|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
May-20-09
 | | playground player: There's something wrong with a game that produces as many draws as chess does today--either with the game itself (which of course is not so), or with the way people are playing it nowadays. The game above is a perfect example of what happens when a master goes into a game with the philosophy, "Play for a draw, take the win if it's blundered into your lap." Something has to be done to discourage this approach. |
|
| May-20-09 | | Sydro: I found it! Feels good man. |
|
| May-20-09 | | mworld: maybe timepressure caused him to check like crazy and when he got a draw offer he jumped on it. |
|
| May-20-09 | | stanleys: Cannot believe this!Think that Ovetchkin has simply played 54...Kd4 and they agreed on a draw,because of repetition |
|
| May-20-09 | | mworld: <playground player: There's something wrong with a game that produces as many draws as chess does today--either with the game itself (which of course is not so), or with the way people are playing it nowadays.
The game above is a perfect example of what happens when a master goes into a game with the philosophy, "Play for a draw, take the win if it's blundered into your lap." Something has to be done to discourage this approach.
>
the rules could further evolve to prevent draws...for instance something along the lines of you are never allowed to repeat the same move 3 times in a row would prevent draw by 3 fold etc... |
|
| May-20-09 | | Marmot PFL: <MaczynskiPratten> One of the first tournaments i played i was 2 pawns down to a much higher rated player, but i found a sac for perpetual and offered a draw. As soon as i spoke i saw i had mate in 3 but this this guy didn't hesitate a second to accept the draw. |
|
May-20-09
 | | Domdaniel: I was on the lucky end of one of these recently. My opponent had a mate in 6, but offered me a draw. I considered the 500 rating points between us and *almost* refused, then I looked at the mate and said yes. |
|
| May-20-09 | | TheChessGuy: The clock does funny things to all players. Even GMs can miss relatively easy combinations. |
|
| May-20-09 | | jfshade: Wow. The sparkling finish that never was. 55.a3+ jumped out at me immediately as probably white's only hope. From there, the forced continuation was obvious. Black can use his two choices on 56 to pick either 57. Bc6++ or 57. Bc6++... |
|
| May-20-09 | | gofer: A nice simple mating combination! Much easier that yesterday's! 55 a3+ Ka4
56 Rc4+ b4 (or bxc4)
57 Bc6#
:-) |
|
| May-20-09 | | YouRang: Pretty easy really. 55.a3+ shoves the black king into a straitjacket at a4 where it can only wait for mate. White has only two pieces that are capable of delivering check, and both are stopped by black's Pb5. Well, there's the hint right there: First use the rook check to dislodge Pb5 and then use the bishop to finish off black through the hole vacated at b5. Then I looked at the game and said "doh!" out loud on Gurevich's behalf. :-\ |
|
May-20-09
 | | Jimfromprovidence: Earlier, white played 50 Kd2 to seemingly set up a perpetual.
click for larger viewBlack had a way out, though, with 50…gxf4 (not 50...b3), also keeping an advantage.
click for larger viewNow, since black’s king has an escape square on e5, there is no more perpetual. |
|
| May-20-09 | | kap54: Looks to me like a draw by repitition with an incorrect final move in the game score. Black plays 54...Kd4 and it's game over. I see no reason why black would back himself into a corner. |
|
| May-20-09 | | CHESSTTCAMPS: The circumstances certainly seem to suggest an incorrect (or misread) scoresheet: It makes no sense to repeat twice then vary on the 3rd and also have both players make blunders of this magnitude. |
|
May-20-09
 | | paulalbert: I thought this one was fairly easy. Surprized a high level player would miss it. Paul Albert |
|
| May-20-09 | | WhiteRook48: I knew it began with 55 a3+!! |
|
May-20-09
 | | gawain: That's great! Took me a few minutes but I eventually saw it. If the game score is correct then poor Gurevitch was probably lulled by the repetition of moves that preceded this. Why on earth did Black fail to play 54...Kd4 to secure the draw by threefold rep? Maybe he felt that he had winning chances! He has two extra pawns after all. |
|
| May-20-09 | | Utopian2020: White blunders by settling for a draw when there was a forced checkmate on the board: 55.a3+ Ka4 56.Rc4! bxc4 57.Bc6#. Yep, that's a mistake I might make. Even a 2600+ rated player is human. |
|
May-20-09
 | | keypusher: <paulalbert: I thought this one was fairly easy. Surprized a high level player would miss it. Paul Albert> Two high level players, even! It's a very pretty combination. |
|
| May-20-09 | | AnalyzeThis: This game shows the wisdom of Reshevsky's approach. After his opponent made a move, Reshevsky would deliberately look at the position at though he was seeing it for the first time, with no preconceived notions. |
|
| May-20-09 | | njchess: I doubt time was a factor in this oversight. White simply missed mate in three. At least, it wasn't too obvious. I wonder if Black saw it? |
|
| May-20-09 | | I Like Fish: how could he miss...
that even i...
a fish...
got it... |
|
| May-20-09 | | SamAtoms1980: 55 a3+ Good morning.
55 ... Ka4 56 Rc4+ Good afternoon.
56 ... bxc4 57 Bc6 mate.
Good night. |
|
| May-20-09 | | TheTamale: Whoo hoo! Got it on a Wednesday. Smart offer of the draw by Black. |
|
| May-20-09 | | eainca: I agree that there seems to be an excess of draws but solutions to the problem is itself problematic. For example, a player who is "lost" manages to pull off a series of moves that lead to a 3 move repetition, should the player who pulls that off not be allowed to draw (or be penalized some other way)? Don't forget the players that play positionally to the extent that a draw will be the result unless his opponent pushes to hard and loses (Tigran comes to mind). And I do not know how to get rid of the 'gentelmans" draw. The only possible solution would be to award more prize money for full points than for 1/2 points. Say that there is a 10 round match, wins 1 & 2 would net X $, 3 & 4 maybe 2X $ and so on. The tournament winner may not end up being the money winner. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
