|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-19-03 | | BLD9802: I may be missing something (I do not have a good analysis computer), but for 26.Nxc5, I was looking at 26....Qa1+!?, 27.Kh2 Kf8. Now Black is threatening ...Nxe2 with ...Qg1#. |
|
| Mar-19-03 | | Javid Danowski: To Honza Cervenka:
The problem with 20... Rd7 is that it is part of a flawed plan, since although it defends f7 and prevents (after Nbd4) 23 Rxd8+, it leaves the other rook unprotected on the back rank. I don't think black should be going after the a-pawn here. Perhaps 20 ... Qb6, followed by doubling rooks on the d-file and aiming for ...d5 is feasible.To BLD9802 and corbinamman:
corbinamman is correct. I should have supplied a little more analysis with my previous note. |
|
| Mar-19-03 | | corbinamman: BLD-I definitely overlooked Qa1+, which does seem to keep black alive. The only thing I would point out there is that since white is ahead in material, he can exchange his bad knight for black's attacking knight, double black's pawns on the h file, and win the end game with patience and technique. 26....Qa1+ 27 Kh2 Kf8 28 Rxf4 g5 29 Rf3 gxh4 30 Nd3 (30 Nxe6+? Ke7...). |
|
| Mar-19-03 | | ughaibu: Has anyone looked at 23.Ra6 Nf4 24.Ra8 Rd8 25.Rd8 Ne8 26.Nc5 Qa1 27.Kh2 g5? |
|
| Mar-19-03 | | ughaibu: Has anyone looked at 23.Ra6 Nf4 24.Ra8 Rd8 25.Rd8 Ne8 26.Nc5 Qa1 27.Kh2 g5? In anycase it's clear that the players and scribes overlooked the possibility. |
|
| Mar-20-03 | | Javid Danowski: After 23.Ra6 Nf4 24.Ra8 Rd8 25.Rd8 Ne8 26.Nc5 Qa1 27.Kh2 g5 28 Re8+ Kg7 29 Re7 black does not seem to be threatening Ne2 anymore e.g 29... Ne2 30 Ne6+ Kh6 31 Rf6 ++
After 27 ... Kf8 how about 28 Rf4 g5 29 Rf3 gh
30 Rb3 Ke7 31Rd7+ Kf6 32 Rbb7 and surely white has too many threats |
|
| Mar-20-03 | | corbinamman: JD-black doesn't have to play 30...Ke7. He threatens perpetual check with Qf1, forcing either Rf3 or Ne4. That pretty well neutralizes white's attack and the queen goes on a pawn hunt. In the lines I've looked at, the initiative shifts to black thereafter. That is why I prefer 30 Nd3 to 30 Rb3. |
|
| Mar-22-03 | | crafty: 23. ♖a6 ♖da7 24. ♖xa7 ♘xf4 25. ♖xa8+ ♘e8 26. ♖xf4  (eval 3.67; depth 13 ply; 150M nodes) |
|
Apr-16-03
 | | Honza Cervenka: Corbinamman, BLD, if 23.Ra6 Nxf4 24.Rxa8+ Rd8 25.Rxd8+ Ne8 26.Nxc5 Qa1+ 27.Kh2 Kf8 28.Rxf4 g5, then 29.Nxe6+ Ke7 30.Nf5+ Kf6 (30...Kxe6? 31.Re4+ etc.) 31.Rf3 fxe6 32.Nd4+ Kg7 (32...Ke7? 33.Nc6#) 33.Rxe8 and white wins. |
|
| Apr-16-03 | | BLD9802: Honza Cervenka: In this line, perhaps Black's only hope is not 28....g5, but 28....e5. I may end up embarrased by saying this, but after 28....e5, I do not see any immediate way for White to win; e.g., if 29.Nd7+ or 29.Ne6+, then Black frees his king and eventually regains some material by 29....Ke7, or if either 29.Re4, 29.Rf3, or 29.Rf5, then Black plays 29....Qxb2 and could perhaps go pawn-grabbing after his king is more secure. (Incidently, a very unique position arises in the analysis in your post after 29....Ke7---all the White pieces are under attack.) I do not know how deeply Marshall and Capablanca examined the consequences of 22....Nbxd5, but I do believe that it is much more risky than they or the annotators realized. |
|
Apr-17-03
| | Honza Cervenka: BLD, 28...e5 fails after 29.Nf5 threatening with 30.Nd7+ and 31.Rxe8#. For example 29...f6 (what else?) 30.Nd6 Ke7 31.Rd7+ Kf8 32.Ne6+ Kg8 33.Nxe8 exf4 34.Rxg7+ Kh8 35.Nxf6 and the mate is unavoidable. |
|
| Apr-17-03 | | BLD9802: Honza Cervenka: I was correct when I said I would be embarrased after my previous suggestion. Your analysis seems correct. |
