Nov-26-05
 | | OhioChessFan: "Original and by no means bad" is high praise from Nimzo. |
|
| Jan-10-16 | | TheFocus: An offhand game played in Kristiania, Sweden on April 28, 1921. Nimzowitsch annotated it in <Die Praxis meines Systems>, pg. 154-156. |
|
| Jan-10-16 | | TheFocus: Oops. Norway, not Sweden. |
|
Apr-22-17
 | | sachistu: The Rudolph (Hamburg) German edition and the On the Road to Chess Mastery both give the location as Oslo. However <TheFocus> the date you referenced does not seem to be present. This is at least 2 Nimzowitsch games that have conflicting location information e.g. Oslo or Kristiania depending on the source. |
|
| Apr-22-17 | | Paarhufer: My edition of <Die Praxis meines Systems> presents this game on pages 119-120, and there it is described as: <Gespielt 1921 in Oslo als freie Uhrenpartie>. As often the guy sailing under the Jolly Roger seems to ... PS: The game has deserved more attention. |
|
Apr-23-17
| | sachistu: The English edition of Chess Praxis from Dover, with translation by J. Du Mont, lists the game on page 221-224 as being played in Oslo and an 'Informal Game with Clocks'. <Paarhufer> unless I'm mistaken, 'Uhrenpartie' translates roughly as 'clock game'. Actually, I have to amend my earlier comment regarding the location of this game as regards the Skjoldager and Nielsen book on Nimzowitsch "On the Road to Chess Mastery, 1886-1924". On page 317, in a footnote to his visit to Norway in 1921... "Kristiania, now known as Oslo. After Oslo burned down in 1624, it was moved a few hundred meters to the west and rebuilt under the name Christiania. Oslo, thus becoming an area outside the city, kept its name. Christiania expanded in 1859, and absorbed the suburb Oslo. From 1877 the name was spelled Kristiania and in 1925 the capital's name was changed back to Oslo". Thus, we are talking about the same place. Apparently, some authors use Kristiania and other use the current name Oslo, although it is probably not precise to refer to it as Oslo until the year 1925 (or prior to 1624). So <TheFocus> is correct about the city name. There is similar historical information regarding Oslo on Wikipedia, but I have to admit that is not a site I completely trust. |
|
| Apr-23-17 | | Paarhufer: <sachistu: <Paarhufer> unless I'm mistaken, 'Uhrenpartie' translates roughly as 'clock game'.> Not only roughly. Does any of the sources confirm the exact date? Sorry, I'm too lazy to check it myself. |
|
Apr-23-17
| | sachistu: Sorry <Paarhufer> I should have included that information. <TheFocus> is right, once again. The game was played at the Schakselkab, April 28, 1921, according to Skjokdager and Nielsen who cite the Norsk Schakblad,1921 Issue 3/4,p47. There is a detailed overview of the circumstances of his visit to Kristiania (Oslo), but nowhere do I find mention of this or any of the other games during this visit as being played with clocks. However, the authors do say some of the games were 'training games', so I think it's safe to infer those were likely played with clocks. As far as the game itself, the authors just refer to it as an 'offhand game' yet at the end of game, they cite <Die Praxis meines Systems>, pg. 154-156. Both of our editions refer to it as a 'clock game'. <TheFocus> does your edition, which seems to match the one the authors quote, also indicate it was a 'clock game'(Uhrenpartie)? I do not speak or read Norwegian, but a reasonable assumption is that Schakselskab means 'chess club'. Interestingly, the authors refer to it as the Christiania Schakselkab, but the location as Kristiania (and also Oslo) so they are comfortable using the names interchangeably. |
|
| Apr-23-17 | | ChessHigherCat: <OhioChessFan: "Original and by no means bad" is high praise from Nimzo.> Yeah, except he doesn't say "bad for whom?" Na3 freed the way to advance the f pawn, but it would have been just as good (or better) to play Nf3 and then trade it for the obnoxious knight on d4 first.
Regarding the pawn push, I don't see why Nimzowich assumes that black would respond to 14. c4 with dxc? Why give up the central pawn? I would just play e6 instead. |
|
| Apr-23-17 | | ChessHigherCat: <sachistu> It does mean "chess club" and Kristiana and Oslo are basically the same thing. When Oslo burned down in 1624, it was moved a bit to the west and rebuilt as "Kristiana", which expanded in 1859 and absorbed the suburb Oslo. In 1877, the spelling of Kristiana was changed to Christiana, and in 1925 the capital was renamed Oslo again. Ready for the quiz? |
|
Apr-23-17
| | sachistu: <ChessHigherCat>Did you happen to read my earlier kibitz from April 23rd? |
|
| Apr-23-17 | | ChessHigherCat: <sachistu: <ChessHigherCat>Did you happen to read my earlier kibitz from April 23rd?> No, sorry, I see in an earlier kibbitz you quoted the same information. I just read your last contribution and was waiting (in vain) for comments about my chess question when it caught my attention because I've heard the name "Christiana" in a documentary about Edward Munch and found the same information you did online. |
|
| Apr-23-17 | | ChessHigherCat: Corrected version [please give generously to the "I hate algebraic notation" fund]: <OhioChessFan: "Original and by no means bad" is high praise from Nimzo.> Yeah, except he doesn't say "bad for whom?" Na3 freed the way to advance the c pawn, but it would have been just as good (or better) to play Nc3 and then trade it for the obnoxious knight on d4 first. Regarding the pawn push, I don't see why Nimzowich assumes that black would respond to 14. c4 with dxc? Why give up the central pawn? I would just play e6 instead. |
|
Mar-04-18
 | | keypusher: <CHC>
<Regarding the pawn push, I don't see why Nimzowich assumes that black would respond to 14. c4 with dxc?> Because he was playing Black and he'd decided that was what he'd do? I and more importantly Stockfish agree with you about ...e6 though. |
|
Dec-06-19
 | | jessicafischerqueen:
This is another example for <chess dreamer's> "Olga Chokes on It" collection. Here is the actual pgn for this game, which you can see by clicking on "view": 1.d4 ♘otes by ♘imzowitsch. The hanging pawns appear only as a
latent threat, as ghosts, in this game, which is as protracted
as it is interesting; the ending is particularly racy. d5
2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e3 g6 4.Be2 Bg7 5.O-O O-O 6.b3 c5 7.Bb2 cxd4
8.exd4 ♘ow ♗lack has in mind to create hanging pawns with
...dxc4 should White play c4. Bg4 9.Ne5 Bxe2 10.Qxe2 Nbd7
11.f4 Rc8 12.Na3 Original and by no means bad. Nb6 13.Rac1
a6 14.f5 If 14 c4 dxc4 15 bxc4 and c5, without delay. after
which ♘ac4 would have brought about the situation we have
pronounced desirable, namely : security by ♗lockade combined
with some measure of initiative. 14 f5 must therefore be held
to be a departure from the straight path, albeit a pardonable
one. gxf5 15.Rxf5 Ne4 16.Rcf1 f6 17.Ng4 e6 18.Rh5 A rook
astray! Its absence will soon be felt. ♖f5f3 looks better. f5
19.Ne5 Rc7 20.Qe3 Nd7 21.c4 At lat White, a player of
undoubted master-strength, decides on this advance. ♗ut now
different pawn formations result from it and hanging pawns do
not occur. Nxe5 22.dxe5 Rd7 ♘ote this rook's freedom on its
own 2nd rank. 23.cxd5 Rxd5 The d-file is now tremendously
effective, see note to move 18. 24.Nc4 b5 25.Nd6
Comparatively best. Rxd6 26.exd6 Bxb2 27.Qh6 Bd4 28.Kh1 Rf7
29.Qxe6 Qxd6 30.Rg5 Bg7 31.Qxd6 Nxd6 32.Rd1 The ending is
clearly not an easy one to win. Rf6 33.Kg1 Kf7 34.a4 b4
35.Rd5 Re6 36.Ra5 Re3 37.Rxa6 Bd4 38.Kf1 Be5 39.a5 Rxb3 40.Rh5
Rb1 41.Ke2 b3 He could quite well have played ...♔g6.
42.Rxh7 Ke6 43.Rh3 b2 44.Rb3 Ra1 45.R6b6 Rxa5 46.Rxb2 There
was no urgency for this. Bxb2 47.Rxb2 Nc4 48.Rc2 Kd5 49.Kf3
Ra4 50.Re2 Ne5 51.Kf2 f4 52.h3 Ra3 53.Rd2 Ke4 54.Rc2 Re3
55.Ra2 Nd3 56.Kg1 Re1 57.Kh2 Ke3 58.Ra3 Re2 59.Kg1 Rb2 60.Ra1
Rc2 61.Ra3 Ke2 62.Ra4 Rc1 63.Kh2 Ke3 64.Ra3 Rb1 65.Rc3 Rb2
66.Kg1 Kd4 67.Ra3 Ne1 68.Ra4+ There follows an interesting
duel between king and rook. Ke5 69.Ra5+ Kf6 70.Ra6+ Kg5
Simpler would be to escape via g7, h6, h5, to h4, but ♗lack
sees a captivating turn which he does not wish to miss.
71.Ra8 Kh6 72.Rg8 Kh7 73.Rg4 f3 74.Kf1 Obviously if 74 gxf3
♘xf3+ with mate or winning the rook. fxg2 More elegant as
well as quicker was 74...♘xg2 75 ♖e4, etc. 75.Kxe1 Kh6 And
♗lack wins by Zugzwang. 76.h4 Kh5 77.Rg5 Kxh4 0-1 |
|
Jun-21-23
 | | Knighthawkmiller: -5.69 (26 ply) 28...Qd7 29.Rh3 Rf7 30.Qf4 Bc5 31.Rd3 Bxd6... meets the threat and saves the "e" pawn. But black chose to surrender a pawn and positional advantage by 28...Rf7 (-1.10 (26 ply) 29.Qxe6 Qxd6 30.Qxd6 Nxd6 31.Rd1 Bc5 32.g4 Ba3 ...) Black's move 28 is not discussed in Praxis. |
|
| Jun-21-23 | | Granny O Doul: Simple but perfectly served. |
|
Jun-21-23
 | | sakredkow: Who doesn't enjoy a racy ending? |
|
|
|
|
Kibitzing
Annotations by 
sac: 25...Rxd6