|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Oct-23-03
 | | Sneaky: <More flexible (and more popular with today's stronger players) than 5. Nbd2 is the immediate 5. g3> A cheap trap is 5.Nbd2 Bf5, because if White plays automatically with 6.g3? he is immediately embarassed by 6...Nb4! |
|
| Oct-24-03 | | drukenknight: cute trap. I try to do that whenever I get the B to f5. which is like never. |
|
| Oct-24-03 | | patzer2: <Sneaky> 5. ..Bf5 may have potential beyond the trap line you mention above, as in the pretty black wins with it in Samisch vs Richter, 1941 and Finn vs Palmer, 1903 White's best response to 5. ..Bf5 (according to Fritz 8) is 6. Nb3! as in Finn vs Palmer (see Kibiting to that game above), leading to a white advantage. |
|
| Oct-24-03 | | AdrianP: <kevin86> <a nice combination! Wasn't Samisch the loser of Nimzo's zugzwang game?> indeed, he was... this is the game Samisch vs Nimzowitsch, 1923 |
|
| Mar-05-10 | | rapidcitychess: I have recommended the Albin but never been able to get the courage to use it.:D |
|
Oct-27-14
 | | OhioChessFan: "Funky Cool Opening, Medina" |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | Carrots and Pizza: Blew it. I thought the key move would be ...Rg6+ and didn't bother to calculate it carefully after that, but it doesn't win, so says the engine. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | saturn2: I looked at18...Nh4+
19. gxh4 Rg6+ 20. Kh1 Qf4 21.Rg1 (if Ne4 to prevent Bd6 and protect h2 Qxf3#) Bd6 22. Rg2 (Nf1 Qf3#)
Re8 23. Ne4 Qxf3 24. Rg1 Rxe4 ∓ |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | agb2002: The white castle is not well defended. This suggests 18... Nf4+: A) 19.gxf4 Rh6
A.1) 20.Rh1 Qh3+ 21.Kg1 Rg6#.
A.2) 20.h4 Qg6+ 21.Kh3 (else 21... Rxh4#) 21... Be7 and 22... Rxh4#. A.3) 20.Rfe1 Qh3+ 21.Kg1 (21.Kh1 Qxh2#) 21... Rg6+ 22.Kh1 Qg2#. B) 19.Kg1 Qh3 20.gxf4 Rg6+ 21.Kh1 Qg2#.
C) 19.Kh1 Qh3
C.1) 20.Rg1 Qxh2+ 21.Kxh2 Rh6#.
C.2) 20.gxf4 Rh6 and 21... Qxh2#. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | Walter Glattke: 18.-Nh4+ 19.gxh4 Rh6+ / 19.Kh1 Nxf3 |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | JimmyRockHound: According to Stockfish 18. Bc1 draws. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | paavoh: <<patzer2>> said in 2003: <As such 17. Ne4! was probably white's last chance to secure an advantage> and it seems so obvious just by looking at that position. 18.-Nh4+ seemed at first to win but 18.-Nf4+ proved much more effective. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: Fun one. The main key to solving for me was that the g-file is a red herring, and the goal is simply to mate on the h-file before White can defend. Fortunately, whether or not he accepts the knight sacrifice, White has to spend a tempo moving his king in either case. So Black's two non-forcing moves to get his queen to h3 and his unblocked rook to h6 only leave White one free move to defend, which is not enough. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | PhilFeeley: I know Alekhine is better than me (and almost everybody else) but I'm having trouble understanding his notation at move 18. How does 20...bxd4 win a piece? He's already sacked his knight and the bishop is attacked twice. I've played through it in my mind but I still don't see it. Is it because mate is threatened? |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: Alekhine and the engine don't agree about much in this game. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | paavoh: @philfeeley: <How does 20...bxd4 win a piece?>. After the suggested sequence, the B cannot be taken: 21.Bxd4 Qxf3#. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | WorstPlayerEver: Not too hard; after 18... Nh4 19. gxh4, Black does not have Rh6 |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | brainzugzwang: Maybe Saemisch didn't take enough time in this game?
(Small joke for those familiar with his history) |
|
Dec-04-19
 | | ajk68: Alekhine's comments seem like hallucinations. |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | SpamIAm: Alekhine's first note is sort of strange. He states that Saemisch was bamboozled by Garcia's queenside castling but that has been a common theme in the Albin Countergambit ever since its invention. Indeed, black can castle queenside as early as move 7 and often does, as that move provides reinforcement to the d-pawn. Black's castling on the kingside actually would've been more puzzling. Was Saemisch completely unfamiliar with this opening? |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | SpamIAm: <ajk68> , I think you answered my question. :) |
|
| Dec-04-19 | | ilovepotatoes: Nice game!
But a blunder could have been avoided by Saemisch |
|
Dec-04-19
 | | gawain: Like some others I was caught by the temptation to follow up the knight sacrifice with action along the g-file (...Rg6+). |
|
Jan-01-21
 | | GrahamClayton: Saemisch's tripled f-pawns make it impossible for his pieces to effectively stop Medina Garcia's attack. |
|
| Mar-28-23 | | Alan McGowan: A belated reply to comments by <SpamIAm> from December 2019. Saemisch was certainly not unfamiliar with the opening. The Deutsche Schachblaetter 1941, Nr. 3-4 gives two games by Saemisch against the gambit defence: Saemisch-Rathai (1-0, 15) and Saemisch-K. Richter (0-1, 26), both in CG.
Saemisch vs V Rathai, 1941
Saemisch vs K Richter, 1941 Introductory words refer to a statement by Saemisch, who commented that in recent years he had faced the Albin Counter-Gambit nine times and won all nine games, some in dashing style. See also Saemisch vs Maroczy, 1936 |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 18...Nf4+