|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-31-07 | | Marmot PFL: You have created a monster, and it will destroy you! |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | ChessCompFan: not that i am a good player myself, people back then played pretty bad compared to today's players. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | Tractatus: It seems black overlooked an earlier win: 27...Re1+. After the dark squared bishop captures on e1, Qxf3#
If instead white's light squared bishop tries to come back to block (Bf1), black will just deliver mate from the f1 square. |
|
Oct-31-07
 | | al wazir: I don't understand why white didn't play 28. Bxe2. It's not as if the ♗ was busy doing anything. And I *really* don't understand why black didn't play 28...Qxg3. If 29. Nxe2, then 29...Qxf3#. If 29. hxg3, then 29...Re1+ 30. Qxe1 Rxe1+ 31. Kg2 Ra1 leaves black with ♖+3♙ vs. ♗+♘. If 29. Bxe2 (finally), then 29...Qf2, and white can't defend the ♗ on e2 without getting mated or losing his ♕. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | patzerboy: It's alive!! It's ALIIIVE!!! HA!HA!HA! |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | King mega: I thought White is winning at the initial! |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | gandu: Great game! The players must have been drunk! It reminds me somewhat of my style of play! ;-) |
|
Oct-31-07
 | | Sneaky: A long time ago there was a television contest; the first person to answer a movie trivia contest would win a ticket to a Miami Dolphins game. I was no great movie buff, but I couldn't believe how easy this question was: "Who played Frankenstein in the 1931 movie?" I immediately called the television station and triumphantly declared "Boris Karloff!" knowing that there was no possible way I was wrong. He informed me, "Sorry--wrong answer!" and hung up on me. Then it struck me... Karloff didn't play Frankenstein... he played Frankenstein's MONSTER!!! D'oh!!! The real answer was Colin Clive, who played Dr. Frankenstein. |
|
Oct-31-07
 | | nasmichael: That's <<Frawn-ken-steen>>. The comments on play strength do not take into account the cultural gamesmanship of the time, as well as the literature available for those players. The sportsman of the day allowed attacks, gambits, forays into new territory for education as well as interest. The positions players allowed themselves to enter into were for the "sport" of the moment. Prophylaxis came later as a primary goal of the players; that meant only the focus was primarily on attack, and the players that would force the focus to other concepts of solidity had not yet entered the stage. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | zb2cr: Re: <nasmichael>'s comments on the gamesmanship of the day. We are talking about Amos Burn here, you know. Burn was well-known for being cautious in his playing style. Here it looks as if he is trying to play a dashing attack--and since it's not his style, he messes it up. |
|
Oct-31-07
 | | keypusher: <sneaky> That's a great story. Being a Dolphins fan has been pretty much all downhill since then, eh? (well, since 1973 or so.) |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | kevin86: It's funny that over the years we have blurred the difference between the inventor:Frankenstein and his invention :THE MONSTER. Students of the book,movies,or the best (IMHO) version,YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN-pronounced Fraank n steen-and his sidekick-IGOR-pronounced (eye gore)(not al gore,btw) know the difference. The game was great-too bad Mr. Burn ran out of stakes,silver bullets,or worst of all,pipe tobbacco. Black's attack seemed to make puppets of white's defenders. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | zb2cr: Hi <kevin86>,
You mention the blurring between Dr. Frankenstein & his monster. This comes from the bad sequel movies, e.g. "Bride of Frankenstein", etc. So, blame the Hollywood of that era, which wanted snappy titles, for the cultural blurring. Recall that many Americans do not read the classic books, so their understanding of them comes from movies--and of course, Hollywood has never been shy about changing the story when they felt it needed greater drama--usually to the detriment of the finished version. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | xrt999: It appears to me both players are trying their hardest to lose, and fail miserably in their attempts. Pathetic.
|
|
| Oct-31-07 | | Chicago Chess Man: I'm not sure how black missed 27. ...Re1+. It would be fairly obvious even to a mediocre player, I'd think |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | xrt999: Considering that in 20th century top level play, white is only +59 -73 =67 with the evans gambit, I dont know why anyone would ever play it, other than an experiment, boredom, or both. I think it has pretty much been proven dubious for white. That being said, Kasparov beat Anand with the evans as white in 95. In that game after move 6, the only other moves to date ever played were 7.Bd3 and 7.Nxe5, and Kasparov played 7.Be2 Kasparov vs Anand, 1995 |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | Chessmensch: Burn baby, burn. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | rozumim: <It appears to me both players are trying their hardest to lose, and fail miserably in their attempts.> Not so! One of them succeeds brilliantly in his attempt to lose. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | rozumim: <I'm not sure how black missed 27. ...Re1+. It would be fairly obvious even to a mediocre player, I'd think> ...and that mediocre player would then lose a rook for nothing after Bxe1, wouldn't he? |
|
Oct-31-07
| | keypusher: <Rozumin> No, he would get 28...Qxf3# in exchange. |
|
Oct-31-07
 | | playground player: This could be Lesson One in a course, "How Not to Play the Evans Gambit." A truly horrifying job by Mr. Burn. |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | zahbaz: What the hell is this??! |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | porgue: Frankenstein totally Burned that guy |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | tatarch: I'd rather see a good halloween atack-- CG.com should stick with the halloween gambit every year, because when else would it be a game of the day? |
|
| Oct-31-07 | | tatarch: Ah whoops, didn't see that the halloween attack was the opening of the day. My mistake CG.com, keep up the good work |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 28...Be3