| Nov-26-07 | | Karpova: At that time the game was of theoretical importance since 4.e5 was refuted and disappeared from practice afterwards. 10.a3
Savielly Tartakower: <White is forced on the defensive, and has therefore no compensation at all for his two pawns.> From Donaldson/Minev "Akiba Rubinstein - Uncrowned King" |
|
| Apr-10-08 | | Whitehat1963: Isn't 10. Bxh7 free material? |
|
| Apr-10-08 | | whiteshark: <Whitehat1963> I wouldn’t give it houseroom! After <10...Nb4 11.Qb1 g6 12.Bxg6 fxg6 13.Qxg6+ Kd7> 
click for larger viewI don't see white's compensation. |
|
| Apr-11-08 | | Whitehat1963: I'm certainly no great player, <whiteshark>, so I'll take your word for it. I see white's a couple of pawns down after that sequence, but what happens after 14. Nd4? (What can I say? I'm stubborn!) |
|
| Apr-11-08 | | Karpova: <Whitehat1963: I see white's a couple of pawns down after that sequence> White is down a whole piece (and got only one pawn for it) <, but what happens after 14. Nd4? (What can I say? I'm stubborn!)> Simply 14...Qg8 |
|
| Nov-29-08 | | Zenchess: Well, I don't get why 4. e5 is "refuted." First of all, Blackburne's treatment of this line, starting with 5. Nxc3 is much better: Blackburne vs A Steinkuehler, 1871
Also, see Lasker's win with this line; I like Blackburne's 9th move better than Lasker's, but Lasker outplays his opponent in an unclear middlegame: Lasker vs K Schultz, 1903
Secondly of all, 11. Bc1? simply undevelops a piece. 11. Ne2, to answer Bf5 with 12. Nd4, was better. I'm not convinced that White has full compensation for the missing two pawns, but he could have played on. |
|
| Nov-29-08 | | Karpova: <Zenchess: Secondly of all, 11. Bc1? simply undevelops a piece. 11. Ne2, to answer Bf5 with 12. Nd4, was better. I'm not convinced that White has full compensation for the missing two pawns, but he could have played on.> 11.Ne2 Bf5 12.Nd4 Nxd4 13.Bxd4 c5
click for larger view |
|
| Nov-29-08 | | Zenchess: <Karpova> 13. Nxd4 instead of 13. Bxd4. |
|
| Nov-29-08 | | Karpova: <Zenchess>
After 13.Nxd4 simply 13...Bxd3 14.Qxd3 c5 [see diagram] 
click for larger viewI don't see compensation for the two pawns. |
|
| Nov-29-08 | | Zenchess: I agree with you there; it still would have been better than what happened in the game. |
|
Dec-04-09
 | | Phony Benoni: Certainly one of the least effecive Danish Gambits ever played. One has to symphatize with the frustrations of White's dark-squared bishop. It's developed on b2, but White's pawn on e5 blocks its effectiveness. So it seeks greener pastures on c1--and Black promptly pries the e-pawn out of the way with ...f6! |
|
| Dec-05-09 | | markwell: This game may have helped the decline of the Danish Gambit, but it certainly is not a Danish Gambit declined. |
|
| Mar-22-24 | | Zenchess: Looking back on this game 16 years later:
--I still think 5. Nxc3 was better than the game continuation.
--Black misplayed this around move nine. 9...c5! would have grabbed a lot more space than Nc6?!.
--I was right that 11. Bc1? was a lemon. However, my alternative, 11. Ne2 Bf5 12. Nd4? would have run into a buzzsaw with c5!, allowing Black to rectify his mistake on move 9.
--I just read Tarrasch's "The Game of Chess", where he talks about pins being one of the main building blocks of the middle game. He gives 15+ different examples to start that chapter. White should prefer 11. Rd1, setting up a pin against the Qd7. White still doesn't have enough for the pawn, but he has counterplay in this line. |
|
Kibitzing
