|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jun-11-07
 | | al wazir: <Eyal: It's winning for Black, but...he could have won the White queen by 32...Rxg3>, etc. Good observation! I totally missed that. |
|
Jun-11-07
 | | Peligroso Patzer: Hjartarson was a world championship candidate around the time this game was played and won a candidates quarter-final match from a slightly-past-his-prime Korchnoi before losing to Karpov ... so it wasn't any patzer that Nogueiras so impressively defeated in this game. |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | sandmanbrig: Wow! 32...Rxf4+!! is amazing. |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | WarmasterKron: <What would Jesus do?> Turn the other check? |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | Sredni Vashtar: <sandmanbrig: Wow! 32...Rxf4+ is amazing>
Doesn't anyone read recent comments any more?
Rxf4 is an amazing blunder, that's what it is.
32...♖xg3!! is much more powerful -- see <Eyal>'s analysis |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | WarmasterKron: <Sredni> 32.Rxg3 certainly wins bigger, but since Rxf4 wins anyway, it's hardly a blunder. More an inaccuracy, as Eyal said. Don't you read recent comments? |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | Sredni Vashtar: <WarmasterKron: <Sredni> 32.Rxg3 certainly wins bigger, but since Rxf4 wins anyway, it's hardly a blunder. More an inaccuracy, as Eyal said.> The difference between two moves is equivalent to giving away a rook, perhaps more (R+K vs Q may have a fighting chance in some positions, K vs Q hardly ever). I call this a blunder, no matter what are the circumstances. Where do you think I got a reference to <Eyal>? Of course I read comments before typing, *ALL* of them, and then re-check for recent additions before posting. Obviously, I disagree with the <inaccuracy> designation, but even more so with calling an inaccuracy to be "amazing". |
|
Jun-11-07
 | | fm avari viraf: A superb, classical & scintillating game till the very end by Nogueiras. |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | WarmasterKron: Clearly R+N vs Q is better for the weaker side than N vs Q. Indeed, as you say, it may stand a fighting chance in certain positions (not this one, incidentally, which is rather relevant to the issue). I agree that ...Rxf4, albeit spectacular, is hardly amazing (not worthy of !, let alone !!) but at the same time, hardly a blunder even if it is inferior to ...Rxg3. A slower, slightly messier win is not as good as a simple, quick win, but it's a win regardless. |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | Sredni Vashtar: <WarmasterKron> OK, I propose to agree to disagree on the distinction between the blunder and inaccuracy. Other than that, I don't have any issues with your argument and certainly agree that no ! is deserved by Rxf4. And I am not going to bicker about the distinction between "amazing" and "spectacular", either :-) |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | WarmasterKron: Very well, we'll agree to a draw. :)
As regards to amazing/spectacular, I use the latter to mean that it looks good, even if it actually isn't. ;) |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | Dr.Lecter: The game was a nice. The clearance sacrifice (18....Bc2) was a hard move to find. And his 32nd move was strong (though <Eyal>'s is even stronger)and finished the game and the attack very nicely |
|
| Jun-11-07 | | outplayer: I have played the winawer many times as black but this game is amazing. |
|
| Jun-12-07 | | MostlyAverageJoe: Interesting game, but appears to have a lot of mistakes. First, regarding the controversy regarding the 32nd move: after putting the game in Hiarcs, the engine tells me that after 32. Qd3, black had quite a number of good choices. The move played in the game, Rxf4, is only THE SIXTH BEST MOVE for the black. Here are the lines, ordered from the best (the one proposed by <Eyal>) to the least advantageous, all analysis 18-ply: 32 ... Rxg4 <-12.22> 33. Qxc4 bxc4 34. Nxg3 Qc2 35. Kf3 Qxc3 36. Kf2 Qd4 37. Kf3 Qd5 32 ... Rg6 <-8.47 - only a computer could come up with this move, I think.> 33. Rxg6 fxg6 34. Nd4 Nd2 35. Qxd2 Qxd2 36. Nxe6 Qe2 ... <I spent extra time double-checking this line - it is valid!> 32 ... f5+ <-7.34> 33. exf6EP Rxg3 34. hxg3 Qg2 35. Qf3 Nd2 36. Ke3 Qxf3 37. Kxd2 Kd7 32 ... f6 <-7.34>, continues same as above, except normal exf6 instead of exf6EP. 32 ... Qf1 <-4.61> 33. Rg1 Rxg1 34. Nxg1 Qxg1 35. Kf3 a5 36. h3 Qh2 37. Kg4 Qg2 32 ... Rxf4 <-2.70> 33. Nxf4 Nd2 34. Qxd2 Qxd2 35. Rg7 Qc2 36. Nd3 Qxc3 37. Rxf7 Qxa3 Now, regarding the mistakes during the game (the number of ? assigned by Hiarcs, not me): 22. Bg3?? (-0.21) while Ng3 evaluates at +1.20
23. Rg3?? (-2.09), while Qd2 evaluates at -0.21
29. Ke3?? (-7.51), while Rg1 evaluates at -3.02
And a couple more later, but they don't matter much any more, with the black advantage hovering around -10. Also several minor inaccuracies elsewhere - none a big deal. |
|
| Jun-17-07 | | outsider: at that time, hjartarson was about number 12 in the world, nogueiras was somewhere about n40. 1987-88 were the peak of hjartarson's career, he wasn't such a bad blayer as it may look like from this game |
|
| Oct-17-07 | | sigi: In my database the game is annotated by Nogueiras/Seiro-Gonzalez and others. The comment after 30 ... Qf2 reads: "finis". The rest of the game is in my oppinion just one of the two variations which Nogueiras/Seiro-Gonzalez gave to show that Black is winning indeed. |
|
| Jul-17-08 | | whiteshark: Man you is a noggy. |
|
| Jan-04-09 | | LivBlockade: <MostlyAverageJoe: 22. Bg3?? (-0.21) while Ng3 evaluates at +1.20> 22. Ng3 was tested once in another very complex game:
A Volokitin vs Ganguly, 2007
|
|
| Jan-04-09 | | Chessdreamer: The score is wrong. It should be...
[Event "Belfort"]
[Site "Belfort"]
[Date "1988.??.??"]
[Round "11"]
[White "Hjartarson, Johann"]
[Black "Nogueiras, Jesus"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C18"]
1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 Ne7 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 c5 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Ne2 Nbc6 11.f4 Bd7 12.Qd3 dxc3 13.Qxc3 Nf5 14.Rb1
0-0-0 15.Rg1 d4 16.Qd3 Na5 17.g4 Ba4 18.c3 Bc2 19.Qxc2 d3 20.Qa2 Qc5 21.Rg2 Ne3 22.Bxe3 Qxe3 23.Rg3 d2+ 24.Kd1 Qf2 25.Kc2 d1=Q+ 26.Rxd1 Rxd1 27.Kxd1 Qxf1+ 28.Kd2 b5 29.Ke3 Nc4+ 30.Ke4 Qf2 0-1. |
|
| Jan-04-09 | | YoungEd: What an exciting game! Looks like it could have been played over 100 years ago. |
|
Jul-17-09
| | fm avari viraf: I like the pun 'What would Jesus do?' My answer 'Just crucified Hjartarson'. |
|
Jul-17-12
 | | juan31: que buen juego chico !! |
|
May-14-14
 | | Domdaniel: Oh, Jesus! A wonderful game by Nogueiras. |
|
| Mar-28-17 | | SpiritedReposte: So many good moves in this French defense. |
|
| Apr-04-18 | | OrangeTulip: For Hjartarson a hell of a Job, playing against Three |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 18...Bc2