapwa: 57, ... Kd8 is less elaborate.
|
|
| | Jan-25-10 Letelier vs Fischer, 1960
| |
|
slapwa: The move order was usually as Keres played (5. f4, and whether 5 ..., d6 or 5 ..., c5, then 6. e5 ) in the 4 Pawns Attack, but it transposes. I dont' have OE but I expect that search would throw more up.
|
|
| | Dec-07-09 Stein vs Petrosian, 1973
| |
|
slapwa: Everett: Why does the comp not consider 44.Qxd6? 44. ..., Qa7 threatens both the Qxe3 and a1=Q.
|
|
| | Oct-10-09 J Hartley vs J Sarfati, 1982
| |
|
slapwa: 13 Bxd5 looks much better. Is there some book refutation?
|
|
| | Jul-07-09 Ganguly vs M Mahjoob, 2009
| |
|
slapwa: "the safety of e7, and a won game. " ??
60 ..., Ke7 61. Rxe8+, Kd7. 62 Qxe6+, Kc7. 63 Rc8 Mate
|
|
| | Apr-12-09 S Sloan vs J Jacobs, 2007
| |
|
slapwa: Not quite: after 38 ..., Nxf7 white takes with the Bishop and he's not losing.
|
|
| | Mar-15-09 M Sebag vs B Yildiz, 2009
| |
|
slapwa: 34 . .... c5 must be wrong. The point was to simplify into opposite bishops and it didn't. Surely black should play Rd7, Ke6, c6 and (if White doesn't exchange rooks) Rf7 and just hunker down on the white squares.
|
|
| | Nov-30-08 Miles vs E Jelling, 1993
| |
|
slapwa: PS 22 Rd1 is as good as any, as well.
|
|
| | Oct-16-08 Lombardy vs Polugaevsky, 1978
| |
|
slapwa: benveniste: No - if 32 ..., Rc8; 33 Nf6+ and the b7 rook goes.
|
|
| | | indicates a reply to the comment. | |
