|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-28-07 | | Fisheremon: <Daodejing><Pawn and Two> How about 36...Kh8 ? |
|
| Apr-18-09 | | Salaskan: White is actually still winning after 35.Kg2 instead of 35.Kg3??: white will either move his king up the board and threaten to mate the black king or eat the weak d6 pawn and queen the d pawn, winning (35...Nxd2 36. Rxg5+ Kh7 37. Kg4 Nxb3 38. Kf5 Rg7 (38...Nxa5?? 39. Kf6 followed by Bf7 and Rh5#) 39.Rxg7+ Kxg7 40.Ke6 Nxa5 41. Kxd6 and white's d pawn will queen). In the game continuation, white still has good drawing chances after 41.h6! Kg6 42.Rxf7 Kxf7 43. f4 exf4 44. Kf3 when white will either keep the black king from moving away because of the threat of the h pawn queening, or when black captures the h pawn, march up with the king and eat the d pawn (45.Kxf4 Kxh6 46. Kf5 Nb3 47. Bd3 Nd4+ 48. Kf6 b6 49. Ke7 Kg5 50. Kxd6 = ) Still, 33...Qg4 was an astonishing move that probably had a huge psychological impact on white, so it's understandable that black managed to win. |
|
| Apr-18-09 | | Salaskan: By the way, according to Fritz, the losing move was probably 42.h6?, giving up the g6 square and allowing black to tie white's rook to the defence of the h pawn. 41.Rg5? was a mistake as well, because it was in white's best interests to force a rook trade in the position. |
|
| Apr-18-09 | | Lutwidge: Whoa. |
|
| Dec-21-09 | | ajile: After 33..Qg4
Analysis by Rybka 3 32-bit : 22 ply
1. ± (1.05): 1.Rxg4 Nf3+ 2.Kg3 Nxd2 3.Rxg5+ Kh8 4.Rg6 Rg7 5.Rxg7 Kxg7 6.Bd1 Ne4+ 7.Kf3 Nc3 8.Bc2 b6 9.axb6 axb6 10.Ke3 b5 11.f4 exf4+ 12.Kxf4 Kf6 13.Bd3 b4 14.h4 Na2 2.  (-3.32): 1.Bxg4 Bxd2 2.a6 bxa6 3.Bd1+ Kf6 4.Rg8 Bf4+ 5.Kh1 a5 6.Rh8 Ng6 7.Re8 Re7 8.Rg8 e4 9.Bc2 Kf7 10.Ra8 Kg7 11.Bb1 Nh4 12.Kg1 |
|
| Dec-21-09 | | ajile: 
click for larger viewContinued from above line #1. White is just flat out winning. Analysis by Rybka 3 32-bit : 34 ply
1.  (3.36): 15.Kf3 Nc1 16.Bc2 Na2 17.Kg4 Nc3 18.Bd3 2. (3.36): 15.Bc2 Nc3 16.Kf3 Na2 17.Kg4 |
|
Feb-18-11
 | | FSR: 33...Qg4!!! is the most amazing move ever played. It's astonishing that this game languished in obscurity for so long. And no, I don't care that Rybka shows that White could still have won with correct play. It's still an astounding resource in a position that looks completely resignable. |
|
Feb-18-11
 | | perfidious: <FSR> It doesn't matter to you or me, but surely to those who lack the analytic capability and simply plug in Fritz, Rybka or some other programme, then proclaim how we masters haven't got a clue. 33....Qg4 is simply astounding, and no amount of foolishness perpetrated by computer 'analysts' can detract from the human being inventive enough to conceive it. |
|
Feb-19-11
| | FSR: <perfidious> Well put. |
|
| Feb-21-11 | | Kinghunt: 33...Qg4 is certainly a flashy move, one that I would never even consider, but it's not a very deep move. Once considered, you only need to calculate three moves deep in each line to see the point. So in that way, yes, on the same level as Marshall's Qg3, but both of them are far below some incredibly deep combinations played by more recent grandmasters in terms of brilliancy. |
|
Feb-21-11
| | FSR: <Kinghunt> Agreed. It's not an exceptionally deep move. Once you're shown the move, get up off the floor, and think about it a couple of minutes, you can understand it. However, it's such a completely counterintuitive move (hanging the queen three different ways, and also hanging a bishop to Qxg5+) that - as you say - you'd never think of it in the first place. |
|
| Feb-22-11 | | NewLine: See, this is the difference between theory and reality. In theory, White had a winning position.
