|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-23-04 | | villasinian: 26.....r x b could have saved the day for black. |
|
Feb-23-04
 | | Honza Cervenka: 26...Rxb1+ would have won the game for black and the same possibility he had even for several moves earlier. |
|
| Feb-23-04 | | drukenknight: some crazy people will even play 6...Qh4+ on you |
|
| Jun-16-04 | | Jesuitic Calvinist: Yes, I agree with Honza - I can't work out why black didn't play Rxb1+ sometime at the end of the game. Apart from that, looking at white's pawn shape as he advances on the king side, it seems to be a very early example of the anti-Sicilian pawn storm that is so familiar to us now. |
|
| Sep-05-04 | | Knight13: Attacking the king side was beautiful. |
|
| Jun-18-06 | | DeepBlade: The opening looks like a KG to RL transposition, very stylish.
The opening is a KGD: Phil def. |
|
| Sep-25-06 | | gauer: When declining the King's Gambit, one strategy says that white gets a good game by transposing into a Spanish Attack, where f4 is played early. One has to love the soul of this pawn chain, beckoning the demise prisoner in chains at the other edge of the board. |
|
| Oct-02-06 | | krdjis: after 22 ...g6, there had yet to be some finagling in order for white to get another shot at black's king. what first looked like a defensive move (22. Qe2) turns out to be the start of another initiative. Beautiful. |
|
| Oct-13-07 | | wolfmaster: 26.? would be a good Tuesday puzzle. |
|
| Nov-28-07 | | nimh: Rybka 2.4 mp, AMD X2 2.01GHz, 10 min per move, threshold 0.33: Philidor 11 mistakes:
13.Be3 -0.11 (13.Nc3 0.40)
14.Nd2 -0.53 (14.0-0 -0.05)
15.g4 -0.62 (15.0-0 -0.03)
18.h4 -0.34 (18.0-0 0.00)
19.Kd1 -0.80 (19.Bd2 0.00)
20.Rb1 -1.20 (20.Qh3 -0.46)
21.Qh5 -1.64 (21.Rb7 0.12)
22.e5 -12.38 (22.Rc1 -1.30)
24.h5 -6.68 (24.Rxb2 -1.87)
25.hxg6 -4.79 (25.Rxb2 0.00)
26.Rxh7 -12.06 (26.Rxb2 2.55)
NN 11 mistakes:
7...Na5 0.62 (7...Qd7 0.23)
14...Nxb2 -0.03 (14...Qa5 -0.53)
15...Nc4 0.00 (15...Qa5 -0.62)
18...Qa5+ 0.00 (18...Rb8 -0.34)
19...Qa3 -0.46 (19...d5 -0.80)
20...Qxa2 0.12 (20...Rfb8 -1.20)
22...g6 -6.81 (22...Rxb1+ -12.38)
23...Rb2 -1.87 (23...Rxb1+ -6.98)
24...c5 0.00 (24...Rxb1+ -6.68)
25...fxg6 2.55 (25...Rxb1+ -4.79)
26...Kxh7 #3 (26...Rxb1+ -12.06) |
|
| Jan-31-08 | | wolfmaster: Nice sacrifice. |
|
| Jan-31-08 | | Petrosianic: You're sure about that? |
|
| Feb-12-08 | | just a kid: Good game,but RxR could give Black a fighting chance,or a win. |
|
Feb-12-08
 | | Phony Benoni: Would it have made a difference had White actually played 20.Rc1 (QR-B1) rather than 20.Rb1 (QR-N1)? The game would seem to make more sense in that case, and the mistake would have been easy to make in tranlating from descriptive to algebraic. |
|
| Feb-13-08 | | just a kid: <Phony Benoni>I couldn't find a difference,but Philidor shouldn't have let his rook stand there. |
|
Jan-02-10
 | | blazerdoodle: It's a cool game alright, but I know why NN never took that blasted b1 rook. They were sitting in a beautiful little restaurant on the Mediterranean with a big carafe of wine discussing something important, maybe business, or the beautiful woman serving them, while staring at the sea... and the wine went down, and someone watching yelled, you missed that move twice already! NN kept - well, it happened to me once. |
|
| Jan-02-10 | | mysql: Could have easily been won by black by taking the rook? |
|
| Sep-28-14 | | Ke2: An awful sacrifice because Rxb1 wins (better is 26. Rxb2). However, you can guess that black didn't see Qh5 in the 1700s. This game took place during the French Revolution! |
|
Sep-25-15
 | | jnpope: Instructional game given by Philidor in <Analyse du jeu des Échecs>, 1750, pp87-91. Philidor does not identify either player. |
|
| Jun-09-16 | | juanhernandez: a mistake !!! |
|
| May-16-21 | | lentil: This game only makes sense if 20 Rb1 is 20 Rc1 (maybe "QR-B1" was mistranslated ?). |
|
May-16-21
 | | fredthebear: The soul of chess: https://www.chesshistory.com/winter... |
|
Jun-25-24
 | | kingscrusher: I agree with GM Ben FineGold - 20.Rc1 makes the game more sensible and plausible. Also <Lentil>. Maybe there can be a correction made for this game a note somewhere about that correction. |
|
Jun-25-24
| | jnpope: I've checked four editions (the 1749 original, the English 1750, the direct translation from English back into French 1750, and the German 1754) and it appears to be 20.Rc1 in all four cases:
<Analyse du jeu des Échecs>, Philidor, London 1749, p109:
"B. La Tour de la Dame à la Caſe de ſon Fou."
<Chess Analysed>, Philidor, London 1750, p90:
"W. The Queen's Rook at its Biſhop's Square."
<Analyse du jeu des Échecs>, Philidor, 1750, p90:
"W. La Tour de la Dame à la Caſe de ſon Fou."
<Die Kunſt im Schachspiel>, Philidor, Strasbourg 1754, p154:
"W. Der Thurn von der Dame auf das Feld ihres Laufers."
I'm changing 20.Rb1 to 20.Rc1. |
|
Jun-25-24
| | jnpope: They all end 28.Qg6 and state that the first player mates next move, so I've also made that change (just to satisfy my OCD). |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 26.Rxh7