Dec-25-04 | | Whitehat1963: Interesting game from the player of the day. |
|
Oct-20-20
 | | Phony Benoni: Played on bard 5 of the match between the Manhattan CC and Marshall CC in the final round of the Metropolitan Chess League, March 25, 1939. <American Chess Bulletin>, March / April 1939, p. 36. |
|
Oct-21-20
 | | GrahamClayton: <Phony Benoni>
Played on bard 5 of the match between the Manhattan CC and Marshall CC in the final round of the Metropolitan Chess League, March 25, 1939. <Phony Benoni>,
Shows the strength of the two clubs when such strong players as Denker and Marshall are playing on Board 5. |
|
Nov-12-20
 | | Phony Benoni: Sorry for the typo. It was Board 4, not Board 5. And if you're wondering why in the world Marshall was on board 4, Boards 1-3 were Reuben Fine, Samuel Reshevsky, and reigning club champion Milton Hanauer. Marshall, at age 61, had lost a step or two. And now imagine what he was like in his prime. |
|
Nov-13-20 | | sudoplatov: Stockfish has Black ahead by move 12. By more 26, Black us up about a Rook. |
|
Nov-13-20 | | sudoplatov: Some from Marshall's prime:
Janowski vs Marshall, 1912
Marshall vs Capablanca, 1909
Marshall vs Chigorin, 1905
Marshall vs Schlechter, 1902
Marshall vs Maroczy, 1903
Marshall vs Rubinstein, 1908
Marshall vs Rubinstein, 1911
Marshall vs Schlechter, 1912
Marshall vs O Bernstein, 1914
Tarrasch vs Marshall, 1914
Reti vs Marshall, 1924
Marshall vs Bogoljubov, 1924
Nimzowitsch vs Marshall, 1925
Marshall vs B Verlinsky, 1925
Nimzowitsch vs Marshall, 1927
Nimzowitsch vs Marshall, 1927
Marshall vs Rubinstein, 1928
Marshall vs Nimzowitsch, 1930
Marshall vs Rubinstein, 1930 |
|
Nov-13-20 | | Granny O Doul: I wonder what the draw by repetition rules were at this time and place. |
|
Nov-14-20
 | | Phony Benoni: <Granny O'Doul> I assume you're talking about the position after the moves B29, B31 and B33. By today's standards, White can claim a draw (third occurrence of position with same player to move). It's possible the players did not consider this a threefold repetition because the first move of the sequence was a capture and therefore "different". Today this is not a consideration since we judge by repetition of "position", not "moves". It's also possible that Denker didn't want the draw. This game was part of a match for the Metropolitan League title. Denker's team eventually lost 11-6, so he may have been trying to salvage a win if at all possible. Finally, it's just possible the players forgot about the rules for a moment. This has been know to happen. The phenomenon, of course, is unknown among kibitzers who, not being caught up in the heat of battle, have the time and spare brain power to spend on such trivialities. I've done it enough myself. It's hard to resist the temptation to know more about chess than Denker or Marshall. |
|
|
|
|