|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Feb-13-05
 | | keypusher: This game won the first brilliancy prize, on the strength of Rubinstein's pretty 24th, 25th and 26th moves, I think. |
|
| Apr-01-05 | | Karpova: The so called "Schlechter defense".
Black's mistake is 7...nbd7? bg4 or dc would have been better.rubinstein makes perfect use of the open c-file.
20.ne5 (20...be5: 21.de qe5: 22.rb7:!)
21...e6 black hopes for nb8: (after rb( d8 is accesible for the bishop) but rubinstein plays 22.g3! rubinstein shows that he's one of the best tacticians of all times! |
|
| Apr-20-06 | | stanleys: Simply brilliant! |
|
Apr-20-06
 | | tamar: Hans Kmoch, who played at Vienna 1922, wrote Bogoljubow played 20...Bf6 hoping to win back the exchange after 21 Nc6 e6 22 Nxb8 Rxb8 23 Qc3 Bd8 when the rook has no move to prevent capture. Bogoljubow's Hope 
click for larger view22 g3 crosses up the plan, as now it is Black to move, and he has no better than to lose a move with 22...Rdc8. Then after the exchange, another shot 24 Bxb5 axb5 25 Qa7 wins for White. 
click for larger viewRubinstein's trademark was unusual moves at the moment of greatest tension, which could surprise even the top players. |
|
Apr-22-06
 | | beatgiant: <tamar>
At first glance, the combination seems to work even without 22. g3:22. Nxb8 Rxb8 23. Bxb5 Bd8 24. Be8, etc.
All I could find is White would lose a tempo because of the back-rank mate threat 24...Bxc7 25. Qxc7 Qxc7 26. Rxc7 Rxe8 27. Rxb7 Rc8 28. g3. Is there any deeper tactic prompting you to say 22. g3 <crosses up the plan>? |
|
Apr-22-06
| | tamar: <beatgiant> Hmm. It looks like you are correct. Still 22 g3 has that eye of the hurricane quiet that emphasizes Black's hopeless position. |
|
| Sep-20-06 | | notyetagm: <Karpova: The so called "Schlechter defense".
Black's mistake is 7...nbd7? bg4 or dc would have been better.
rubinstein makes perfect use of the open c-file.
20.ne5 (20...be5: 21.de qe5: 22.rb7:!)>
Yes, a nice little tactic that makes the manoeuvre 20 ♘e5 - 21 ♘c6 possible. 20 ♘e5! does -not- lose a pawn to 20 ... ♗xe5 21 dxe5 ♕xe5 because then White has the <DISCOVERED DEFLECTION> 22 ♖xb7!, winning a piece for a pawn (22 ... ♖xb7 <deflection from d8> 23 ♕xd8+). Position after the <DISCOVERED DEFLECTION> 22 ♖xb7!: 
click for larger view20 ♘e5! is a beautiful example of the interplay between strategy and tactics. Strategically White wants to play ♘f3-♘e5-♘c6 and the <DISCOVERED DEFLECTION> 22 ♖xb7! makes it tactically possible. |
|
| Sep-20-06 | | notyetagm: <DISCOVERED DEFLECTION 22 ♖xb7!>: Use the masking piece (White c7-rook) to exploit the <LOOSENESS> (Black d8-rook) created by the unmasking of the rear piece (White a5-queen) by taking what the newly <OVERWORKED> defender (Black b8-rook) no longer <DEFENDS> (Black b7-bishop). Discovered attacks that makes things loose are dangerous, dangerous, dangerous! |
|
| Dec-26-06 | | ivanov90: 19...Rdf8? loses. The best move in this position is 19...Rfe8 (Fritz 10), then 20.Qc3 (20.Ne5? Bxe5 21.dxe5 Qxe5, and 22.Rxb7 impossible!) 20...f6!!=. Show me how white can become stronger their position! |
|
| Feb-17-07 | | Aspirador: Of course, instead of 25...Qf8 it would have been much stronger to play 25...Bxc7 where black can still play a rook ending. |
|
| Jul-19-07 | | Karpova: <Aspirador: Of course, instead of 25...Qf8 it would have been much stronger to play 25...Bxc7 where black can still play a rook ending.> 25...Bxc7 26.Qxc7 Qxc7 27.Rxc7 Rxe8 28.Rxb7 white gets a won ending. Bogoljubov knew this and therefore correctly avoids those exchanges. The following play by white was also hard to forsee and it was good to hope for his opponent to miss a win in a complicated position than in an obviously lost ending. |
|
| Jul-18-16 | | clement41: Nice tactical flurry by Rubinstein |
|
Aug-14-17
 | | tpstar: Rubinstein controls the open c file to infiltrate Black's position, then his Knight dominates Black's Bishops to win material. 22. g3! is a clever waiting move. |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | ChessHigherCat: Fantastic game. It must have been emotionally charged with Rubinstein vs. our friendly local Nazi sympathizer. |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | RookFile: Not in 1922 it wasn't. |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | john barleycorn: <ChessHigherCat: Fantastic game. It must have been emotionally charged with Rubinstein vs. our friendly local Nazi sympathizer.> In 1922? |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | WorstPlayerEver: Wait...! Aren't nazis these socialist guys who will -be sure of it- terrorize everyone for having another opinion than them? And subsequently whine about the mess they have created themselves? You don't say! ☺ |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | ChessHigherCat: I was just drifting off to sleep when it occurred to me I should have checked the dates before I said that, but fortunately the busy-beaver fact checkers saved me the trouble. |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | WorstPlayerEver: <ChessHigherCat> You obviously mean the people who are a little smarter than you. And you obviously are a person who will first call me dumb if I asked you how this world came into existence. And because you don't know you will give me a link to a Stephen Hawking vid. A guy who also doesn't know, but since he's in a wheelchair he must be right. How effing predictable! Now go back to bed, please. |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | ChessHigherCat: <WorstPlayerEver>
I didn't call you dumb, but at times like these I wish you were struck dumb. And if you asked me how this world came into existence, I would be much more likely to direct you to Buddha and Schopenhauer to inform you that it never has. a |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | WorstPlayerEver: <ChessHigherCat> "Our existence has no foundation on which to rest except the transient present. Thus its form is
essentially unceasing motion, without any possibility of that repose which we continually strive after. It resembles the course of a man running down a mountain who would fall over if he tried
to stop and can stay on his feet only by running on; or a pole balanced on the tip of the finger; or a planet which would fall into its sun if it ever teased to plunge irresistibly forward. Thus existence is typified by unrest." From: Schopenhauer, Vanity of Existence
What if I told you I can run down a mountain, slow down, and stop? 😊 What if you told you Schopenhauer was running down a mountain himself and couldn't stop? 😄 |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | WorstPlayerEver: PS besides, the Buddhist philosophy is based on tranquility instead of unrest. But as I did predict; dropping some name here and there made you feel fine again. Not that you made any sense, but okay. |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | ChessHigherCat: Wow, QED. If you can try to grasp the concept of metaphor you'd realize that it's highly unlikely that S. thinks he's running anywhere since, like Buddhism, it's non-dualist so there's no separate entity in the first place. And while we're dropping names, here's another:
William Blake — 'That which can be made Explicit to the idiot is not worth my care.' . |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | WorstPlayerEver: <ChessHigherCat> Oh, now he used a metaphor! Ha ha the wrong one, but okay. A Hindu would state that Buddhism is a state of impersonalism yes. An ultimate form of illusion. But, you won't call me dumb, just drop in another name ☺ |
|
| Aug-16-17 | | WorstPlayerEver: PS and now what?
Socialism is impersonalism too! Coincedence...? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 26.Rxb7