But in real life, an unexpected and complicated twist like that shocking ..Qg4 can knock you out of focus, undermining your confidence, resulting with mistakes and ultimately loss. This kind of consideration, no computer or computer-follower, could possibly appreciate. I would like to describe the tactical shots involved in the sequence: After 32..Bxg5:
click for larger viewWhite has his Bishop and Queen under attack, and also the threat Nf3 with the 3-way-fork White had dealt with all threats with:
33.Bh5
1. Moving the Bishop to safety
2. Pinning Bg5 while he's under double attack
3. Preventing Black from Nf3
Now black counter with the move in question:
..Qg4
click for larger view1. Attacking the Bishop (again...)
2. Allowing the fork Nf3 (again...)
3. Un-pinning Bg5 who now threat the White Q (again...) White respond with Rxg4 which is:
1. Winning the Queen
2. Protecting the Bishop at h5 (obviously)
3. Pinning and attacking the Bishop (again...) as well as the Nh4 But there was something important he could not protect... The fork on f3!
I don't know about you, I totally LOVED it! |
|
| Feb-22-11 | | erimiro1: I agree with all comments. Also amazing, that till then Burn played bad, and complicated his position as he used to do so often...
But take a look at the journey of the hero b8 horse, who was forced to wander along the black kingdom and to move from b8 via d7-n6-a8(!)-c7-e8-g7-f5 -h4 to find the hidden treasure at- f3... Wow, he needed a rest after the game! |
|
Jul-09-11
 | | OhioChessFan: 33. ... Qg4 !?
34. Rxg4 Nf3
35. Kg3! Nxd2
36. Rxg5 Kf8
37.Rf5+ Kg8
38.Bd1 Rg7+
39.Kh4 Rg6
40.Rg5+ Rxg5
41.Kxg5
Can someone plug 39...Rg1 into Rybka? And why not 39...Rg6 40. f4? <ajile> 36...Kh8 looks horrible. Are you sure Rybka picks that over Kf8? |
|
Jul-09-11
| | OhioChessFan: I threw it in Fritz10 and he says 39...Rg6 or 39...Rg1 White plays 40. Rg5 either way. |
|
Jul-09-11
| | OhioChessFan: I'm not persuaded White had a win My quick human analysis is outposted N on f4, Black King triangulates e7/f6/f7 and any time the White King moves to the h file move to opposition but the fact remains Qg4 was an incredible move. |
|
Jul-10-11
| | OhioChessFan: I've played with this and think White can force a position with a passed h Pawn and Bishop against the Knight. I am pretty sure that's a textbook endgame position. Can anyone tell me if that's a win? |
|
| Jul-10-11 | | Gregor Samsa Mendel: Isn't that a case where the bishop is of the wrong color compared to the queening square, so that's a draw even without the knight? |
|
| Sep-24-11 | | Gilmoy: I find it odd that Krabbe thinks so highly of <33..Qg4>. Burn may not have had it in mind, but he was already playing for the N fork with <31..Nh4>, and <32..Bxg5> removing one defender. From Black's POV, he's winning White's Q. So the price he can willingly pay for that is ... his own Q, and be happy to just trade them. Hence, it's not so hard to spot the "sac" if you go into it knowing that you can afford to throw your own Q for just 1 tempo. The whole line was actually a fatal miscalculation by Burn, as he admitted himself. Burn may have realized with amazement (on White's clock) that <33.Bh5> fails because of the Novotný theme. How's his poker face? Moody's Ratings Agency downgrades this move two notches to C. A = <tour de force:> have my Q, you're mated in ~8 no matter what, me a guru you a chump B = <delayed exchange:> vat, you will attacks my Q, i'll poke yours, let's trade C = <a new hope:> oops i'm losing me a chump life sucks -- zhemoi!! now i am rock star D = <spite trade:> I got your hanging Q, what you will pokes mine, Qxh7+ haha, and -- a pawn up!! |
|
| Mar-18-12 | | brankat: In theory Practice and Theory are the same. In practice they are not. |
|
| Mar-18-12 | | JoergWalter: <brankat>
Practice:= everything works and nobody knows why
Theory:= everybody knows how it should work but nothing works. We can reconcile Practice and Theory:
Nothing works and nobody knows why. |
|
| Mar-18-12 | | brankat: Yep, that about covers it :-) |
|
Mar-18-12
 | | Penguincw: Black really knows how to use the knights. The first knight did a lot of manoeuvring in the opening and early middlegame, the second one, it eliminated the queen, and lead black to a won endgame. |
|
| May-14-12 | | Llawdogg: 33 ... Qg4! is quite a spectacular queen sacrifice. |
|
Aug-05-12
 | | Phony Benoni: I envy those of you who are seeing this position for the first time today. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
+ sac: 33...Qg4