|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Aug-30-08 | | lost in space: Thanks <johnlspouge>, will try Toga. Was not aware that it is a public domain program. I know what OTP, LOL and IMO means. What does "kudos" stand for? |
|
Aug-30-08
 | | chancho: <lost in space> kudos n. Acclaim or praise for exceptional achievement. |
|
| Aug-30-08 | | lost in space: muchos gracias, <chancho> |
|
| Aug-30-08 | | outplayer: What do you think of 7...f6 or 7...Be7? |
|
| May-03-09 | | WhiteRook48: Damiano's mate? |
|
| Jun-13-09 | | jsheedy: To sneaky pete: 16...Qxa2 [your analysis] slows the attack, but white plays 17. b3!, stopping mate and cutting off the Q. If 17...Qa3+, 18. Kb1 and black's threats end. If 17...dxN, 18. Qc4+, etc. |
|
| Oct-16-11 | | JoergWalter: The magic on the h-file will be stopped with
13. ... Nh7!!
mainline
14. Rh4 Rfe8 15. g6 Nf8!
and the attack is gone.
[16. Rdh1 Nxg6 17. Rh7 f6]
[16. gxf7+ Qxf7]
(Claus Dieter Meyer, 1997) |
|
| Aug-14-13 | | Karpova: The lengthy C.N. 8203 discusses the identity of Black in this game: http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... It turns out that it is far from clear, whether Black was Mindeno or someone named Hulscher or Hoelsder. |
|
| Oct-02-13 | | King Sacrificer: Here's an Edward Winter article about this game:
http://chesshistory.com/winter/extr... |
|
| May-04-14 | | Calli: <karpova> Actually, none of those, the name turns out to be Hoelscher. Found in Euwe's chess column. See C.N. 8203 and 8291. http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/... About ten years ago, <sneaky Pete> suggested that the player might be H G J Holscher, a fairly well known correspondence player. Might be, but as of today the forename is still unknown. |
|
| May-05-14 | | Karpova: <Calli>
Thanks for the update! Gnandt's reasoning in C.N. 8283 that the name was <Hoelscher> looks convincing. |
|
| May-06-14 | | Calli: I can quite imagine that Alekhine got the name from Euwe's column. He scribbles down the score from memory and begins to copy the name from the newspaper carefully. Note that he prints the first four letters H-o-e-l, then realizes he is running out of room and scrunches scher in his usual bad handwriting, thereby causing 80 years of controversy! Still, how in the world did Hoelscher/Hoelsder get published in AA's book as Mindeno? |
|
May-06-14
 | | Stonehenge: http://kranten.delpher.nl/nl/view/i... |
|
| May-14-14 | | Calli: *claps* A long standing error of chess history is finally correct. And the dups are gone too. "Mindeno" can now R.I.P. |
|
| May-15-14 | | sneaky pete: Correct? The game score is still wrong. Both Alekhine's manuscript and the publication in <Tijdschrift> (November 1933, page 297) give 2... Nc6 3.Bb5 d6 4.d4 exd4 5.Qxd4 .. etc. |
|
| May-15-14 | | Calli: <sneaky pete> The name is finally correct. I'll let you submit the score correction ;-). |
|
May-15-14
 | | tamar: Keep some incorrect information, or it won't seem like an Alekhine game! |
|
| May-15-14 | | RedShield: Just as there'll always be Paris, this will forever be the Mindeno game. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend. |
|
| May-15-14 | | Calli: <this will forever be the Mindeno game> Looking at the scorecard, I guess CG thinks so too. |
|
May-16-14
 | | perfidious: <tamar: Keep some incorrect information, or it won't seem like an Alekhine game!> You've got it all wrong--it was the gremlins that did it! |
|
| May-21-17 | | zanzibar: Fantastic link by <Stonehedge>, it settles the issue for me (even better than Winter really, since I can see the contemporaneous ref). I wonder if Mantia even published scans of Alekhine's notebooks? I also wonder what's the story of origins of the lot he discovered them in? As for the <legend vs. fact>, this is a true dilemma - I found this game via Fine's Middle Game book, where it is uncredited who played Black. But <MillBase> gave it as Van Mindeno (with the wrong year - 1938). So, when originally looking on <CG> for the game I couldn't find it. Frustrating. Luckily, I found the Winter article via google. It would be nice to have an entry in <CG> that at least pointed to this game under <Van Mindeno>. I have some opinions on this - like other famous historically inaccurate games, the "wrong" info is memorialized in the literature. <CG>, if it wanted to make the effort, could be (almost) everything to (almost) everybody. I.e. have the fake/wrong games, with a PGN tag notifying people they're fake/wrong. Such games don't go into any statistics - but they serve as stub (or fully playable) games readily found doing searches. And they then follow the user to the "correct" game - like here. . |
|
| May-21-17 | | TheBish: Funny how things work sometimes. I just recently discovered a fantastic combination to finish the game in a tactics trainer program. I thought it must be from a famous game, but you never know. So today, I'm looking at the Recent Kibitzing on this site's homepage. I see an Alekhine game (this one), which I figure must be a good one, so I click on it. I decided to play Guess the Move!, as I need practice heading into a tournament next weekend. As I get near the end, it dawns on me that things are shaping up to resolve into the above-mentioned combination I recently encountered in the tactics trainer! So that didn't hurt my score at all, knowing the finish! (37, par is 19.) |
|
Jan-12-19
 | | Messiah: Amazing game! |
|
Aug-10-20
 | | nizmo11: 14...f5! as played in E E Book vs Reinhold, 1944 is much better 14...Qe6. This forces White to play 15. g6 and then 15...Qe6. Now after
16.Ne5 not dxe5? that leads back to this game and loses forcibly, but 16...Rfe8! and it seems there is no mate, and Black may even be somewhat better. E. Book's analysis in CN and Suomen Shakki continues with 17. Rdh1 Kf8 18. Rh8 Ke7 19. Nxc6+ Kd7! Rxe8 Rxe8 21. Nxa7 Qxg6, and after few minutes thinking my comp does not find anything convincing either. |
|
Aug-10-20
| | nizmo11: another comment: somewhere below move 14...Ng4 was mentioned.
According E. Book this was played in the game Mazzoni-Andor, Paris 1955 that ended after 15.Rh4 Ne5 [15...f5!?] with blunder 16.Nxe5?? 16...Qxg5 and 0-1 Of course white should have played 16.Rdh1 Ng6 17.Rh7, but then 17...f5.
one sample variation:
17...f5 17. Qc4+ Qf7 18. exf5! Qxc4 19. fxg6 Qxc2!!+ 20. Kxc2 Be4+ 21. Kd2 Bxg6= |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 11.Nd5
icon.