A good blog this one.
Me playing a girl at chess at a fancy dress chess tournament.
Proof Ian Fleming knew about chess - and a mini review of Moonraker.
The Bond villian Drax getting trapped.
A new example of the Reti Study theme missed by an RHP lad.
A 'how did that happen puzzle'
(S.G. what is the correct technical term and please post the solution here with a pgn thingy.)
Just to interrupt.
A long way back you did a post on Blackburne doing a f5 in response to Evans Gambit.
Anyways I tried it out f5 after 4. c3 and played one of my best games of chess.
Game 10454369
P.S another interesting post, I will try the square when I can
G
- Joined
- 08 Apr 09
- Moves
- 19887
Originally posted by PonderableThat's indeed the funny thing. To squeeze in one more move for each side is really hard. I managed to find it however:
I can do it in three:
[hidden]1. e4 e6 2. Bc4 c6 3. Bxe6 dxe6 [/hidden]
but not in four. I do need three pawn moves for black, and I can't any filling move with the knight (to and fro)...
You have solved it TVchess.
I was hoping the do it in 3 would throw you.
I was ready with a "I said 4 moves not 3." It's good one.
That is an entertaing game the7tidlys.
The last thing I expected was it to go all the way to an ending with
both sides promoting, The game was on edge all the way through.
Originally posted by greenpawn34I am sure there were places in there that a quality player (better than me and the opp), would have found a way.
You have solved it TVchess.
I was hoping the do it in 3 would throw you.
I was ready with a "I said 4 moves not 3." It's good one.
That is an entertaing game the7tidlys.
The last thing I expected was it to go all the way to an ending with
both sides promoting, The game was on edge all the way through.
I just wish I knew someone who likes to anlayse slightly unusual chess positions...
Anyway thanks for the response, it is a pleasure to read your (and Russ, who the hell is he?) blog.
G
One big "stand up and applaud" for me was that the blog shows how studies such as Reti's have tremendous learning value, as the concept/idea can be applied to our own games.
The idea that, in chess, the shortest distance between two points for a king is not always a straight line is not an intuitive one, and worth remembering.
Originally posted by Paul LeggettEm. Lasker said that he learned from Reti's endgame studies. High praise indeed.
One big "stand up and applaud" for me was that the blog shows how studies such as Reti's have tremendous learning value, as the concept/idea can be applied to our own games.
The idea that, in chess, the shortest distance between two points for a king is not always a straight line is not an intuitive one, and worth remembering.
