|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 19 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Sep-05-07
 | | keypusher: <How many of us can claim to have won a game in which we were down a Queen, two Rooks, and a Bishop?> <Me!>
Oh, sorry, <Bishop of Blunder>, I just realized you said "won." Never mind... |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | zb2cr: <keypusher>,
LOL!! |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | realbrob: <zb2cr> You're right, in the real world it works like that. If I were supposed to be sure that every move I play is perfectly fine I'd get in big zeitnot before playing the first move!
A sacrifice is also a challenge to your opponent to refute it, and if the sac is well played, it's very difficult to do it. What I mean is, there are many kinds of sacrifice. Modern players usually don't sac pieces out of nowhere at move 3 in a game with standard time controls. <"I feel that the idea of calculating each sacrifice through to a forced win is fundamentally wrong.">
I wasn't suggesting that at all. You can't calculate it through to a "forced win" but you can calculate it through to a "better position". |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | twin phoenix: TKS Chess Games!!! i have never seen this game before. (and probably wouldn't have if it hadn't made game of the day!)true chess poetry and one of the reasons this is such a great site!
some things i found very interesting about this game...
1. 19. e5!! had to study it for a couple of minutes before it made sense. what a fantastic move.
2. if instead of N-a6 black plays 20.--,N-c6. he gets mated in an analagous manner by 21. Nxg7+ and 22. B-c7 mate. a pretty mirror image of actual conclusion.
must admit that i had to go thru this game 4 times before i could even begin to understand what was going on... |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | kevin86: What can I say? This may be themost quoted,played,and beloved gamne ever. In the top 10 games ever,I would venture to say that it would make everyone's list. White gives up queen,two rooks,and a bishop for ONE solitary pawn-pshaw,pshaw. |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | Chessmensch: What was the purpose of leaving the bishop en prise after move 9 and then losing it on move 11? Was it only to gain tempi for his other purposes or is there something deeper I am missing? |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | Rubenus: Hasn't this game been game of the day before? Did they just run out of games? |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | keres777: I prefer this game : Kramnik vs Kasparov, 1994 to both the 'Immortal Game' and the Byrne-Fischer game. I don't know why, I just do! |
|
Sep-05-07
 | | playground player: Complaining about having seen this game before is like complaining about having heard Beethoven's 5th Symphony before. |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | zb2cr: <Chessmensch>,
You wrote: "What was the purpose of leaving the bishop en prise after move 9 and then losing it on move 11? Was it only to gain tempi for his other purposes or is there something deeper I am missing?" In a nutshell, yes, the purpose was to gain tempi. Note that Anderssen used those tempi to first chase Black's Queen around, and then to threaten to trap it with 15. Bxf4 -- which in turn forced the retreat of Black's Knight to clear space for the Queen. After Black's 15th, note that he has ONLY his Queen in play, vs. White's Queen, Bishop, Knight, Rook, and advanced Pawn s. |
|
Sep-05-07
| | playground player: <Honza> Thanks for the link to Anderssen vs. Rosanes. I hadn't seen that game before. It's a corker! |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | Rodrigo Gutierrez: <brankat: Nothing is above/beyond Doubt.> No doubt about that... |
|
Sep-05-07
