|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-25-12 | | zb2cr: Hi <Abdel Irada>:
You are almost certainly correct about White not being able to force Black to sacrifice a Bishop. I looked at the position after 27. Qxg3, Rxg3; 28. fxg3, Bxc4 somewhat casually, and was considering that perhaps White could march his Kingside Pawns down, then exchange into having a pair of connected passed Pawns. This might entail, in my view, Black having to sacrifice a Bishop for one of the Pawns. In turn, this would leave Black with a Bishop and Rook to stop the lone remaining White Kingside Pawn supported by the White Rook. Easily done, of course. Looking at the position more deeply, I have to conclude that you are right and Black has tactical resources that would prevent White from ever getting that far. For example, if 29. g4, Be6; 30. g5, Rb8; 31. Kc2, Rb4; 32. Rh2, Ra4!; 33. Rh1, Rxa2+; 34. Kd3, Kxd7; 35. h5, Bf5+; 36. Ke3, Rg2 and it's obvious that White can't force his Pawns far enough to require the sacrifice of one of his Black's Bishops. Doubtless a more efficient line for both sides could be produced. Thank you for focusing my attention back on this position; if repays study! |
|
| Sep-25-12 | | zb2cr: Hi <Oxspawn>:
I see you have been taking lessons from this site's acknowledged humor master, <Once>. :) |
|
| Sep-25-12 | | TheBish: H Lehmann vs K Junge, 1942 Black to play (26...?) "Easy", Black is up a piece for two pawns. It might seem easy to win a piece up, but Black's queen and rook on g1 are both attacked, so it seems he has to lose something. But mate takes priority over material! 26...Qxg3! 27. Qxg3
If 27. fxg3 Bd3#, or 27. Qa5+ Qc7 with an easy win.
27...Rxg3 28. fxg3 Bxc4 and Black is up two pieces (for two pawns). |
|
| Sep-25-12 | | QueenMe: <chrisowen>: Just curious what your resume might look like (especially in light of the news about the SAT scores that came out today). I have a hunch you can write normally when you really have to. |
|
| Sep-25-12 | | Tiggler: <Blunderdome: I saw Qxg3 pretty quickly but thought white had ...Qa5#. Much later, I had an epiphany, realizing that if white doesn't take the queen, it's still on the board and can retreat to c7. Got it, but tough for a Tuesday IMO.> I had the exact same illusion. I saw Qxg3 right away and then found the phantom Qa5# for white. So I stopped looking at Qxg3 and struggled for ages to find another way. So as a result of that, I am pretty sure there is no alternative solution. |
|
Sep-25-12
 | | chrisowen: <QueenMe> Ar catch in germane dog in digs ate light upper g3 arrest in f1 it he (in heckles) kingd8 safe while d1 it lost in leaders queen foray d6xg3 in tonic again fxg3 then dutifuls in build it Bd3# in. So loot as at rookd2 am sit each in can early it hold in dials on g3 back in learn it free association up ti a loss for Dr I very agreement in SAT of take got course hustle ich bin ein devotee. |
|
| Sep-25-12 | | Moonwalker: This took me a very long time to solve, relative to normal Tuesday-level puzzles. Unusual outcome for a Tuesday (mate or material gain) but enjoyable nonetheless. Keeps you on your toes! |
|
| Sep-26-12 | | Abdel Irada: <QueenMe>: The question with <chrisowen> is not whether he *can* write normally, but whether he *will*. So far, the answer has been no, although I keep thinking that if I study his words closely enough, I might be able to decipher them; however, the effort required to do this being entirely disproportionate to the potential value of succeeding, I have never quite pursued it. |
|
| Sep-26-12 | | Tiggler: <Abdel Irada>: <potential value of succeeding> Who knows what the potential value might be? It could be the Rosetta stone. The World Team vs GM Akobian considers <chrisowen> to be our secret weapon. If the GM threatens to win, we will crack the code... |
|
| Sep-26-12 | | Abdel Irada: <Tiggler>: In that case, I suggest finding an adept specializing in necromancy, because our only chance is to consult Alan Turing. |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | Trebbybear: It seems like 22. Re2 is winning for white. Am I missing something? |
|
Sep-30-14
 | | al wazir: <Abdel Irada: The question with <chrisowen> is not whether he *can* write normally, but whether he *will*. So far, the answer has been no>. Wrong. Jul-15-14 Premium Chessgames Member chrisowen: <al wazir> Yes I agree (Potkin vs Kamsky, 2010) |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | newhampshireboy: I was hoping to see a good discussion of this very interesting game but <chrisowen> seemed to be the main attraction here which is unfortunate. After seeing the term, free association in his post, I think I have a feel for the position if one takes my meaning thank you. |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | Garech: Why not 19.hxg5?
-Garech |
|
Sep-30-14
 | | offramp: Anyone who doesn't have <chrisowen> on his or her ignore list needs his or her head examined. |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | ColeTrane: dont really have any insightful commentary other than to say this is a really amazing game, spawned by an aggressive system |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | morfishine: Heinz's annotations puts this game in "layman's" terms... |
|
Sep-30-14
 | | moronovich: <morfishine> Sorry,thought you said Lehmanns terms. |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | shivasuri4: <Garech: Why not 19.hxg5?> I suppose the simple continuation of 19...Bxf3 20.exd7+ Kxd7 21.gxf3 Qb4+ wins. |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | kyg16: Is this the Anti-Moscow gambit of the Semi-Slav ? |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | paavoh: The Sep-25-12 post by <chrisowen> is surprisingly understandable with phrases like "... means black can extricate his a8 rook...". That is a mind-boggling SEVEN clear words in a row! Either of us must be getting worse ;-) |
|
Sep-30-14
 | | playground player: Hmm... A couple of Germans in a German city in 1942, playing the Semi-Slav Defense, Botvinnik System... And the Gestapo didn't grab them? |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | Garech: <shivasuir4>
Wow, I had not even seen that the queen was hanging!! Mental note never to play thru GOTD before coffee again. Thanks for the explanation!
<playground player>
Lol, very astute!
-Garech |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | kevin86: Nice closing moves. Looks like a Monday puzzle. |
|
| Sep-30-14 | | Once: I suspect that white was pretty happy with his attack until it all started to go icky. It may have been around this point that white realised that his attack might not crash through. Black has just played 21... Qc7. It's white to move. 
click for larger viewAt first glance, white seems to be doing well. He is down a bishop, but as compensation he has rampant pawns, active rooks and the black king is stuck in the middle of the board. But look again. That black king is actually quite safe behind the white d7 pawn. He is sitting on a black square and white has neither a dark squared bishop nor a knight. The white queen can't easily get to the black king either. If anything, the white pawns on d7 and f6 make effective shields for the black king. Until we invent the "evil megalomaniac" version of chess, you can't take your own pieces or pawns. Although sometimes you really wish you could. White has what looked to be a promising attack, but it has now stalled. So what do you do when an attack slows down? All the books say that you should invite more friends to the party. Chuck some more pieces into the fire. And that's why white tried 22. Rh3. Left to its own devices, the rook is going to swing across the third rank. He never gets the chance. The problem with 22. Rh3 is that it leaves the white back rank unprotected. Black whips up a vicious attack. Which probably left white feeling more than a little bemused. Wasn't he supposed to be the one doing all the attacking? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 26...Qxg3