< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Jun-25-19|| ||Richard Taylor: That's a beautiful move! There are famous moves, even squares, where great moves have been played. One was in a game by Tarrasch, another is g3 by....and we all know who that was. And f2 in a Fischer game. There are other games and positions but this is one of the best...|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Jonathan Sarfati: Great Novotny intereference! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novot...|
|Jun-25-19|| ||mjmorri: Multiple interference themes. Very pretty.|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Jonathan Sarfati: <Richard Taylor:> The game Tarrasch vs Allies, 1914 (on which you commented astutely), featured Plachutta interference, i.e. the intersection between two orthogonally or two diagomally moving pieces, as opposed to the Novotony which is the intersection of diagonal and orthogonal pieces like here?|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Peligroso Patzer: For more on the Novotny theme, see FSR’s comment on page 3 in the comments to R Fuchs vs Korchnoi, 1965, and also the Wikipedia article therein linked.|
|Jun-25-19|| ||dorsnikov: That was NOT easy unless you re Sigbert Tarrasch !|
|Jun-25-19|| ||dhotts: Black committed suicide with 33...Kh8, where the move 33...Kh7 was even....Pritchett missed it, Miles did not!|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <AlicesKnight: *** Did Black have anything earlier with 31 .... Bd4? (with e.g. ...Re1 to follow)- if so, there would be sad irony.>|
The move you suggest (<31. … Bd4>) would have been good enough for approximate equality (after, for example 32. Rd8 Rxd8 33. Qe2), but the real irony is that Black was totally winning at move 31 with the bishop sacrifice 31...Bxc3! , e.g., 32.Qxc3 (if 32.Be5 Rxb2–+) 32...Qxd7-+.
At move 32, Black would still have been clearly winning if he had continued 32...Qc2!, for example, 33.Qxf7+ Kh8 34.Rb1 Qxb2+! forcing mate. Unfortunately for Black, the bishop sacrifice was no longer winning at move 32 after White replied with 33. Qxf7+. Now Black could have held after 33...Kh7 34.Be5 Qxd7 35.Qxd7 Bxe5, but he was lost after 33. ... Kh8? Because at the end of the line above (starting with the variant 33. ... Kh7) in the actual game continuation (with the Black king on h8 instead of h7), White can play 36. Qxe8 with check.
|Jun-25-19|| ||patzer2: <cocker> Thanks! I did mean Black could have won with 32...Qc2!|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Peligroso Patzer: The other interesting tactical aspect of this game is that in the final position, Black could have tried the ultra cheapo 34. ... Bxb2+?!?. (This might have even been worth a practical try if White were facing extreme zeitnot.) After 34. ... Bxb2+?!?, if White preserves his Novotny (which, after all, sets up <unstoppable threats>) by playing 35. Kb1??, Black completes the ultimate swindle with 35. ... Qc2#|
Furthermore, after the correct 35. Bxb2 (in response to 34. ... Bxb2+?!?), Black could try a final ultra cheapo with 35. ... c3!?. If White were in extreme zeitnot, who knows?, he might just walk into 36. Bxc3??? Qxa2# rather than mate on move with 36. Qxg7#.
|Jun-25-19|| ||Nosnibor: <Peligroso Patzer> In your last line after 36 Bxc3 it is not mate because the a2 pawn is protected by the Queen at f7.|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <Nosnibor> Right you are. Culpa mea!|
(I forgot that when Black's c-pawn pushes ... c4-c3, it no longer obstructs the line from f7 to a2. I suppose it's that sort of oversight that explains why, despite playing games teeming with a wealth of dangerous ideas, over-the-board I am distinguished only as a paragon of patzerdom.)
|Jun-25-19|| ||TheaN: This Novotny <34.Be5 +-> is brilliant and I haven't seen it before. Did see it, but the theme is so uncommon it took me a while.|
<patzer> denoted Black's improvements in the two moves up to his demise, which is almost as striking as the winning move.
Why both players missed <32....Qc2 -+> is beyond me: it's not that difficult; the concept of the 7th rank clearly visible.
