| Feb-05-09 | | Ychromosome: !!!!!!!! |
|
| Feb-05-09 | | whiteshark: White to move. Find the best continuation! <12.> ?
click for larger view |
|
Oct-21-15
 | | plang: Entertaining game - did not see several of Whites shots |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | Brenin: 12 Bxf7+ seems irresistible, forcing 12 ... Kxf7 and allowing 13 Qf4+, e.g. 13 ... Kg8 14 Qc4+ Qe6 (or Qd5) 15 Qxe6 mate, or 13 ... Nf6 14 Ne5+ winning the Q, or 13 ... Kg6 14 Nh4+ Kh5 16 g4 mate. If 13 ... Ke6 or Ke8 then 0-0 or 0-0-0 looks strong for White, with Re1+ to follow. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | mel gibson: I saw 12. Bxf7+
Stockfish 14 followed the text game line of 12.O-O-O for a few minutes
and then changed its mind to 12. Bxf7+.
12. Bxf7+
(12. Bxf7+
(♗c4xf7+ ♔e8xf7 ♕a4-f4+ ♔f7-e8 O-O-O c3xb2+ ♔c1xb2 ♕c6-b6+ ♔b2-a1 ♘d7-f6
♖h1-e1+ ♗f8-e7 ♖d1-d6 ♕b6-c7 ♖d6xf6 ♕c7xf4 ♖f6xf4 ♔e8-d7 ♖e1xe7+ ♔d7-c6
♘f3-e5+ ♔c6-d5 ♘e5-c4 h7-h6 ♗g5-h4 ♔d5-c6 ♖e7xg7 ♗c8-e6 ♖f4-f6 ♖a8-e8
♗h4-g3 ♖h8-f8 ♖f6xh6 ♖f8-h8 ♖h6-g6 ♔c6-d5 ♘c4-e3+ ♔d5-d4 ♔a1-b2 ♔d4-d3
♖g6xe6 ♖e8xe6 ♖g7-d7+ ♔d3-e2 ♔b2-c3 ♖h8-g8 ♖d7xb7 ♖e6-b6 ♖b7-d7 ♖b6-a6
♖d7-d2+ ♔e2-e1 f2-f3+ ♖g8xg3 ♘e3-c2+ ♔e1-f1 h2xg3 ♔f1-g1 g3-g4 ♖a6xa2)
+7.84/47 2902)
score for White +7.84 depth 47. |
|
Mar-19-22
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Solved it, but...never saw *this* game before, yet the position seemed familiar. A search through the database reveals Taimanov vs Polugaevsky, 1960, one of SEVEN games with this sacrifice. Had seen that game before, so no credit for me. Still nice to have solved this position, though. |
|
Mar-19-22
 | | master8ch: What's wrong with 12.Ne5? If 12...Qxa4, then 13.Bxf7++; if 12...Nxe5, then 13.Bb5; if 12...Qe4+ 13.Kf1, threatening 14.Re1. |
|
Mar-19-22
 | | al wazir: < Brenin: 12 Bxf7+ seems irresistible, forcing 12 ... Kxf7 and allowing 13 Qf4+>. But what's the continuation after 13...Ke8 ? |
|
Mar-19-22
 | | raymondhow: I found 12.Ne5, but the engine thinks it's not nearly as good. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | newzild: Like <Brenin> I went for 12.Bxf7+ Kxf7. However, instead of 13. Qf4+, I followed with 13. Qc4+, when both 13...Ke6 and 13...Ke8 looks unsurvivable after 0-0 (threatening Re1+) and 13...Kg6 14. Qd3+ looks decisive after 14...f5 15. Nh4+ and 14...Kh5 15. Qf5, threatening 16. g4#. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | Brenin: <al wazir: < Brenin: 12 Bxf7+ seems irresistible, forcing 12 ... Kxf7 andallowing 13 Qf4+>.But what's the continuation after 13...Ke8 ?> As I posted, <If 13 ... Ke6 or Ke8 then 0-0 or 0-0-0 looks strong for White, with Re1+ to follow.> |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | Brenin: <newzild> 12 Bxf7+ Kxf7 13 Qc4+ Qe6+ and Black wins a piece. |
|
Mar-19-22
 | | agb2002: White is two pawns down.
