| May-28-04 | | Catfriend: A wierd game... I's happily see an analysis! I'd do it myself, but I scarcely have time to breathe right now |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | blingice: Skewers the ♕ after 34. ♔e2..♕h2+. |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | rclb: blingice 34Ke2 Qh2+ 35Rf2 |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | rclb: 34Ke2 Qe5+ 35Qe4 Qxb2+ 36Ke1 (or 36Ke3) Re5 skewers the queen |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | alefromitaly: 34. Ke2 Qe5+ 35. Kf2 [35. Qe4 Qxb2+ 36. Qc2 (otherwise #in1, <rclb> faster than skewering) Qxc2 (#next)] Qh2+, bye bye white lady (even if it's Valentine's Day) and #soon (to me, to CM10 #in7, I'm still far from this precision). Love Is The Answer!! |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | Ashram64: no the idea is the player's name is "valentine" and Valentine won the game.. which makes "happy valentine" cute. :) |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | Confuse: yes the pun for the game of the day always has a lot of thought put into it, and you could even analyze further, and say that since the date is ?? - ?? - 1867, that u could speculate that by winning this game, valentine was happy on this day, and created happy valentines day to celebrate. just kidding. anyway good game : ] |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | RolandTesh: <chessgames.com>
You must have at least considered "Valentine's Day Massacre" |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | EmperorAtahualpa: This is typically one of those 19th century games where making the most extrordinary sac seemed more essential than winning the game. By the way, wasn't the 19th century also the era of romanticism? That also seems to fit the Valentine's Day theme, doesn't it. :) |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | dakgootje: <Valentine's Day Massacre> Yes but that sounds....well it doesnt really sound like lets all be happy and love each other ;-) |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | joeaverage: Why did black play 22...Kh8? I don't see the immediate threat. Maybe black was planning to play f5 (in order to play Bxf3 forking the rook(s) and knight) and needed to get his king out of the way of the bishop on a2? Also, wouldn't 30. Kc1 have been a better move opening up the possibility of Rd8+ and maybe even mate with e5? |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | kevin86: Try as we may to associate the day with love,remember St. Valentine WAS a martyr. I see the conclusion as:
34♔e2 (or ♔c3 ♖c5+ shewers the queen) ♕e5+ 35 ♕e4 ♕xb2+ followed by ♖e5 winning the queen,right? |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | psmith: According to Fritz, White is winning until 26. Qxd3 (26. Bxf7 would have won) and the losing move was 32. Rf1 (32. Ke2 with = according to Fritz). I believe there are better games by DeVere. |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | schnarre: <RolandTesh> Not a bad indea! |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | ajile: Looks like 8.exd is great for White. Not sure why he didn't play this obvious move. |
|
| Feb-14-06 | | ichessu: ichessu: In my opinion 8 exd is not going to achieve a lot for white after black gains tempo by playing 8.. Nd4. The queen has to retreat to either d1 or d2 to protect the c2 pawn. black can safely recapture the d pawn with better position. What do you think |
|
| Feb-15-06 | | schnarre: A St. George Defense in spirit! |
|
| Feb-16-06 | | ajile: < ichessu: ichessu: In my opinion 8 exd is not going to achieve a lot for white after black gains tempo by playing 8.. Nd4. The queen has to retreat to either d1 or d2 to protect the c2 pawn. black can safely recapture the d pawn with better position. What do you think> I think you are right. For some reason I was thinking the Knight was already on f3. |
|
| Feb-19-06 | | schnarre: <ajile> Fret not! |
|
| Feb-14-08 | | Emma: Are there any games where De Vere doesn't sacrifice a piece?! |
|
| Feb-14-08 | | vonKrolock: The sacrifice <18.♗xd4> - if it was fundamented in the belief that the ♘ in 'f4' created decisive threats, it was sheerly speculative... But white play, especially after <23...♔h8>, in the end justifies the boldness... But - if there was not that possibility in the 18-th move, what black could try? To play passively a whole ♙ down... |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 18...Bxd4