< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Aug-02-05|| ||fgh: I was thinking about exploiting the weakened position of the king with moves like Bb2 and Bxe5, but it was obvious that wouldn't work. Then I thought "How could I incorporate the bishop into the attack?". Of course, by opening up lines with 33. Qxh7+!, since black's king, whenever it runs from the h file where the rook gives a check, can only run to black squares, and the bishop gives a check on h6, king back to h7 or h8, bishop to f8 checkmate.|
Easy puzzle :-)
|Aug-02-05|| ||kevin86: This one seemed easier than yesterday's-because the first move is so obvious,and forcing.|
|Aug-02-05|| ||horror: nice queen|
|Aug-02-05|| ||teme: Yeah this was easy.|
|Aug-02-05|| ||bishopmate: this may look like an easy puzzle to all the people who got it here... but pretty sure myself that hardly 20% of us would be able to find this tactic in an actual game. I was looking for the queen sac here, too bad i'd never look for it in a game|
|Aug-02-05|| ||notyetagm: <bishopmate: this may look like an easy puzzle to all the people who got it here... but pretty sure myself that hardly 20% of us would be able to find this tactic in an actual game. I was looking for the queen sac here, too bad i'd never look for it in a game>|
I've made this point before. The strong players see these tactical shots many moves in advance. It's possible that Dr. Nunn saw this concluding sequence way back when he put his queen on h6. That's where the skill lies. <If I tell you that a position has a winning move and only one move threatens anything at all (♕xh7+!!), then it's not a big deal at all when you find it.> Setting it up moves in advance when no one is there to tell you that it wins, that's the big deal.
|Aug-02-05|| ||Studpuffin: Excuse me. I am a novice who has played recreationally for years but I thought that this solution could be countered by K h7 (K takes Q) since the Q was not protected and that move would not put the K in check. Can the K not take the Q under those circumstances and why not?|
|Aug-02-05|| ||euripides: <stud> As posted by <alxandrovm> above <33. Qxh7+ Kxh7 (forced) 34. Rh4+ Kg7 (forced) 35. Bh6+ Kh7 (forced) 36. Bf8#> is the solution. Two ways to see this: (a) recognise the pattern - which come with practice: (b) make sure you analyse every check and continue the analysis as long as one side has a forcing move.|
|Aug-02-05|| ||notyetagm: <Studpuffin: Excuse me. I am a novice who has played recreationally for years but I thought that this solution could be countered by K h7 (K takes Q) since the Q was not protected and that move would not put the K in check. Can the K not take the Q under those circumstances and why not?>|
Yes, the king can take any piece that is not defended so ... ♔x♕ is a legal move for Black to make. Unfortunately for Black, though, he will still be mated by ♖h4+ ♔g7 ♗h6+ ♔h7(h8) ♗f8#.
|Aug-02-05|| ||euripides: <stud> the 1-0 at the end of the game means that Black resigned, lost on time or was mated. Here it's a resignation.|
|Aug-02-05|| ||RSD770: this combination was played by tarrasch (with colours reversed) at Hastings 1895, does anybody know in which game? (I don't).|
|Aug-02-05|| ||marcusantoinerome: <RSD770> It wasn't Tarrasch, but Teichmann (Richard the Fifth!) who beat Amos Burn with this Queen sac. See Burn vs Teichmann, 1895|
|Aug-02-05|| ||cjhasbrouck: This puzzle is pretty.
I really like how the bishop circles around the board to capture the queen.
This is probably the quickest I've ever seen the solution to one of these puzzles.
|Aug-02-05|| ||marcusantoinerome: Oops! There seems to be a problem with the game Burn vs Teichmann, 1895
It's supposed to be a Semi-Slav (D46), and here is the score that I have from my ChessBase Big Datababse:|
[White "Burn, Amos"]
[Black "Teichmann, Richard"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Nf3 c6 5. e3 Bd6 6. Bd3 Nbd7 7. c5 Bc7 8. b4 e5
9. dxe5 Nxe5 10. Nxe5 Bxe5 11. Bb2 Qe7 12. Be2 O-O 13. Qc2 Bd7 14. O-O Rae8 15.
Rad1 Bb8 16. Nb1 Ne4 17. Nd2 f5 18. Bd4 Ng5 19. Bd3 f4 20. Kh1 Qf7 21. Nf3 Nxf3
22. gxf3 Qh5 23. Rg1 Rf7 24. Qe2 Be5 25. Bc2 Rf6 26. Bxe5 Qxh2+ 27. Kxh2 Rh6+
28. Kg2 Bh3+ 29. Kh1 Bf1# 0-1
Chessgames.com: you might want to look into this.
|Aug-02-05|| ||RSD770: <marcusantoinerome> You're right, I just looked and it was Tarrasch who wrote the anotations to that game in the Tournament book.|
|Aug-02-05|| ||Benzol: <RSD770> are you sure it was Hastings 1895? I've checked ALL of Tarrasch's games from that tournament and the nearest I can find is this one Tarrasch vs Walbrodt, 1895|
|Aug-02-05|| ||BishopofBlunder: It took me a while to get this one. Which is strange since the queen sac was the first move I looked at. I must have had blinders on because I couldn't see the mate. So I spent some time looking at the other options which, of course, didn't pan out. Finally, I came back to Qxh7 and ... BOOM! saw it immediately.|
I'm such an ultra-moroon!!!
|Aug-03-05|| ||patzer2: The August 2, 2005 puzzle solution 33. Qxh7+ gives up the Queen to force a mate, using the discovered check tactic (i.e. 33...Kxh7 34. Rh4+ Kg7 35. Bg6+ Kg7 36. Bf8#).|
|Jul-17-09|| ||WhiteRook48: 33...Kxh7 34 Rh4+ Kg7 35 Bh6+ Kh7 36 Bf8# gives a nice ending picture|
|Aug-29-09|| ||sfm: 31.h3 looks so harmless. But it is a deadly threat that Portisch overlooks. White wants to play Re4, but Black has Qe1+. So, after 31.h3 White has an escape for the king. Black must now play 31.-,Rg8. After 31.-,c5?? it's over.|
|Jul-26-12|| ||kasputine: Nunn commenting on this neat combination:
"Then came the shock. I crashed through with 33 Qxh7+! and for a moment Portisch looked stunned. At first he couldn't see the point of the queen sacrifice; then he realized that it was a forced mate after 33 ... Kxh7 34 Rh4 Kg7 35 Bh6+ followed by 36 Bf8 mate. Portisch resigned and it was a point to me. If a strong grandmaster such as Portisch can overlook a mating pattern, then anybody can."
|Nov-07-12|| ||Naniwazu: If 30...Nxa2 there's 31. Bg5! Qd4+ (not 31...fxg5 because of 32. f6!) 32. Kh1 Kg8 33. Bxf6 Qg4 34. Qe3! (threatening Qa7 to which Black has no reply).|
|Apr-21-13|| ||Castleinthesky: Game of the Day!|
|Jun-10-17|| ||Toribio3: Portisch should not have swapped his bishop on move 13. The power of two bishops should have been emphasized as a matter of course.|
|Apr-30-18|| ||wordfunph: "In my game with Portisch from the Reykjavik World Cup, I had a simple combination at the end starting with Qh7 check. He looked totally surprised when I played this move and I thought that if he had read 1001 Ways to Checkmate it would not have been such a surprise for him (laughs)."|
- John Nunn (New In Chess Magazine 1991 #1)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·