< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 56 OF 56 ·
|Mar-21-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> I had a game against the 4.f3 Nimzo, although I don't think the line I played is best. S Tennant vs F Rhine, 1982 No doubt I would have been scared shirtless if I'd known before the game that my opponent had crushed Seirawan and Bisguier with the line.|
|Mar-29-14|| ||Shams: Do you play the Marshall Gambit? What about the Noteboom?|
|Mar-30-14|| ||FSR: Submitted:
[Event "Internet blitz game"]
[White "Rhine, Frederick"]
1.d4 d5 2.c4 dxc4 3.e4 c6 4.Bxc4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e6 6.Nf3 Be7 7.0-0 0-0 8.Re1 b5 9.Bd3 Nbd7 10.e5 Nd5 11.Bc2 b4 12.Qd3 f5 13.exf6 N7xf6 14.Na4 a5 15.Ng5 Ba6 16.Qh3 h6 17.Qxe6+ Kh8 18.Nf7+ Rxf7 19.Qxf7 Qd6 20.Nc5 Rf8 21.Qe6 Bc8 22.Qxd6 Bxd6 23.Ne6 Bxe6 24.Rxe6 Bf4 25.Rxc6 Bxc1 26.Rxc1 Nf4 27.Re1 Rd8 28.g3 Nh3+ 29.Kg2 Ng5 30.Bg6 Rxc4 31.Rc8+ Ng8 32.h4 Nh7 33.Bf7 Nf6 34.Bxg8 Nxg8 35.Ree8 Rd2 36.Rxg8+ Kh7 37.h5 g5 38.hxg6# 1-0
Comment: The game is preserved at http://www.instantchess.com/?EXP=1&... It is an extremely rare example of checkmate by capturing en passant. Edward Winter stated in his book "Chess Facts and Fables" that Gundersen-Faul (G Gundersen vs A H Faul, 1928) was the only such game known.
|Mar-30-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> In blitz I've often played the Marshall Gambit, but I'd be afraid to play it in a tournament game because I haven't studied it to any significant degree. The Noteboom is a good line that one could definitely make a specialty of as Black. I've played the wimpy 3.Nf3 Nf6 4.Qc2 a couple times in tournament games to avoid that sort of thing, but it's certainly nothing special for White. The Slav and Semi-Slav are very annoying. One has to know a ton of theory (e.g. the Botvinnik Variation, and the Moscow Variation or the Anti-Moscow Gambit) to get anything out of the opening.|
|Mar-30-14|| ||perfidious: <Shams> Played the Noteboom at least twice in CC, one of which was D Beaumont vs A Shaw, 1998.|
|Mar-30-14|| ||FSR: A lot of people on the Interwebs play weak stuff against the Marshall Gambit, such as not accepting it. Here's a crush: http://chicagochess.blogspot.com/20...|
|Mar-30-14|| ||FSR: Submitted:
[Event "Tulsa Open"]
[Site "Tulsa, Oklahoma"]
[White "Movses Movsisyan"]
[Black "Thomas Patton"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Nc3 g6 4. d4 exd4 5. Nd5 Bg7 6. Bg5 Nge7 7. Nxd4 Bxd4 8. Qxd4 Nxd4 9. Nf6+ Kf8 10. Bh6# 1-0
Comment: An important opening trap, which surprisingly does not appear in your database.
|Mar-31-14|| ||FSR: Submitted:
[Event "Northeast Getaway Open"]
[Site "Chelmsford, MA"]
[White "Desmarais, Chris"]
[Black "Fang, Joseph"]
1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c5 4. dxc5 Bxc3+ 5. bxc3 Qa5 6. Qd4 Nf6 7. Qb4 Nc6 8. Qxa5 Nxa5 9. Bd3 O-O 10. Ne2 b6 11. cxb6 axb6 12. Be3 d5 13. Bxb6 dxe4 14. Bb5 Ba6 15. Bxa5 Bxb5 16. Bb4 Nd5 17. Nd4 Bc4 18. a3 Rac8 19. O-O-O Nxb4 20. axb4 e5 21. Nb3 Bxb3 22. cxb3 Rxc3+ 23. Kb2 Rd3 24. Rc1 Rb8 25. Rc4 Rd2+ 26. Kc3 Rxf2 27. Rxe4 f6 28. Rc4 Kf7 29. g4 Rf3+ 30. Kc2 Rh3 31. Rc7+ Ke6 32. Rd1 e4 33. Rdd7 Ke5 34. Rxh7 Rxh7 35. Rxh7 Kf4 36. Re7 f5 37. gxf5 gxf5 38. Kc3 Ke3 39. Kc4 f4 40. b5 f3 41. Kc5 f2 42. Rf7 Ke2 0-1
|Mar-31-14|| ||Shams: Re: Noteboom, I think it's not to my taste despite the impressive game that <perfidious> played. In the main lines Black gives up the center, doesn't he? |
I more meant Marshall Gambit and Noteboom from the White side. In other news I'm annoyed that recent games in the Marshall <Attack> have been termed the Marshall Gambit, on TWIC and other sites. Come on, people.