 | | Domdaniel: My favorite in the dashing romantic style is R Steel vs NN, 1886 -- even if there's some doubt as to whether it was all played over the board. On the other hand, there's Nimzowitsch's Immortal Zugzwang Game. Or Gufeld's 'Mona Lisa' vs Bagirov. There are an awful lot of brilliant games out there. I just wish a nice helpful opponent would let me play one someday... |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | wolfmaster: How can this game not have been GOTD already? |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | Chessmensch: <zb2cr> Thanks very much for the comment, which confirms and elaborates on my observation. Your point about black's position after 15 is noteworthy and telling. I often observe such things (see my kibitz re Arnason vs. Timman on Sept. 1) but I missed this one. |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | apple pi: I can't believe this hasn't been GOTD before! I'm a new member; i just assumed the immortal would have been cashed a lot earlier. |
|
| Sep-05-07 | | D4n: BishopofBlunder called that one. |
|
| Sep-06-07 | | ahmadov: <Domdaniel: My favorite in the dashing romantic style is R Steel vs NN, 1886 -- even if there's some doubt as to whether it was all played over the board.> Yes, that is a true brilliancy... |
|
| Sep-07-07 | | BishopofBlunder: <keypusher: <How many of us can claim to have won a game in which we were down a Queen, two Rooks, and a Bishop?> <Me!>
Oh, sorry, <Bishop of Blunder>, I just realized you said "won." Never mind...> lol! You had me going for a moment. I was about to demand that you post the PGN! |
|
| Sep-07-07 | | Darth Lasker: <<crafty> 20. ... Ba6 21. Nc7+ Kd8 22. Nxa6 Qc3 23. Bc7+ Qxc7  (eval -0.44; depth 12 ply; 5000M nodes)>Chigorin analyzed this line and the conclusion is: white still wins! |
|
| Oct-03-07 | | m0nkee1: Really like e5 - beutiful move, sealing off a few more squares around blacks king. preventing the queen retreating to defend & offering a big diversion to the opponent.... Am a a big fan of "retro" chess computers (good Saiteks & Novags) they're very greedy and will follow the best line's to get material. making them vulnerable to early checkmates with lots of scafifices. "Old Kentucky" By Blackburne is another beautiful sacrificial game on the site.... |
|
| Oct-05-07 | | jbahadur: This game is very pretty to look at, but there are plenty of blunders. For example, after 18...Qxa1+ 19. Ke2 Qb2, Anderssen is toast, I believe. It's the extra tempo he spends grabbing the rook with his bishop that loses it. |
|
| Oct-05-07 | | Calli: Its not that simple. See Honza's analysis on page 7, Anderssen vs Kieseritzky, 1851 |
|
| Oct-17-07 | | notyetagm: Position after 21 ... ♔e8-d8:
click for larger viewHere White is threatening the snap mate 22 ♗d6-e7#. Black is meeting this threat by having his g8-knight <DEFEND> this e7-mating focal point. But if the Black g8-knight <DEFENDS> the e7-mating square, what Black piece or pawn <DEFENDS> the f6-square? <<<That is, if the Black g8-knight keeps the White d6-bishop from giving mate on e7, what keeps the White f3-queen out of f6?>>> The answer is simple: nothing(!) stops 22 ♕f3-f6+!. Position after 22 ♕f3-f6+!:
click for larger viewThe Black g8-knight is just terribly <OVERWORKED>: it cannot keep the White d6-bishop out of e7 -and- keep the White f3-queen out of f6. White forces mate with 22 ♕f3-f6+! ♘g8x♕f6 <deflection from e7> 23 ♗d6-e7#. 
click for larger viewA lovely <PURE CHECKMATE>. |
|
| Nov-04-07 | | nimh: Rybka 2.4 mp, AMD X2 2.01GHz, 10 min per move, threshold 0.33. Anderssen 4 mistakes:
8.Nh4 -0.59 (8.Rg1 0.28)
10.g4 -1.30 (10.Ba4 0.00)
17.Nd5 1.59 (17.d4 3.24)
18.Bd6 -0.69 (18.Re1 1.53)
Kieseritsky 7 mistakes:
7...Nh5 0.28 (7...Nc6 -0.24)
9...c6 0.00 (9...g6 -0.51)
10...Nf6 -0.32 (10...g6 -1.30)
11...cxb5 0.22 (11...h5 -0.32)
16...Bc5 3.24 (16...Qc6 0.52)
18...Bxg1 1.78 (18...Qxa1+ -0.69)
20...Na6 #3 (20...Ba6 1.18) |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 19 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 11.Rg1