< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
|Feb-13-11|| ||falso contacto: This is a brilliant player isn't he?|
|Jun-25-11|| ||Llawdogg: Holy Cow! That was a great move and this is a brilliant game! Amazing! This is what chess is all about.|
|Sep-26-11|| ||DrMAL: Roman Dzindzi featured this game in his video (#2 of Roman's Lab) as a remarkable/fascinating positional sacrifice, it was in fact why I saw it my friend wanted my opinion of it's value (he must be nuts LOL). With over a trillion positions computed, Houdini predicts a draw via 14...d6 15.Nd5 Be6 16.Nxf6+ Kg7 17.Bd4 Rfc8 18.Nd7+ Kg8 19.Nf6+ Kf8 20.Nxh7+ Ke7 etc. It made for good dialog where, to me, his quandary was already answered by Roman's closing words on that long five-part video. In effect, Roman states that it is positional judgment that defines a chess player's strength. While a powerful engine might finally have the ability to refute 12.Qxf6!! as objectively still a draw, I certainly would not want to have the black pieces to try and prove it.|
|Sep-26-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @<DrMal>
the back story is interesting. The position at move 12 had been seen quite often and the peace pipe was lit here. Nez' thought for 40 minutes before taking on f6. The strategic grounds for 12. Qxf6 being the weakening of the K-side and black's lag in development.
Even after extensive analysis, although Rashid had seen much, neither he or his friend Voloshin could find the truth to 12. Qxf6 and were thus surprised to see 14...d5 was suggested as a refutation. Rashid dreamed of playing the position against one of the journalists!
(Based on the notes to the game by Voloshin in <Nezhmetdinov's Best Games of Chess> by Rashid Nezhmetdinov, Caissa 2000.)
|Sep-26-11|| ||DrMAL: <SWT> Thanx much for that fascinating background and reference. I will get that book feeling good to finally study his games. Being Tal's mentor I have left out the "granddaddy" of modern chess, such thinking was so singular back then.|
Personally, I like the way Kasparov describes chess in 3-D with material, quality and time (psychology being an unmentioned "imaginary" fourth dimension) where "positional" here refers to the overall Gestalt. Perhaps a new dimension (or collapsing) has been added recently referring to everything as tactical after all, where computers are stepping in more to help us understand this.
As Roman also mentions in this long video, computers serve as our best advisers (provided we know what we are looking at) and discovery today is a "mere" matter of feeding them ideas. Knowing Nakamura years ago certainly demonstrated that to me. In any event, a computer cannot presently be programmed to appreciate beauty, and the complexities of human thought here (and resulting positions) have a timeless beauty indeed, cheers.
|Sep-26-11|| ||davegras: My all-time favorite game.|
|Sep-26-11|| ||kellmano: Wow. It is always amazing to stumble across games like these. I have played through many of Nez's games and admired them, but this is something else.|
It makes me glad that chess exists, and that i understand enough to recognise this kind of beauty. Imagine the feeling if you played it.
|Sep-26-11|| ||sevenseaman: I thought I had seen only one game as wonderful as this one. When I searched, it was this very game in one of my collections of about a year ago. Extraterrestrial!|
|Sep-26-11|| ||scormus: <sevenseaman: I thought I had seen only one game as wonderful as this one.>|
I had a similar feeling, and it was this one
Polugaevsky vs Nezhmetdinov, 1958
|Oct-02-11|| ||kamalakanta: This has to be one of the most courageous Queen sacrifices ever!|
Check out this quote from the book "Super Nezh", by Alex Pishkin, after Black's 11th move!
"Long ago this position was known to be drawn because White could choose between 12.Qh6 Bg7 13.Qh4 Bf6 with a repetition of moves, or 12.Qg5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5 Nxb3 15.axb3 Bxc3 with a drawn endgame. If 12.Qg3 or 12.Qf4, Black would reply 12...Qxc3!"
" Chernikov was sure that his opponent wanted to rest that day. Therefore he quietly strolled about in the tournament hall. Meanwhile time went on and Nezh continued to think. Everyone was puzzled "what was Rashid Gibyatovich thinking about", there was no avoiding a draw...At last a boy, out of breath, ran up to Chernikov and said: "Dyadya, a Queen has been sacrificed to you!"
|Oct-02-11|| ||kamalakanta: And the quote at the end of the game is even more charming, for it shows the chivalry and admiration of the other players towards Nezhmetdinov's genius:|
"The game produced such an impression on the many participants of the championship that none of them presented their games to the judges- it was guaranteed in advance to Nezh."
|Oct-30-11|| ||Cibator: A few random comments.
