|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Aug-29-08
 | | johnlspouge: Hi, <lost in space>. My chessforum contains instructions for downloading Toga. I have found it indispensible in analysis. Here is the Mom-and-Pop computer analysis after 16.Ne5, with <last move entered> emphasized. (Humans can improve at the end of the full computer variation.) The positions analyzed appear before their evaluation and best play. 
click for larger view [ply 15/69 time 19:28 value +M10]
16.<Ne5> Qh6 17.gxh6 Be8 18.Qc4+ Bf7 19.h7+ Kh8 20.Nxf7+ Rxf7 21.Qxf7 Nc5 22.Rxf5 Ne6 23.Qxe6 Rd8 24.Qf7 d5 25.Rg5 Ra8 26.Qxg7+ Best play appears to be mate in 10.
click for larger view [value +M5]
16.Ne5 <Qxe5> 17.g6 Qf4+ 18.Qe3 Qh6 19.Rxh6 gxh6 20.Qxh6 Nxf2 21.Qh7+ After 16…Qxe5, best play appears to be mate in 5, along the lines <lost in space> gave. 
click for larger view [ply 15/49 time 00:16 value +5.82]
16.Ne5 Qxe5 17.<Qxe5> Kf7 18.Qxf5+ Ke7 19.Qh7 Rxf2 20.Re1 Raf8 21.Rxe4+ Bxe4 22.Qxe4+ Kd7 23.Qxb7 Re8 24.Qb5+ Kd8 25.b4 a6 26.Qxa6 Ree2 27.Rh8+ Ke7 28.Qa4 Rxc2+ 29.Qxc2 Rxc2+ 30.Kxc2 After 17.Qxe5 (the simple response to 16…Qxe5), there is a crushing win, but no immediate mate. 
click for larger view [ply 15/48 time 00:40 value +2.62]
16.Ne5 Qxe5 17.g6 Qf4+18.<Kb1> Qh6 19.Rxh6 gxh6 20.Qe3 Ng5 21.Qc3 Rae8 22.f4 Nf7 23.g7 Re2 24.gxf8Q+ Kxf8 25.Rc1 Rxg2 26.Qa5 Kg7 27.Qxc7 Be4 28.Qe7 White still has a win after 18.Kb1.
click for larger view[ply 15/51 time 00: 36 value +1.53]
16.Ne5 Qxe5 17.g6 Qf4+18.Kb1 Qh6 19.Rxh6 gxh6 20.<Rxh6> Nf6 21.<<>g7> Rfe8 22.b3 Ng4 23.Rh5 Rac8 24.Rxf5 Bd7 25.Rg5 Re7 26.f3 Ne5 27.f4 Nc6 28.Qc4+ Be6 29.Qc3 Rf7 30.g3 Re8 The move 20.Rxh6 is not best play, but is likely enough to win. The previous variation shows the best move is a variant on <lost in space>'s move Qe3. The best follow-up after 20.Rxh6 Nf6 is indeed <lost in space>'s 21.g7. |
 |
| Aug-29-08 | | YouRang: <malbase: 16. Rh7 does not work as Black has:
16-; Nf6.
17. g:f6 Q:f6 18. Qf6 gf6 19. Nd4 Rae8 and the game goes on.>I think that after 16.Rh7 Nf6 17.gxf6 Qxf6, you overlooked 18.Qc4! d5 <forced> 19.Qf4 <threat: 20.Ne5 (or Ng5) & Rh8#>. Black is helpless.
If, say, 19...Rfe8 <guard e5 and give K some room> 20.Ng5 Kf8 21.Rh8+ Ke7 22.Qxc7+ Bd7 23.Re1, and after a few more laughs it will be all over. |
|
| 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! |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 11.Nd5