|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-18-06
 | | patzer2: In addition to the draw described by <DexterGordon> after <36. Qxc4 c6 37. Nb6+ Kc7 38. Qc5 Qxg3+ 39. Bg2 Bxh3, 40. Nd5+ Kb8! =>, Black also has draw by perpetual after <36. Qxc4> Qxg3+ 37. Bg2 Kb8! (not 37...Bxh3?? 38. Nb6+  ) 38. Qc5 Bxh3 39. Qf8+ Ka7 40. Qc5+ Kb8 = 1/2 1/2. |
|
Jan-18-06
 | | kevin86: I need a compass on this one:did white blow a win or did he play just good enough to lose? Capa is so good that even in the future,he can change a game's outcome :) |
|
| Jan-18-06 | | Stonewaller2: Me, I would've snagged the ♘. Then Capa would have cleaned up my ♙s with 36. ♕xc4 ♕xg3+ 37. ♗g2 ♗xh3 38. ♕e2 ♔b8 followed by ... ♗xg2 and ... ♕e1+. So all in all a pretty wishful shot by Marshall here, but what else is there against The Machine? Hey <DexterGordon>, just wanted to say I really liked your show at George Washington U. in 1991 or 92 I think it was, remember you started off with a dozen or so choruses of "Long Ago and Far Away" and provided an lesson in leading by example for us and your sidemen? ;) |
|
Jan-18-06
| | beenthere240: 39. Qxb2 Qe1+
40. Kh2 Qe6 and white now threatens the Knight and has 2 passed pawns. However, I also think that passive defense with 36. Kh2 would have lost in the long run. I think Marshall didn't realize that after 39. Ne3 Na4 White could force the exchange of queens and be up 3 pawns. |
|
Jan-18-06
| | patzer2: <Steppenwolf: Patzer 2, in your analysis 39...Qd6 is much superior to QxQ, and Capablanca would have gone for it.> I think you're correct. After 39. Qe6! Qd6! 40. Nxf6 Nd1! 41. Qe5 Qc6+!, Fritz 8 indicates Black equalizes with counter chances in an unbalanced position. These and other complications following 36. Bg4! Qxg3+ 37. Kh1 Kb8 38. Bxe6 Nxb2 39. Qe6! are IMO a good reason for White to prefer the small but lasting advantage following 36. Kh2! |
|
Jan-18-06
| | patzer2: <beenthere240> <I also think that passive defense with 36. Kh2 would have lost in the long run.> Do you have some analysis to show 36. Kh2! loses? After 36. Kh2! White protects the g-pawn and (depending on Black's reply) threatens 37. Qxc4  or 37. Nxf6 or 37. Bg4 with a clear advantage. After 36. Kh2!, IMO White, with strong play, has zero chance of losing and it is Black who is fighting to hold the draw. |
|
Jan-18-06
 | | LIFE Master AJ: <patzer2>
I have the (red) book on this tournament. Have you ever seen it? Its excellent, but expensive. (The average chess buff should probably spend his money on a book he will use more or has greater instructional value.) |
|
Jan-18-06
| | patzer2: <LIFE Master AJ> I haven't seen the book, but it sounds interesting. Does it offer any insights to indicate whether Marshall missed a win or if Capablanca had a draw in hand all along? I can't figure out how Chess Informant included this as their first example of a winning pin in their Encyclopedia of Chess Middle Games. Your thoughts? |
|
| Jan-18-06 | | Koster: Well the pin does win a piece. Operation successful, but the patient died. |
|
Jan-18-06
 | | Richard Taylor: This has White to play so I assumed White was going to win saw either Qxe6 (interesting but didn't look like a win) or Bg4 (I thought bg4 was the move - then left it -then it turns out Black wins!! Lol The postion should have ne set up with the White King on g2 for a good problem involving a pin etc. The actual game could have been put on somewhere else some other time. I only looked cursorily at this however - but some people might have spent hours on it. |
|
Jan-18-06
| | Richard Taylor: <patzer2> Why dont you throw away that huge encylopedia of chess problems away? -you'll never learn anything about chess looking up the answers in a book...! |
|
| Jan-18-06 | | offramp: <Richard Taylor: <patzer2> Why dont you throw away that huge encylopedia of chess problems away? -you'll never learn anything about chess looking up the answers in a book...!> LOL. Like the great man said:
"You can sit and read your books all day,
But eventually you will have to sit and play..." |
|
| Jan-18-06 | | JBF: 38.Qe6 any comments? |
|
Jan-19-06
| | patzer2: <You'll never learn anything about chess looking up the answers in a book...!> What prompted this? Are you feeling poorly or having a bad day? If so, I hope you get well soon. |
|
Jan-19-06
| | patzer2: <offramp> I too am a great fan of Lasker, but I had to learn about him from a book. |
|
Jan-19-06
| | Richard Taylor: <patzer2> I really am worried for your chess -as I (myself) (altho it's true that I am not you) found that I improved greatly when I worked or tried to work moves out by myself -it took time but l slowly I got better. I think you should try and risk working things out for yourself -and eventually you will see some of these combos wihout a book or whatever. I mean this sincerely as I want to assist your chess growth... Regards, Richard |
|
Jan-19-06
| | Richard Taylor: But dont get me wrong I also studied a lot of chess books... |
|
Jan-19-06
| | patzer2: <Richard Taylor> Appreciate your concern. I'm your age and have played and analyzed thousands of games on my own. However, I find that I can facilitate my learning by utilizing books, the internet, computers and other resources to try and find the best moves in a game position. I enjoy using my own and other resources to find potential flaws in Chess books, puzzzles and games, as is the case with the Informant puzzle position from this daily puzzle. As a player, I found that my greatest improvement came by studying books on the middle game and endgame, in conjunction with books of gambit and Open games (Mora Gambit, Benko Gambit, Ruy Lopez Marshall Attack, Tarrasch, Two Knights etc.). In a short time my rating soarded over 600 rating points after this study. I found that I was no longer losing to tactical shots, and in fact was able to make threats and pull off tactical wins against class A and lower players with surprising ease. And on rare occasion I could get a Master or Expert scalp. My work with the Masters and Experts I knew found one common theme -- they combined their talent with a lot of hard work and study of Chess Books. Bobby Fischer reigned supreme when I started to become active in tournament Chess, and aside from extraordinary talent most of his success is attributable to his study of Chess Books and games. |