(1) Slightly reminiscent of the famous 50th game La Bourdonnais vs McDonnell, 1834 , in that the player giving up the queen then has to make several moves in a row before he can achieve the optimum placing for his pieces - and yet his opponent can do damn-all about it!
(2) The sac 12.Qxf6 was tried some time after this in a London League match, with J G Enticknap (Islington) playing white. The game was published in CHESS magazine with light annotations, but I can't remember exactly when. Black (whose name I also can't recall) played a weak passive 14th or 15th move and was soon overwhelmed.
(3) The final position here is quite hopeless for black, who apart from anything else must surely soon drop another pawn. Even an 1800-rated player like me would have little trouble tucking this one away.
|Dec-04-11|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: The game produced such an impression on the many participants of the championship that none of them presented their games to the judges !!|
|Dec-15-11|| ||Rook e2: Fantastic sacrifice!|
|Jan-01-12|| ||Tigranny: I'm really starting to like Nezhmetdinov as a player.|
|Mar-03-12|| ||Tigranny: <kamalakanta> What if 12...Bxg5?|
|Mar-10-12|| ||kingscrusher: One of my most favourited Youtube videos ever is on this game:|
|Mar-10-12|| ||Tigranny: <kingscrusher> I watched your video on this game. Its on my favorite videos list along with your other instructive games.|
|Mar-11-12|| ||kingscrusher: <Tigranny> Cheers :)|
|Jun-13-12|| ||OhioChessFan: <Check out this quote from the book "Super Nezh", by Alex Pishkin, after Black's 11th move!|
"Long ago this position was known to be drawn because White could choose between 12.Qh6 Bg7 13.Qh4 Bf6 with a repetition of moves, or 12.Qg5 Qxg5 14.Bxg5 Nxb3 15.axb3 Bxc3 with a drawn endgame. If 12.Qg3 or 12.Qf4, Black would reply 12...Qxc3!">
<Tigranny> I assume the second line is supposed to be 12. Qh6 Bg7 13. Qg5 Qxg5 14. Bxg5 Nxb3 15. axb3 Bxc3
click for larger view
I am hard pressed to see how that can be called a drawn endgame though.
|Jun-23-12|| ||Everett: I haven't looked at the comps, but after the sac, I see a human suggested 14..d4! And why not? It hopes to activate not only the Bc8 but the Ra8 as well. The Rf8 does should not have priority in such situations. |
How many times must Black suffer a mortal lack of development of his q-side forces before he realizes that this is of some import?
|Jul-26-12|| ||Girkassa: Wow, that is an amazing queen sac. I thought I had seen most of the greatest games from the past, but apparently not this one.|
|Jul-26-12|| ||Girkassa: <OhioChessFan>, it is not a dead draw, but between two strong GMs, it is very likely that it will end in a draw. Since this line is well known among players who play this regularly, it is unlikely that White would go into such an endgame if he is looking for a win.|
|Jul-26-12|| ||perfidious: One wonders about the translation, or the usage. The position in the diagram provided by <OCF> looks level, but I agree with him-that isn't the same as saying it's drawn, though there must be better ways to play for a win than to go in for this.|
|Apr-18-13|| ||Rookiepawn: I think a lot of people misses the point not between human and computer analysis but between mere analysis and a real game.|
Performing analysis, regardless you do it with a program or not, implies a whole different scenario. Starting with the fact that you know you are not risking anything, you can take moves back, etc. It's like comparing driving a real race and playing Daytona.
Here Nezhmetdinov plays an astonishing sac, which proves sound enough to resist analysis during decades, and even computers cannot really refute it but arrive to a draw. That proves the sac is an incredible move for a real game.
A real game implies the rival doesn't have all the time in the world to analyze the variants (as neither have you), so even choosing a move that can lead to one or two loosing variants is a strong move from a practical perspective if they are counterbalanced by many winning variants, which often occurs in complicated and tactical positions.
Of course, after the game there will be a crowd of geniuses that after hours of analysis carried out in the living room, with or without Houdini, will boast this "comedy of errors" is not worth their sharp eye.
This is simply lack of perspective: what Nezhmetdinov did is not what you did, guys. Prove is simple: you cannot do the same.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·