|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-28-16 | | RookFile: Marshall avoided Capa's tactical trap that was set at the end. |
|
Dec-31-18
 | | profK: 13. Qa3 reminds me of Fischer-Spassky game 6, when the black square pin is quite useful after the black bishops are off! |
|
| Dec-31-18 | | hukes70: You are right, <profK>. This game at 13. Qa3 :
click for larger viewFischer - Spassky Game 6 at 13. Qa3 :
click for larger view |
|
| Dec-31-18 | | avidfan: Fischer vs Spassky, 1972 is the link for game 6 |
|
| Jan-01-19 | | cormier:
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 29 dpa done
<1. = (0.00): 13...Bg4> 14.Ne5 Rac8 15.0-0 Be6 16.f4 Rc7 17.Qb2 Ne8 18.Qc2 Nf6 19.f5 Bd7 20.Qd2 cxd4 21.cxd4 Rfc8 22.a5 Be8 23.Rab1 Rc3 24.Qb2 R8c7 25.Qd2 Rc8 26.Qb2 <2. = (0.00): 13...Be6> 14.0-0 Rac8 15.Rfb1 Rc7 16.dxc5 Nd7 17.c6 Qxa3 18.Rxa3 bxc6 19.a5 Nc5 20.Bc2 Ne4 21.Bxe4 dxe4 22.Ng5 Bd5 23.Ra4 c5 24.Nxe4 Bc6 25.Rc4 Bd5 26.Ra4 Bc6 |
|
| Jan-01-19 | | sudoplatov: I think that Marshall wrote (in "Marshall's Chess Swindles") something to the effect that his opening and middlegame procedure was a hailed as a "new idea in the Queen's Gambit." He didn't say what was that procedure. Was it the Qa3 (later used by Fischer and a main idea for White against Hanging Pawns) or the attack withe a4, and a5? |
|
Aug-12-19
| | NM JRousselle: Marshall had terrible records against Alekhine, Capablanca and Lasker (so did just about everyone else!). However, people forget how good Marshall really was. In this game for example, he plays near perfection. Compare his moves to Stockfish's 1st choices. |
|
| Sep-25-19 | | AliSawalha: 26.Rb6 was blunder |
|
| Apr-24-20 | | Chesgambit: b6?! Bg4! |
|
| Apr-24-20 | | Chesgambit: Rb6 is not blunder just dubious |
|
| Sep-14-20 | | zenwabi: Capablanca annotates this game at p. 81 of his CHESS FUNDAMENTALS, Everyman Chess edition. |
|
| Sep-19-20 | | RandomVisitor: <cormier> and I agree that black's slide started as early as move 13, when better choices were available:
click for larger viewStockfish_20091507_x64_modern:
42/56 09:23 0.00 13...Bg4 14.Qxc5 Qxc5 15.dxc5 Bxf3 16.gxf3 Nd7 17.Ke2 Nxc5 18.Rhd1 Rfd8 19.a5 Rac8 20.Bf5 Rc6 21.Be4 Rcd6 22.Bc2 g6 42/54 09:23 0.00 13...Be6 14.0-0 Rfc8 15.Rfb1 Rc7 16.dxc5 Nd7 17.Nd4 Nxc5 18.Be2 Ne4 19.Qxe7 Rxe7 20.Rc1 Rc8 21.c4 dxc4 22.Nxe6 fxe6 |
|
| Sep-19-20 | | RandomVisitor: Black might have played differently at move 5:
click for larger viewStockfish_20091507_x64_modern:
45/58 27:54 0.00 5...h6 6.Bh4 0-0 7.Nf3 b6 8.Be2 dxc4 9.Bxc4 c5 10.0-0 cxd4 11.Nxd4 Bb7 12.Qe2 Ne4 13.Bxe7 Qxe7 14.Nxe4 Bxe4 44/50 27:54 0.00 5...0-0 6.Nf3 h6 7.Bxf6 Bxf6 8.Rc1 dxc4 9.Bxc4 Nd7 10.Ne4 c5 11.0-0 cxd4 12.Nxf6+ Nxf6 13.Qxd4 b6 14.Rfd1 Qe7 |
|
| Sep-19-20 | | RandomVisitor: Black would be doing ok after the suggested improvement 14...Rb8:
click for larger viewStockfish_20091507_x64_modern:
NNUE evaluation using nn-03744f8d56d8.nnue enabled <55/65 2:10:26 +0.11 15.0-0 Be6> 16.Rfb1 Rfc8 17.axb6 axb6 18.Qb2 g6 19.h3 c4 20.Bc2 Kg7 21.Kf1 Qb7 22.Ke2 Ra8 23.Rxa8 Rxa8 24.Qxb6 Qxb6 |
|
| Sep-19-20 | | RandomVisitor: Things likely start getting harder for black at move 15:
click for larger viewStockfish_20091507_x64_modern:
NNUE evaluation using nn-03744f8d56d8.nnue enabled <54/73 3:05:58 +0.69 15...Rab8 16.Ne5 Qc7 17.Rfb1> Bc8 18.h3 Nd7 19.Nf3 Bb7 20.axb6 axb6 21.Qb2 Bc6 22.Bf5 g6 23.Bxd7 Bxd7 24.Qb3 c4 |
|
| Sep-19-20 | | RandomVisitor: Almost game over by move 17:
click for larger viewStockfish_20091507_x64_modern:
NNUE evaluation using nn-03744f8d56d8.nnue enabled <42/65 06:34 +1.78 17...Nf6 18.dxc5 bxc5 19.Rb5> g6 20.a6 Bc6 21.Rxc5 gxf5 22.Nd4 Ng4 23.g3 Ne5 24.f4 Rab8 25.Re1 Nf3+ 26.Nxf3 Qe7 |
|
| Feb-08-23 | | Messiah: Excellent game! |
|
| Aug-31-23 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: <profK: 13. Qa3 reminds me of Fischer-Spassky game 6, when the black square pin is quite useful after the black bishops are off!> Of course, Marshall is the originator of the move in master play, but it was adopted by Capablanca himself in the world championship, half a century before Fischer v Spassky: Capablanca vs Lasker, 1921 