|
Jan-19-06
| | Richard Taylor: <patzer2> I was pulling your leg initially and expected you might fly into a rage (when I was going to tell you it was all a silly joke -lol) -my "point" is that you seem a bit too serious about these puzzles - that said it was bit naughty of me - you are obviously a very keen Chess player - I have also studied many Chess books -actually have seen that big book somewhere - well I thnk I have seen the one by Alburt - I also have quite a collection of my own books - I spend less time searching the net although I go to couple of tactics sites -one just recently found... When I was at my best I was also very fit and feeling great in myself meantally (all was going well at home and in my family) as well as conatantly studying chess positions and then I went through many games by Karpov - which is interesting as I could never play 'postional chess' as such (OTB) (of course tactics and strategy etc interact - after the study of Karpov etc and certain kinds of openings I had quite a bit of success and was around the 1800s and beat a couple of IMs (I thnk the study of Karpov gave me the ground or base from which to build my games - from where I could use tactics if need be -anc without memorising openings as such I got a 'feel' for various openings etc or positions) (but also playing over say Alekhine even one or two of his games would inspire me - so Karpov for reality - Alekhine for dreams!!) - certainly I was snapping at some 2000 level players' heels - but the study of tactics and master games is essential and also the studying of many games of any master including all or as many of his / her games possible including draws etc I got the feel fot ways to handle a game (rather than study games 'all over the place') - It helps to be feeling good also (as I do now) and to be fit - I'm not as fit as I was and I'm older now - and a bit rusty but I want to improve to get into the A grade again... But I have a lot of things going on beside Chess...but I keep coning back to it!! My sense of humour is bit impish but I didn't intend to make fun of you - I expected you would realise I was being silly buggers - This lastest puzzle (game by Judit) is tough one. |
|
Jan-19-06
| | Richard Taylor: <patzer> I probably need to try some gambits -maybe not the Kings but some of those you mentioned - I tried the Tarrasch but didnt have success with it - but I think the Ruy and so on and aggressive lines against the French are best for me.. I used to try to get the Two Knights also and may try that again and have a look at the Marshall - rather than only playing the Sicilian. I also play the Alekhines a lot. |
|
Jan-19-06
| | patzer2: <Richard Taylor> Thanks for sharing that. We seem to have a lot in common. By the way, I have two grown daughters, both of whom played Chess and were scholastic state Chess champions, and both of whom are now married and work in hospitals as nurses. Also, I am the proud Grandfather of a five-year-old grandson, two-year-old granddaughter and a brand new grandson born last week. Despite my obvious over fascination with this game, I have my daughters permission to teach Chess and soccer (I'm also a former soccer coach) to my grandchildren
(the five-year-old was quite the star in his league this fall). |
|
| Jan-19-06 | | DoThinkTwice: I stared at this puzzle, on and off, over the course of a day. I'm new to this, but have sometimes worked Wednesday puzzles. I saw the PIN right away, but I expected that a clear resolution would be evident after no more than a handful of moves. Apparently nobody can even prove that the game is winnable by white. I let the time pass for checking out the answer (I had a perfect score this week! Ha) and then tried to find the game in the data base. I looked at all the (few) games where Marshall beat Capablanca and at all the games where he fought him to a draw--and it did, by that point, seem much more probable that the situation could result in a draw--and then even, just in case I got the names mixed up, started looking at all the games where Capablanca beat Marshall. But that was assuming that Capablanca was playing white!
Very clever, and it was an interesting game, but I think I got "fooled" by your playing on my psychology rather than by any misunderstanding of chess tactics. |
|
| Jan-20-06 | | ketchuplover: There's too much thinking going on here...sigh. |
|
| Jul-29-12 | | PinnedPiece: GTM Score=113, no par yet. First one to try it.
I thought white was winning this in the midgame. I think Marshall let it get away from him. ---- ----
Looking over the kibitzing, in particular <patzer2>'s excellent analysis, I see my suspicions (while playing the side of black in guess the move) were correct. . |
|
| Feb-19-20 | | Straclonoor: <38.Qe6 any comments?>
After this move engines gives only tiny advantage for white - 0.23, 0.25, 0.27 Best move is 38.Bxe6 (done in the game) but it's not enough for win for white. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 37...Kb8