Black threatens Qxa4 and cxb2.
The uncastled black king suggests 12.0-0-0, assuming it is legal: A) 12... Qxa4 13.Rhe1+ Be7 (13... Ne5 14.Rd8#) 14.Rxe7+ Kf8 (14... Kd8 15.Rexd7+ Ke8 16.Rd8#) 15.Rxf7+ A.1) 15... Kg8 16.Rfxd7+
A.1.a) 16... Qxc4 17.Rd8+ Kf7 18.Ne5+ Ke6 19.Nxc4 wins decisive material. A.1.b) 16... Kf8 17.Rf7+ Kf8 (17... Ke8 18.Rd8#) 18.Rd8+ Qe8 19.Rxe8#. A.2) 15... Ke8 16.Re1+ Ne5 17.Rxe5+ Be6 18.Bxe6 cxb2+ 19.Kxb2 Qb5+ 20.Bb3#. B) 12... Be7 13.Bxf7+ (13.Rhe1 0-0 14.Qxc6 Bxg5+) B.1) 13... Kxf7 14.Qf4+
B.1.a) 14... Nf6 15.Ne5+, followed by Nxc6, wins decisive material. B.1.b) 14... Bf6 15.Rxd7+
B.1.b.i) 15... B(Q)xd7 16.Ne5+ as in B.1.a.
B.1.b.ii) 15... Kg6 16.Nh4+ Kh5 17.g4#.
B.1.b.iii) 15... Kg8 16.Qc4+ Kf8 17.Qf7#.
B.1.b.iv) 15... Kf8 16.Rd8+ and 17.Rxh8 wins decisive material. B.1.b.v) 15... Ke8 16.Rdd1 (16.Rd6 cxb2 17.Kb1 Bf5+) must be winning. B.1.c) 14... Ke8 15.Rhe1 looks very good for White. B.1.d) 14... Kg8 15.Bxe7 looks very good for White. B.2) 13... Kf8 14.Qf4 looks very good for White. B.3) 13... Kd8 14.Rhe1 Bxg5 15.Nxg5 must be winning. C) 12... Nf6 13.Bb5 wins.
D) 12... cxb2+ 13.Kb1 doesn't seem to change much. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | goodevans: I quickly focused in on the idea of <12.0-0-0> followed by the devastating check on e1 and it isn't all that difficult to determine that the Q-sac is sound. The fly in the ointment, and the reason why 12.Bxf7+ is better, is that the win isn't quite so straightforward if Black declines the sac with <12...Be7> as in K Langeweg vs M Bosman, 1990. White still has an edge but it's not so clear as with 12.Bxf7+. Interesting then that as far as I can tell looking at various databases whenever this position is reached White almost always chooses the game line and has never chosen the right line. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | saturn2: It takes black too long to castle
Even 12. Qb3 and 0-0-0 a bit later should win. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | offramp: <n Englishman: ..Solved it, but...never saw *this* game before, yet the position seemed familiar. A search through the database reveals Taimanov vs Polugaevsky, 1960, one of SEVEN games with this sacrifice. ...> I did <not> know that there are previous versions of this. The Taimanov version must be the famous, but I prefer this 1934 version. To Müller the laurel, and a hearty handshake. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | johnnydeep: Yeah, as others have said, 12 Bxf7+ seems irresistible, even for this sub-par patzer. |
|
Mar-19-22
 | | scormus: I suppose it was too much of a wish that the line could have been the Müllheim Variation. Then plenty of pun to be had ;) I agree with <Brenin> that 12 Bxf7+ is well nigh irresistable. It shouts to be played and the one I probably would play OTB. But I did wonder about 12 O-O-O, it looked really interesting, maybe I'd play it in a bar game against a friend, though probably not in a team match. For one thing I wouldn't have trusted my calculating skills. For another, B has other options than 12 .... Qxa4. |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | Hercdon: Since I found Bxf7+ does that mean I�m smarter than the Average IM? |
|
Mar-19-22
| | Steve Holloway: 12.Bb5 seems simpler |
|
Mar-19-22
 | | chrisowen: Night of ni baffled no e7 no |
|
| Mar-19-22 | | Stanco: 12.0-0-0 is the best move, 12.Bxf7+ is dull and obsolete |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 12.O-O-O