Something like this:

17...Qg3 18. Qxf7+ Kc6 19. Qd5+ Kb6 20. Qb3+

click for larger view

Black has to submit to the exchange of queens when white will win easily.

That piece is particularly funny. But does it not veer a little towards parody, pastiche, satire, or one of the crueller forms of humour?

I was merely pointing out, in jest, that pastiche (or parody, etc) *can be* cruel. Which you know, because you've seen me acting like the kind of kid who pulls the flies off wings.

I wasn't one such, I hasten to add. Not cruel at all, really. Only with the verbals: a pun opportunity clicks my lack-of-affect switch.

But the world needs satire more than it needs the absence of satire, whether that absence is caused by totalitarian regimes or an excessive desire to avoid causing offence.

If Jonathan Swift thought like that, then Gulliver would never have started his travels. Or, worse, he'd only have gone to *nice* places that reminded nobody of anything, and the book would deservedly be forgotten.

Black's strongest move was 14...Nf6! after which White has no defence.

There is even a quicker but more pedestrian mate with 16...Qg3 instead of ...Be2. White can do nothing except give away his Queen and Rook: mate via ...Qh2# or hxg4 Qh4# is inescapable.

I would guess that Black saw this way of winning, but chose the prettier variation in the game, complete with Queen sac. It's just as sound, but can take a little longer.

White, however, had an early advantage, despite the ugly (and bad) 3.Be2. Any normal developing move leads to equality or a slight edge for Black - anything except the tempting but weak 3...Bc5, which allows White to play a familiar trick with Nxe5 and d4, regaining all the space, momentum, and initiative he gave up with 3.Be2.

One way for White to maintain that advantage would be 11.b4 -- if 11...Bxb4 12.Qd5 wins because of the double threat of Qb5+ and Qxf7+.

Qd5 was the right idea, but White should have prepared it with b4. He should also have been more alert to his denuded King -- the trap he played in the opening had the medium-term disadvantage of leaving him without a Knight on the kingside. In such open positions, the Nf3 is important. Instead of the Queen adventure Qd5, a couple of developing moves (eg Nd2-f3) would have made sense.

After 11...Be6 White should retreat with Qd3, and have a slightly inferior position. The b7 pawn is poisoned, because it begins a forcing sequence: 12.Qxb7 Bxc4 13.Qxa8+ Kd7 and White is in deep trouble. Moving the Rook to safety, as he does, invites the brilliant 14...Nf6. But a Queen move just loses the Rook, with mate threats still in the air. And he can't even protect the Rf1, due to his undeveloped queenside: an ominous sign.

The double Rook sac (11...Be6! and all that follows - as long as White takes the bait with Qxb7) would make a moderately difficult puzzle: fairly long, but with few variations. The position at move 14, (14...Nf6!) is, ironically, an easy one. Once you find the ...Nf6 idea the banal mate with ...Qg6 soon follows.

What biographical info did Richter give?

I'm wondering how <CG> arrived at such precise identifications of the players - without citing a source in the PGN.

<CG> has a few games by a Hungarian/Romanian Dr. Janny, but only this one game for <I. Abraham>.

Though it is sometimes (often?) correct, I wish <CG> would document where it garnered additional biographical data of players.

<High School of Chess Tactics>

I assume that <Hohe Schule> has a slightly different meaning in German than <High School> does in American English.