Missing out on that obvious win, Black could have given himself a saving grace with <33....Kh7=>. The key, the king not being on the back rank, is that Qxe8 does not come with check. <34.Be5> still works, but after <34....Qxd7! (Bxe5 35.Qg6+! Kg8 36.Qxe8+ +- and it's check again) 35.Qxd7 Bxe5!=> as White does not have 36.Qxe8? Bxb2+ 37.Kb1 Rxe8 38.Kxb2 Re2+ -+ and Black should be winning. Without Qxe8, Black has the stronger pieces and White will have to watch b2 forever, making it a pretty much dead draw.
|Jun-25-19|| ||An Englishman: Good Morning: Not an easy move to see, but what a move indeed! Literally a problem (Novotny) move.|
|Jun-25-19|| ||mel gibson: I saw that unusual move but it was complicated.
Black has to lose its Queen or be mated.
The Bishop blocks the 2 Rooks from supporting each other.
Stockfish 10 saw it too:
(34. Be5 (♗g3-e5 ♕a4xd7 ♕f7xd7 ♖e8xe5 b2xc3
♖e2xf2 g2-g4 ♔h8-h7 ♕d7-c6 ♖f2-f8 ♕c6-d6 ♖f8-e8 ♕d6-g6+ ♔h7-h8 ♖d1-d7
♖e8-g8 ♖d7xa7 b6-b5 ♔a1-b2 ♖e5-e2+ ♔b2-a3 ♖e2-e5 ♕g6-f7 ♖e5-g5 ♕f7-e6
♖g8-f8 ♕e6-e4 ♖f8-g8 ♖a7-e7 ♖g5-c5 ♖e7-e8 ♖g8xe8 ♕e4xe8+ ♔h8-h7 ♕e8-e4+
♔h7-h8 ♕e4-a8+ ♔h8-h7 ♕a8-a7 ♖c5-g5 ♕a7-d7 ♖g5-e5 ♕d7-d6 ♖e5-e3 ♕d6-d4
♖e3-d3 ♕d4-e4+ ♔h7-h8 ♕e4-e8+ ♔h8-h7 ♕e8-g6+ ♔h7-g8 ♔a3-b4 ♔g8-f8 ♕g6-f5+
♔f8-e8 ♕f5xb5+ ♖d3-d7) +8.85/40 103)
score for White +8.85 depth 40.
|Jun-25-19|| ||gawain: I found Be5,threatening mate and disconnecting the black rooks. I think I must have seen this position before.|
|Jun-25-19|| ||1stboard: 35 Be5 !! ... That's just nasty and black does not have a ghost of a move .....|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Andrew Chapman: That's a beautiful move, as has already been said.|
|Jun-25-19|| ||morfishine: Exsquisite!|
|Jun-25-19|| ||NBZ: Once you see it, it's clear why this has to be played.|
What a devilish move to see though.
|Jun-25-19|| ||landshark: It wasn't until I started looking for defensive moves for White that I found today's solution. What a wonderful puzzle!|
|Jun-25-19|| ||louispaulsen88888888: I always consider all checks and captures first. So I wasted a lot of time considering a lot of ridiculous moves before finding the solution.|
|Jun-25-19|| ||Carlos0012358: The horrendous move in 33.......Kh8 setting up 34.Be5|
|Jun-27-19|| ||Richard Taylor: <Jonathan Sarfati: <Richard Taylor:> The game Tarrasch vs Allies, 1914 (on which you commented astutely), featured Plachutta interference, i.e. the intersection between two orthogonally or two diagomally moving pieces, as opposed to the Novotony which is the intersection of diagonal and orthogonal pieces like here?> |
Yes. That was the one. I remember you said you played over the longer version of Tarracsh's games. I had the 182 game book edited by Reinfeld. And my son and I experienced an epic of chess playing them all one or two a day when we went for a walk and had lunch.
I also found a complex attack that led to a beautiful mate in a game where Tarrasch had a B on d3 and a pawn was about to attack it on c4. I thought there has to be an attack, something's up, surely there is a great attack or combination here. So I sat for about an hour calculating everything. The end of if was very beautiful with two Ns ending the game I think it was...
|Jun-27-19|| ||Richard Taylor: But here I found the move almost immediately as I was looking for a defence to the threatened mate. Then I saw the interference. But the B is in almost the most beautiful square possible for it! It maximizes it's power there!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·