Feb-13-06 | | blingice: Does it surprise anyone else that no one has kibitzed on a Lasker LOSS to NN? When 15. ♔g1..♗f2+:
If 16. ♔h2..♕h4#.
If 16. ♔f1..♗e3+ 17. ♔e1..♕f2# or 17. ♔e1..♕f2#. |
|
Feb-14-06 | | Jim Bartle: Good for NN. Even Charlie Brown finally hit a home run. |
|
Feb-14-06 | | blingice: Oh, sorry, for the second line under the seventeenth move, it's supposed to be 17. ♔e2..♕f2# |
|
Sep-25-07 | | whiteshark: NN That's me! |
|
Feb-02-08 | | ughaibu: How about 15.Kg1 Qf2, 16.Kh2 Bg3, 17.Kh3 h5 with an unmeetable threat of double mate? |
|
Dec-14-08 | | WhiteRook48: whiteshark you are not NN Maybe N N is or Nomen Nescio or the GreatNN. Can't believe Lasker lost. |
|
Dec-22-08 | | WhiteRook48: Lasker loses!!! |
|
Dec-31-08 | | WhiteRook48: kind of like a Reverse Scandinavian Defense. |
|
Jul-05-09 | | backrank: Really strange game. 8. h4?, 9. Ng5? and 12. Nxf7 ??? (fxg4 hxg5 13. h5 was necessary, with a horrible position for White) are 1st rate patzer moves. Lasker must have criminally underrated his opponent here. |
|
Jul-05-09 | | Emma: I bet NN was fuming that his name was never published in this game :-) |
|
Mar-19-10 | | TheChessVids: This game can't be real. |
|
May-22-10
 | | FSR: Lasker's 1.c4 was an unusual opening for the time; Staunton, after whom it was named the "English Opening," had played it a half century before, but he had gained few followers. After Black's weak 1...d5? 2.cxd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd8, Lasker may have concluded that his opponent was a fish who wouldn't be hard to beat. Lasker's 8.h4!? set the trap 8...0-0? 9.e5 Nd5 10.Bxh7+ Kxh7 11.Ng5+, the sort of thing with which he doubtless caught a lot of his simul opponents. After 8...Ng4!? 9.Ng5?!, Lasker must have been expecting Black to retreat his hanging knight or play 9...h5. Lasker must have been unhappy after 9...e5!, and his game went rapidly downhill from there. |
|
May-22-10 | | CapablancaFan122: Lasker's <Nxf7> was bad! Better would be: 12.fxg4 hxg5 13.h5 |
|
Aug-16-12 | | drpavno1: Its a wonderful display of tactics by NN and a bit overconfidence by Lasker |
|
Jun-17-16
 | | louispaulsen88888888: perhaps Fischer was right when he called Lasker a coffee house player who knew nothing about openings. |
|
Jun-17-16
 | | louispaulsen88888888: NN Rules!!! |
|
Jun-17-16
 | | louispaulsen88888888: I wonder if he said his name a la James Bond.
The name is N......N N |
|
Apr-10-21 | | macer75: <blingice: Does it surprise anyone else that no one has kibitzed on a Lasker LOSS to NN?> IKR? Absolutely shocking! |
|
Jan-04-22 | | Chesgambit: Shock |
|
Jan-05-22
 | | Dionysius1: Shows how much in Zugswang Lasker is, that NN has time to bring the ♖ into play with h5. I don't see any other quick way to win this. |
|
Dec-18-22 | | generror: Unlike many other quick NN wins, this one looks genuine. Black's stupid opening may have been quite cunning, it may have lured Lasker into thinking this was an easy opponent. Which of course is total speculation, but the fascinating thing about this is that Lasker usually was the one who was said to use such psychological tricks. Anyway, hooray for NN's Immortal Game :) |
|