chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
W Schwartz vs Lionel Kieseritzky
"Easy Like Sunday Morning" (game of the day Mar-20-2011)
Paris (1842), Paris FRA
Queen's Gambit Accepted: Saduleto Variation (D20)  ·  1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening
find similar games 1 more W Schwartz/Kieseritzky game
sac: 12.Bxc4 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: The tournament is found above the game. For the newest chess events, this information may be a link which takes you to the tournament page which includes other games, a crosstable, discussion, etc.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Phony Benoni: <roastedrook> After <14.Bb5+>:


click for larger view

Black can escape the immediate mate by <14...Nc6>. In fact, does White even win then?

Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Phony Benoni: <rilkefan> After <8...Qxd5>:


click for larger view

White can just get the pawn back by 9.Qxd5 cxd5 10.Nf4, and looks to have a good game afterward. However, this being 1842, he would probably play something like 9.Qc3 and keep the Nf4 move in reserve.

Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: The "Lionel" portion of his name triggers the pun "Easy like Sunday Morning", one of Lionel Ritchie's fine songs.

[Lionel_____________Kieseritsky].

Most creative, by these folks!

Mar-20-11  weary willy: <WannaBe: You never seen the name of the female chess player (I can't recall the name) and she was married 7 or is it 8 times, and kept all the names... I am sure someone here at CG will know what's her name. =) - Sneaky: <WannaBe> Dr. Jana Malypetrova Hartston Miles Bellin>

Only she didn't keep all the names, of course. It's just CG's (helpful) way of enabling us to track a single person who played under different names, thanks to our idea that a woman should take her husband's surname on marriage.

We don't find a similar requirement when a male player teams up with different females (in series or in parallel) because men made up the surname rules and found it easier to keep their original name.

Mar-20-11  Llawdogg: Phony Benoni: Excellent analysis of the Bagration. That always tickles my funny bone too. But what do you make of Adalbert?
Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  scormus: Another great, multi-pun. I think we should all be grateful to Mr Kieseritsky for the memorable brilliancies played to beat him. This is a beauty. Lovely 2R-sac - I guess it is sound all the way through
Mar-20-11  mucher1: Another road to victory seems to be 14.Ne6 (Nd7 15.Bb5).
Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  FSR: Kieseritzky was actually a strong player - not that you would ever guess that from this game. Anderssen only scored +7=2-6 against him. http://tinyurl.com/49vk92y That included, most famously, the Immortal Game - which was only an offhand game at London 1851, played during the Great Tournament. Soltis wrote about how no one could lose with as much panache as Kieseritzky - when he lost, he didn't just get ground down in inferior endings; no, his opponents won coruscating brilliancies where they sacked every piece in sight.
Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  FSR: Here's a nice endgame crush by the K-Man: Anderssen vs Kieseritzky, 1851
Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  FSR: In J Schulten vs Kieseritzky, 1844, K mated White off the board with the same ridiculous gambit later played, less successfully, by K in the Immortal Game and in Short vs Kasparov, 1993 (though ChessGames' database actually shows Black scoring extremely well with it).
Mar-20-11  newzild: <weary willy> <Only she didn't keep all the names, of course. It's just CG's (helpful) way of enabling us to track a single person who played under different names, thanks to our idea that a woman should take her husband's surname on marriage.>

Really? It's my understanding that she did, in fact, keep the names of her former husbands. That was her choice - not forced on her by "our idea".

Mar-20-11  Ratt Boy: <newzild> <It's my understanding that she did, in fact, keep the names of her former husbands...>

Well, Wiki calls her "Jana Bellin," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_B... . Googling "Jana Bellin" yields 222K hits; "Jana Malypetrova" gives 1530.

By the BTW, if Wanda Sykes had married Howard Hughes, and then Henry Kissinger, she'd be Wanda Hughes Kissinger now.

Mar-20-11  goodevans: <Phony Benoni: <rilkefan> After <8...Qxd5> White can just get the pawn back by 9.Qxd5 cxd5 10.Nf4, and looks to have a good game afterward. However, this being 1842, he would probably play something like 9.Qc3 and keep the Nf4 move in reserve.>

I guess I'm just old fashioned because before I'd even looked at your post I'd decided I liked <8 ... Qxd5 9 Qc3> for white. It's surprisingly complicated, but as far as I can see if black tries too hard to hold onto his extra pawn he ends up being mashed. In many lines, if he plays < ... Qe4+> he ends up with his Q trapped.

