|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-06-05 | | jahhaj: <JohnBoy> I'm not sure about the ♔+♙ ending. After 39.♕g7+ ♕xg7 40.♘xg7 ♔f7 41.♔g3 ♘e7 42.dxe7 ♔xe7 43.♔f3 ♔f7 44.♔e4 ♔xg7 45.♔d5 ♔f7 46.♔d6 white looks to be winning even though he is a ♙ down. <yakaturk's> variation is more interesting than the original I think. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | Happypuppet: <the amusing Knight Fork 41. Nxf6+! which also serves as a deflection to force 41...Nxf6 42. Qe7#>
Is it really a fork? White doesn't have any interest in playing Nxg8 or Nxd5. It's a forced mate: Black either plays Nxf6 and gets mated with Qe7#, or he plays Kd8 and gets mated with Qc7#. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | halcyonteam: got it, but only first move |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | erimiro1: 30. - Kf8? was, in my opinion, the desicive error.desicive error. White pawn at d5 was very strong, while Black's bishop and knight were out of the game. Bringing the King to f8, exposed the king to a clever attack, by N-g3-h5 and Qc2! (gained a tempo)- h7. The rest, including the puzzle, was simple, since black was helpless. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | Mountainman1: Well, the bishop move gets rid of the key defender, so that was not so hard to see - and the pawn looks like it has some important work to do in the near future. I am sure black started sweating when he saw Bd5. I would have. |
|
Jul-06-05
 | | Richard Taylor: I saw this fairly quickly although I wondered at first if White was going to force a pawn promotion - I looked at 39. Bd5 as my first choice saw the check after Q:d5 40. Qg7+ Ke8 and then looked at 41. Qg8+ but that didn't work then saw 41. N:f6+ N:f6 42. Qe7# <An Englishman> 3. .... Bc5. At one stage I learnt the English but abandoned it but my book by Cafferty gives 3. ..Bc5? for this reason: "Alekhine gave an apt description to all systems involving Bc5 when he wrote that he considered the move appropriate when Black could be sure of preventing d4." (If d4 cant be pervented as it seems not to be able to be in this position - the B is forced out of play - and white dominates the centre)... 3..c6 is good (Keres worked the syetem out) and 3. ... d5. I think also 3. ... Bb5 is good. its interesting that 3. ... Bc5 could be seen as a clear error yet some quite strong players have attempted it - superficially it looks "logical" -interesting...but clearly it's not good. What do you feel is Black's best system here? |
|
Jul-06-05
| | Richard Taylor: yes with the Bishops off it looks like a draw -
<chesswonders> if you study comnbinations like this: eventually they will become easy over the board..the only impediment to finding them is time (he dreaded clock) - fatigue - and the nervous strain of tournament play but I have played many conbinations like this and some mre difficult OTB - but that is from years of studying combinations. Most players who have difficulty with relatively simple combos simply haven't studied the game sufficiently -of course we all cant be Shirov's or whoever..but we can all play interesting combinations - with practice! |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | GamerJV: I was surprised when I got this immediately. I like seeing sacks that may not even work. It's almost like an addiction now. I love puzzles. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | alexandrovm: I'm not sure about this one, how about: 39. Bd5 Qxd5 40. Nxf6 (if Qxd6 41.Qxg8 Ke7 (only move) etc). hm, let's see... |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | alexandrovm: of course! The winning continuation is 40. Qg7+ (instead of Qxg8), etc. My other line does not have any real future :) |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | Shubes82: <chesswonders> read the link that someone posted in the kibitzing for yesterdays puzzle on the 'seeds of tactical destruction', or something like that. It explains when you should be looking for tactical threats and when you shouldnt. As per that article, I think its only fair to say that one needed to see the whole variation to say they solved the puzzle, as if you couldnt see further than one move you were down a whole bishop for nothing. |
|
Jul-06-05
 | | kevin86: A fork followed by mate-nice combination! |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | artemis: <chesswonders> keep doing the puzzles and you will find similar positions in your games. Get a good puzzle book and keep track of how you do. Be honest with yourself though, only give yourself credit for a correct answer if you saw the continuation. half of solving a puzzle is deciding when you have a winning position. In the games that you play if you look at the game as a chance for you to get better and learn about your abilities as oppossed to a chance to gaining or losing rating points, then you can achieve a type of detatchment from the position that many people find to be difficult. This detatchment allows you to consider more amazing possabilities. If you focus on winning or losing, then you will be afraid to look for sacrifical combinations. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | farrooj: <chesswonders> there is a nice way to find out if there is a tactic in your game. First of all, you must know a lot of tactics, by reading, or trying to solve tactical puzzle. Then there is a link that a kibitzer gave that's really good www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman05.pdf |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | chessic eric: An obscure 3 move combination. In my humble opinion, anyone who would play Bd5 without having Qg7+ in mind didn't solve the puzzle. I want to second <artemis> on how to practice combinative vision. Many players need to quit obsessing over their inflated internet ratings and take chances in casual games to let the clock run in order to see thematic moves. So you lose an internet game on time; if because of that you can reinforce otb vision of combinative themes, then 1)you have improved, 2)your internet chess is thereby worthwhile, and 3) you might even save time on the tournament clock. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | belka: What I liked about heisman's article is that is emphasizes looking at forced moves first, and looking at them all the way through, even if they lose material. It should be easy to spot Bd5 as forcing. I wonder how much 'easier' the puzzle gets if Bd5 Qxd5 is given? From there there are only a few candidate moves that show any progress, and the winning one happens to be forcing again. In fact, every move of this solution is forcing, and I think most of us should be able to compute a 4 move forced sequence -- the key, as heisman points out,is that you must see that the moves are forcing and follow through. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | xxdsdxx: This puzzle is as beautiful as they come. I was impressed by the ease that everything fell into place after Bd5. Of course it took me 30 minutes of jumping around with my knight to realize I was getting nowhere! |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | Castle In The Sky: This is a great example of drawing away the protector. I was able to solve it and attribute part of my success to CT-Art 3.0 and Chess Tactics for beginners. I have religiously been trying to do between 25-40 problems a day for the last few months and my ability to see combinations has increased dramatically. I highly recommend these two programs. I have also been reading Tal's autobiography and he has commented on the necessity of constant practice to remain in playing shape. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | Fezzik: What I find amazing about this game is that Black didn't resign after Bd5. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | THE pawn: Sac, check,check...mate. easy. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | Koster: Very nice combination. Neither sacrifice was that hard but you have to see them both when playing the first. The d6 push makes one think a promotion is coming but black has that well covered. |
|
| Jul-06-05 | | Dick Brain: It looks as though White did not see this opportunity earlier on when he played 36. Kh2. If he proceeded with 36. Nh5 immediately there seems to be no defence to the attack that ultimately did happen after 36.Qd7? |
|
| Nov-26-05 | | bomb the bishop: <Fezzik> I have to agree with you on that one |
|
| Mar-06-08 | | ghyanoki: 2 sacrifices, not very usual, great game by Luis Galego |
|
Feb-19-18
| | Richard Taylor: It's not clear that Bc5 is an error although it was considered that some time ago. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 39.Bd5