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

Only Chess Forum

  1. 07 Dec '12 14:06 / 1 edit
    Whilst the rest of you are fawning and gushing over the those
    inflated rated clowns in the Classic. I thought I’d show just a few positions
    from the FIDE OPEN where the real chess is being played.

    Our Chess, where we don’t need to plug in Fritz in the forlorn hope
    it will tell us what is going on.

    But I must you warn you T.Farrand - V.Hamitevici is not
    for the faint of heart. Your toes will curl, your jaw will hit the deck
    and you will thank your god that it was not you playing White that day.

    But first a clever piece of calculation from GM Simon Williams.
    Possibly seen a long time before I saw it.
    (without a doubt seen a long time before I saw it.)

    M Ferguson (2402) - S. Williams (2515) London Chess Classic FIDE Open 2012



    J. Spychala (1521) - T. Bermingham (1959)] London Chess Classic FIDE Open 2012

    Typical OTB blunder. White misses a piece going with check.
    It’s a simple as that. You won’t see this in the Classic, but there again none of us
    will ever be playing in the Classic. (hopefully these closed shop tournaments which
    do nothing but hyper-inflate grades will soon be a thing of the past.)
    So let us stick to what we do best.....Blunder with a capital ‘B’.



    P.Casaschi (2005) - E. Baasansuren (1795) London Chess Classic FIDE Open 2012

    Black is handed the game on a plate. He suddenly remembers the grades
    and gets a nose bleed.




    R. Sayers(2153) - S.Whatley (1707) London Chess Classic FIDE Open 2012

    A neat double exchange sac from White sees this one off.



    T.Farrand (2200) - V.Hamitevici (2440) London Chess Classic FIDE Open 2012

    Now then. Was this a blunder by Black or a gamble. You decide.
    Either way it’s up there with the greatest swindles on the chessboard.

  2. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    07 Dec '12 16:04
    Originally posted by greenpawn34
    Whilst the rest of you are fawning and gushing over the those
    inflated rated clowns in the Classic. I thought I’d show just a few positions
    from the FIDE OPEN where the real chess is being played.

    Our Chess, where we don’t need to plug in Fritz in the forlorn hope
    it will tell us what is going on.

    But I must you warn you [b] T.Farrand - V.Ha ...[text shortened]... language that can console a player after losing such a game. None.}[/pgn]
    You said, "This sac had to be seen when Black played Rb1 and Qb1. Without it Black has nothing." Obviously you must mean Qa1 there.

    I disagree because I saw those moves without first seeing the sac.
  3. Standard member vivify
    rain
    07 Dec '12 16:54
    This post makes me sooooooo much better right now. I was just murdering someone on another site, before making a careless, careless blunder, and resigned imediately. Glad to know I'm not the only one.
  4. Standard member wolfgang59
    Infidel
    07 Dec '12 20:50
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You said, "This sac had to be seen when Black played Rb1 and Qb1. Without it Black has nothing." Obviously you must mean Qa1 there.

    I disagree because I saw those moves without first seeing the sac.
  5. 07 Dec '12 22:58
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You said, "This sac had to be seen when Black played Rb1 and Qb1. Without it Black has nothing." Obviously you must mean Qa1 there.

    I disagree because I saw those moves without first seeing the sac.
    Because your engine showed them to you.
  6. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    08 Dec '12 01:53
    Originally posted by tomtom232
    Because your engine showed them to you.
    You don't need an engine to see them, because they are not that hard to see. You may need an engine to see the win with the sac, however.
  7. 08 Dec '12 02:45 / 1 edit
    "I disagree because I saw those moves without first seeing the sac."


    There is the difference between us and the GM's.
    They tend to think first and then move.

    Williams would not have burnt his bridges with Rb1 and Qa1 without
    seeing the Rook sac. After White plays Qxa5 White has at the very least
    a perpetual starting with Qc7+ so there was no time for the cosy Rh1.
    He had to have seen the coming Rook sac 4-5 moves before it was played.

    I suppose the only way to be sure is to ask him.

    All Simon has said about it so far is: "It was a fun way to finish."
    So someone out there with a Twitter account needs to ask him.
    I bet I'm right. (I don't have or need one....I twitter enough on here.)
  8. Standard member nimzo5
    Ronin
    08 Dec '12 02:54
    Originally posted by greenpawn34

    There is the difference between us and the GM's.
    They tend to think first and then move.
    This needed repeating for RJ
  9. Standard member usmc7257
    semper fi
    08 Dec '12 05:49
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You said, "This sac had to be seen when Black played Rb1 and Qb1. Without it Black has nothing." Obviously you must mean Qa1 there.

    I disagree because I saw those moves without first seeing the sac.
    why are you using bold text like JCmessy?...... uh oh
  10. Subscriber thaughbaer
    Duckfinder General
    08 Dec '12 10:54
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You don't need an engine to see them, because they are not that hard to see. You may need an engine to see the win with the sac, however.
    You're missing the point JC. Why would you play them if ( by your own admission you had not seen the rook sac ) you have no idea what is coming next ? Presumably you are relying on some other entity to finish the game for you.
  11. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    08 Dec '12 15:55
    Originally posted by thaughbaer
    You're missing the point JC. Why would you play them if ( by your own admission you had not seen the rook sac ) you have no idea what is coming next ? Presumably you are relying on some other entity to finish the game for you.
    I do not always analyze games to the end. I just stated that I saw the idea of lining up the rook and queen on the back rank in order to attack the white king. What is so hard to understand about that?
  12. Subscriber thaughbaer
    Duckfinder General
    08 Dec '12 19:12
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I do not always analyze games to the end. I just stated that I saw the idea of lining up the rook and queen on the back rank in order to attack the white king. What is so hard to understand about that?
    So you don't deny you're JC. At least we're making some progress. Understanding what you're saying isn't difficult at all. Accepting it as an intelligent statement is a different matter altogether. Count the thumbs. You're even less popular than me. And that's no easy feat. Congratulations.
  13. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    09 Dec '12 04:11
    Originally posted by thaughbaer
    So you don't deny you're JC. At least we're making some progress. Understanding what you're saying isn't difficult at all. Accepting it as an intelligent statement is a different matter altogether. Count the thumbs. You're even less popular than me. And that's no easy feat. Congratulations.
    You just need to get your head out, that's all. 😏
  14. Subscriber thaughbaer
    Duckfinder General
    09 Dec '12 11:04 / 10 edits
  15. 09 Dec '12 12:37 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by thaughbaer
    Count the thumbs.
    OK.

    In the last seven posts on this forum that show up in a search (http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/search.php?threadid=0&authorname=rjhinds&dayfrom=1&monthfrom=2&yearfrom=2001&dayto=9&monthto=12&yearto=2012&page=&page=1) at the moment, RJ has been given 36 thumbs-down and no thumbs-up. 46 thumbs-down in the last ten posts, and no thumbs-up. The most recent posts don't show up, and none of them has a thumbs-up as far as I can see.