chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Richard Teichmann vs Jacques Mieses
Vienna (1903), Vienna AUH, rd 1, May-02
King's Gambit: Accepted. Bishop's Gambit Bogoljubow Variation (C33)  ·  0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 27 more Teichmann/J Mieses games
sac: 23...Rxe5 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
Jan-25-04
Premium Chessgames Member
  Benzol: A great winning move. 28...b5 forces 29.♕xb5 after which 29...♕e2+ wins at once.
Dec-04-05  Cogano: Well, I'm going to go out on a limb here and expose my great ignorance of chess, which is to be expected I guess, since I've only read a few books on it(none really indepth)& barely played any games to get any experience!

I actually didn't think of playing Qe2+. For one thing I didn't know how to play after that, and for another thing I thought I could get away with winning without exchanging queens:

29)Qxb5 Rd5+; 30)Ke1 f2+; 31)Rxf2 Qe4+; 31)Re2(Qe2 & black mates!) Qxf4 & if say 32)Rxe6, then: 32)... Qd2+; 33)Kf1 Rf5+; 34)Kg1 Qd1+; 35)Re1 Qxe1+; 36)Qf1 Qxf1 mate(or just staright & simple 35)Qf1)or 35)Kg2 Qf3+; 36)Kg1 Rg5X. What do you think? & how would you propose one continue after Qe2+?

On a separate note, since I'm replying to you Paul, I wonder if you'd be good enough to educate me on something, concerning your games. I'm rather ignorant of chess theory, tactics etc. So, is it simply your style to trade off pieces A.S.A.P.? Or have you learned that for both openings, as different as they're from each other, that it's the best thing to do, when playing black, to get the best fighting chance? Do kindly forgive my igno-rance. As I do not wish you to feel like you're mentally stooping to such a level to help me, as if you were being asked to help with addition & sub -traction problems by someone you expected to know at least a first year university's worth of Calculus! Thank you most kindly for your anticipated patience, tolerance, understanding, consideration, & assistance. Take very good care and have yourself a most joyous day, every day.

Dec-04-05  Rama: It is an interesting position. 28 ... Qe2+, does not work because white is not compelled to trade Q's, and can play 29 Kd1 .... At this point black has no time to play 29 ... f2, because the Re5 is hanging.

29 ... b5, gets the white Q away from its protection, so white IS compelled to trade after 30 Qxb5 Qe2+, and now 31 Qxe2 fe+, 32 Ke1 ef=Q+, 33 Kxf1 Rf5!, wins the Bishop due to the pin. This leaves black a Rook up.

It is always good to see black win a K's Gambit. I thought 15 ... Qd5, was very good. It initiated the winning maneuver which was the centralization of the Rooks. This culminated in the N-sac which opened the white King to the piece attack.

Dec-04-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  Benzol: <Cogano> First off don't worry about feeling silly about asking what you think might be a silly question. The only really silly question is the one you don't ask.

If you look at the position you'll see that the White Queen is defending the Rook at f1. The White Queen is defended by the pawn at b3. The idea of 28...b5 is to force the queen to an undefended square. If White plays 29.♕d3 then Black pins and wins the Queen with 29...♖d5. So the only reasonable reply is 29.♕xb5 since white still has to defend his rook. With 29...♕e2 as well as being check Black is now threatening to take the undefended White Queen on b5 so White must play 30.♕xe2. Black now replies 30...fxe2 check, forking the White King and Rook.

Play could then continue

31.♔e1 exf1=♕ double check
32.♔xf1 ♖f5 pins and wins the f4 Bishop.

Following your line

29.♕xb5 ♖d5+
30.♔e1 f2+
31.♖xf2 ♕e4+
32.♖e2 ♕xf4

Now if I were white I'd play here

33.♕e8+ ♕f8 (forced)
34.♕xe6+ ♕f7 (♔h8 loses the Rook)
35.♕c8+ ♕f8
36.♕e6+ and White can draw by perpetual check if he wants to.

Also note that White can't win with
36.♖e8 because of 36...♖e5+ winning either White's Rook or Queen.

Regarding exchanging off pieces I suppose it is more my style than anything else. My reason for doing so was to reduce my opponents possibilities in those games. Both of my opponents were good players and I have a great deal of respect for them, so exchanging while keeping an edge seemed my best choice to me. I actually missed an opportunity as <Von Krolock> pointed out in the Sermek game. See Drazen's thread for an explanation about that.

Dec-06-05  Cogano: Firstly, I can't begin to thank you, Benzol, enough. You've been most kind, gracious, patient, tolerant, understanding, considerate & helpful. Thank you for that and for the free lessons. I felt quite dismal when you pointed out the fork of fxe2+, as I had missed it. Just goes to show how little experience I have both with respect to understanding tactics as well as playing chess! :( Oh well. Even with my own line, I completely missed Qe8+. I guess one of the things that contributes to my "missing" certain moves is that I haven't had enough experience to teach me the value of exchanging pieces, even the Q's! So when I look at a position, my first instincts are to look for other "non-exchange" solutions. A number of the games I really admire do involve exchanges, but they're really more sacrifices, first of pieces (N, R etc.), then the queen, as a grand finale. But I've noticed that in all of these "sacrifice" games, the sacrifice is forced. To ignore the white piece that just moved to (or captured a pawn or piece) on a square leads to a great loss of material (or even mate). And capturing the piece just serves to open up the files, ranks & diagonals to allow the mating attack to occur!