It seems the whole idea behind <7 ... Bd5> is that after <8 Nxd5 cxd5> black has straightened out his pawns. "Bagration" at least shows some positional understanding with this although he clearly underestimated the importance of the <e6> weakness.

Mar-20-11  Chessmensch: What if Kathleen Battle married Emanuel Ax?
Mar-20-11
Premium Chessgames Member
  Penguincw: Nice mate. :)
Mar-20-11  WhiteRook48: dang... Kieseritsky keeps losing the brilliances
Mar-21-11  kevin86: Is Schwartz another name for Anderssen?
Oct-12-12
Premium Chessgames Member
  FSR: Despite this fine example, 3...f5 has never taken off. Opening Explorer Kieseritsky also originated the Smith-Morra Gambit, which languished for a century before becoming (somewhat) popular. Opening Explorer Maybe 3...f5 will have to wait two centuries.
Oct-13-12  Abdel Irada: I think White actually did have a marginally faster mate starting with 15. Be6†. Here Black would have three options:

<(1) 15. ...Kd8
16. Qxf8†, Kc7
17. Nd5†, Kc6
18. Qe8†, Nd7
19. Qxd7#.>

<<>(2) 15. ...Kc7 16. Nd5†, Kc6>
(if 16. ...Kd8; 17. Qxf8#)
<<>17. Qe8†, Nd7 18. Qxd7#.>

<<<>>(3) 15. ...Kc6 16. Qe8† and one of

(3.1) 16. ...Nd7
17. Qxd7†, Kb6
18. Nd5†, Ka6
19. Qa4#,

(3.2) 16. ...Kc7
17. Nd5#, or

(3.3) 16. ...Kb6
17. Nd5†, Ka6
18. Qa4#.>

Of course, this is mere Monday-morning quarterbacking. A mate is a mate. :-)

Apr-20-13  TheTamale: The motto of the first half of the 19th century: "Win if you can, lose if you must... but always play P-KB4."
Apr-19-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: I came upon this game via Kieseritzsky's <Fifty Games Played in the Chess Circle at the Cafe de la Regence (>

http://books.google.com/books?id=aK...

A lot of the games don't seem to be in the cg database. That may not be an altogether bad thing....

Anyway, here Kieseritzky shows the same stalwart defensive technique that Anderssen later Immortalized. Still, nice of K. to publish both games.

Jul-29-23  generror: Kieseritzky is the Greatest Loser Of All Times, aka the GLOAT! As <FSR> pointed out, he was one of the strongest players of his time. Edochess ranks him at #3 from 1845 to 1847, ChessMetrics even at #1 from 1849 to 1851. He was also one of the most original ones, tried a lot of openings (most of them misguided). And he even invented 3D chess and of course got ridiculed for it by his his contemporaries.

But when he lost, he really lost in style -- and that's all that people remember of him now. He died penniless in Paris 1853.

By the way, lichess's opening DB lists <3...f5> as Schwartz Defense. Man, Kieseritzky was even cheated to have this opening named after him. Although, frankly, in this case maybe that's a good thing :)

Jul-31-23
Premium Chessgames Member
  fredthebear: The "Greatest Loser" is an oxymoron. Kenny's kids come to mind; losers, yes, but great certainly doesn't apply.

“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

-- Theordore Roosevelt

Aug-02-23  generror: I have no idea what Kenny's Kids are, but ole Teddy (despite his overblown prose) seems to say pretty why I think Kieseritzky is the GLOAT.

In my opinion, greatness has nothing to do with success or failure. But of course that depends on your definitions of "great" and of "loser". If your definition of "great" is coupled with success, then yeah, no loser can be great.

I think the distinction between "great" and "ungreat", "winner" and "loser" is a highly toxic one anyway, so I'm using the term GLOAT as an axe for the frozen seas within us.

Aug-02-23
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <generror>, the 'Kenny's Kids' is just another passive-aggressive swipe which has nothing to do with the game at hand; not sure why that shtick even made it here.

In my view also, winning and losing are not zero-sum games; that, ah, poster's view of it is, as so often, unnecessarily reductive in nature and easier to post than actually using critical thinking skills.

In his words, it is:

<lazy and rather effortless>

search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC