Jan-29-14 Wilke vs A H Privonitz, 1933 
|
czxcjx: Hmm... I want to check on the h-file. It turns out I have a rook lift. Let's see... Re6? No. Re5? No. Re4? No. Re3. Hmm! Turns it it threatens mate Qh2# after the rook sacs itself on h3. Bxe3 fails to Nxe3. Rg1? Qh4#! Cute. Nf4 fails as well, since the queen AND the knight are both ... |
|
|
|
Jan-19-14 V Gashimov vs B Lalic, 2007 
|
czxcjx: What happens after 22... gxf6? |
|
|
|
Dec-30-13 Z Peng vs S Plukkel, 2010 
|
czxcjx: I believe that http://translate.google.com/#zh-CN/... will settle disputes over the pronunciation of Zhaoqin's name, there being a phonetic pronunciation. |
|
|
|
Dec-12-13 S Rubinstein vs J H Stapfer, 1913 
|
czxcjx: 32...Rg4 works, doesn't it? (Threatens Qh2#, Be2 doesn't clear the way in time after Rxg2+, and g3 falls to 33...Rxg3+ 34.fxg3 Qxg3+) |
|
|
|
Jan-27-13 H Szapiel vs Keres, 1950 
|
czxcjx: @ Vardeep: 45. Nc4+ Kf2. Now either Rxa3 or Nxa3 (else a2 and with the knight poised to defend the pawn, the plan Rc1 a1=Q is unstoppable (at least not satisfactorily). If Rxa3 Rxa3 Nxa3 and it's exactly the same as the game continuation. Else Nxa3 gives the line:
46. Nxa3 Ne3. Black |
|
|
|
Jan-12-13 I Rajlich vs K Cyfka, 2012 
|
czxcjx: The key difference between 61.Rh4 and 61. e6! that makes the game move winning is that after 61.Rh4 Ra6+, there is no longer the threat of Rb8#. This gives rise to the line of, for example, 61.Rh4 Ra6+ 62.e6 Kg8 63. Rg4+ Kf8 64. Rxg3 Ra7 65. Rh3 Rf7+! with a stalemate draw. |
|
|
|
indicates a reply to the comment. |
|