click for larger view |
|
| Aug-31-23 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: <zenwabi: Capablanca annotates this game at p. 81 of his CHESS FUNDAMENTALS, Everyman Chess edition.> I owned a copy of that book many years ago, but made the mistake of lending it to someone, together with two other chess books, and when I got them back, Capablanca's masterpiece was missing. Consequently, it is now a few decades since I last had a look at it. I think we can be fairly certain that Fischer read the book when he was a teenager. |
|
| Jul-12-24 | | Mathematicar: I'm pretty sure Fischer knew by heart all of Capablanca's tournament games. Capablanca's notations in Chess Fundamentals are pretty short, but they rarely lack the core features of every given position and it is on the student to learn the rest of variations. I think that this is the book for 1200-1600 Elo players, but I think that even 1700-1800 Elo players can learn something from it. It's a classic, just like Lasker's Manual of Chess, and every chess player should read these books for universal chess education, if nothing more. |
|
Jul-12-24
 | | Sally Simpson: Chess Fundamentals has a proven track. Every player pre-1980 would have been familiar with it. When club members pass away they donate their chess books to the Edinburgh chess club. We have countless copies of 'Fundamentals' the trouble is they are in descriptive. If you are looking for an algebraic version do not go near 'Chess Fundamentals ' by Nick de Firmian (Random House, New York, 2006) 9 games with Capablaca's notes have been left out, or the one brought out by Emereo Publishing. In the latter version they have no diagrams and because Capablanca uses set positions with diagrams the book is totally useless. See; 'Capablanca Book Destroyed'
https://www.chesshistory.com/winter... |
|
Jul-12-24
 | | perfidious: <Geoff>, never read it, same as I never went cover to cover with <My System> or Lasker's <Manual>, somehow managing to become a somewhat competent player despite those shortcomings. |
|
Jul-13-24
 | | offramp: <Sally Simpson: ...When club members pass away they donate their chess books to the Edinburgh chess club ... See; 'Capablanca Book Destroyed'> It's strange that publishing companies have so many problems with converting descriptive to standard. How hard could it be?? |
|
Jul-13-24
| | Sally Simpson: Hi Perfidious,
Never got into 'My System' I had to wait till the Quality Chess version for a much better translation. The original 'My System' is another book along with Alekhine's volumes of best games which everyone seems to have had. These three books along with 'Fundamentals' added together we must have at least 50 well thumbed copies - no exaggeration. Lasker's Manuel is an exercise in grandiloquence and his armchair philosophy. He was one of the greatest players ever but stick a pen in his pompous hand...Good Grief. I gave up on most of it. I had no idea what he was blethering on about. Lasker describing the Reti (1.Nf3) “A spiritual opening which possesses, it is true, not so, much force as variety, but which is exceedingly plastic and therefore susceptible of being turned into many wholly different shapes.” The meat is when he notes up games, then he remembers this is a chess book and what you get is excellent and can almost forgive the bombastic prose he more than occasionally slips into. 'Fundamentals' filled a gap or two. An honest attempt by a gifted player trying to explain his gift and he does a reasonable job. Chernev and Reinfeld (IMO) do it better. |
|
| Jul-13-24 | | Mathematicar: I enjoyed reading Lasker's book and I liked his style of writing. Have in mind: it's written in 1925 when art and science flourished and it's written by famous mathematician, after all. It is not for everyone, though. Of course, you don't have to read it to become a good (even first-class) player. But... imagine to never learn about about the ancient Egyptian pyramids. Lacking. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