With respect to your games, I agree. If they're as good and strong as you describe them, then allowing them to retain many pieces to attack you with wouldn't be a very good strategy at all. So I must agree with your assess-ment. As for the missed opportunity (which I've yet to check), all players(grandmasters, and even geniuses, included) will miss at least one oppor-tunity throughout a given game, because they're human & can't be expected to be aware of and remember every single possible thought, idea etc. that occurs to them, that the position inspires. So, as far as I'm concerned, it's okay, and human.

Dec-06-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  Benzol: <Cogano> Don't feel dismal about missing something. We learn by doing and experience is something that can't be looked up in a book or downloaded onto a screen. One way to improve is to study master games and this is definitely the place for that. Try solving the daily problem. Mondays are the easier ones and they get progressively harder as the week unfolds. Also there are many kibitzers here who are willing to help you so don't be afraid to ask.

:)

Dec-25-05  Cogano: <Benzol> Firstly, I apologize for the delay of this reply. I've only learned how to keep track of my kibbitzing. So I've had trouble remembering what I've kibbitzed, when and where. As for the puzzles, I'm having trouble adjusting to them, because the puzzles I'm used to are proper puzzles of a set position and a set number of pieces for White & Black. Whereas the puzzles here are positions taken from an actual game. So there isn't a set solution for something that someone composed. But rather the "solution" is what White or Black decided to play in that position. And that is open to interpretation, since you can never be sure that he/she will play a "reasonable" move, as opposed to something bizarre. So I've had trouble figuring out this site's puzzles' solutions. & as I said before, so long as I can't afford to join a club & so long as I continue to have trouble figuring my way around websites & the Int- ernet in general, I'll continue to have
trouble gaining playing experience, I'm sad to say. Anyway, thank you for your help. From the fact that there are only 2 of your games on the site, am I to take it that you've stopped playing competitive chess? If yes, then why, if you don't mind my asking? Season's Greetings and Happy New Year.
Dec-26-05
Premium Chessgames Member
  Benzol: <Cogano> No, I don't mind you asking. I haven't exactly given up competitive chess but my work commitments have meant my giving up club chess and limiting my other chess activities. Also one of the stipulations regarding uploaded games is that at least one of players should be rated 2200 or better. I'm not that highly rated so I don't get to meet that many highly rated players, hence the number of games is quite low. Roger Perry has an FIDE rating of 2131 and Drazen Sermek is of course a GM. Hopefully the game against Nigel Short will be in the database soon.

Hope you had a good Christmas and all the best for the New Year.

Dec-26-05  syracrophy: What a great game, full of tactics and sharp attack and counterattack! Now I wanna shoy some points of this game:

-7.e5? its a mistake, because this pawn its very advanced and can be easily attacked. The correct move was 7.Nd5! Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.d4! with a better position for White

-7...Nh5?! its an unnecesary move. The sharp 7...d5! was the correct move

-17...Rad8 its too slow. 17...e5! was much better

-18...R8f6 its not bad, but the move 18...f3! its better

-19.b3 does nothing. 19.Qe4 was correct

-21.Re5 was risky. I would have preferred 21.Rf3

-23...Rxe5?, offering a piece, its a mistake. If white plays correctly, white will demonstrate that the piece sacrifice its incorrect. 23...Rg5 was correct

-28.Bf4? its a mistake, because it does nothing to avoid the black's move 28. Correct was 28.Kc1!

If white should have played 28.Kc1!, black has nothing better that the perpetual check: 28...Rd5 29.Be3 Qxa2 30.Bxc5 Qa1+ 31.Kc2 Qa2+ 32.Kc1 Qa1+ and its draw by perpetual check

In conclusion I must say that 28.Kc1! would hav shown that the piece sacrifice by black, was a mistake

Dec-26-05  psmith: <syracophy> Interesting analysis. You seem to be right that the piece sacrifice with 23...Rxe5 is incorrect. Besides the perpetual you give, White can play for a win with 28. Kc1 Rd5 29. Rd1!?

I am not sure about your earlier analysis, though. After 7. Nd5 why isn't 7...Nxe4 better for Black? On the other hand, after 7. e5 d5 8. Bb3 how does Black get an advantage? (These questions stem from running the game through Fritz.)

Dec-29-05  Cogano: <Benzol> Thank you for your candidness, your well wishes and your reply. I wonder, would you mind if we we stayed in touch? You can reach me at i_am_inca, through the CAnadian Yahoo service, the emphasis is on "CA", if that's not readily obvious! I'm pretty sure you understand what I mean. Thanks, & look forward to hearing from you. Cheers!
Jan-03-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  Benzol: <Cogano> I'm not sure I do understand. I'm an absolute dinosaur when it comes to computers and the internet. Is that an e-mail address?
Jan-04-06  Cogano: Happy New Year. Thanks for the reply. Yes it is. If you still need me to point it out for you more still, then just say so. I am eager to continue to be able to stay in touch with you, as opposed to the irregularity with which I am able to do so through this site. Take care and I'll talk to you soon.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Vienna 1903
by LaBourdonnaisdeux
Vienna 1903
by docjan
xVienna 1903 received many Kings
by fredthebear

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC