1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. b3 {This is called the Nancy Opening because as I’m typing this I’m listening to Nancy Sinatra’s Greatest Hits and I can’t think of anything else to call it.} 3... b6 {The Double Nancy!} 4. Bb2 Bb7 5. d3 Bc5 6. Bxe5 {Yup. What is the point of playing the Nancy and hitting the e-pawn if you not going to take it when given the chance.} 6... Nxe5 7. Nxe5 {Now Black should have played 7…Bd4 threatening to take the a1 Rook which is the new checkmate.} 7... Bxf2+ 8. Kxf2 Qf6+ {If now 9.Nf3 then the a1 Rook goes.} 9. Kg1 Qxe5 {Now here is a situation. What is more important the a1 Rook or the King….} 10. Nd2 {…The a1 Rook.} 10... Qd4 {That’s that. Yes 10.c3! would have saved both the a1 Rook and the King.}
1. e4 e5 2. Ng1f3 Nb8c6 3. b3 {The Nancy again.} 3...Bf8c5 4. Bc1b2 Ng8f6 5. Nf3xe5 {Taking the e-pawn with the Knight this time.} 5...Nc6xe5 6. Bb2xe5 d6 7. Be5xf6 Qd8xf6 {That's that. A double attack on f2 and the a1 Rook end this one.}
This was Bobby Fischer’s comment on the following game in the August 1968
issue of Boys Life. It was the first time a computer beat a human in a tournament.
MacHack IV - Ben Landy, Boston 1967.
When computers talk amongst each other, and they do.
They often mention this game and it’s Morphy Mate.
Black’s 14th move is a move no reasonable human
would play.It shows the ‘horizon effect’ in all it’s glory.
I did not have all the win worked out. I just knew wrecking
it’s King’s protection and giving me Qh5 with a tempo would
give me a huge attack. What I took in a two second glance .
you will to when you see it, took programmers years ot redress.
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 d6 6. Bc4 e6 7. Bb3 Be7 8. O-O Nxd4 9. Qxd4 O-O 10. Bg5 b6 11. Rad1 Bb7 12. e5 dxe5 13. Qxe5 Qb8 14. Qe2 {Well that’s me fresh out ideas so I centralise and wait.} 14... Bd6 { It goes off pawn hunting. To say it underestimated the coming attack would be wrong as these thing do not estimate. They crunched numbers and munched pawns.} 15. Bxf6 Bxh2+ 16. Kh1 gxf6 17. Qh5 Be5 18. Bxe6 {Rarely miss easy tricks. If 18…fxe6 then 19.Rd7 wins. Good ploy that, centralise and wait. Now I suspect it saw the Bishop going to f5 and would like to play Be4 to hold the h7 pawn but that Knight on c3 stops that, so….} 18... Bxc3 19. Bf5 Rd8 20. Qh6 {Threatening the old 1-2-3-4 mate as shown above.} 20... Qc7 {Which it sees thus proving it is looking ahead at least 4 moves.} 21. bxc3 {Now I simply threaten Rfe1 cutting off the flight square then Qh7+ and mate so it has to grab the e-file.} 21... Rxd1 22. Rxd1 Re8 {Stops Re1 but only for 3 moves.} 23. Qxh7+ Kf8 24. Qh8+ Ke7 25. Re1+
A Sockdolager?
I first saw this term in a Chernev book and wondered about it then.
Recently I came across this advert.
I saw this book advertised in the UK but never with the ‘Sockdolager’ tag.
What is a Sockdolager?
Do you put something heavy into a sock and dolaged someone with it?
(Nancy Sinatra does a dreadful version of ‘Light My Fire.’ rest of the stuff not too bad.)
When I was new to chess I bought an old copy of Horowitz's "Chess Openings: Theory and Practice". As I flipped through it, I noticed that the King's Indian Defense, the Pirc Defense, and the King's Indian Attack all were the same position after 5 moves. Ol' beginner me thought "Wow! If I play these, I can go 5 moves into any game without being out of book! Brilliant!"
Fifteen years later GM Yasser Seirawan writes "Winning Chess Openings", and in it he advocates the KIA, the KID, and the Pirc for the very same reason.
And he still doesn't give me credit for the idea.
Fifteen years later GM Yasser Seirawan writes "Winning Chess Openings", and in it he advocates the KIA, the KID, and the Pirc for the very same reason.
And he still doesn't give me credit for the idea.