Frank Marshall vs Oldrich Duras (1913)

Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players ·

Kibitzing

Frank Marshall vs Oldrich Duras
Quadrangular Masters (1913), New York, NY USA, rd 4, Sep-08
Danish Gambit: Declined. Sorensen Defense (C21) · 1-0

White to move.

ANALYSIS [x]

1-0

rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	19 more Marshall/Duras games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: Premium members can suggest a game for Guess-the-Move with the Guess-the-Move Suggestion Queue.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Jan-31-19		sudoplatov: Again, Stockfish thinks that 25.Bd2 would have won material.

Jan-31-19		sudoplatov: Marshall also missed a mate-in-9 with 68.Rh6+.

Feb-02-19		Phony Benoni: And, after <22...Rbc8>: click for larger view 23.Bd6 would have saved a lot of trouble. Well, I guess it was good practice. (American Chess Bulletin, November 1913,p. 258)

Mar-07-19		fredthebear: This active game between two chess warriors is a joy to watch unfold. It contains plenty of tactical elements. White's occasional less-than-perfect moves were not unreasonable; his game flows smoothly. Who can hint that the White warrior played poorly when he maintains control throughout? Critics with their silicon brain crutches love to walk all over the graves of the past greats for being imperfect. These same critics never would have found the clever sacrificial interference Bd6 at move 23 or 26 on their own. Hindsight is their shine, which pales in comparison to original creativity. (FTB is willing to bet that whoever back-in-the-day originally suggested 23.Bd6 did so after seeing that 26.Bd6 was played, and then used that enlightening idea to see that it could have been played sooner. Perhaps it was one of warriors who found the improvement in the post-mortem.) Most of the great cinema movies that people enjoy contain a production film flub somewhere, but we can still enjoy the show! Put that computer away and watch the story unfold first -- the building up of the position against the parry is the true art form of chess -- and see if you can spot the flub for yourself! Those who understand chess know that the skewer 68.Rh6+ would NOT have resulted in a mate-in-9 like the computer says. The Black warrior would have resigned on the spot.

Mar-07-19		fredthebear: One would be dead wrong to think Frank James Marshall was a poor endgame player. White had the insight to skillfully remove Black's kingside pawns when he could have easily picked off the last Black pawn on the queenside. That difference is huge! Leaving all the remaining pawns on the kingside would have been drawish. The Black knight would have been in his element one just one side of the board. White realizes this winning plan on move 39. Thus, about half of the game was committed to it's fruition. Marshall collects two pawns for one on the h-file, leaving himself connected passers protected by the king, and then cleans up the queenside. The realization of this plan and it's execution is outstanding. The rook ending follow-up was certainly not so clean, but White does have a won game at that point with the two connected passers by design. "It's a matter of technique."

Mar-07-19		JimNorCal: Bravo, FTB. Still, Marshall missing 68. Rh6+ is glaring enough to make one wonder .... severe time trouble? Momentary chess blindness? An incorrect game score?

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.