Frank Marshall created not one but two dynamic gambit lines that remain very viable a hundred years later. That's a pretty impressive achievement.
|Mar-31-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> Indeed. There are so many Marshall gambits that <Marshall Gambit> has a disambiguation page in Wikipedia with six entries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh... New In Chess Yearbook 49 analyzed <Four Gambits by Frank Marshall!>, http://www.amazon.com/Chess-Yearboo..., namely the two biggies in the Semi-Slav and Ruy Lopez; 3...f5 against the Lopez, which they thought should be named for Marshall rather than Schliemann or Jaenisch; and 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 Bg7 4.e4 e5!?|
Of course Marshall wasn't always right. His 2...Nf6 against the Queen's Gambit isn't very good. And if you have your copy of <Marshall's Chess Openings> (1904) at hand, you'll see at page 84 that he advocated 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 f5 for Black, with his main line ending in an advantage to Black! But 3...f5 is almost never played, and White scores extremely well. Opening Explorer
|Mar-31-14|| ||perfidious: <Shams: Re: Noteboom, I think it's not to my taste despite the impressive game that <perfidious> played. In the main lines Black gives up the center, doesn't he?|
Have always had the feeling I missed a win near the end of the game with Beaumont.
Yes, in the main line of the Noteboom, White gets the bishop pair and an impressive centre, to wit: Opening Explorer
Recall losing another CC game to a Swiss fellow rated ~2550 in one of the main lines-if I had the score to hand, I would submit the game.
|Mar-31-14|| ||FSR: <perfidious: ... Have always had the feeling I missed a win near the end of the game with Beaumont.>|
Surely you've heard of them new-fangled computer programs? :-) Houdini 3 agrees: you were rolling him like a joint! (<Shams> should appreciate the simile. :-) ) See the analysis I've posted on the game page.
|Mar-31-14|| ||perfidious: <FSR> Ha ha ha!
Had Fritz 5.32 back at the end of my playing days; even if I knew where to find it now, I'd just as soon use my head.
|Apr-03-14|| ||Shams: <FSR> Against the Budapest, what about the 4.e3/5.Nh3 line?|
|Apr-08-14|| ||Shams: You know what's always bothered me about chess notation? |
(waits for everyone's curiosity to pique)
It's the fact that we have nice names for ranks and files, but only very clumsy names for diagonals. The "c8-h3 diagonal"? Yuck. I always have to pause and think for a second before I give the correct name. It's just one diagonal, so it should have a simple name. (If you live in Brooklyn, do you take the "M-line" or the "Forest Hills - Middle Village train"?)
1.) My first thought was to just use Greek letters. Alas, there are 26 diagonals on a chessboard and only 24 Greek letters. Sorry, Hellenes.
2.) The Cyrillic alphabet has more than enough characters, and adopting it would give the Russians their due. It might create a conflict in Russia, though, since presumably these characters already represent the a- through h-files. Also, have you ever tried to pronounce some of these frickin letters? I'm never going to try to make the "shch" sound again in my life..
3. Hebrew is a good option-- I count 27 characters, so we'll have to leave one off. This would be a fine way to honor the unbelievably disproportionate amount of ass that Jewish chess players have kicked over the years.
But what direction would we read them in? Very confusing. Oy vey.
Thoughts? All options, apart from the status quo, are on the table. Keep in mind though that whatever we decide will surely be widely adopted in a decade or two, so it's kind of an awesome responsibility we have.
|Apr-09-14|| ||OhioChessFan: a1/h8 alpha
|Apr-10-14|| ||Shams: <OCF> That could work too. Not sure I want to invoke the US military though.|
|Apr-10-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> <OCF> Given that there are 26 diagonals and the exact same number of letters in our alphabet, certainly something based on it is natural.|
|Apr-10-14|| ||WannaBe: I personally don't see the need of the number after the letter. Examples:|
The Bishop controlls the c-g diagnal, or the queen controls the h-b diagnal...
