|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 36 OF 914 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Sep-20-08
 | | Phony Benoni: <Gang> Quite a diversity of opinions here! I actually chose the not-so-brilliant mating attack of #5, but I may have been prejudiced because I knew that Black was rated over 2300. <whiteshark> Black got off easy in #1. White could have chosen 1.Nd4+ winning the bishop instead, in which case he would have had to suffer for another twenty moves or so before being mated. <YouRang> I'm glad somebody else finally appreciated #4; most people I've shown it to don't get the joke. <WannaBe> Just to show you how such things can happen, here's the full score of #6: (1103) - (1110) [B32]
Michigan Class DE Detroit (4), 14.01.1996
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Bc4 e6 5.Nxd4 Nf6 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.e5 Ne4 8.Nd2 Nxd2 9.Bxd2 d5 10.exd6 Bxd6 11.Bc3 0-0 12.Qd2 Qc7 13.0-0-0 Bf4 14.g3 Bxd2+ 15.Rxd2 a5 16.Rhd1 Ba6 17.Bxa6 Rxa6 18.f4 Raa8 19.Be5 Qb6 20.a4 Rfd8 21.Bd4 c5 22.Bxc5 Qc7 23.Bd4 Qd7 24.Bb6 Qxd2+ 25.Rxd2 Rxd2 26.Kxd2 Ra6 27.Bd4 Rd6 28.c3 f6 29.Ke2 Rd7 30.b3 Rd5 31.Bb6 e5 32.c4 Rd6 33.c5 Re6 34.f5 e4 35.fxe6 Kf8 36.Bd8 Ke8 37.e7 f5 38.c6 g5 39.c7 f4 40.gxf4 gxf4 41.c8Q e3 42.Qc6+ Kf7 43.e8Q+ 1-0 Going through the game (especially around moves 22-24), you get the feeling that maybe it wasn't such a good idea for Black to trade his DSB for a mere queen. But, of course, 34...e4?? puts the icing on the cake. |
|
| Sep-20-08 | | Calli: Here is the young and slim Bogo. Parental Guidance is suggested. http://picasaweb.google.com/Caissa1... |
|
| Sep-20-08 | | sneaky pete: Yes, that's from long before he was a Groß-, Dick- und Breitmeister. |
|
| Sep-20-08 | | Calli: Who said that he became "ein Doppelbauer"? Tartakower perhaps |
|
Sep-20-08
 | | Phony Benoni: <Calli> Yes, that's Bogo's facial expression all right. Even the hands look right. |
|
Sep-21-08
 | | Phony Benoni: WORST MOVE OF THE YEAR: SET 13, 1997
And, perapas appropriately, the last set. In celebration, there are two extra selections! <#1: BLACK TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
Obviously unhappy with drawing an opposite-colored bishops ending, Black succeeded in finding winning chances with <1...Bg1?? 2.c7>. Too bad they weren't his winning chances. <#2: WHITE TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
It's never too late for a back rank mate: <1.Bg6?? Ra1+>. <#3: BLACK TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
Anxious to push the g-pawn, Black tried <1...Kf6??>. Alas, White pushed his g-pawn first with <2.g3>, and with much more effect. <#4: WHITE TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
Yes, White missed 1.Qh6# and went on to lose quickly after <1.Nh3?? Qe1+> <#5: BLACK TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
This time Black did find <1...Ne4#>, but still went on to lose! White,
evidently a member of the You Can't Win A Game Of Chess By Being Checkmated School, played <2.Kc3> anyway. Though obviously confused, Black still seized the opportunity to play <2...Nd5+>, the first double check from two knights in the history of chess. White responded <3.Kb3> and was able to survive the attack and win in another ten moves. <#6: BLACK TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
Irritated by the knight, Black decided to chase it away with a pawn move.
Unfortunately, he decided on <1...f6?? 2.Ne6+>. <#7: WHITE TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
White spied a brillancy and played <1.Qxg7+??>, intending 1...Kxg7 2.Nf5+. You saw the rook on a7, didn't you? <#8: BLACK TO PLAY>
 click for larger view
Fearing that White's Qe5+ would win the knight, Black brought the piece to safety with <1...Ne4??>. Too bad that the move was actually <2.Qe5#>. But give Black some credit. At least he didn't adopt the WanneBe Defense, of 1...Ke7. |
|
Sep-22-08
 | | WannaBe: I thought #2 was hilarious, until I saw #5. So, that's my vote, number V. (P.S. please stop posting my losses, I don't know where you got these PGNs from... But I suspect there is a mass conspiracy going on... =) |
|
| Sep-22-08 | | whiteshark: Dealing again with these gems I'll vote for #8. (#5 is great, naturally, but it's illegal. I wonder if I ever voted for such sort of move? [Don't quote me, if so.]) :D |
|
Sep-22-08
 | | TheAlchemist: I vote for #5, though it's really tragic in a way. By the way, what happens in such a situation, is the score 1-0 still counted (since I guess both signed their sheets) or is there a chance for appeal? |
|
| Sep-22-08 | | ravel5184: 1996 - #4
1997 - #5 obviously. |
|
| Sep-22-08 | | YouRang: <1997> Yep - #5
It's kinda sad that the momentous occasion of a double-check with two knights went by without the appropriate fanfare. They should have at least stopped to share a drink and make a toast. Then again, perhaps they had already been drinking and were already toasted... |
|
Sep-22-08
