|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-12-07 | | sitzkrieg: Hmm.Bouwmeester gives another winning line, Rg4!.
If i may ask, in what book does Bronstein mention his solution suzuki? |
|
| Jan-12-07 | | Fisheremon: <sitzkrieg: Hmm.Bouwmeester gives another winning line, Rg4!.
If i may ask, in what book does Bronstein mention his solution suzuki?> He might mean "Self-tutor" ?! (See his comment on Duras vs Swiderski, 1908) |
|
| Jan-13-07 | | sitzkrieg: Thanks,could be. I never seen that book yet:), will search for it. |
|
| Mar-07-07 | | RandomVisitor: After Black's 23rd move:
click for larger view(18-ply)Rybka2.2winfinder
1. (3.08): 1.Nxg7 Qxc4 2.Rxc4 Rxc4 3.Qa1 Rac8 4.Kf2 Rc1 5.Qxa6 Kxg7 6.Qxa7 R1c2+ 7.Kg3 R2c6 2. (1.05): 1.b5 Bxb5 2.Nxg7 Bxc4 3.Nh5 Bd5 4.Nxf6+ Qxf6 5.Rg4+ Qg6 6.Rxg6+ hxg6 7.Qa3 Rd8 3. (0.32): 1.Rg5 fxe6 2.b5 Bxb5 3.Rxb5 Kh8 4.Qd3 Re8 5.Re5 Rac8 6.Qb3 Nd5 7.Kf2 Red8 |
|
| Jan-04-09 | | percyblakeney: It's interesting to read Kotov's description of how chess experts all over the world analyzed the position before white's 24th. Various winning lines turned up to soon be refuted, and article upon article was published on the subject. Eventually Winter and Kotov himself found that white wins with 24. b5. The winning line as given by Kotov is in fact not winning since he has missed that after 24. b5 Bxb5 25. Nxg7 Bxc4 26. Nf5 Qa4 27. Re8+ Rxe8 28. Rg4+ Kf8 29. Qxf6 black seems to have a draw: 
click for larger view29. ... Qd1+ 30. Kf2 Qc2+ 31. Kg3 Qxf5 32. Qxf5 Be6 leaves black with two rooks and a very fast a-pawn against the white queen. Nowadays it's just to put the pgn into an old version of Shredder and it immediately declares that 24. Nxg7 is winning... |
|
| Jan-04-09 | | acirce: And people all over the world watching the game live on ICC or Playchess would immediately have shouted "blunder!!" when Flohr missed it. |
|
| May-22-09 | | PeterB: Fine himself, in his "Lessons from my games", felt that Flohr had a win with 24.Rg4! But he must have had tremendous self confidence to go into such a complicated line against one of the top players in the world! |
|
| May-22-09 | | AnalyzeThis: That's really the point. Fine was playing for a win, right from the start, and was willing to take chances in a complicated line to get it. That of course opened the possibility of him losing. It was a courageous way of playing. |
|
Jan-01-10
 | | Phony Benoni: So Fine lures Flohr into a complicated sacrificial attack. Flohr is fully capable of conducting one, of course, but it's not his forté. What's very interesting is that Fine had recently collaborated on a collection of Lasker's games. |
|
| Jan-01-10 | | zanshin: <25.Rg4> has got to be suspect:
click for larger view |
|
| Jan-01-10 | | zanshin: Just confirming <RV>'s Rybka 2 analysis. White to play, move 24 (Rybka 3):
click for larger view [+4.19] d=16 24.Nxg7 Kxg7 25.b5 Bxb5 26.Rxb5 Kf8 27.Rf5 Qe6 28.g4 h6 29.Rdf4 Rxc4 30.Rxc4 Ng8 31.Rc6 Qa2 32.Rc7 Qb1 (0:20.21) 59371kN [+1.66] d=16 24.b5 Bxb5 25.Nxg7 Bxc4 26.Nh5 Bd3 27.Rd8 Rxd8 28.Qxc6 Nxh5 29.Rxh5 Rac8 30.Qb7 Bg6 31.Rd5 Rxd5 32.Qxc8 Kg7 33.Qc3 Kg8 34.e4 Ra5 35.Kf2 h6 36.Qc7 Ra2 (0:29.39) 88502kN |
|
| Sep-14-10 | | Al2009: In 1994 I made (without any computer help, and without moving pieces, just as an exercise suggested by Kotov's book to train and improve your own calculation's skills) the calculation below for the move: 24. Rg4!! with the following lines: a) 24...Nxg4 b) 24...fxe6 c) 24...Bxc4 d) 24...g6 e) 24...Ne8 a) 25.Rg5! f6 (only) 26. Rxg7+ Kh8 27. Qd3!  f5 28. Qxf5 Nf6 29. Qxf6 etc. b) 25. Reg5!! g6 (25...Rc7 26. Qxf6 25...Qxc4 26. Rxg7+ Kh8 27. Rg8+! Rxg8 28. Qxf6+ ) 26. Qxf6 Bxc4 27. Rxg6+ c) 25. Rxg7+ Kh8 26. Re4!! (26...Nxe4 27.Rg8++! and mate 26...Bxe6 27.Qxf6 Qc1+ 28. Kf2 Rc2+ 29. Kg3 Qe1+ 30. Kf4 and escapes, 30...Qh4+ 31. Qxh4 Kxg7 32. Qg5+ wins) d) 25.Rc5!! bxc (only) (25...fxe 26. Rxc6 Rxc6 27. Qxf6 Bxc4 28. Rxc4! Rxc4 29. Qxe6+ ) 26. Qxf6, fxe 27. Bxe6+ Qxe6 28. Qxe6+ Kh8 29. Rh4! Rg8 30. Qxa6 e) 25.Rxg7+! Nxg7 26. Rg5 f6 27. Rxg7+ Kh8 28. Qxf6 etc. Now, I am curious to see whether Rybka or other engines can confirm my calculation...but why Rybka didn't find 24.Rg4!! and he suggested just 24.Nxg7? But it took me 50 minutes to make the calculation above, very difficult to spend such a time at 25th move in a real game. Faster calculating human players than me can spend less time, of course, but I think it's impossible to spend less than 30-40 minutes for a human player to calculate after 24. Rg4 (and it is not so easy to find 24.Rg4!!). If 27.Rg4!! is correct, I think you should get rid of Rybka (3200 Elo rating level for that silicon thing? Mmmhhh...) :-)))) |
