|Oct-05-04|| ||Knight13: Instead of 32... d4?! maybe 32... Rg8 was better. But white is in a very good position so I would say it's a Resign position. |
|Oct-09-04|| ||Chessical: <Knight 13> Your suggestion of <32...Rag8>meets with 33.Rxh7+; Black is lost, and has no defence better than played.|
Macdonnell's f5 and g5 plan was too ambitious.
|Oct-10-04|| ||Chessical: De Labourdonnais outplays Macdonnell, who as in other games in this match, weakens his K-side by pushing his pawns before completing the necessary development.|
<14...g5> is simply too bold. Macdonnell cannot both coordinate his pieces and protect his K.
<28.Rh5+!> is the elegant culmination of De Labourdonnais' play.
|Oct-06-05|| ||Jaymthetactician: 3...e5? is poor, why play that? Though white does get an isolated d-pawn with black controling d5 (the point of Nd7-Nb6 is to control this square further). I'd like 4.dxe5 better.|
13...g5?? is way too poor, the rest is a matter of technique for white from here.
|Oct-06-05|| ||Swapmeet: <I'd like 4.dxe5 better.> 4.dxe5 Qxd1+ is simply awful for white.|
|Oct-06-05|| ||Jaymthetactician: Swapmeet, youre right, I didnt check the variation with an actual board but in my head, though I don't think the centralized king is too vulnarable as the pieces give it ample protection, though like you say the games better. (people say 1.f3,d5 2.Kf2,e5 is awful but I am undefeated with it, I am so endgame oriented that I hope the opponent will throw alot of pieces at me trading them off leaving me with the better king position, very deep, and computers give it a -1.100, which is optimistic for black I think.|
|Feb-03-06|| ||Steppenwolf: Jaymthe...
You must play rather weak players. Try f3, etc. in the A section of a tournament to see what happens to you.
|Jul-29-06|| ||Knight13: I saw this game long time ago. Nice to see it become the Game of the Day!|
|Jul-29-06|| ||itz2000: hey guys,
What does 20..Kh8 prevents?
Is it Macdonnel's day or something?
Look at the openning of the day? Grand Prix Attack!
and guess who used it in many many games? Macdonnels and De La Bourdonnais
|Jul-29-06|| ||EmperorAtahualpa: The game was pretty close and a good fight between White and Black, but the way Black got mated was pretty silly!|
Can anyone explain the pun please? Thanks.
|Jul-29-06|| ||Tariqov: <swapmeat>Are you sure? Looks better for White after 3...e5?! 4.dxe5Qxd1,what makes you think its simply awful?|
|Jul-29-06|| ||Tariqov: <Jaym>If you're a genius why do you a need board to check the variation??Can't you calculate it in your head? :)|
|Jul-29-06|| ||kevin86: How sweet! Macdonnell gives up two queens to mate with two rooks!|
The LaBourdonnais-Macdonnell rivalry was the Yankees-Red Sox/Ohio State-Michigan/Brazil-France rivalry of its time,and still among the finest in chess history.
|Jul-29-06|| ||Phony Benoni: Another dull 1.d4 game. Didn't these guys ever play something interesting?|
|Jul-29-06|| ||OhioChessFan: <EmperorAtahualpa> a London Broil is a steak dish. Here's a little info about it: http://www.askthemeatman.com/london...|
The pun is that LaBourdonnais broiled MacDonnell in London.
|Oct-29-06|| ||McCool: Shouldn't it be 34.f7+ on the scoresheet?|
|Sep-20-07|| ||nimh: Rybka 2.4 mp, AMD X2 2.01GHz, 10 min per move, threshold 0.25.|
De La Bourdonnais 3 mistakes:
16.f4 1.34 (16.Nxd5 2.42)
19.Bc2 0.26 (19.Ne4 3.05)
27.Rfe1 1.29 (27.Bb3 2.00)
McDonnell 9 mistakes:
12...f5 0.64 (12...a5 -0.04)
13...g5 1.29 (13...a5 0.57)
15...Qe8 2.42 (15...Kg7 1.24)
16...g4 2.24 (16...gxf4 1.34)
19...Qh4 2.21 (19...Bxe5 0.26)
28...Bb5 2.05 (28...Raf8 1.07)
29...Rg4 4.55 (29...Raf8 1.92)
30...Rxd4 9.15 (30...Rf8 4.63)
31...Rg4 #13 (31...Rf8 9.12)
|Feb-23-08|| ||wolfmaster: <McCool> They corrected it. Nice pun, too.|
|Jun-04-08|| ||Ulhumbrus: 20 Qe4 pins the g4 pawn and so prevents the move ...g3|
|Jan-02-09|| ||WhiteRook48: McDonnell loses! Weird to see that happen. And in such spectacular fashion (not shopping!) Amazing.|
|Feb-01-12|| ||Knight13: 16...g4? completely kills the positional chances black has in the future!|
|Jan-27-19|| ||ndg2: They say, Steinitz-Zukertort was the match where the QGA was first played on a high level. But me thinks La Bourdonnais - McDonnell came first (of course not with the still modern ideas Steinitz had, but still).|