Aug-07-03
 | | Honza Cervenka: 23.Rc1 or 23.Qf5+ Rd7 24.Rc1 would have broken black's resistence sooner. |
|
Aug-07-03 | | JSYantiss: If White plays either of those lines, Honza, couldn't Black reply by moving his Bishop to c6 and still hold the position? |
|
Aug-07-03
 | | Honza Cervenka: 23.Rc1 Bc6 24.Ne2 Qb5 (or Qe7) 25.Nd4
23.Qf5+ Rd7 24.Rc1 Bc6 25.Ne2 is not much different. |
|
Aug-07-03 | | Calli: In the game, there is also 25.Nb5! and black can resign. Pillsbury evidently wasn't paying attention after winning the pawns. |
|
Aug-07-03 | | JSYantiss: 25.Nb5 is an interesting move....if Black takes the knight with his queen, then 26. Qe8+ wins the Black queen for White. If 25...Qh5 to stop 26.Qe8+, how should White continue after 25...Qh5? |
|
Aug-07-03 | | Yuri54: If 25.Qh5 then 26.g4 (if Black moves off the e8-h5 diagonal then it's mate after Qe8+ and Nxa7#. If 26.Qf7 then 27.Nd6+ and that's it |
|
Aug-07-03 | | JSYantiss: Very true, Yuri....I hadn't seen that before. That's why Black would resign with 25.Nb5! Very nice, Yuri and Calli |
|
Aug-08-03
 | | Honza Cervenka: If 25.Nb5 Bd5, then 26.Nxa7+ Kd8 27.Qf6+ Ke8 (27...Qe7 28.Qh8+ Qe8 29.Bg5+ etc.) 28.Nc8 (threatens Re1+ with mate) 28...Re7 29.Bd6  By the way after 25.Nb5 Qh5 white can play 26.Nd6+ Kd8 (26...Kc7 27.Nf7+ Kc8 28.Qe8+ with mate.) 27.Qg8+ Ke7 28.Re1+ Kf6 29.Re6#. |
|
Jan-24-04
 | | Benzol: Is the score of this game from move 25 onwards correct? The three sources I have all give the score as the following 25.♕g8+ ♖d8; 26.♕g4+ ♖d7; 27.♗e3 ♗xg2; 28.♖xd4 1-0. Sources: 100 Chess Gems by P. Wenman.
Pillsbury The Extraordinary by Andrew Soltis & Ken Smith.
Pillsbury's Chess Career by P.W. Sergeant & W.H. Watts |
|
Jan-24-04
 | | tamar: I believe the score of the moves is wrong. 15.0-0 looks suspect as something Pillsbury would play. It allows 15...♘xe4 16 ♕e7+ ♔xe7 17 ♘xe4 c5 18 ♘d6 ♗d5 19 ♖he1+ ♗e6 with good chances for black. My score gives 15. 0-0-0 (Pillsbury's Chess Games by Sergeant and Watts) here. Later on this would make 23...d4 more plausible for black. He is pinning the ♘ to the ♔ on c1. |
|
Jan-24-04
 | | Benzol: <tamar> I didn't check back far enough in the score earlier. My other two sources also say 15.0-0-0 was played.
Sorry about that. |
|
Nov-04-08 | | chocobonbon: I'm a few years late but the most interesting thing about 25.♘b5 is that it is an illegal move. Did the game score change after the previous posts? |
|
Mar-14-13 | | backrank: 23. Rc1 (as Honza suggests in the very 1st post) is illegal as well ... |
|
Feb-12-14
 | | plang: A lot of nice tactics. 3..b6 with a "bad" Queens Indian is a move you will not see often today but 6 e4 is a stange way of trying to punish it. |
|
Nov-23-17
 | | cwcarlson: ChessBase shows 15.O-O; their mistake! |
|
Dec-14-22
 | | jnpope: Interesting, the tournament book gives Harry Nelson Pillsbury vs Rudolf Swiderski as:
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 b6 4.Nf3 Bb7 5.cxd5 exd5 6.e4 dxe4 7.Ne5 Bd6 8.Qg4 Kf8 9.Bc4 Bxe5 10.dxe5 Qd4 11.Bd5 c6 12.Bxe4 Qxe5 13.Bf4 Nf6 14.Qh4 Qe7 15.0-0 Ne8 16.Qg3 Na6 17.Rfe1 Rd8 18.Bd5 Qc5 19.Rxe8+ Kxe8 20.Qxg7 cxd5 21.Qxh8+ Kd7 22.Qxh7 Kc8 23.Qxf7 d4 24.Qe6+ Rd7 25.Rd1 Qc6 26.Qg8+ Rd8 27.Qg4+ Qd7 28.Qh4 Nc5 29.Be3 Bxg2 30.Qxd4 1-0
Source: <Der Dreizehnte Kongress des Deutschen Schachbundes>, Leipzig 1902, pp125-126 |
|
Dec-14-22
 | | jnpope: User: mifralu sent me an email noting that the 15.0-0-0 version was published in <Schachzeitung der Münchner Neueste Nachrichten>, 24 August 1902, which may be the source that Sergeant and Watts utilized in 1922 (and then subsequently Wenman, et. al.). The tournament book:
https://books.google.com/books?id=X... Does anyone know why the <Schachzeitung der Münchner Neueste Nachrichten> differs from the tournament book? |
|
Dec-14-22
 | | jnpope: After doing more digging (I didn't even know this was an issue until today), the <Deutsches Wochenschach und Berliner Schachzeitung>, v18 n37, 14 September 1902, pp304-305 (https://books.google.com/books?id=w...)
appears to give the earliest, most complete, score of the 15.0-0-0 version:
1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 b6 4.Nf3 Bb7 5.cxd5 exd5 6.e4 dxe4 7.Ne5 Bd6 8.Qg4 Kf8 9.Bc4 Bxe5 10.dxe5 Qd4 11.Bd5 c6 12.Bxe4 Qxe5 13.Bf4 Nf6 14.Qh4 Qe7 15.0-0-0 Ne8 16.Qg3 Na6 17.Rhe1 Rd8 18.Bd5 Qc5 19.Rxe8+ Kxe8 20.Qxg7 cxd5 21.Qxh8+ Kd7 22.Qxh7 Kc8 23.Qxf7 d4 24.Qe6+ Rd7 25.Qg8+ Rd8 26.Qg4+ Rd7 27.Be3 Bxg2 28.Rxd4 Bc6 29.Rxd7 Bxd7 30.Qg8+ 1-0In fact all of the contemporary versions of this game (British Chess Magazine, Philadelphia Public Ledger, etc.) all give the 15.0-0-0 version (usually ending at 28.Rxd4), so it really looks like the tournament book published the wrong score with 15.0-0 and then juggled the ending moves for it to make sense. |
|
Dec-15-22 | | stone free or die: <<jn> Does anyone know why the <Schachzeitung der Münchner Neueste Nachrichten> differs from the tournament book?> Looks as if the most likely explanation is the one your provided yourself. Normally we try to take the tb version as definitive, but the 15...Ne8 move really gives the correct version away (I think). |
|