Sep-07-23 Lasker vs F C Short, 1908
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: In the first 18 moves Lasker played like Lasker and gained an advantageous position. But then consecutive moves 19th and 20th changed the game flow completely: - firstly, 19.Nc6+ holds the advantage but 19.Ra3 was much better; - secondly, as <Honza> said, the ... |
|
|
|
Aug-21-23 G Norman vs Vidmar, 1925 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: While 18...♘xf2 seems more "obvious" and is also the move actually played, i would rather play less flashy 18...♗xb2 instead. White has to respond with moving a1-rook, but there is no good place for it on the first rank and the bishop still protects ... |
|
|
|
May-15-23 Spielmann vs Schlechter, 1914 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: In the final position 19.♕f2 doesn't save white because of 19...♕d5! which is mate-in-10. |
|
|
|
Feb-16-23 Vladimirov vs D Donchev, 1976 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: Probably everybody knows <DOUBLE ROOK SAC>, but what about <DOUBLE QUEEN SAC>? Well, to be honest, this game doesn't offer exactly "sacing" 2 queens for a win since black loses anyway, so maybe <DOUBLE QUEEN LOSS> is more correct. So... how it ... |
|
|
|
Jan-23-23 M Warmerdam vs J Song, 2021 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: This game is on the list of "Notable games" of Max Warmerdam . The game surely didn't finish after 8 moves, so i suspect the game line is incomplete. |
|
|
|
Dec-29-22 Svidler vs V Yemelin, 1994 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: 28.?
As majority today, I also went for <28.♕h4>, which calmly wins an exchange. Svidler opted for <28.♘f5> and after seeing that black resigned 3 moves later it seemed that Svidler's move was far superior. Yet deep silicon search (SF 15, depth ... |
|
|
|
Nov-07-22 Chandler vs C Ionescu, 1980 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: <31.♕e1??> should be met with 31...Rxc4
[DIAGRAM]
which is game-over, black wins.
Maybe it is error in the text and <31.♕c1> was really played which makes much more sense and is compatible with the remainder of the game.
_________
... |
|
|
|
Oct-01-22 D Flores vs J Duarte, 2016 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: White missed mate-in-3 on move 18.
18.?
[DIAGRAM] Solution: 18.Qxf7+ Qxf7
[DIAGRAM]
and now 19.O-O-O+ Kc7 20.Bd8#
[DIAGRAM] |
|
|
|
Aug-25-22 S Vokarev vs G Prakken, 2000 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: <mel gibson & Teyss> Indeed the main line up to 24.♘f3 has no reasonable branches which means that the whole sequence from 18.♕xd4
[DIAGRAM]
to 24.♘f3
[DIAGRAM]
is more or less forced (18.♕xd4 ♕xd4 19.♘xd4 e5 20.♗g6 ♖b8 21.♖xe5 ♘g4 ... |
|
|
|
Aug-16-22 Bogoljubov vs Yates, 1925 
|
Autoreparaturwerkbau: <Honza Cervenka: It was better to play 19.g5> Certainly, though the position after that was still (barely, to be honest) playable. The terminal game-over move was 22.b4??
[DIAGRAM]
which allows infiltration of bishop to a4 controlling a4-d1 diagonal, which ... |
|
|
|
indicates a reply to the comment. |
|