< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Apr-21-04|| ||masterwojtek: Could they see 8 moves ahead!? |
|Apr-21-04|| ||TrueFiendish: More, if necessary, though depending on the complexity of the postion. |
|Apr-21-04|| ||Cerebrate2006: were the first 8 moves actually a line in the old benoni? |
|Apr-21-04|| ||neerajlulla: what a game" brilliant draw by alekhine |
|Apr-21-04|| ||karlzen: <cerebrate2006>, I'm not impressed by white's opening play, black equalised without resistance. 4...Be7 intending Bg5 to exchange the bad bishop is the most usual continuation. Perhaps white should've played 14.Qf5! intending Qe6+ and Nf5(+Ne4).|
It's not neccessary for black to calculate the whole variation from ...c4!? but perhaps Alekhine did (though he missed the following). 24.Be3! retains white's advantage. Because after exchanges on c3 white has Rc1 winning the piece back with endgame advantage.
|Apr-21-04|| ||kevin86: Nice perpetual by Alekhine! I believe that this is one of the many championships between the two. This is somewhat like the Dempsey-Tunney fights-the boxer vs the slugger. If you know chess,you know who's which. |
|Apr-21-04|| ||myratingstinks: masterwojtek..............
I assume both saw the perpetual after 23 ... Ne4 Sometimes I play things out just to see if the other sees my impending doom. Sometimes you get a lucky break. But I suppose not with this type of player.
|Apr-21-04|| ||worktobedestroyed: sorry, 27. Rc1...
I can't find a good move for 26... after 24. Qxe4 Qxc3 25. Qb7 Qc4 26. h3
|Apr-21-04|| ||karlzen: <worktobedestroyed>, 24.Qxe4? Qxc3 25.Qb7?? Qxa1+ looks very good. :) |
|Apr-21-04|| ||worktobedestroyed: sorry.. very stupid of me not to see the hanging R |
|Apr-21-04|| ||Calli: <Karlsen> "24.Be3! retains white's advantage (because of)... Rc1" etc |
Good point! Instead of defending f2 with Be3, however, why not simply 24.h3 eliminating back rank tricks? (e.g. 24...Nf2+ 25.Kh2). The idea is that white has the additional threat of Bd8. Seems to lead to won positions in the variations I quickly examined.
|Apr-21-04|| ||Hidden Skillz: once alekhine played 21.Rac8 im pretty positive he saw the draw.. |
|Apr-21-04|| ||ruylopez900: Good Job by Alekhine, but he doesn't seem to have kept tha magic the entire match, seeing as he lost to Euwe in 1934 (only to regain it right away) |
|Apr-21-04|| ||WMD: The championship match with Euwe took place in 1935. This game occurred on the 17th February 1934, before the championship match with Bogoljubow.|
"In the last of his exhibitions in the Netherlands, Alekhine played an exhibition game with Euwe in the Carlton Hotel, Amsterdam that was broadcast over the radio. The game opened with the Benoni Defence which Alekhine had been experimenting with at this time in order to test its soundness." (Skinner & Verhoeven)
|Apr-21-04|| ||ruylopez900: <WMD> My mistake. |
|Apr-21-04|| ||talchess2003: <karlzen: 24.Qxe4? Qxc3 25.Qb7?? Qxa1+ looks very good. :)>|
what kind of sample line is that, lol, Qb7..your supposed to show good moves in calculations not blunders when assessing a line and trying to prove it your way..
another thing, you give a lot of exclamation marks to moves that dont deserve them =\ it gets a little annoying, seeing your unmerited melange of exclamation marks in your calculations..
|Apr-22-04|| ||tpstar: <talchess2003> IMHO, karlzen is the best analyst around, and his detailed subvariations speak for themselves. I'll bet he's at least 100 points stronger than everyone else (or in my case, 1,000 points). Here he gently pointed out to another poster an obvious hole in their line (note the little smiley), which we all miss from time to time. Moreover, he consistently concentrates on the chess and avoids any counterproductive flamethrowing. I always find his comments helpful, but if you are truly annoyed by his posts (or mine), there is the ignore list function. |
|Apr-22-04|| ||karlzen: <talchess2003>, I was, as tpstar just wrote, answering a fellow poster who had given that line. He even responded to my post commenting the line, before you posted your "thing". Please point out what you mean about putting exclams at the wrong places, examples would be nice. If you're right, I'll try to spare my posts from too much enthusiasm. Hope that helps you with your issue.|
Thx <tpstar>. :)
|Apr-22-04|| ||karlzen: <calli>, I agree that 24.h3 is an improvement. I guess I got a bit carried away of the more beautiful Be3. |
|Feb-18-05|| ||Happypuppet: Is this the only top level game where one side gets multiple queens for more than a move? I know of the Alekhine v NN game, but I heard that was fake. |
|Feb-19-05|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Fischer and Petrosian once played a bizarre game with four Queens skipping merrily around the board. Fun game.|
Fischer vs Petrosian, 1959
|Oct-30-15|| ||TheFocus: This was a radio exhibition game played in The Netherlands at the Carlton Hotel on February 17, 1934.|
See <De Schaakwereld 1934>, pg. 78-79.
|Oct-30-15|| ||sneaky pete: <See <De Schaakwereld 1934>, pg 78-79.>|
That's easier said than done. The first issue of <De Schaakwereld> is dated July 10, 1936. It has 16 pages. The next issue starts again with page 1, and so it goes. No chance of getting anywhere near page 78 or 79.
I checked Tijdschrift van den Nederlandschen Schaakbond, 1934. No mention of this game on page 78-79 or anywhere else. The February issue gives an extensive report of the world champion's visit to the Netherlands in February. On Thursday, February 15, Alekhine gave a lecture in the Carlton Hotel in Amsterdam with Dr Euwe as the subject, so it's quite likely the two men met at the same location 2 days later for this exhibition game.
|Oct-30-15|| ||Stonehenge: See http://resolver.kb.nl/resolve?urn=d..., the first 10 moves were already played.|
|Oct-15-16|| ||MissScarlett: <TheFocus> is often careless in his copying. The correct reference is <Tijdschrift van den Nederlandsch-Indischen Schaakbond>, p.78-79, an Indonesian magazine, we understand. <De Schaakwereld> did publish it, but not until 1939, v3. p.411.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·