|
| Sep-07-05 | | notyetagm: I was just reading Nunn's algebraic edition and he points out that Capablanca, Marshall(!), and the annotator Golombek all missed 23 ♖a6!!, a crushing move which completely refutes Capablanca's attempted combination. Amazing how even the very best players miss <discovered attacks against loose squares on the backrank>. |
|
| Sep-07-05 | | notyetagm: A more recent example of a <discovered attack against a loose mating focal point on the backrank> which wins instantly is Topalov's 27 ♕f6+! in Topalov vs Naiditsch, 2005. |
|
| Sep-07-05 | | Koster: This is the last Capa-Marshall game listed here, but I am sure they played their last game several years later, and I believe that Marshall won. |
|
| Sep-07-05 | | Calli: <Koster> No, CG has all 51 games plus the three Max Lange "games" which were part of a study of the opening by Marshall. you are probably thinking of a match with Lasker Lasker vs Marshall, 1940 <notagmyet> You might want to read the previous posts. |
|
| Sep-07-05 | | Koster: <calli> You are right, it was Lasker, not Capablanca. They both left the scene about the same time, early 40s. The only games marshall won from Lasker were the first and this one which was either the last or 2nd to last they played. <Marshall vs Lasker, 1940;
Marshall is in very good form but Lasker is clearly no longer the old lasker. |
|
| Sep-08-05 | | RookFile: Speaking of Lasker, I believe he would have found 23. Ra6. That's just the sort of desparado rook move he specialized in, as Tarrasch found out: Tarrasch vs Lasker, 1908 |
|
Apr-05-08
 | | chancho: After Marshall's last win over Capa at Havana 1913, the next 24 games go +12 -0 =12 in favor of the Cuban Maestro. |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | notyetagm: Game Collection: The underrated removal of the guard -- Heisman Marshall vs Capablanca, 1931 23 ... ♕a4x♕f4, 24 ... ♕a4x♕f4 |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | notyetagm: Game Collection: The underrated removal of the guard -- Heisman Marshall vs Capablanca, 1931 23 ... ♕a4x♕f4, 24 ... ♕a4x♕f4 <IMPORTANT: NOT ONLY IS THE *WEAKNESS* (loose White d6-rook) A TARGET BUT <<<SO ARE THE *DEFENDERS* (White f4-queen) OF THE WEAKNESS!!!>>>> No DEFENDERS => EN PRISE (Kasparov vs Kramnik, 2001 Black f4-knight defender of Black g2-rook) No FLIGHT SQUARES => TRAPPABLE (Kasparov vs Kramnik, 1995 f7-flight square of Black f5-rook) |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | notyetagm: underrated removal of the guard --> defenders are targets just like the weakness |
|
| Sep-19-10 | | notyetagm: http://www.truechess.com/web/oversi... |
|
| Apr-17-12 | | notyetagm: PGN
[Event "Masters Tournament"]
[Site "New York"]
[Date "1931.??.??"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "09"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Frank James Marshall"]
[Black "Jose Raul Capablanca"]
[ECO "E16"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "72"]
1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 e6 3.c4 b6 4.g3 Bb7 5.Bg2 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Bxd2+
7.Nbxd2 O-O 8.O-O c5 9.dxc5 bxc5 10.Rc1 Qc7 11.Nb3 d6 12.Qd2
Nc6 13.Rfd1 Rfd8 14.Nh4 a5 15.a4 Rab8 16.Rc3 Ba8 17.h3 Nb4
18.Bxa8 Rxa8 19.Qf4 Qc6 20.Rf3 Rd7 21.g4 Qxa4 22.Rxd6 Nbd5
23.Qe5 Rxd6 24.Qxd6 Ne4 25.Qe5 Qxc4 26.Rd3 a4 27.f3 Nef6
28.Nd2 Qc1+ 29.Kf2 h6 30.f4 c4 31.Rd4 c3 32.bxc3 a3 33.g5 a2
34.Nb3 Qxc3 35.gxf6 Qxb3 36.Rd1 Qxd1 0-1 |
|
| Apr-24-12 | | notyetagm: Game Collection: DEFENDERS! DEFENDERS! DEFENDERS! THAT IS A DEFEN |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
