Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 28 Jun '11 12:44
    Alexander v Plater, European Zonal, Dublin , 1957, searched for it everywhere, no joy.
  2. 28 Jun '11 13:38
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Alexander v Plater, European Zonal, Dublin , 1957, searched for it everywhere, no joy.
    Hi Robbie, is this it?

    http://www.365chess.com/game.php?gid=2534132
  3. 28 Jun '11 14:06 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by Mad Rook
    Hi Robbie, is this it?

    http://www.365chess.com/game.php?gid=2534132
    yes it is Rook, thanks sooo much, been searching for it for ages, Pirc defence,
    awesome! Now here is the thing, Golombek, who spent time with Alexander during the
    II world war, as a decoder, said of this position, that black cannot take the bishop pawn
    because of Bc5 regaining the pawn with advantage for white, but i dont think its true



    what do you think? can black take the pawn?
  4. 28 Jun '11 14:13 / 1 edit
    1. Bc5 Qxf4 is an option I guess.
  5. 28 Jun '11 14:20
    Originally posted by tvochess
    1. Bc5 Qxf4 is an option I guess.
    yes, exactly!
  6. 28 Jun '11 14:59
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    what do you think? can black take the pawn?
    You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me?

    My 1200 opinion is, I'd take the pawn, but what do I know? (Yeah, I'd also grab the f-pawn if given the chance.)

    My box sort of alternates between preferring ...Qxb4 and ...Qc7. It even gives ...Qa3 as a 3rd choice. But in all cases, it gives the edge to White, maybe half a pawn.
  7. 28 Jun '11 15:06 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Mad Rook
    You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me?

    My 1200 opinion is, I'd take the pawn, but what do I know? (Yeah, I'd also grab the f-pawn if given the chance.)

    My box sort of alternates between preferring ...Qxb4 and ...Qc7. It even gives ...Qa3 as a 3rd choice. But in all cases, it gives the edge to White, maybe half a pawn.
    yes, i was talking to you my friend, you'd take the pawn, so would I, half a pawn advantage to white you say, meh, its better than nuthin i suppose. What about Golombecks remarks that white takes the pawn back, i assume he must mean, Bxe7, so we have the line ...Qxb4, Bc5 Qxf4 and Bxe7, is this still an advantage for white? after say ...Rf7, Bc4 and . . .e6, i cant believe it.
  8. 28 Jun '11 15:26
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    yes, i was talking to you my friend, you'd take the pawn, so would I, half a pawn advantage to white you say, meh, its better than nuthin i suppose. What about Golombecks remarks that white takes the pawn back, i assume he must mean, Bxe7, so we have the line ...Qxb4, Bc5 Qxf4 and Bxe7, is this still an advantage for white? after say ...Rf7, Bc4 and . . .e6, i cant believe it.
    If 16...Qxb4, the box wouldn't immediately play 17. Bc5. It would play a different and much messier variation. (17. Rhb1 or Rab1) The line you give (16...Qxb4 17.Bc5 Qxf4 18. Bxe7) is roughly equal.
  9. 28 Jun '11 15:32 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    What about Golombecks remarks that white takes the pawn back, i assume he must mean, Bxe7, so we have the line ...Qxb4, Bc5 Qxf4 and Bxe7, is this still an advantage for white? after say ...Rf7, Bc4 and . . .e6, i cant believe it.
    I believe your last move ... e6 is impossible since that pawn was just taken with Bxe7.

    Perhaps fxe5 is interesting at some point, since it connects the rook and queen on the f-file, on which white's king is positioned.

    Edit: By the way: if ... Rf7, then e6 is interesting for white (is this what you meant perhaps?)
  10. 28 Jun '11 16:01
    Originally posted by tvochess
    I believe your last move ... e6 is impossible since that pawn was just taken with Bxe7.

    Perhaps fxe5 is interesting at some point, since it connects the rook and queen on the f-file, on which white's king is positioned.

    Edit: By the way: if ... Rf7, then e6 is interesting for white (is this what you meant perhaps?)
    yes you are correct, its what happens when one tries to do these things in ones 'minds eye', yes, ...e6 is impossible
  11. 28 Jun '11 20:09
    Originally posted by Mad Rook
    You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me?

    My 1200 opinion is, I'd take the pawn, but what do I know? (Yeah, I'd also grab the f-pawn if given the chance.)

    My box sort of alternates between preferring ...Qxb4 and ...Qc7. It even gives ...Qa3 as a 3rd choice. But in all cases, it gives the edge to White, maybe half a pawn.
    your 1200 opinion is as good as mine and robbies 1600-1700 opinion in these games

    personally i'd usually take the pawn but blacks position is so bad i might think about centering the queen to get some sort of attacking defense going.
  12. 29 Jun '11 01:11
    Hi Robbie.

    Plater went into the same line as Black 7 years later and followed
    the first 15 moves of the Alexander game. White deviates first.

    B.Pietrusiak - K.Plater, Warsaw 1964

    It's a cracking game. White is all over Black when it appears out of desparation
    Black sacs for a a perpetual...and gets it!

    One of the very interesting unplayed variations was here. White to play.



    I think White saw this and tried to squeeze an extra trick in.
    He played Rc1 and Black baited him with b6.



    Here is the full game.

  13. 29 Jun '11 08:25
    this is really great GP, thanks for that. Since i have been reading my Golombek book there are hundreds of gems from the 1950's full of bristling ideas from Keres and Bronstein, not materialistic chess like we see now, but creative chess, sacking pawns to keep the initiative, Bronstein in one game sacks a well placed knight as black and gains three passed queenside pawns in return, its astounding chess.
  14. 29 Jun '11 14:40
    50's was a great era.

    Fishcer & Tal were teenagers and their games are full of the confidence of youth.
    Especially Tal. And of course the games of Spassky who played some sparkling
    games at that time. This makes up for the methodical games of Botvinnik
    who ruled during that decade.

    Bronstein has always had the magic. If you can get your hands on
    Paul Keres 'The early and middle years. 1929 - 1952' then you are in for a treat.