|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
May-19-05
 | | perfidious: If you want to see a thunderbolt, look at Black's 17th move. In fairness, if Spielmann had played 17.Qd3, intending Qh3, I think Black has problems over the defence of f5, so has trouble justifying his sacrifice. |
|
| May-19-05 | | halcyonteam: foreseen a queen-king skewer |
|
| Apr-24-07 | | Prokofiev fan: This game is in the archive twice for some reason. Spielmann vs Colle, 1928 |
|
| Apr-24-07 | | nescio: As usual the reason is that the games are not exact copies. This one has 6...e6 7.Be3 dxe5 8.fxe5 Nc6. In Spielmann vs Colle, 1928 we see 6...dxe5 7.fxe5 e6 8.Be3 Nc6. |
|
| May-07-07 | | Prokofiev fan: But their obviously the same game right?
with the game itself, could someone explain 12.Nh4?
also 14..Nd4 where he loses a pawn? |
|
| May-08-07 | | nescio: <Prokofiev fan: But their obviously the same game right?> Of course. If someone is able to find the correct score one of them can be deleted. <with the game itself, could someone explain 12.Nh4?> An active move which leads to complications. Quite in accordance with Spielmann's style, I would say. <also 14..Nd4 where he loses a pawn?> He gives it back, but the alternatives give white good play for the pawn in my opinion:
14...Nb8 15.c5
14...Nb4 15.Qb3
14...Na5 15.Bxb6 axb6 16.a3
I seem to remember having read an analysis of this game once, but I have forgotten where. From Yates perhaps? |
|
| Mar-22-08 | | lentil: 21. Bxf5 Nf3+! |
|
| Oct-24-08 | | Zillengold: Lentil 21...Nf3+! is wrong. It is really 21...Nf3+? because 22.gxf3 and black has nothing. Black must move his queen as it is attacked by a rook, losing time, unless he has a constructive square to go to, which it does not. However, you are correct that 21. Bxf5? is wrong. Here is why... 21.Bxf5?, Rxf5! 22.Rxf5 (if you can find a better move tell me)and now comes your Nf3+ 22...Nf3+! Now there are two continuations. Here they are...
22...Nf3+ 23. Rxf3, Qxe1+ 24. Rf1 (forced), Bxh2+! 25. Kxh2, Qxf1 and white has knight and pawn for a rook , which means  . Another continuation is 22...Nf3+ 23. gxf3, Qxe1+ 24. Kg2 (forced), Re1 and the white king is in trouble. |
|
| Oct-27-08 | | morin: Watson analyses this game on "Secrets of Modern Chess Strategy: Advances since Nimzowitsch". I believe 21.-
Bxf5 deserves analysis: 21.- ... Rxf5
22.- Rxf5 Kf3+, 23.- Rxf3 Qxe1+, 24.- Rf1 Bxh2+, 25.- Kxh2 Qxf1, 26.- d6. Now white is not so good, but black storm was calmed down.
What do you think?? |
|
| Dec-16-09 | | Halfpricemidge: Perhaps Spielmann should have sacrificed the exchange 21.Rxe5, excellent game. |
|
Sep-13-16
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Colle plays a curious gambit at move 17 with ...b7-b5. After White accepts, probably best, Black can play ...Bd6 and not worry about either c4-c5 or Na4-c3-b5. But while Black secures the d6 square for his Bishop, he doesn't do it with a vacating sacrifice of the sort that Spielmann describes in The Art of Sacrifice in Chess. So Colle's sacrifice isn't the same as in Spielmann vs Janowski, 1907, to give an example from the book. Does this mean that Colle pulled off a sacrifice that Spielmann didn't know about? |
|
| Sep-13-16 | | AlicesKnight: Not often Spielmann is outplayed in a tactical mix-up, and by the strategist Colle.... |
|
Sep-13-16
 | | piltdown man: <Perfidious> I didn't know thunder was visible? |
|
| Sep-13-16 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: If there were a version of the Colle System for Black, this is what it might look like. |
|
| Sep-13-16 | | kevin86: Black's pieces come to the attack for a quick win. |
|
| Sep-13-16 | | Conrad93: The pun should say "The Colle of the Wild." |
|
| Sep-13-16 | | JohnBoy: <piltdown> - Thunderbolt = lightening. Usually visible. |
|
| Sep-13-16 | | RandomVisitor: By 23...Qh4 black arguably has a winning position. Better for white was 22.Nc5 with a white advantage. |
|
Sep-14-16
| | piltdown man: <JohnBoy> No, thunder and lightning are two different things. Thunder is the sound, and lightning (as the name implies), the light. You can't see thunder. |
|
| Sep-14-16 | | RandomVisitor: After 21...f4
click for larger viewKomodo-10.1-64bit:
<+0.38/44 22.Nc5> f3 23.g3 Qf6 24.Ne6 Nxd3 25.Qxd3 Qxb2 26.Rxf3 Rxf3 27.Qxf3 Qxb5 28.Qe4 Re8 29.Rb1 Qd7 30.Kg2 a5 31.Rb7 Qf7 32.a4 Qf6 33.Rb3 Qa1 34.Rf3 g6 35.Kh3 Qe5 36.Qxe5 Bxe5 37.Re3 Bd6 38.Rc3 Kf7 39.Rc6 Rc8 40.Kg4 Kf6 41.Nxc7 Rxc7 42.Rxd6+ Ke5 43.Rc6 Rd7 44.Kg5 Kxd5 45.Ra6 Ke4 46.Rxa5 Rd2 47.h3 Kf3 48.g4 Kg3 49.Ra7 Rd5+ 50.Kh6 Kxh3 51.g5 Kg4 52.a5 |
|
| Sep-15-16 | | drleper: <piltdown man: <JohnBoy> No, thunder and lightning are two different things. Thunder is the sound, and lightning (as the name implies), the light. You can't see thunder.> Literally, a thunderbolt means "a flash of lightning, especially when close enough for a simultaneous clap of thunder to be heard". Metaphorically, it's something that strikes suddenly and violently. So you can see literal thunderbolts, and you can see metaphorical ones too (since they point to something concrete; like a surprising and powerful chess move). |
|
Sep-15-16
| | perfidious: Dang, look what Ah started eleven years ago! |
|
Sep-15-16
| | perfidious: Dang, look what Ah started eleven years ago! |
|
Sep-16-16
| | piltdown man: <perfidious> And you thought you'd forgotten! |
|
| Sep-16-16 | | drleper: 27...Kf7 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TY... |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 