Nov-08-05 Ed. Lasker vs F Englund, 1913 
| |
| atrifix: <KingG> Actually, it reminded me very much of Yasser Seirawan's depicition of his thoughts at a very young age (perhaps younger than 8). This game appeared in Winning Chess Openings (Seirawan playing White): 1. e4 e5 2. Qh5 Nc6 3. Bc4 g6 4. Qf3 Nf6 5. Qb3 Nd4 6. Bxf7+ Ke7 7. ... |
|
|
|
Nov-08-05 J Murey vs E Mortensen, 1982
| |
| atrifix: <patzer2> Although White has an advantage in your line (extra pawn, bishop pair, better pawn structure), it is still a pretty technical win. Black can do much better with 24... Rfe8 and 25... Rac8 and attempt to bring the knight to c4 or e4 or a rook to the 2nd rank, although ... |
|
|
|
Oct-06-05 McDonnell vs La Bourdonnais, 1834
| |
| atrifix: <schnarre> These ARE modern annotations. Here's my favorite one: "Theory about chess strategy made a leap forward in 1927, when Euwe wrote sagacious articles about pawns in the center and the attack on the King, and Nimzovich published his system of prophylaxis. Van Reek ... |
|
|
|
Oct-05-05 Topalov vs Kasimdzhanov, 2005
| |
| atrifix: <Chicgirl> There is no threefold repitition: 69... Ra5 70. Kf3 transposes to the game, where White wins. |
|
|
|
Oct-05-05 A J Goldsby
| |
| atrifix: <chancho> There are a large number of players in the range of 2000-2500 who visit this site from time to time, besides the well-known GMs Susan Polgar, Keene, etc. I personally know a few of them. But most of them don't get their own pages (unless they're closer to the 2500 ... |
|
|
|
Oct-04-05 J Polgar vs Topalov, 2005
| |
| atrifix: 64... Kd3! makes everything clear. Black will get the same a- and c-pawn endgame, but White's king will be too far away from the queenside to make a draw. There were a number of chances for Black to go wrong in this endgame (e.g. 61... Rxb3?). In the post-adjournment days, this is ... |
|
|
|
Oct-02-05 Fischer vs A Sandrin, 1957
| |
| atrifix: <RookFile> Fischer got his IM title by winning the US championship in 1957. |
|
|
|
Oct-01-05 Topalov vs Adams, 2005
| |
| atrifix: <Uhlhumbrus> It all depends on specifics. If Black can play ...f5, then the bishop is better placed on g6, but if not, then it may be stuck out of play there. If Black could attack c4, then it would be better placed on a6, but Black seems to have no way to do that. Best is ... |
|
|
|
Sep-29-05 Topalov vs Anand, 2005
| |
| atrifix: <tamar> I have a feeling that this whole game is going to be analyzed quite a bit...of course Anand missed a draw by moving his king away from the pawns, when Topalov could have won with 85. f5+!. 60. g5 also appears to win. Black can't move his bishop off the diagonal, ... |
|
|
|
Sep-28-05 Capablanca vs Marshall, 1918
| |
| atrifix: Surprisingly, no one has posted the analysis on 16. Bd2 yet, so I will post Kasparov's analysis. 16. Re2
Of course, not 16. Qxf2? Bh2+! 17. Kf1 Bg3 18. Qe2 Bxh3 19. gxh3 Rae8 and White is in trouble. However, in the 1950s it transpired that 16. Bd2! is stronger, for example: 1) ... |
|
|
|
| indicates a reply to the comment. |
|
Kibitzing
