< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Feb-28-08 | | RookFile: But then, he wouldn't be Steinitz. There is a place for his bulldog tenacity. The difference between him and Lasker, though, was that Lasker knew when things weren't working, and it was time to try a different course. |
|
Aug-30-10 | | soothsayer8: Any modern GM would have had little problem with Chigorin's Evan's Gambit. It was interesting to see this WC match as a battle of ideologies, with Steinitz clearly favoring the more positional QG and Chigorin with the aggressive Evan's Gambit. |
|
Apr-04-14 | | Tal1949: It was very odd to see Steinitz play a game like this at this stage of the match. You would think by now that he would be able to handle the very predictable Evan’s Gambit, as he has already shown in game 9 that he can complicate the position for white. Here, however, he decides to ruin the opening by playing horrible moves at 10-13. |
|
Dec-22-18 | | myhilarioususername: Its funny that Steinitz is still going for the 5th consecutive time, a variation that is already losing if white plays 8.d5 |
|
Mar-27-21 | | Chessist: Actually 29....Kc4 was played ("K-B5", ICM 1889, p. 91). |
|
Mar-27-21
 | | MissScarlett: Why do you assume the <ICM>'s infallibility? |
|
Mar-27-21 | | Chessist: <ICM> is the pope. |
|
Mar-27-21 | | Chessist: Steinitz himself should probably know best what he actually played. |
|
Mar-27-21 | | Z4all: What source did <CG> use then? |
|
Mar-27-21
 | | MissScarlett: Probably will not suffice. This is a site that demands the highest standards. The trick is to ignore 99.9% of the other posters. |
|
Mar-27-21 | | Z4all: The sourcing question still remains.
Without it, <CG> is just run-of-the-mill (barring the scintillating posts of the 00.1% of course). |
|
Mar-27-21 | | Chessist: Is there any source for Kc5 instead of Kc4? Copying the megabase does not meet any minimum requirements. |
|
Mar-27-21
 | | MissScarlett: After 130 years, why the hurry? |
|
Mar-28-21 | | sneaky pete: Both Bachmann (Schachmeister Steinitz, Dritter Band, 1920) and Khalifman & Soloviov, Mikhail Chigorin, The First Russian Grandmaster, 1999) give after 28.Be4+ Kc4 29.Rxf7 Kb4 30.e6 d3 31Rd7 1-0. |
|
Mar-28-21
 | | MissScarlett: The <BCM, June 1889, p.239, also goes with <28...Kc4> & <29...Kb4>. The <ICM> has <28...Kc5> & <29...Kc4>. Does anyone claim <28...Kc5> & <29...Kb4>, or <28...Kc4> & <29...Kc5>? |
|
Mar-28-21 | | Chessist: <ICM> has <28...Kc4> & <29...Kb4>. Do you know the descriptive notation?
"28. K-B5" = 28... Kc4.
"29. K-Kt5" = 28...Kb4. |
|
Mar-28-21
 | | MissScarlett: <Chessist: <ICM> has <28...Kc4> & <29...Kb4>.> <Mar-27-21 Chessist: Actually 29....Kc4 was played ("K-B5", ICM 1889, p. 91).> Chigorin vs Steinitz, 1889 (kibitz #10) This is a site that demands the highest standards. At present, you appear to be failing. |
|
Mar-28-21
 | | MissScarlett: Upon a clear consensus, I will amend the score from <28...Kc5 29. Rxf7 Kc4> to <28...Kc4 29.Rxf7 Kb4>. |
|
Mar-28-21 | | Z4all: <Missy> let's see what Helms says... leave it to me. |
|
Mar-28-21
 | | MissScarlett: Helms was on the scene in 1889? |
|
Mar-28-21 | | Z4all: <MissS> You are certainly a strict taskmaster. (I was close, 1889 vs 1893, but close don't count in hand grenades...) I meant BDE of course, but pre-Helms its record isn't quite up to snuff. |
|
Mar-28-21 | | Z4all: <DSZ v44-45 N4 Apr 1889 p111 G-5195> has it though, with <28...Kd5-c4 29.Te7xf7 Kc4-b4> (DSZ). https://books.google.com/books?id=B... . |
|
Mar-28-21 | | Z4all: <La Revista de ajedrez, Issues 1-9 p34> <
28.... R 5 A
29. R x P ...R 5 C
>
https://books.google.com/books?id=M... |
|
Mar-28-21
 | | MissScarlett: <You are certainly a strict taskmaster.> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2Y... |
|
Mar-30-21 | | Chessist: Do you edit my posts to blacken me? I find that reprehensible. Helms didn't start chess journalism before 1893 which almost everyone knows. |
|
 |
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |