|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-19-06 | | TrueBlue: I got Ne1 straight away. Nc5 is weird. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | zb2cr: As others have said, with White having zero prospect of an attack on the Black King, it was easy to see the 46. Nc5 move, breaking communication between the Queen and the Rook. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | ianD: Too easy :-) |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | poachedeggs: Saw the queen's long range defense of a surrounded rook as the issue pretty quickly. Then saw the Q-R cut-off and the added benefit (connected passed pawns) of Nc5. Thanks for the no-Q-sac-on-a-Tuesday. |
|
Sep-19-06
 | | kevin86: At first,I looked for a queen sac at a3,but since black's pieces are otherwise safe,I abandoned it. Then,I saw that the queen's defense of the rook could be blocked by Nc5 and the rook is then trapped. A neat puzzle. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | cade: If Ne1
45...Qb4 46. Nc2 Rxb3 and then Black will win either Whites a or f pawn next. The material won is slighly less. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | YouRang: I suppose that, like others, I saw Nc5 right away to cut off the rook from its defender & winning the exchange. But I then spent a bunch of time looking for something better. Eventually, I "gave up", and discovered I had solved it all along. :-| |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | belka: <backyard_pawn: Upon seeing the solution, I wondered if Black could respond to the text with 46..., Rxb3. > I believe that this is the crux of the puzzle, and it has not been noted in the comments thus far. If the white bishop were on c3 instead of b3, Nc5 would still trap the rook, but the tactic would be a blunder. Whenever you put your own piece en prise for tactics, you can be susceptible to zwischenzug. If your opponent has any forcing threats, he doesn't have to take your piece right away. Here Rxb3 can be met by the pretty Nxb3. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | lvlaple: Yeah, I had Nc5 right away, but the rook is going to be won anyway isn't it? Regardless of White's move the rook is won eventually. Correct me if I am wrong, I don't mean to mislead. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | moonrain: You are right gwarmerdam - nothing! |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | bakuazer: <ahmadov>, yes, I'm from Baku. Isn't that obvious?:) i don't live in Baku though. nice to meet you in this forum. (apologies for the unrelated conversation). |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | syracrophy: Quite easy-I didn't got the answer! :-)
<Nc5!> This move reminds me another brilliant move of interception <Rd4!!>M Cuellar-Gacharna vs Reshevsky, 1967 |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | brainzugzwang: 46.Nc5 is nice and clean, but I saw 46.Rf1 with 47.Ra1 to follow, picking up the rook outright. Am I missing something? |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | unferth: <belka: I believe that this is the crux of the puzzle, and it has not been noted in the comments thus far. If the white bishop were on c3 instead of b3, Nc5 would still trap the rook, but the tactic would be a blunder.> actually, I think in your position after 46 ... Rxc3 47 Rxc3 bxc5 48 dxc5, the three connected passers would likely be fatal to black anyway. |
|
Sep-19-06
 | | OhioChessFan: <brainzugzwang> 47. Ra1 Rxa1 Not sure why, but Nc5 is the first move I looked at. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | YouRang: <lvlaple: Yeah, I had Nc5 right away, but the rook is going to be won anyway isn't it? Regardless of White's move the rook is won eventually.> Perhaps so. Black's position is pretty dreadful any way you look at it -- a bad bishop, a bad knight, and (as you say) a rook that has been hung out to dry. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | unferth: <YouRang: Perhaps so. Black's position is pretty dreadful any way you look at it -- a bad bishop, a bad knight, and (as you say) a rook that has been hung out to dry.> black's down a pawn as well ... the fact that an IM would resign after mere loss of the exchange is a pretty good indicator that his position is thoroughly compromised, I'd say. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | scorpius: This was way easier than yesterday's puzzle |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | cade: <I saw 46.Rf1 with 47.Ra1 to follow, picking up the rook outright. Am I missing something?> Are you freaking kidding me? Black will just exchange Rooks then. |
|
Sep-19-06
| | OhioChessFan: <Cade> most of us have had a case of board blindness. I always try to gently correct a person who has made an obvious error. Sometimes they are at work, and don't have a board, get distracted after one move, etc. Sometimes they just blunder. It's happened to me, and I know the shoe will be on the other foot some day. |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | backyard pawn: Thank you <belka> and <bright1>. You're right on. It's so obvious once you see it! |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | vibes43: I saw 46. ne1 was winning and took it. The clock was ticking (my boss could catch me with chessgames on my screen any second) |
|
| Sep-19-06 | | haconly: Its just so easy |
|
| Sep-20-06 | | ahmadov: <bakuazer: <ahmadov>, yes, I'm from Baku. Isn't that obvious?:) i don't live in Baku though. nice to meet you in this forum. (apologies for the unrelated conversation).> You can continue posting on my forum. It is really nice to meet you here. |
|
| Sep-20-06 | | ahmadov: <Bakuazer> Here you can talk about various topics. It is permitted by <CG> User: ahmadov |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
