|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-22-05 | | EmperorAtahualpa: <offramp> LOL, I understand your sarcasm, but I would rather wish to know which way to improve Black's game! Yes indeed, move 17 seems to be the worst of all.
Any suggestions for improvement?
Perhaps 17...exd4 18.Qxd4 Qxd4 19.Qb6 Qxb6 20.Nxb6 (or perhaps 20.axb6) could lead to better chances? |
|
| Dec-23-05 | | offramp: Or possibly 17...exd4 18.Qxd4 Nf8. Black would lose a pawn but the queens would come off. |
|
Jun-12-06
 | | Honza Cervenka: There is no satisfactory defense against 27.Qf6+ or 27.Qe5+. |
|
| Jul-30-07 | | Fast Gun: Marshall appears to have Alekhine's "Bunny" In spite of his reputation and tournament successes, he was something of Whipping Boy for Capablanca and Lasker too:
For example
v Capa 4 - 21
v Lasker 2 - 12
v Alekhine 0 - 7
With an overall score of 6 - 40 against arguably three of the strongest players of his generation:Funny how Marshall always reminds me of Bent Larsen, a creative player who was colourful and entertaining, who achieved numerous tournament success, but never became World Champion and never really "cut it " with the big names of his own generation!! |
|
| Jun-07-08 | | Ulhumbrus: Instead of 16...e5, 16..dxc4 17 Bxc4 Nb6 frees Black's QB with tempo. On 18 Ba2 Bd7 prepares to develop the QR. |
|
| Apr-17-09 | | notyetagm: Damn, what a *massacre*. |
|
Jan-14-12
 | | jessicafischerqueen: <Alekhine> won the tournament Second Brilliancy Prize for this game. |
|
Jan-14-12
 | | Penguincw: < Indian Game: Döry Indian > Interesting game. |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | Infohunter: The Döry Defense is not seen too often. This game helps me understand some possible reasons for this. Even without the benefit of this example, however, that business of Black's making a second move with the Knight at his third turn without any real provocation doesn't leave the best impression. |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | aidfarh: Can someone please explain the pun? |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | consul: The game at that point is already lost, but i'm wondering why 23 .. a5 and not directly 23 .. g6 ... |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | TheTamale: <Infohunter> And it seems Marshall's response to it is sub-optimal, doing the same thing, moving a piece twice. For all his daring, Marshall seemed to take a timid approach playing against unfamiliar openings. |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | laskerian: <aidfarh: Can someone please explain the pun?>
(a)This game was played in New York, (b)There is this song by the band Eagles which is titled "In a New York Minute", and
(c)Marshall's move 3...Ne4, being prepared beforehand, probably occurred during his first minute of thinking time. |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | paavoh: @aidfarh: Look it up at: <http://www.urbandictionary.com/defi...> |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | Abdel Irada: There may be something to be said for completing one's development before setting up a pawn formation like that after Black's 17th move, which is certain to open every possible line. Of course, without speculative aggression from the outset, it wouldn't be a Marshall game. |
|
Nov-09-12
 | | kevin86: The queen has to move to give the king breathing room...but they she cannot protect him anymore. |
|
Nov-09-12
 | | chessgames.com: A "New York minute" is American slang, meaning some amount of time much shorter than a minute, as if to imply that New Yorkers are an impatient bunch. It's the etymological opposite of "a country mile", which is much longer than a mile. But the *real* reason why we used today's pun is to draw attention to our new feature which allows us to have organized, kibitzable pages for historical tournaments. If you look at the top of the page you'll see the clickable link
New York (1927) which takes you to our special page on that tournament. Enjoy! |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | TheFocus: <CG.Admins> You just keep making it better and better!! Hats off to you! |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | waustad: The pushes in the center when behind in development seem suicidal to me. |
|
Nov-09-12
 | | perfidious: <Infohunter> Ten years on, there was a theme event held at Vienna devoted to 1.d4 Nf6 2.Nf3 Ne4: http://www.365chess.com/tournaments.... |
|
| Nov-09-12 | | TheTamale: Hmm, I can't delete my last comment. It contained an error of perception... Alekhine played the weird response to Marshall's weird move, not the other way around. Sigh. |
|
Nov-09-12
 | | profK: The moral of this game should be 'develop or die !'..Frank didn't and he died. |
|
Apr-30-21
 | | plang: 3..Ne4!? is new to me; just looks odd. 4..Bb4 was played partly hoping for 5 a3?..Qf6 and Black wins; interestingly enough in all 3 games played after this game White did indeed play 5 a3? and lost. Black's setup with ..c6,..Nbd7 and ..Be7 seems passive and slow; I think many modern players would have tried for an early ..c5. 14..Rxf4 and 16..e5 led to an opening of the position when Black was behind in development; not surprisingly he was punished for this. With the quiet and effective 17 Qd2 Alekhine was prepared to respond to 17..Qb6 with 18 c5..Qa5 19 exd..exd 20 b4!..dxc 21 Qg5..Qc7 22 d6..h6 23 Qe7 and wins. Premature would have been 21 e6..Nf6 22 e7..Qg8 23 Rxf6..Bg4! 24 Qxg8+..Kxg8 25 Rd6..Re8. |
|
| Apr-30-21 | | carpovius: 24.e6 is brilliant |
|
| Apr-30-21 | | sudoplatov: Perhaps Stockfish's suggestion of 9....c5 would have equalized. Marshall always seemed to me (based on EDO and other rankings) to be outclassed by Lasker, Capablanca, and Alekhine. His 1914 St Petersburg 5th place seems about right. Some of his records are funny, he had a losing record against Tartakower but his records against Nimzovich and Rubinstein were pretty good based on their strength. Against both Rubinstein and Tarrasch, he barely lost (and would have a winning or tied record if matches didn't count. Matches do count though and as Parcells said, "You are your record.") Bill Martz pointed out to me that Marshall's style is very exhausting to play. It takes lots of calculation (Marshall was good at that) and one should be a good endgame player to recover from unsuccessful attacks (Marshall was.) I think some of Marshall's success comes from what Spielmann called the "shock" value of sacrifices and the difficulty of defending. Still, his wins in big tournaments from 1904 to 1908 were impressive. Perhaps all this just shows how really good Capablanca, Lasker, and Alekhine were. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 19.Qf4