< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-13-05|| ||TheAlchemist: A quote from the movie Roxanne (1987):
"When you are reaching for a star,
there is a long way to fall."
I bet Steinitz was still hurting after a few days :-)
|Dec-13-05|| ||Akavall: 2...d6 is probably, I think white has nothing here.|
|Jun-11-06|| ||offramp: Morphy once lost to Maurian in 12 moves! Morphy vs Maurian, 1855.|
|Jun-20-06|| ||RookFile: Did you forget to mention that the game was played at ROOK odds, offramp?|
|Jun-20-06|| ||keypusher: <tamar> <"He continued to play chess with Maurian for about two years, but resolutely declined to play anyone else. He also continued to concede him the Knight, in spite of the fact that Maurian gradually grew too strong for such odds. The scores in the last four series of games which they played in 1869 are given as follows: (1) Morphy 6, Maurian 3 (2)Morphy 3, Maurian 3 (3) Morphy 7, Maurian 10 and (4) Morphy 0, Maurian 4, drawn 1." Morphy's Games of Chess>|
According to <SBC>, after this they played a long series of games at pawn and move (or pawn and two), but the games have not been preserved.
|Jun-20-06|| ||ughaibu: "is a guy who miscalculates
going to beat Morphy?" J Schulten vs Morphy, 1857
"I think not" --RookFile. (Roll over Descartes)
|Jun-20-06|| ||keypusher: Here is her post, copied from the Morphy page.
download <ckr>'s wonderful mymorphy.pgn (with historical commentary) http://batgirl.atspace.com/MyMorphy...
In 1869 Morphy played 38 games against Maurian at knight odds. No exact date for any of them is known. Morphy, believing Maurian had grown too strong for knight odds, continued playing him a pawn&2 odds, none of which have been preserved. After 1869, Maurian didn't trouble Morphy with requests to play chess, but this isn't to say Morphy didn't play any more chess. While there are no game scores, it seems that Morphy played chess until at least 1877.>
|Jun-20-06|| ||ughaibu: "Maurian didn't trouble Morphy with requests to play chess", I guess he thought Morphy was too weak to provide an interesting game.|
|Jun-20-06|| ||chancho: <ughaibu> LOL|
|Jun-20-06|| ||RookFile: We'll let ughaibu speak for himself, his words need no comment.|
|Jun-20-06|| ||chancho: Steinitz did get some payback in the following game.|
Steinitz vs Maurian, 1883
|Nov-30-08|| ||WhiteRook48: <ughaibu>: What the? If Maurian thinks Morphy's weak, he's heading for trouble.|
|Dec-23-08|| ||RookFile: Uggie just likes to pull people's chains. It's a great indoor sport, enjoyed by many.|
|Feb-07-09|| ||WhiteRook48: of course, Morphy's career was already over|
|Apr-24-09|| ||Fanacas: RookFile everyone makes mistakes ^^ in chess even your great morphy.|
|Apr-27-09|| ||Fanacas: btw steinitz has great results with this openig.|
|Jan-12-11|| ||slowtyper77: Steinitz looks better here, but he miscalculated the sac. I think Morphy is better than Steinitz, but this is definitely not the best evidence|
|Jun-29-12|| ||e4 resigns: <2...d6 is probably, I think white has nothing here.>
Actually, 2...c5 is the main move to equality.|
|Jun-29-12|| ||RookFile: Move 2 and black has equalized?
I think not.
|Jul-13-12|| ||e4 resigns: 1.f3 e5 2.g4 and black has equality (Maybe 0.03)|
|Oct-01-12|| ||Big Pawn: Morphy's whipping boy beats the great Steinitz. Maurain must have been a pretty good player. Perhaps Morphy gave him some sage advice over the years? |
Morphy used to give Maurain knight knight odds and beat him most of the time. Yet Maurain beats Steinitz on even terms.
Morphy would definitely have beat Steinitz. I bet it would have been similar to the Morphy vs Harrwitz match.
|Jun-17-13|| ||Just Another Master: Morphy was a chess genius of the highest class, please dont campare him to mortals, its insulting.|
|Jun-17-13|| ||brankat: It is equally "insulting" to compare other "great mortals" to Morphy.|
|Jun-18-13|| ||KlingonBorgTatar: This game reminds me of Steinitz vs Winawer Vienna 1882, 1st game of the tie breaking match. Steinitz played the same variation, made the double rook sac, spurned a draw ( or did he miss it?) , lost the game - AND- the undivided first prize!!! Perhaps tactics were not really his forte..... or the tension of the occasion was too much for his nerves? |
If my memory serves me right, Vuckevic in ' The Chess Sacrifice' writes that the positional prerequisites of making the double rook sac were simply not there. This dosen't speak well of Steinitz' positional judgement either at least in these types of positions.....
|Jun-18-13|| ||perfidious: This has got to be a first-<JAM> actually acknowledges a player's greatness, rather than denigrating someone till the cows come home.|
Seeing this makes me believe I am delusional, going blind or still worse.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·