|Apr-01-13|| ||master of defence: How Aronian wins after 35...Qxe4+ 36.Rxe4 a1=Q?|
|Apr-01-13|| ||dumbgai: Dear organizers: please don't nominate Radjabov next time. Thanks.|
|Apr-01-13|| ||dumbgai: The finish is 35...Qxe4+ 36. Rxe4 a1=Q 37. Re6+ Kh5 38. g4+! and on both Kxg4 and Kxh4 white mates with a combination of f3 and Rxh7.|
|Apr-01-13|| ||John Abraham: I'm happy to see that Aronian had the equanimity and composure to end this tournament on a high note especially after his unfortunate losses in previous rounds|
|Apr-01-13|| ||al wazir: I think 35...Qxe4+ 36. Rxe4 Kg6 is a draw.|
|Apr-01-13|| ||dumbgai: 35...Qxe4+ 36. Rxe4 Rg6 37. Ra7 a1=Q 38. Rxa1 Bxa1 39. hxg5 Kxg5 40. Rc4 and white wins the c-pawn and the game.|
|Apr-01-13|| ||King Sacrificer: This is a masterpiece. I would guess White was Aronian if the player names were hidden. He lost the tournament but put his signature on it.|
|Apr-01-13|| ||fisayo123: 29...a4 is an unbelievable over-sight. Most be the lighting. Get well soon Teimour.|
|Apr-02-13|| ||Ulhumbrus: 5 h3 ?! moves a pawn in the opening and so loses a tempo for development and so suggests an energetic response eg a pawn sacrifice such as 5...c5 6 dc Qa5|
|Apr-02-13|| ||luzhin: 5.h3, according to Chessgames opening explorer, has been played almost 900 times, and has a slightly better score than the standard 5.Nf3. Your suggestion 5...c5 6.dxc5 Qa5 has occurred three times - resulting in three wins for White. So 5.h3 is hardly a ?! move. More like !?|
|Apr-02-13|| ||perfidious: There is also the line which goes 5.Nf3 0-0 6.h3 Opening Explorer; contrary to <Ulhumbrus>' suggestion that 5.h3 is dubious, not so. The subvariation with 6.Bg5 is a speciality of Suba.|
|Apr-02-13|| ||Archswindler: Apparently, Lasker once said that pawn moves in the opening are bad. Therefore, it must be the absolute truth in all positions, ever, and you don't even need to bother analysing, because Lasker said so. Never mind if the move is well established theory played by top GMs for decades, such as when white plays a3 in the Symmetrical English. These modern GMs like Aronian and Kramnik are wasting their time studying the opening, when Lasker clearly knew better 70 years ago. Lasker, of course, got an opening advantage in every game he ever played.|
|Apr-02-13|| ||perfidious: <Archswindler> It was actually Lasker's contemporary and compatriot Tarrasch who tended to be the dogmatist, though even Tarrasch adapted and was known to adopt modern openings late in his career. Lasker exploited his great opponent's rigidity to effect in their 1908 match.|
See this game, where Tarrasch plays Alekhine's Defence: Lasker vs Tarrasch, 1923.
Wonder what ol' <Ulhumbrus> has to say about that game....
|Apr-03-13|| ||Archswindler: <perfidious> That game does in fact contain a typically inane Ulhumbrus comment. It's becoming increasingly hard to find a game that doesn't. You would think someone who has evidently studied so many master games might actually have learned something by now, but no. 100+ year old general principles are still the extent of Ulhumbrus' chess knowledge. I have nothing against bad players, but bad players who think they know better than every grandmaster of the last 50 years and never miss any opportunity to pompously hold forth on the subject? That is too much.|
|Apr-03-13|| ||dumbgai: In many queen pawn openings, black has difficulty finding a good square for his light square bishop. White plays an early h3 in many systems to further limit black's options by taking away the g4 square. In this game for example the e6 bishop blocks his own e7 pawn which becomes a target.|
|Apr-04-13|| ||HeMateMe: In the last round, all eyes were on Kramnik and Carlsen. It was easy to forget about the other two games. Radjo takes his final loss of the tournament.|
|Apr-04-13|| ||perfidious: <HMM> We may rest assured that detractors of Radjabov-in every respect-have in no way overlooked this game, as they rush pell-mell to bury him for good and all as a title contender.|
Wonder what some of these pundits would have had to say regarding Fischer after Curacao.
|Apr-04-13|| ||RookFile: Well, Fischer did put up a plus score at Curacao. It's funny - we hear about what a total failure that was for him and how lousy how played. I did a quick count and came up with +9 -6 =12 for him against world class opposition. That gets better the more you look at it. Keres probably said it best when he said that is exactly where he should have finished at that stage of his development. Fischer was not yet the strongest player in the world then.|
|Apr-10-13|| ||Ulhumbrus: If White is going to play Bg5, the move ...c6 may keep White's knight out of d5. Thus in the game an alternative to 6...a6 is 6...c6|
|Sep-15-13|| ||WillyLo: @dumbgai Really you're such a dumb gay..Raja is just temporary in bad form..U cannot judge him because of his bad luck in 2013..one don't reach 2793 by accident..i suggest u to take a look more of his games..u need to learn how to respect others.|
"Form is temporary..Class is permanent".
|Aug-18-17|| ||Toribio3: Teimour was struck by a 7 magnitude tremor! Viva Levon.|
|May-27-18|| ||ndg2: I'm not surprised by 5.h3, but more by 6.Lg5. Isn't that a mix-up of Makagonov and Smyslov systems? 6.Sf3 strikes me as more usual.|