|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-09-04 | | AdrianP: <Taidanii> 41... Qxb6?? 42. Rh1+ Bh6 (42...Kg8 Rh8#; 42...Rh3 changes nothing) 43. Qxf2+ Kh8 44. Rxh6# |
|
| Jan-09-04 | | euripides: 41 Rb6 Qxb6 42 Rh1+ Bh6 (or 42...Kg7 43 Rh8 mate) 43 Qf7+ Kh8 44 Rxh6 mate. |
|
| Jan-09-04 | | AdrianP: <euripides> "...at vividus Umber haeret hians, iam iamque tenet..." ;-) |
|
| Jan-09-04 | | Hidden Skillz: ye euripides dats what i thought too..eating the rook on b6 is game over.. |
|
| Feb-09-04 | | jmcvay1: That game should not have ended then |
|
| May-15-04 | | apple head: This was drawn by repetician |
|
| Jul-23-04 | | cjhasbrouck: I think it's possible that Kasparov could've taken the H-pawn on 34... 34... Kxh7
35. Qh4+ Kg8
36. Rh1 Bg7
37. Rcxd6 Rxd6
38. Rxd6
Anybody see any problems with this? I know it's just a series of exchanges but I'm curious anyway. |
|
| Jul-23-04 | | Cyphelium: <cjhasbrouck> Well, there is a problem with your variation. Playing 38. Rxd6 is not possible, since you put that rook on h1 at move 36. Anyway, after 34.- Kxh7, interesting is 35. cxb4. The obvious point is that black cannot take the pawn with 35.- Rxb4, since then the rook on d8 is lost after 36. Qh4+. The other point is that white gets his knight back into play (and to the best square too!) after, say, 35.- Kg8 36. Nc3 Rxb4 37. Nd5 Rb7. Then 38. Nf6+ Kg7 39. Nh5+ is likely to lead to a perpetual, since black can hardly go for 39.- Kh8 40. Rc8, but on the other hand white doesn't get anywhere after 39.- Kh7 40. Rh1 Bh6 41. Qh4 Qe3 either. So I agree with you, taking the h-pawn seems possible. But it seems white can go for a draw then. Maybe Kasparov wasn't interested in a draw at that point? |
|
| Jul-23-04 | | JSYantiss: applehead, nowhere in this game was a position repeated three times.....this game was NOT drawn by repetition. |
|
| Jul-23-04 | | hongisto24: do you remember that Leko scolded Kaspy for trying to win this on time in a drawn position?? |
|
| Dec-11-04 | | dbquintillion: anyone know of any other games with four queens? i played a game against my brother a year or two ago that had four queens on the board for 6 or 7 moves in the middle game until i blundered one of mine. |
|
| Dec-11-04 | | drukenknight: db look up Fischer/Petrosian, back in 1962 I think. I think its carokann but maybe french youll find it. |
|
Dec-11-04
 | | Chessical: <dbquintillion> I believe that <drukenknight> is referring to: Fischer vs Petrosian, 1959 You may also be interestd in thisn game collection:
Game Collection: Multi-queens! |
|
| Dec-12-04 | | dbquintillion: <chessical> Thanks! I figured there was such a collection but I couldn't find it. |
|
| Dec-12-04 | | iron maiden: <dbquintillion> You also might want to look at this five-queen game: Alekhine vs NN, 1915 |
|
| Jul-12-05 | | fgh: A very complex battle. Also an early example of Leko's great defensive skills. |
|
| Oct-21-05 | | alexandrovm: <fgh: A very complex battle. Also an early example of Leko's great defensive skills.> that he lacked a bit in the San Luis tournament... |
|
| Jun-11-06 | | spirit: any games with >5 queens on board????? |
|
| Sep-05-06 | | Kukka: There is a game "Nesis - Koshnitzkiy" (or something like that) with 6 queens on board but its authenticity is uncertain. The other >5 queen games "Van Hall - Krabbe" and "Sumpter - King" are definitely made up. |
|
| Oct-11-06 | | positionalgenius: A great fighting game between these two. |
|
| Aug-17-09 | | WhiteRook48: ...and he was winning |
|
| Mar-01-11 | | Blunderdome: Wow, what a game. |
|
Nov-19-14
 | | Bubo bubo: <Kukka: There is a game "Nesis - Koshnitzkiy" (or something like that) with 6 queens on board but its authenticity is uncertain. The other 5+ queen games "Van Hall - Krabbe" and "Sumpter - King" are definitely made up.> That's right, but in recent times there are two genuine games featuring six queens: E Szalanczy vs Thi Mai Hung Nguyen, 2009
D Anton Guijarro vs A Franco, 2011 |
|
Jul-26-15
 | | MissScarlett: <At the end of the game an unpleasant incident occurred. I had five minutes left, Leko had ten seconds, and he decided to claim a draw in view of a three-fold repetition of the position. But he did this incorrectly: with me to move he suddenly stopped the clocks and appealed to me and the arbiters, stating, moreover, that Black was trying to win on time (as if he had not done this with Kramnik in an endgame with rook against bishop, 10th match game (rapid), Budapest 2001). My opponent's behaviour made me terribly angry, but in the end the arbiters calmed things down and recorded the draw. A little later Peter apologised to me - apparently his trainer and father-in-law Arshak Petrosian had had a few words with him.> (Garry Kasparov on Garry Kasparov; Part III: 1993-2005, p.404) Unfortunately, Garry omits to tell us if he was trying to win on time. There's also the small matter that it was Kramnik not Leko who won the cited game on time: Leko vs Kramnik, 2001 As for the game notes, I'll just give the final one:
<73...Qf6?
Again missing a win, which would have been achieved by 73...f6 74.Qe7+ Kh6 75.Qaf8+ (75.Qef8+ Qg7+!) 75...Kg5, when White has nothing better than 76.Qc5+ Qxc5+ 77.Qxc5+ Qf5 78.Qg1+ Qg4, etc.> |
|
Jul-26-15
| | MissScarlett: I see now another error - <73...Qf6? [...]> This should be 74...Qf6. Garry, or whoever, incorrectly gives the score as <71.Qd5 Qg6+ 72.Kc7 g1Q 73.Qxe5+ Qf6>, which omits the intermediate 71...Qc2+ 72.Kd6 Qg6+ 73.Kc7, and the positions coalesce. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