The numbers themselves are not really that necessary. In my opinion.
|Apr-10-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> That 4.e3/5.Nh3 line has never struck me as any great shakes. I just played the main line, 4.Bf4 Nc6 5.Nf3 Bb4+ 6.Nbd2 Qe7 7.e3. Incidentally, I was surprised to see in the new issue of <ChessBase Magazine> that they're saying that everyone is playing 4.Bf4 g5!? these days. If that's somehow good, the Budapest is almost worth playing. Tim Taylor in his book on the opening says that 4...g5 sucks because of 5.Bg3 Bg7 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.h4! His illustrative game is Kouatly vs E Preissmann, 1983.|
White's other main line, with 4.Nf3 Bc5 5.e3 Nc6 and eventually ...a5 and a possible rook-lift to the king-side with ...Ra6 gives Black good chances to blow White off the board.
|Apr-11-14|| ||Shams: <WannaBe> <the queen controls the h-b diagonal...The numbers themselves are not really that necessary. In my opinion.>|
But there are two "h-b diagonals." It would be confusing without the numbers.
<FSR> Interesting. I'm new enough to the Budapest that I can't say. I have, however, had enough experience in the Fajarowicz variation to confirm the truth of what you told me: you don't need much theory against it. Amazingly, out of like four blitz games I've already snared two people in the 4.a3 d6 5.Qc2 Bf5 6.Nc3 trap. How do you play 3...Ne4 and not know that line?
A happy development in our weekly chess meetup-- this old duffer has been coming in who is really creative. He's not a bad player at all (though he is highly variable) and a pleasure to play and chat with. He told me that he had a plus score OTB back in the day against James McCormick "because he was so obnoxious that I always tried my best against him."
And he plays the Beefeater variation as Black! He calls it by the old name, the Dzindzi Indian. It's a great little theoretical discussion we're having. I love this guy, he lives in a local nursing home, he watches Ron Henley DVDs but he can't get a good game there so he comes to the coffee shop on wednesday nights.
Last week I played the 6.h4 Nf6 7.h5 line, but after 7...Nxh5 I tried the exchange sac immediately and he rolled me. Then I looked it up and this week returned the favor after the correct 8.e4. But then he deviated on me, playing 7...Rg8 in the next game and giving me problems with a quick ...Qa5. I had forgotten Volkov's 8.hg hg 9.Qa4 that we discussed previously, but next week I'll roll it out and see what he has against it.
Who knows, he may put me off 3.Nc3 altogether in that line.
|Apr-11-14|| ||OhioChessFan: I just had a look at the chessgames.com Wiki page. While there, I decided to have a look at the view history page. I happened to mistakenly click on the edit link instead of the view history link. I have never edited on Wiki, so I was surprised to find this message:|
<You are currently unable to edit Wikipedia.
You are still able to view pages, but you are not currently able to edit, move, or create them.
Editing from xx.x.xx.xx1 has been blocked (disabled) by Kww for the following reason(s):
Block evasion: matching block on xx.x.xx.xx0>
What exactly does all that mean?
|Apr-12-14|| ||FSR: <OCF> It sounds like Wikipedia blocked an unregistered user for doing something bad, and that the Wikipedia administrators now think, based on the similarity of your IP address to his, that you may be the same person trying to evade that block. Based on my limited understanding of how IP addresses are allocated*, my guess is that someone in your geographic area who uses the same ISP as you was the miscreant, and that Wikipedia is unable to determine whether or not you are the same person.|
*My knowledge of this subject comes from reading the USCF-commissioned report by Brian Mottershead, which concluded that Paul Truong had impersonated Sam Sloan on the Internet. http://www.anusha.com/mottershead.pdf (If you're interested, see http://www.geocities.com/SiliconVal... for background.)
|Apr-12-14|| ||FSR: <Shams> It must be exciting playing skittles games against actual in-the-flesh humans. I very rarely have occasion to do that. Almost every skittles game I play is over the Internet, usually against some person I'll never meet.|
|Apr-15-14|| ||FSR: Submitted:
[Site "Stockbridge, England"]
[White "Chandler, Geoff"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4 4.Nxe5 Qg5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.0-0 Qxe5 7.Bxg8 Rxg8 8.c3 Nc6 9.d4 Qa5 10.d5 Ne5 11.Qh5 Nf7 12.d6+ 1–0
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 56 OF 56 ·