|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-12-10 | | Notagm: I'm not saying that Morphy wasn't great, but so weak were so many of his opponents that one can't get too carried away with many of his victories. Many of his opponents (the current opponent included) would barely be 1500 hundred players today. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | kellmano: <simonwilms: <morpstau: To build a fire you need two things. First you need fuel and second you need wood>
I believe you retards have the concept wrong. The wood is the fuel, unless as fuel your thinking like gasoline but even then you need fire. "To build a fire you need two things, first you need fuel and then you need wood" YOUR A RETARD, THE WOOD IS THE FUEL. Don't use metaphors that you don't understand
>
Probably best not to write in block capitals if you don't know the difference between 'your' and you're'. This game has a nice finish, though i do find it strange how Morphy's opponents failed to realise when you're playinga tactical genius and are a rook up, it's best not to play an extremely double edged opening as then the game will be finished before your extra material has moved. |
|
Apr-12-10
 | | keypusher: I think for any fire you need fuel, energy and oxygen. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | spy vs spy: <On that background it is amazing, that some people still believe him to be a player of WCh-quality. Personally I would not even put him on top 50 on an all-time-greatest/strongest-list.> Poulsen! Poulsen! Why are you still sourgraping until now?! Is it because I refuted your every move in just five minutes/or less while you think hours after hours of your not so precious time? Seven of the former World Champions didn't undermine my contributions to Chess development up to now. Why not try to hold a 'blindfold' game to any NN you know. Loser!!!
--- P.Morphy
P.S.
I am conducting a ten boards simultaneous 'blindfold' games here in heaven. St. Peter can't hold his game... Grow up, patzer! |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | spy vs spy: <keypusher: I think for any fire you need fuel, energy and oxygen.> Very true. Most importantly, Oxygen/presence of air. Try to build a fire in a vacuum as a proof... |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | kellmano: You can't start a fire without a spark - Bruce Sprinsteen. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | Carekka: There is a lot of nervous people around here wanting there opinions to prevail at the cost of coming out as not so well-educated. Anyways, as a chess-fan and not much more I do agree that Morphy wasn't surely as complete as today's Top 50. But I must say that the Top 50 wouldn't exist as they do if Morphy hadn't existed. So in the end, make such comparisons comes out as not such a brilliant thought. Always a pleasure to take a peek at Morphy's games even if with unworthy opponents and full of mistakes. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | kevin86: The Fried Liver Attack at its finest! In the hands of Morphy! |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | YetAnotherAmateur: <spy vs spy: Try to build a fire in a vacuum as a proof...> When I did that, my vacuum exploded. Thanks a lot. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | ChessValley: Material: Almost as it was at the start of the game; white one pawn up. Position: Checkmate.
Conclusion: Morphy won one pawn and the game. |
|
Apr-12-10
 | | Bishoprick: Read somewhere that Fagetello Attack or Fried Liver has been analysed to a draw by Russians a long time ago. Yes, or no? Of course, not minus a QR, but with all the pieces? |
|
Apr-12-10
 | | chrisowen: Morphy is calling for the king, victory is at hand. Conservative play has Morphy one step well ahead. Set after 14..Kc7, 14..Bd6 would have kept him hanging on. The Fried Liver pools the men, his call, centre stage. 15..Bd6 patches him through, mate in three. NN's king goes round the houses till he's blue in the tooth, payment sooth as it is gunning for a remote shelter. Charitable finish polishes off NN's resistance, not a monumental effort since black was pathetic. |
|
Apr-12-10
| | benveniste: There's also this game in the database from 1854:
Cochrane vs Mohishunder, 1854 |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | MaxxLange: NN brought a spoon to a knife fight
what a cruel charade it was to give "Rook odds". Did these old-time masters ever give odds of their King's Knight, or their King's Bishop? I don't think so. I'm glad that time odds replaced "pawn and move" and all those Romantic handicaps |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | ROO.BOOKAROO: These Morphy games look like curiosities. There's practically nothing to learn from them, and one can only discuss the absurdity of the opponent's moves. They have simply no relevance to modern chess, and probably no relevance to the history of real chess. I, for one, have lost long ago any interest in dissecting those games for the meager satisfaction to spot the lamentable defense of his opponents.
No wonder that in their famous book, THE WORLD'S GREATEST CHESS GAMES, the three writers — Graham Burgess, John Nunn ad John Emms — all top analysts and expert players, producing clear, sharp and incisive commentary, could not find any Morphy game to include in their collection of 112 games.
It's fun to go through one of these games, occasionally, but on the whole, they are boring and feel like wasted time. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | MaxxLange: there is a LOT to learn from these executions of weak players |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | MaxxLange: when I was 1200, and dreaming of beating 1500 players, these kind of games put me on the right path FM Burgess may have a different point of view, but it hasn't helped his results, AFAIK |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | drpoundsign: smothered mate by bishop (or fool's mate) instead of knight? |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | SirChrislov: 10...exd4?? suicidal. looks like 10...Ng6 holds.
Easy and entertaining. Good choice for a monday gotd. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | WhiteRook48: black's an idiot |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | MaxxLange: how well would we do, against Morphy? Black was probably a decently good player at the club |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | tatarch: <MaxxLange: when I was 1200, and dreaming of beating 1500 players, these kind of games put me on the right path> Well said, I feel the same way. Now I dream of beating 2000 players sometimes, and it's kind of boring compared to those days. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | TheFocus: <ROO.BOOKAROO> <It's fun to go through one of these games, occasionally, but on the whole, they are boring and feel like wasted time.> I recently began looking at Morphy's games and I have to agree with you. Morphy was ahead of his time, only because he began to develop all his pieces and then attack. His opponents did not understand this concept as well as he did and could not compete. It is like a Grandmaster playing against a local chess club. Nothing to learn from Morphy! On the other hand, I never learned much from Steinitz either. I think you don't need to go past Lasker. Just start at his games and go from there. |
|
| Apr-12-10 | | mortigi tempo: I wonder where Morphy learned about initiative and attack. Not to mention whatever opening book he studied from. MCO or something from chessbase? I bet he studied every game as it was published online. I would pay good money to study under the master who trained Morphy. Oh wait... |
|
| Apr-14-10 | | njchess: The thing about Morphy is that his games are rather deceptive. They seem so simple and yet, they are often quite complex. He was actually a rather conservative player, not unlike Capablanca. But he often played open positions because his opponents were not as adept at them as he was. Take this game. Yes, Morphy is obviously playing a club player, but he gives him ROOK odds. Given the odds, Morphy knows he can ill afford an endgame. So, he attacks from the outset. He opens with the Giuoco Piano and Black responds with the aggressive Two Knights Defense. And why not? After all, Black is up a rook. Morphy's response... he ups the ante with the Fegatello (Fried Liver) Attack! Black must have sat there in disbelief as Morphy prepared to sacrifice material while down a rook. What makes this game interesting is that the Giuoco Piano and the Fegatello variation are very old openings dating back to the 1600s. Given Black's text book handling of the opening through 9. ... c6, he had to have had at least a passing familiarity with the opening. 5. ... Nxd5 is a risky move which can give White a strong attack. (Na5 developed by Chigorin is generally preferred today.) The difficulty with this opening for Black is that it is hard to find the refutation of Nxf7 over the board. In any case, Black falters under the pressure with 13. ... cxd5. Kc7 would have been better. At this point, he might as well have resigned. However, I doubt he saw the pretty checkmate that Morphy had lined up for him. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 6.Nxf7