|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 12 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-24-03 | | ughaibu: But did he sacrifice purely to bring about his preferred defensive position? |
|
| Dec-24-03 | | Benjamin Lau: That would be more opinion-based, and we can't exactly ask Petrosian anymore. :-) |
|
| Feb-03-04 | | m0rphy: My what a lot of debate on this game!!.To add fuel to the fire please read Karpov's book "Miniatures from the World Champions" where he puts this whole combination by Morphy's ...Rf2 under his analytic spotlight to determine its' soundness.Interesting that he does not pick as an illustration of Morphy's style those hoary old chestnuts Paris 1858 vs the aristocracy at the opera nor Morphy's 6th match game win vs Louis Paulsen New York 1857. |
|
| Feb-19-04 | | Whitehat1963: What I have always loved about Morphy's games is his absolute fearlessness and great over-the-board analytical abilities. He might play the occasionally unsound move, but so often his moves are designed to yield immediate insurmountable advantages. I can't imagine playing against Morphy under time pressure. It's got to be worse than playing against Tal or Fischer. He must have been terrifying to face across the board. 17 ... Rxf2 is a typical example. |
|
| Feb-19-04 | | Stavrogin: Good post Whitehat1963.
Yes, that fearlessness is beautiful.
I´ve said it before. In risk of being repetetive: I love the feel of Morphy´s games. Actually feels godd in the hand when playing through his games.
The Mozart of chess. |
|
| Jun-17-04 | | Chesspatch: Question, is 6.Nxe5 a good move? Is there any continuation to that? |
|
| Jun-17-04 | | Swindler: Can't Black just take the knight on e4? |
|
| Jun-18-04 | | acirce: <Can't Black just take the knight on e4?> Doesn't seem so... 6. Nxe5 dxe4 7.Qh5+ g6 8.Nxg6 hxg6 9.Qxg6+ Kd7 10.Qf5+ Ke8 11.Qe5+ Be6 12. Qxh8 or 8...Nf6 9.Qe5+ Kf7 10.Nxh8+ |
|
Oct-01-04
 | | keypusher: Also, remember, this was a casual game, not a match game (Morphy didn't play 3...f5 in match games). I suspect ughaibu is absolutely right and Morphy believed the sac was a winner. (I suspect he would have looked a little more closely in a match, but he made mistakes in matches, too.) |
|
| Oct-16-04 | | Knight13: 13. bxa3?? Bxa3#. Henry Bird is busted. |
|
Oct-17-04
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: ughaibu, if you would like to see a truly sensational defensive sacrifice, see Perlis vs. Marshall, Carlsbad 1911. Perlis unleashes a Marshall swindle on the guy who invented them. |
|
| Oct-17-04 | | ughaibu: Thanks. I looked at the game and it's still not what I had in mind. |
|
| Oct-17-04 | | SBC: According to Sergeant, Steinitz justifiably evaluated Morphy's 17th move as unsound, but Steinitz's explanation was that "Morphy's impetuous ingenuity could not resist the temptation of a brilliant sacrifice, though he was a P ahead with an excellent game." |
|
| Dec-11-04 | | morphy234: Does this game remind anyone of the Kasparov - Topalov game?? |
|
| Dec-11-04 | | crafty: 6. ♘xe5 dxe4 7. ♕h5+ g6 8. ♘xg6 hxg6 9. ♕xg6+  (eval 2.03; depth 12 ply; 500M nodes) |
|
| Feb-19-05 | | aw1988: <Knight13> No, after Kb2 Bird is busted. Kc1 merely gives white a slight disadvantage. |
|
| Mar-01-05 | | InspiredByMorphy: <crafty> <6. Nxe5 dxe4 7. Qh5+ g6 8. Nxg6 hxg6> 8. ...hxg6? Why wouldnt black play 8. ...Nf6 ? |
|
| Mar-01-05 | | aw1988: <InspiredByMorphy> 8...Nf6 9. Qe5+ Kf7 (9...Kd7 10. d5!) 10. Bc4+! (Nxh8 also works) Kg7 (10...Kxg6 11. Qg5#) 11. Bh6+! Kxh6 12. Nxh8 |
|
| Mar-01-05 | | piteira8: 18. ... Bf4 is a possibility. It pins the queen, and black ends up with a queen for a rook and a bishop. Instead black went for mate. |
|
Mar-02-05
 | | beatgiant: <piteira8: 18. ... Bf4 is a possibility.> After 18...Bf4 19. Qxf4, what's the follow-up? |
|
| Mar-04-05 | | InspiredByMorphy: I think 6.Nxe5 leads to a drawing game. <6. Nxe5 dxe4 7. Qh5+ g6 8. Nxg6 hxg6 9. Qxh8> Be6 10. Qe5 Qd5 11. Qxc7 Nd7 12. Be2 Bb4+ 13. Kf1 Two pawns down or not I think black has equalized because of the minor pieces. 6.Ng3 is better than 6.Nxe5 . White would have had an equal game after 11.Bxf6 Qxh5 12.Be2 Qe8 13.Bg5 . |
|
| Jul-21-05 | | MarkN: I was thinking about what <metriktracer> said, and about how a technical win would be forgotten. the disagreement might be over what someone considers a win. is a win a checkmate of the other king, or is it something beyond the pieces, such as a change in chess ideas or extensive analysis over a creative move? if you consider a win simply a checkmate of the opponent's king, then sure, Morphy's move was pretty chancy, and it probably wouldve been safer to play for a slow win. but if you think that a great win/game is something we talk of for 160 years, (even if it the gamble failed) as <metriktracer> said, then you may have a different idea about the move. Sorry-I dont mean to preach, i just think some people feel that this move changed more than the outcome of one game, and thats why they love it |
|
| Jul-22-05 | | ughaibu: MarkN: I would say the winning is the proof of the idea and is "important" in that sense rather than as a bare result. |
|
| Jul-22-05 | | MarkN: ughaibu- normally, i would agree with you, but in this case i dont think morphy's win is proof of his idea, becuase it was unsound-even though highly creative. but think of all tal's sacrifices-they were unsound too, and they didnt always work, but it was still incredible chess, and could be considered a victory in that respect |
|
| Jul-22-05 | | ughaibu: I dont mind if analysts conclude that the winner could have lost, I dont understand how it detracts from the result, unless a blunder had reversed things in a clearly decided position. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 12 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 17...Rxf2
