Aug-30-15
 | | Penguincw: Hmm. No comments before this game was GOTD.
(checks ignore list; empty)
Has there ever been a GOTD where there were no comments prior to the day it received the honours? I'm sure it's happened before, just doesn't seem all that common. For sure it happens all the time in the POTD. In fact, I'm making the prediction that tomorrow (Monday) puzzle will be like that; no previous comments. |
|
Aug-30-15
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Interesting Benko Gambit, esp. in the Q vs. 2R ending; Black's Knight really helps offset the Queen's weakness against the Rooks. 73.Rf6 eschewed the possible three-fold repetition and White resigned after only 2 more moves by Black, so was the move a mistake? |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | Jamboree: Why resign in the final position?
I tried 75. Rxf3+ to see what would happen, and in my analysis white can achieve a fortress setup with pawn on e4 defending a knight on f5 defending a rook on h4 defending the original pawn on e4, preventing black from making any breakthrough. Black's only attempt to win at that point is to sac the queen for the rook and pawn, but as long as white keeps his king near the action, black can't win the 2p vs. N endgame. I assess the final position as a draw. Anyone with a computer to disprove that? One line is: 75. Rxf3+ Kxf3 76. Nh4+ Ke3 77. Nf5+ Kd3 78. Kh4 h6 79. Kh5 Qh1+ 80. Kg6 h5. 81. Rh4 and it's a fortress and thus a draw because the Q sacs don't work. |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | Retireborn: <An Englishman> 73.Rf6 is as good or bad as anything else, eg 73.Ne1 Qxe1, or 73.Rxh7 Nf3+, when 74.Kh3 Ng5+ forks a rook and 74.Kh1 Qc1+ is a mating attack according to Houdini. <Jamboree> You may well be right that 81.Rh4 is a fortress, but Houdini says that 77...Kf3 (threat Qh1#) is stronger than 77...Kd3; essentially White is going to lose the e4 pawn. Two possible lines after 77...Kf3 are (i) 78.Kh4 Qh1+ 79.Kg5 h6+ 80.Nxh6 Qxh6+ etc, and (ii) 78.Nh4+ Ke2 79.Rg2+ (79.Kg3 h5 and the rook is lost to ...Qg1+) Kd3 80.Rg4 Qh1+ 81.Kg3 h5 & 82...Qxe4 White's pieces are tripping over each other. |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | jith1207: Even <Penguincw>'s Eagle statistical eye seems to have missed that <CGdotCom> has played a Woo(r)d pun on both GOTD and QOTD. |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | morfishine: <Retireborn> Nice post in response to <Jamboree> It looks like in your last position, White draws with <82.Rxe4> the theme being the White Knight can influence both Black pawns freeing up the King to remove the one the Knight ignores, for example: 82...Kxe4 83.Nf3 Kd5 84.Ng1 e4 85.Kf4 Kd4 86.Ne2+
Kd3 87.Ng3 e3 88.Kg5 e2 89.Nxe2 Kxe2 90.Kh6
***** |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | Retireborn: <morfishine> I think you're looking at 81...Qxe4, and you're correct that 82.Rxe4 would then be a draw! After 81...h5 the rook cannot defend pawn e4 any more. The amusing line then is 82.Rg5 Qg1+ (taking e4 may win but this is clearer) 83.Ng2 h4+ 84.Kxh4 Qh2+ 85.Kg4 Qxg2+ 86.Kf5 Qxg5+ 87.Kxg5 Kxe4 etc All credit to Houdini, of course. |
|
Aug-30-15
| | Penguincw: < jith1207: Even <Penguincw>'s Eagle statistical eye seems to have missed that <CGdotCom> has played a Woo(r)d pun on both GOTD and QOTD. > Hey, maybe I <did> notice but just didn't comment on it. But FTR, I missed it. I should've gotten it, since if there's anyone that knows a thing or two about the QOTD on <cg>, it should be me. :| |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | thegoodanarchist: <Jamboree: Why resign in the final position? > Maybe White lost on time. |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | dark.horse: <thegoodanarchist: <Jamboree: Why resign in the final position? >
Maybe White lost on time.>
A more general question: Why isn't more detailed result information (example: reason for loss) commonly included in chess scores? |
|
| Aug-30-15 | | dusk: Is 32. Qd4+ a bad move? |
|
| Aug-31-15 | | kevin86: Queen defeats two rooks! |
|
| Mar-30-22 | | rwbean: 19. b4! followed by ♘g5 threatening ♘e6 and ♕g7# or forking the black rooks, wins 40. ♘e2 a winning defensive move
72. ♖h3 drawing (I think) |
|
| Mar-30-22 | | Cibator: <dark.horse: <thegoodanarchist: <Jamboree: Why resign in the final position? > Maybe White lost on time.>
A more general question: Why isn't more detailed result information (example: reason for loss) commonly included in chess scores?> Been saying for years that all games forfeited on time should be noted to that effect - all it takes is "1-0T" or "0-1T". Too simple for most, I guess. |
|
Kibitzing
