| Jun-01-04 | | GaviaO: I think there's something wrong with the annotation, see: 54.h5 - "Forcing the exchange of queen's."
WHERE are the queen's??? |
|
| Jul-05-04 | | dac1990: I think its supposed to be Rooks. |
|
| Jul-05-04 | | Calli: The annotations are horrible! 37.Rd5! is a fine move, not a "?". Please Chessgames wipe them out. The glaring move here is 35...Nb5? Instead, Black has the fairly obvious 35...Nd5 followed by Rxd6. The knight gets a wonderful position. How does white breakthrough? |
|
| Jul-05-04 | | dac1990: Also, 14.Bxh7 isn't a mistake, it's winning. |
|
| Nov-24-04 | | kostich in time: It is interesting that Vidmar was invoilved in three famous endgames with the Knight vs. rook theme-his game with Alekhine at SanRemo, this game, and, most famous of all, the game with Botvinnik at Groningen,1946, where Botvinnikd knight outplayed Vidmars rook |
|
Nov-24-04
 | | beatgiant: <The glaring move here is 35...Nb5? Instead, Black has the fairly obvious 35...Nd5 followed by Rxd6. The knight gets a wonderful position. How does white breakthrough?> On 35...♘d5 , White can try 36. ♖c6!? so that if 36...♘e3+ 37. ♔f3 ♘xg4 38. hg followed by ♔f3-e4-d5, ♖c7 etc. leads to a rook ending with much more active pieces for White. For example 38...♔f8 39. ♔e4 ♔e8 40. ♔d5 ♔d8 41. a4 and Black's almost in zugzwang. If not 36...♘e3+ , White's hope is to siege the blockaders (try to get king to e4 or rook to e5, etc.) I'm not sure if this wins and I don't have time to analyze more deeply at the moment, but it might help explain Vidmar's choice. |
|
| Oct-05-05 | | posoo: Who is this loon doing the annotating? I enjoy his optimism, but he needs to show us more. I've seen him on several other games with his "A good move!" business. I agree, he should be taken away. |
|
| Jun-09-07 | | sanyas: I like to imagine Mr."good move" as having the voice of Professor Farnsworth from Futurama. It makes it more bearable, somehow. |
|
| Sep-15-07 | | Maynard5: Alekhine in his book included two other similar games as an appendix to this one. The theme is an endgame with two rooks versus rook and knight. One of these is Alekhine-Kashdan, Pasadena, 1932, and should be available in this database. Another interesting example of this type of endgame is Alekhine-Lasker, St. Petersburg, 1914, except of course that Lasker was on the winning side. |
|
| Sep-15-07 | | Benzol: For those who are interested
Alekhine vs Kashdan, 1932
Alekhine vs Lasker, 1914 |
|
| Apr-11-08 | | Alphastar: these annotations are indeed strange. Best to have them removed. |
|
| Jun-04-08 | | ganstaman: For anyone who ever comes by while these annotations are still up, the following should be noted. The actual annotations are only !, ?, ?!, !?,  ,  , etc. However, all of these symbols have meanings that we can put into words, e.g. ! is "a good move" and means "white has a slight advantage" (or something like that).So it all sounds strange, but just look at the symbols being used -- those are the real annotations. |
|
Dec-24-14
 | | FSR: Bled Him Dry. |
|
Mar-23-23
| | FSR: I withdrew the pun and submitted it for the 98-move game Ivkov vs Rellstab, 1950 instead. |
|
| Feb-12-24 | | Sirius69: 35----Nb5? is bad. Better is 35-----Nxa2! leading to a drawish R vs N endgame. |
|
Feb-12-24
| | beatgiant: <Sirius69> It looks very dangerous to let White cut off Black's king on the back rank after 35...Nxa2 36. Rc7 Rxd6 37. Rxa7 Nc1 38. Rf4 f5 39. Rf3 etc., but could you post an example of the drawish R vs N endgame you're seeing? |
|
Feb-13-24
| | beatgiant: 35...Nxa2 36. Rc7 Rxd6 37. Rxa7 <Nc3> looks better than what I posted above, because from there Black's knight can soon get in a position to add pressure on White's d-pawn. That looks to me like it gives good drawing chances for Black. To avoid that, White could try 35...Nxa2 36. Rc7 Rxd6 <37. Rf4> immediately. Here White aims to cut off Black's king while slowing down the return of Black's knight. I believe White should win, but again I'd be very interested in seeing what <Sirius69> found. |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 65.Rxd6+