|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-12-06 | | Grampmaster: Artemis your advice is good. Too often I have tried an attack without the necessary support in the vicinity to sustain the onslaught.
Bronstein has played some great games in the past. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | blair45: I agree with greensfield. I missed the puzzle because I didn't see that the f pawn guarded the escape square. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | Cannon Fodder: <Ladies and gentlemen, whats the problem with this puzzle? Why is it that hard? What does this puzzle make inappropriate? Too many possibilities? Too deep calculation necessities? Twas the latter i suppose.> Right. I just saw the knight as a defender, and gave up before I looked to see how easily the defender can be eliminated. I am making some progress, however, since a couple of months ago I was missing the Monday Queen sacs. Can anybody recommend a book with mating puzzles similar to this? The reason I ask is that there are a lot of puzzles that say "find mate in two" when a perfectly simple mate in three or four is readily apparent. I'm sure these sorts of puzzles are helpful for more advanced players, but I think what I need to concentrate on is seeing when there is a forced mate, period, without worrying about finding a really complicated way to do it in the least possible number of moves. I've been going through Laszlo Polgar's Chess puzzle book, but I am finding it a little frustrating that the basic and advanced puzzles all seem to be jumbled together. I'm not criticizing the book, but a lot of it is just over my head right now. Then again, maybe my thinking is totally misguided and I do need to work on solving complex puzzles to get a better understanding of mating patterns. Any advice from experienced players would be appreciated. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | who: <cannon fodder> I like Reinfeld's "One Thousand and One Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations" (http://www.amazon.com/Thousand-Winn...) |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | kevin86: This puzzle was too easy! so i missed it !? I saw that supposedly that white could reply ♔f1 or ♖xf2 to the final move-but it doesn't matter-the king is still trapped and condemned to mate with rooks at h1 and h2.♗xf2 of course was necessary to remove the annoying knight. The Battering Ram of rooks was adequate for the job as white's forces look in awe. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | diemjay: <Cannon Fodder>
<Can anybody recommend a book with mating puzzles similar to this? The reason I ask is that there are a lot of puzzles that say "find mate in two" when a perfectly simple mate in three or four is readily apparent. I'm sure these sorts of puzzles are helpful for more advanced players, but I think what I need to concentrate on is seeing when there is a forced mate, period, without worrying about finding a really complicated way to do it in the least possible number of moves.>Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess
http://www.amazon.com/Bobby-Fischer... Bantam Books, May 1972,
ISBN 0-553-26315-3 |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | Stonewaller2: Does anyone here think that, without looking it up, Deep Fritz 10 would have played 11. ... b5 - ? |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | WarmasterKron: It seemed fairly obvious to me. Qxh2 struck me as the only move and whilst the calculation was quite long, it was almost all forced. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | TrueBlue: got it in a second. Hoever, I have to admit I didn't get the Monday's puzle (white was already a piece up and had way to many winning moves). |
|
Dec-12-06
 | | playground player: Hah! Got it! I must be getting smarter. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | WarmasterKron: <TrueBlue> Actually, White was a pawn down at the beginning of yesterday's puzzle. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | dzechiel: <Cannon Fodder> diemjay's recommendation of "Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess" is exactly what you seem to be looking for. However, another book that had a great effect on my game is "Chess Traps, Pitfalls and Swindles" by Horowitz and Reinfeld. I read that book cover to cover back in the early '70's and never looked at the board the same afterwards. |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | Luckyicekiller: yea, I gotta say, that was the first time I noticed chessgames had a puzzle of the day thing, so yeah. But I did get it--took like a second to see the position COMPLETELY called for that queen sac, and the calculation after was pretty easy, but I looked back and saw some of the other puzzles can be QUITE hard so I can't wait for tomorrows! |
|
| Dec-12-06 | | Cannon Fodder: dzechiel, diemjay, and who:
Thanks for the book suggestions. It's good to hear what other people have used. |
|
| Oct-03-08 | | parisattack: Wonderful game! Too bad Bronstein didn't get his year or two or three as WC; he certainly deserved it. But then, so did several others - Rubinstein, Flohr, Fine, Reshevsky, Keres... |
|
| Oct-03-08 | | parisattack: I would amend my last post to include Pillsbury. One could also build a large 'on a good day' list including Tarrasch, Nimzovitch, Kashdan, Gligoric, Stein ... |
|
| Jan-26-09 | | Garech: Fantastic game; nothing more skilfull that a well played closed game in my opinion. |
|
| Feb-12-09 | | Brown: <parisattack> Bronstein is the ultimate trickster figure of chess, showing everyone where the boundaries are. Tricksters don't make good kings. |
|
| May-25-09 | | Brown: I think white had to play 12.cxb5 c4 13.Qb4 or 13.Qd1. The text allows black to lock the Q-side and start taking shots at the white K. Bronstein mentioned this is the only time he castled Q-side in the KID. Well, the reason for it is because of white's response to 11..b5!? |
|
| Jul-06-10 | | Damianx: doesn,t 54 knight take bishop save it king + 5 pawns each ending |
|
| Feb-16-12 | | screwdriver: Yea, I was surprised white didn't take on b5 too. But since white did that, I concur that castling queenside for black becomes quite attractive. It sure took alot of jostling around to get the victory afterwards though. |
|
| Feb-16-12 | | waustad: I'd been waiting for the B sac on g3 for many moves. He had the ability to know when the time was right. |
|
| Jan-02-22 | | jerseybob: <madlydeeply: ... so why doesn't Shamkovich play 12. cxb5 winning a pawn? > 12..c4 looks a little messy, which is why 11.Qb3 is dubious. |
|
Jan-02-22
 | | perfidious: While one often sees games in the King's Indian featuring castling on opposite sides, especially in the Saemisch, do not believe I have ever seen a game in any line of the KID featuring long castling by Black till now. |
|
| Jan-02-22 | | jerseybob: It's not a King's Indian, but one of my favorite games featuring 0-0-0 for both sides is Chigorin-Lasker, London 1899. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 54...Qxh2+