The Game That WIll Shut Down RHP.

Hello.

Before we get to the main event I have to reveal some jiggery-pokery
and slip-slop-dash that a few lads from chessgames.com have put me on to.

When a I was covering Mating Patterns one of the best
received blogs was the one showing the Pillsbury Mate.


The Bishop can be anywhere from a1-f6 the Rook anywhere from g1-g5
You remember it? It’s the one where crazy Morgski dragged his sister onto an iceberg
to play the Icelandic Gambit and I introduced the Pillsbury Two-Step and the Pillsbury Shuffle.
(I’ll give a link to it at the bottom of the page.)

Anyway it transpires that the game from…..



…where they give H. Pillsbury - F. Lee London 1899 Never Happened.



Unfortunately it now appears that this game belongs with a handful of other
famous games sparkling with sacs and combinations that was never actually played.

So what did happen?

This position occurred in Pillsbury v Newman from a blindfold simul in Philadelphia, 1900.
This game is No.107 in ‘Pillsbury’s Chess Career’ by P. W. Sergeant and W. H. Watts.


But it ended differently to game given in ‘The Art of Checkmate.’
In the actual game Pillsbury played 17. Kd2 and not 17.Qf3!

This position cropped up in both the Lee and Newman games with Black to play.


In 1889 Lee played 10..Bxc6. Newman, one year later played 10….Rb8.

Somehow somebody got things all mixed up and added in a cute finish that was never played.

So the Pillsbury Mate is not really the Pillsbury Mate, it’s the Nearly Pillsbury Mate.

OK now the fun part, when and where did it happen? This book:



Is my own personal copy and is a 1966 re-print of the 1937 reprint of the 1922 original.
(did you follow that, I have the 3rd reprint.) right at the end of this book this note appears:



What a strange note to add in the 1953 version. It does seem as if they know something.

Did the 1922 copy have the score wrong (is that the smoking gun) and in the 1937
2nd re-print did they dropped the whole game. (anybody got the 1922 copy?).

Tarrasch used the position in his book, 'The Game of Chess' which was published in 1931 but
gives no names and no dates. (diagram 241.) So the position and the trick hding within it was known.

Well that was fun. Now onto more serious business…..

I never usually run a Planet Greenpawn column past the
RHP site owner Russ but on this occasion I felt I just had to.

My reason being that Russ will need a team of sharp lawyers to deal with all the lawsuits
that are about to drop into his lap from Chess Widows and I really do mean Chess Widows.

Once some of you have seen this game you will shut down your computer,
climb onto the window ledge and jump. Those of you that live on the ground floor
will I’m sure find more imaginative ways to end your lives but end them you will.

After seeing the following game you will realise that life
has nothing more to show you, you might just as well give up.

Here is a link to leave this column taking you the relative safety of the Chess forum.

Back to the Chess Forum

It is your last chance to get off this page. If I were you I would use it.

OK you are still here, well don’t say you were never warned.
What about me? Fours years of doing this blog and looking at
your games has driven me totally round the bend. I’m insane and immune.

I will set the scene.

Do you know of any game where a player was four minor pieces up and lost?

There are actually a few. The most famous one being:

The Polish Immortal” Glucksberg - Najdorf , Warsaw 1930.
We join the game just as Black is about to sacrifice his four minor pieces.

(Mystery also surrounds this game as to when it was played. I’ve taken 1930 as that
is the date Najdorf gives in ‘Najdorf The Life Games, but there are books giving
1935 and one claim for 1928. Anybody know any other dates? )

And of course there is the “RHP Forlorn Immortal” where White ends up
4 minor pieces and a Rook down after setting the trap of traps and wins.

blackknight (1140) - ic (883) RHP 2010

You could plug this position in the strongest computer in the world and it would
never play what White played next. It would just sit there brooding and sulking.

Computers are totally hopeless in hopeless positions, they simply have no hope and yet this
1140 player won because of a tactical shot based on the well known and simple ‘deflection theme.’

Here it is. You are lost, totally lost. There is however one last trick to play.
It requires a blunder by your opponent, but human opponents are not machines, they do blunder.

White to play what would you try?


Here is what happened, but I am sure most of you saw it.

But do you know of a game where all the minor pieces were captured by the same piece?

No and neither did I till I saw this game.

Russ’s lawyers have been in touch. Apparently I have to give you three chances to go.

Back to the Chess Forum

The evildoer in this game is the knave sitting on g8.
The King’s Knight.This is where it captured them, these are the crimes scenes.



It captured Bishops on e3 and g4, it took both White Knights on d5!.

Yes Black was two Bishops and two Knights ahead in material and lost.
Why did he lose? It was the fault of the very Knight that took the four pieces.

Here is the last back to the chess forum link that I am legally obliged to give..

Back to the Chess Forum

OK we now see (and for some of you this will the last game of Chess you ever will see)