 | | Phony Benoni: <Gang> Yes, #5 seems a good place to end this journey. <YouRang> I hate to explode your fantasy, but the players were two pre-teens rated 690 and 495 respectively. Perhaps Black just figured that the high-rated player with White knew what was going on. <TheAlchemist: By the way, what happens in such a situation, is the score 1-0 still counted (since I guess both signed their sheets) or is there a chance for appeal?> It's an interesting question. If the illegal move had been noted during the game, the game would have reverted to the position in question. After the game is over, I think the result stands. After all, if a checkmate appears on the board and nobody notices, is there actually a checkmate? There has to be some latitude, however. Else you could have games starting <1.e4. e5 2.Bc4 Nf6 3.Qxf7#>, and White claims that, with the game over due to checkmate, the illegal move cannot be corrected. That claim would be thrown out immediately, though perhaps Black should be given the option of responding with an illegal move of his own like Pg7xf7. I do know that the illegal move was not noticed at the tournament, possibly because this was the next-to-bottom board in the last round and nobody was paying much attention. When the scoresheets from the tournament came to me I saw the problem immediately, but I long ago learned to (as we say in the U.S.) "Let sleeping dogs lie". You see, I once found an error in tiebreaking the day after a tournament which affected a number of trophy winners, and made the mistake of mentioning it to a few people. A protest was lodged, and the tournament director wound up having to take trophies from some players to give to others. I made a number of enemies that day--not the least of which was the director--and learned to keep my big fat mouth shut. If I hadn't, they might have forced me to direct the tournaments myself, and I would be writing this today from an insane asylum. |
|
| Sep-28-08 | | just a kid: I vote for #5. |
|
Oct-02-08
 | | Phony Benoni: It's not surprising that a game like #5 should have occurred in Michigan. You see, in this state games often aren't over <when> they are over. Here are three cases in point, all of which occurred in the same year. Case #1: White has just sacrificed a piece for a winning attack. Black, thinking it a blunder, has already relaxed and makes an illegal move. White stops the clocks to correct the move. Black interprets this as resignation, and extends his hand--which White interprets as Black resigning. The players shake hands, turn in their scoresheets, and go off to the skittles room to analyze. Several minutes later, one very confused tournament director walks in. "Who won your game?" "I did", both players respond, in unison.
The game resumed and it turned out that White was right. Case #2: two players mumble and shake hands. White writes down <1-0> on his scoresheet, Black writes <½-½>. "Whaddya mean draw?", asks White. "Why I just make this move and you're busted." "No way", says Black. "I play here and I hold easily." ""But doesn't this win then?" says White, making another move. "No; I just go here. Easy draw".
So the players stood at the board and conducted a post mortem of the final position to determine the result. By the time a director could get there they had agreed to a draw, which result was allowed to stand. Case #3: White is two pieces down, but has a bit of an attack going. He optimistically offers a draw. Black replies, "No, I'd like to think about it." A few minutes later Black decides that continuing would be too risky, so he accepted the draw. "You can't accept the draw now--you already declined it." "I didn't decline the offer; I just wanted to think about it." "You said 'No'; that's a refusal."
"OK, OK, I offer you a draw."
"I decline; I don't want a draw now!"
This one went all the way to an Appeals Committee which finally decided that Black's statement was ambiguous enough for White to assume that his offer had been declined. So the game was resumed, and White eventually lost--which, I think, is proper punishment for refusing your own draw offer. |
|
Oct-02-08
 | | WannaBe: Must be something in them Michigan water... =) |
|
Oct-04-08
 | | Phony Benoni: I've noticed that the last couple of daily puzzles have featured sacrificial combinations concluded by an unusual mate with a lone queen. I wonder if Przepiorka vs L Steiner, 1925 will come up tomorrow. Any other predictions? |
|
| Oct-05-08 | | Benzol: Any other predictions? G Koshnitsky vs A Wolfers, 1948 could be a possibility. |
|
| Oct-08-08 | | whiteshark: <Phony Benoni>
Is there any relation to Richard 'Magic' Moody Jr.? Or are you possibly even the driving force behind him? http://www.correspondencechess.com/... |
|
Oct-08-08
 | | Phony Benoni: <whiteshark> No way. The only thing we have in common is that neither of us knows anything about the openings. |
|
| Oct-11-08 | | fictionist: Hello <PB>! Are you busy? I would like to challenge you to an 8 game match. |
|
Oct-11-08
 | | Phony Benoni: <fictionist> Thanks, but I'll have to say no for right now. I'm cutting way back on playing games not because I'm busy, but simply because I need a break. I get into these funks every once in a while. |
|
Oct-13-08
 | | Phony Benoni: Those of you who enjoyed the Worst Move series might want to take a look at the latest entry (no. 382) in Tim Krabbé's <Open Chess Diary> at http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess2/... The newest composition task he has set is constructing a position where White has the most legal moves of which all but one are mate on the move, while the final move <forces> black to deliver mate in one. Here's the current leader:
 click for larger view
Obviously. promoted pieces are allowed, but the position does appear to be legal. At any rate, 51 of White's 52 legal moves are mate on the move, while #52--The Worst Move--forces Black to deliver mate in one. It took me several mintues to find the loser; you might want to see how quickly you can spot it. On the othr hand, maybe you don't want to try! |
|
| Oct-22-08 | | ahmadov: Is the game we are playing on QA not a dead draw? |
|
Oct-22-08
 | | Phony Benoni: <Ahmadov> Perhaps it is, but I offered a draw some time ago and I think it's a breach of etiquette to offer another after being refused. |
|
| Oct-22-08 | | YouRang: <Phony Benoni> It took me several minutes to see the 'worst move' too. It's not particularly tricky, but it doesn't jump out at you either... |
|
 |
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 36 OF 914 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|