|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-08-13 | | Conrad93: The pawn is on already on the third rank by move 28, so no. |
 |
| Nov-08-13 | | Conrad93: I was taught that you can capture a pawn any time it passes another pawn en passant. I don't remember any website mentioning the rule that it has to be on the fifth or fourth rank. |
|
| Nov-08-13 | | Wyatt Gwyon: So how did you make it all the way to 2200 with this misconception? You must've pulled quite a few fast ones on opponents in your extensive tournament career. Or were they all likewise unfamiliar with the rule? |
|
| Nov-08-13 | | Jim Bartle: <conrad> OK, good. So you understand you wre mistaken in your comments about Geller vs Fischer, 1970. |
|
Nov-08-13
 | | perfidious: <Conrad93: I am rated 2200+.> This is sublimely comical.
If I had known I could pull a 2200 rating out of my arse as <Conrad> has done, I should never have wasted all those years getting there the hard way. |
|
| Nov-09-13 | | Conrad93: I will never accept that I am wrong. It's not in my nature. |
|
| Nov-09-13 | | Jim Bartle: <Conrad93> "I will never accept that I am wrong. It's not in my nature." You won't get far in life with that attitude. |
|
| Nov-09-13 | | Wyatt Gwyon: <Conrad> That's 'cause you're a tard. |
|
| Nov-10-13 | | Conrad93: No. it's because such admission is bad for the mind. |
|
| Nov-10-13 | | Conrad93: Anyways, you guys are a bunch of weaklings anyway. |
|
| Jul-05-15 | | SpiritedReposte: Actually admitting you are wrong and learning from your mistakes is quite good for your mind...otherwise you're just in denial. Denial is definitely not good. |
|
Jul-05-15
| | perfidious: The great opponents in this game would never have reached such heights as they did without learning from their own errors. That attribute, combined with hard work, the toughest competition and talent, took both a long way. |
|
| Jul-05-15 | | SpiritedReposte: Or you can think of yourself as infallible, not know the basic rules of chess, and be a 2200 player lol. |
|
Jul-05-15
| | perfidious: Ah am infallible, don't know nuthin and Ah am still a 2200 playah! |
|
| Jul-06-15 | | JimNorCal: Wasnt there a Soviet GM (multiple?) who didn't know the details of castling? Specifically that a rook can traverse a square covered by an enemy piece? |
|
| Jul-06-15 | | Retireborn: <JimNorCal> Averbakh v Purdy(?) and Korchnoi v Karpov 1974; both White players unsure about legality of castling when the rook is attacked or crosses an attacked square. Korchnoi wrote about this in his book; not sure if the Averbakh story has been verified. |
|
| Jul-06-15 | | SpiritedReposte: I think Korchnoi may have been one. Maybe in the book <Karpov on Karpov> if my memory serves me (don't bet on it). Which is quite amazing if true. My first thought was there was 0% chance Conrad was 2200+ now that <Jim> brings that up there could be a good 1% chance! |
|
| Jul-06-15 | | Wyatt Gwyon: Korchnoi did that to troll Karpov. Conrad is a patzer. |
|
Jul-06-15
 | | Sally Simpson: Korchnoi vs Karpov, 1974
click for larger viewHere Korchnoi (White) was unsure whether or not he as White could or could not castle Kingside. At a visit to the London Chess & Bridge Center someone asked Korchnoi if this was true - his reply. "Korchnoi confirmed he did ask the question at that point, explaining that
the Russian chess rules left the situation a little ambiguous, and it was the
first time the situation had occurred in his games. " I just tried the link I had confirming that but it no longer works. I'll see if I can find another source. ---
Averbakh vs Purdy, 1960 Here
click for larger viewPurdy played 14...0-0-0 and Averbach objected.
You can get more details from Purdy from the above link. Maybe Averbach fell foul of these unclear rules the Korchnoi mentions. |
|
| Nov-17-15 | | SpiritedReposte: It's just amusing, the last time I was unsure about castling rules I was probably <1400. And here are these 2500+ gms who play for a living who are still not grasping it. |
|
Nov-17-15
 | | NeverAgain: @Sally: don't bother with a link.
It was not the first time Korchnoi encountered such a castling situation in his games (see Chess Notes #9550
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...)
So I highly doubt he went up to the arbiter because he was not sure about the rules. WyattGwyon is right, methinks. |
|
| Nov-19-15 | | SpiritedReposte: Makes more sense than GMs not knowing the rules, but why?? If my opponent objected to a legal castling move I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be mad lol. Some weird head games going on or what? |
|
Nov-20-15
| | NeverAgain: Yes, that was a tense match psychologically, a forerunner of the scandalous Baguio match. You can read about the psychological warfare in Korchnoi's "Chess Is My Life", chapter "Final Test" (pp.103-113). |
|
| Jan-06-18 | | circleVIII: 36. Ng6? made me sad. Lines with 36. Qxa7 are so much more delectable. |
|
| Jan-07-19 | | BickeDag: I played the same first 8 moves today, but used 9. Bg5 instead of 9. Ne2. He responded with 9... Rg6 10. Bxf6 Qxf6 11. Qe3 cxd4 12. Bb5+ Bd7 13. Bxd7 Nxd7 14. Qxe4 dxc3 15. Qxb7 Rb8. I ended up with decent drawing chances but made a massive blunder about 20 moves later and lost the game. It's at least interesting to know that I played just like Alekhine in his world championship match for the whole opening without studying Winawer much at all. |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 37.Qxf4