|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 15 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-16-04 | | arielbekarov: I have had very nice holidays, so I haven't been able even to take a look here.
I wanted to answer Bobsterman3000 regarding my comments of Rotlewi's
3. e3,
but, I haven't figured out how to do it.
I think Rotlewi should have played Bg5 instead, and then e3.
My knowledge regarding openings is very limited, but, he gave the initiative to Rubinstein immeadiately.
From here on he was on the defensive and that was not the way to play against such a giant.
It is like a team in soccer is giving the initiative to the Brazilians. Any team is doomed to lose.
( I compare with soccer as you in USA is now very active finally, and you are playing very nicely and good soccer. )
With other words Rotlewi made the mistake to play the game that Rubinstein was such a master in.
He was not disturbed by one single move, but, really, it was no shame to lose against a player that for me belongs to one of the alltime greatest ever.
Being short is not my strongest side.
Ariel |
|
| Apr-18-04 | | joydeepmukherjee: what a game!! just cold blooded murder!!!!!!! |
|
May-04-04
 | | LIFE Master AJ: <Reply to everyone>
I rate this as one of ...
"The Ten Greatest Chess Games Ever played." My FULL analysis - when printed out in the ChessBase format, with diagrams - runs over 50 pages. I also have a web page (or two) on this game. In fact, I used to have an entire web page dedicated to Rubinstein ... with about 100 of his games, lightly annotated. |
|
| May-04-04 | | TrueFiendish: Fifty pages!!? You must have analysed the possibilities after 1.d4 Nf6 as well. ;-)
This game was in the first chess book I ever read. It was one where you try to pick the next move and get points for your choice. After 22.Rxc3!!! it said: "0 points--if you saw this move you cheated!" |
|
| May-05-04 | | Lawrence: After 22...Rxc3 it's "Take my Queen and you're in a pickle (mate in 8). Take my Rook and you're in an even bigger pickle (mate in 3.) (Junior 8) <AJ> has also done a gargantuan analysis on another "Take my Queen and you're up to your neck in it, take my Rook and it's up to your mouth" game Polugaevsky vs Nezhmetdinov, 1958 |
|
May-05-04
| | LIFE Master AJ: <Reply>
It IS a great game ... it is in about a DOZEN books / game collections. Probably the most notable are Soltis's book on << The 100 Best>> and the Nunn/Emms/Burgess book, ---> [The Mammoth Book Of] "The World's Greatest Chess Games." |
|
| Aug-20-04 | | Gregor Samsa Mendel: In my mind Rubinstein is an Honorary World Champion for having given us this game. It never ceases to amaze me. |
|
| Aug-20-04 | | iron maiden: It is a great game (that's why it's in fifty-something game collections). After 23...Rd2, Black has left a queen, two rooks, a bishop and a knight hanging in the last two moves. |
|
| Aug-20-04 | | Gregor Samsa Mendel: Poor Rotlewi, constrained by the rules of chess to capture only one piece per move... |
|
| Aug-28-04 | | Whitehat1963: The fifth most over analysed game in history? |
|
| Oct-22-04 | | aw1988: <Kmoch gives this move three exclamation marks.> I give it four. |
|
Oct-23-04
 | | offramp: Hubner would give it one. His system of annotation goes something like this: ! The only move to keep a won (or drawn) position
? A move that turns a win into a draw, or a draw into a loss ?? A move that turns a win into a loss.
And that's it. No triple or quadruple exclams from him! |
|
| Oct-23-04 | | aw1988: Lol, effective but dull annotation system. |
|
| Oct-26-04 | | fgh: For me, it's like this:
! - Correct move.
!! - Brilliant move.
? - Bad move.
?? - Losing blunder. |
|
Oct-27-04
 | | Gypsy: For me, it's like this:
! - A key, subtle move that underlines a deep tactical or strategic concept in a game. !! - A !-move that, for human reasons, was hard to see. ? - A serious tactical of strategic misstep.
?? - An obvious ?-move. |
|
| Oct-27-04 | | Shadout Mapes: I do what I want. |
|
Oct-27-04
| | offramp: When I do my own games it's like this:
! - A brilliant, unexpected and winning move by my opponent !! - A reasonable move by me
? - A move by me that drops a pawn
?? - A move by me that drops a piece
?! - All my opponent's blunders. (This is to make it look as if I won without my opponent making any major errors). <fgh: For me, it's like this:
! - Correct move.>
I can't agree with that! All correct moves get a dog-stop? There must be a lot of them in the recent Kramnik-Leko match. |
|
| Dec-04-04 | | aw1988: Me: !-good move. !!-brilliant move. ?-bad move. ??-blunder. !?-interesting move, perhaps not the best at times, but one which does not change the evaluation of the position. ?!-dubious. Note. THIS IS ONLY BASED ON THE CHESS. I do not water down a knight sacrifice from ? to !? just because of irrational complications. If it is incorrect, I will say "of course, the opponent cannot be expected to sift through all of it. A nice change from A.J. Goldby's system of "!?- perhaps not the best..." when it really deserves a '?'. |
|
Jan-02-05
| | LIFE Master AJ: <aw>
Are you always so hateful? (Did your Momma drop you on your head a lot? On purpose? Just kidding!) But seriously, you GROSSLY ... MIS-REPRESENT my system of annotation!! Dozens of writers have ranked this as one of the ten greatest games of chess ever played. I dare not disagree. (http://www.geocities.com/lifemaster...) I also point out all of White's bad moves. I am also happy to report that I am NOT of the modern school of annotation. (And I don't care if every other master in the world joins that sorry club!!!) And without computers, you wouldn't be able to tell a good move ... from a bad one ... or your ___ ... from a hole in the ground. (Would you care to tell us what your rating is?) |
|
| Jan-14-05 | | dac1990: My system. No pun intended.
!! -Brilliant. Man, I was not expecting this to happen. ! -Good. This makes the equivalent of my king being kicked. Into Strong Sad. With the chicken pox. !? -Interesting. Needs analysis. Hope Fritz doesn't mind. ?! -Dubious. There was a better move. You didn't see it. Maybe this move was okay. ? -Bad. How could you not have seen it? It practically gives away a pawn or two! ?? -Blunder. Holy @*#&, I must have been drunk. Or I'm horrendously stupid. The latter is more likely. Then there's
!!! -Black's 22nd move of a game played in 1907. By Rubinstein. Rook takes knight. Immortalized. |
|
| Jan-14-05 | | aw1988: Oh dear, you have taken offend to what I have said again. I must make a mental note to be careful what I say. This is NOT an insult, I am merely using a system of comparison. |
|
| Jan-14-05 | | aw1988: <!!! -Black's 22nd move of a game played in 1907. By Rubinstein. Rook takes knight. Immortalized.> Amen. Add one more exclam and you get my ranking for it. :) Actually, I might just put this as '!!', since all the forces are obviously aimed right at the king. |
|
| Jan-15-05 | | ughaibu: Aw1988: Dont worry, AJ seems to be pathologically incapable of not taking offence. |
|
| Jan-15-05 | | aw1988: I nevertheless try my utmost not to offend, regardless of er-- pathology. |
|
Feb-16-05
| | LIFE Master AJ: <ughaibu>
I laughed out loud. Seriously! (For several minutes.) Thanks. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 15 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 22...Rxc3