|
Sep-14-10
 | | Sastre: One computer (Stockfish) refutation of 24.Rg4 is <24...Kh8 25.Rc5 bxc5 26.Rxg7 Bxc4 27.Rxf7 Qxe6 28.Rxf6 Kg8 29.Rxe6 Bxe6 30.Qe5>, which is evaluated as equal. I think this defence would be very hard to find, even for many strong players. All the variations given by <Al2009> above are good for White. |
|
| Sep-15-10 | | Al2009: Sastre, I don't have analyzed too much - so far - the proposal from your computer Stockfish. (24...Kh8) But, even in case it is correct, I wouldn't define this a "refutation", as your computer himself recognize that at the end the game is "equal", I would say it's a refutation when you discover that your proposal is losing. Moreover, I agree with you that it would be very hard to find a good defence after 27.Rg4, even for very strong players. Therefore, if after 24.Rg4 Black can just equalize in one variation out of 6, and loses in the other 5, then let me put again 2 exclamation marks to 24.Rg4!! I am sure that Fine wouldn't have found the right defence, and therefore I believe this move is psychologically the best...remember that humans are not computers, remember Lasker, and Tal. Moreover, I have seen the alternatives suggested above by Rybka3 (24.Nxg7 and 24.b5) but I am not fully persuaded by them, especially by the first one (24. Nxg7) Now, Rybka3 gives: 24. Nxg7 Kxg7 25. b5 Bxb5 26. Rxb5... But now what happens after 26...Qxb5?
If 27. Rg4+ Kf8 28. Qxf6 Rxc4 where is the victory for White? (if 29.Qh8+ Ke7 30. Qxa8 Rxg4 I don't see any victory for White, a draw seems the only result that can ensue.). However, Rybka3 evaluation gives this variation a +4.19. Boh! That seems to me quite strange... |
|
Sep-15-10
| | Sastre: After <24.Nxg7 Kxg7 25.b5 Bxb5 26.Rxb5 Qxb5 27.Rg4+ Kf8 28.Qxf6 Rxc4>, White has 29.Qd6+ Ke8 30.Rg8#. If you'd like to explore the variations arising after 24.Nxg7, I would suggest downloading one of the many strong engines that are available for free. In case you aren't aware, Stockfish and Firebird are two of the strongest. |
|
| Sep-15-10 | | NARC: I have a corny suggestion (very much internet blitz).
17. Rg5 Qf6 18. Qb3 Rd8 19. Rd5 Rd8 20. Rd6 |
|
| Sep-16-10 | | Al2009: Sastre, I repeat, I am NOT interested to download ANY software, neither for free, nor paying (and I have money enough to pay them, for your infomation). I prefer 10,000 times the blunder that Kramnik played with Fritz in Dubai, taking mate in one, than a patzer giving suggestions from an engine... I DO PREFER ANY HUMAN BLUNDERS, RATHER THAN COMPUTER'S SUGGESTIONS! |
|
Sep-16-10
| | Sastre: <Al2009> Why did you say 'I am curious to see whether Rybka or other engines can confirm my calculation' if you prefer 'human blunders'? You ask for confirmation and then criticise the use of engines? All I did was try to help you. I don't understand this. |
|
| Feb-01-15 | | hippokrates: I am à beginner Player . Please hep me because ý can't understand. 25. B× f7 is à good idea. if ýsnt NOT ... why? |
|
| Feb-01-15 | | Jim Bartle: No, because after Qxf7 Nxf7, then black captures the white queen with Rxc3. I think. |
|
| Feb-01-15 | | hippokrates: Thank you for answer but Ý think play after Q×f7 then Q×c8 ... K×a8 and B× f7... iþ that wrong. |
|
| Feb-01-15 | | hippokrates: Excuseme 1wrote wrong Q× f7 Q×c8 and cattle× c8 and B× f7 |
|
| Feb-01-15 | | Jim Bartle: You may be right. Gotta check. |
|
| Feb-01-15 | | hippokrates: Horse×f7 |
|
| Feb-01-15 | | hippokrates: Thank you friend |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
