< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 10 · Later Kibitzing>

Jan-15-18 SeanAzarin : And if we can get back to chess...

Capablanca said of this game, "I felt honor bound to take the Pawn, as my position should then be defendable." After a Titanic struggle, he was [barely] right.

Jan-15-18

offramp : <Harrison Bergeron: ... He’ll escape the embassy, daringly, in the coming months...> It will be the least dramatic and least daring escape in world history. He simply has to walk to the front door of the embassy, open it and walk outside. <Tout simple> .

Jan-15-18 john barleycorn : <offramp: ... He simply has to walk to the front door of the embassy, open it and walk outside ...> It will be tougher for him to return once the embassy is thoroughly aired

Jan-15-18

morfishine : Very nice post by <visayanbraindoctor> summing up Marshall's record. I used to think Marshall has been somewhat overrated, but not now *****

Jan-15-18

offramp : Marshall invented many interesting gambits.

There is a Marshall Gambit in the Scandinavian Defence: 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Nf6. There is also one in the QGD Tarrasch Defence: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5 4.cxd5 exd5 5.e4. There is one used one in the Semi-Slav Defence: 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2. See R Pert vs J Burnett, 2015. And there's one in the French Defence, 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 c5. Then there is the one that can be seen in Nunn vs Hitech, 1992, which has the name "Four Knights Game: Spanish. Classical Variation Marshall Gambit". But oddly enough, the famous pawn offer in this game, versus Capablanca, is called the Marshall <Attack> , not gambit. He was a fantastically inventive player but some large losses in matches made his record look much worse than it could have been.

Jan-15-18

WorstPlayerEver : PS But, obviously, the article is not hostile to women... hell no!

Jan-15-18

thegoodanarchist : <offramp: He must be getting pretty fed up in there, and I bet the Ecuadoids are pretty fed up of him.> So folks from Ecuador are called Ecuadoids? Good to know! (I thought it was Ecuadudlians)

Jan-17-18

Sally Simpson : ChessBase have now pick up the Assange message. https://en.chessbase.com/post/wikil... it's obvious, he is planning to escape and fly to Cuba.

May-24-18 bobbyperezchess : 11...Nf6?! is risky.

Better moves are 11...c6! and the calmer 11...Bb7!? . However, those moves aren't still known in that era! 11...c6 became the main line of the Marshall after Spassky popularized the ...c6 Marshall and used it as a drawing weapon, while the queenside-attacking plan by playing 11...Bb7 12.Qf3 Bd6! 13.Bxd5 c6 14.Re1 cxd5 15.d4 Qc7 16.h3/g3 Rae8 is slightly newer.

Oct-23-18

ketchuplover : Today is the 100th anniversary of this skirmish.

Oct-24-18 Granny O Doul : Just as the Battle of Sharqat was opening in Mesopotamia.

Dec-08-18

MissScarlett : <Soltis in the Marshall book mentions that Ed Lasker was astonished to learn from Emanuel Lasker whilst they were walking in a garden during the New York 1924 tourney that Lasker (the good one) had never seen nor heard of the Marshal Gambit (Capa v Marshall played in 1918).> Carlsen - Caruana World Championship Match (2018) (kibitz #3252) By 1926, he wasn't much the wiser: Lasker vs H R Bigelow, 1926 I do find it surprising how long it took the Marshall to gain theoretical respectability, even given the post-war hangover. One would have thought the hyper-moderns would've been all over it - maybe the Ruy Lopez was too venerable an institution. The DB has only a handful of master-level examples from the 1920s, although there must be quite a few more. One such is <Yates - O'Hanlon, British ch, 1921, 1-0> , where O'Hanlon's try 20...Qxc1 is actually worse than Marshall's 20...Bxf2, but Yates's play also suggests he hadn't analysed it to any great depth.

Dec-08-18

Retireborn : <MissS> Interesting story. Perhaps Lasker did heed Edward's warning, given that he reverted to his good old 4.Bxc6 against Marshall at NY 1924 (which also seems to be the last time he played it.)

Dec-08-18 john barleycorn : <MissScarlett: <Soltis in the Marshall book mentions that Ed Lasker was astonished to learn from Emanuel Lasker whilst they were walking in a garden during the New York 1924 tourney that Lasker (the good one) had never seen nor heard of the Marshal Gambit (Capa v Marshall played in 1918).> ...> Believe Soltis or not. I don't.

Dec-08-18

MissScarlett : I can't believe you don't believe Soltis believes Edward Lasker not believing Emanuel Lasker.

Dec-08-18

Sally Simpson : ***

it is on page 265 of the Soltis book, Soltis lists 'Chess Secrets 'by Edward Lasker in the bibliography but does not link this piece to any particular source. It may be in 'Chess Secrets,' I read it about 40 years ago, (something like that tale rings a bell, though I have to admit the only bells I hear these days is nursey coming with my meds) have a copy somewhere I'll dig it out when I have time. (the grand kids are up....funny how they only do a surprise visit just before Christmas.) ***

Dec-08-18 john barleycorn : <MissScarlett: I can't believe ...> well, even you have your limits

Dec-08-18

MissScarlett : Didn't you believe I was <Daniel Freeman> 's mum?

Dec-08-18 zanzibar : <Sally ... funny how they [i.e. the grandkids] only do a surprise visit just before Christmas.> Ha!

Dec-08-18 john barleycorn : <MissScarlett: Didn't you believe I was <Daniel Freeman> 's mum?> NO. (capital letters). You are simply not bright enough to make an intelligent baby.

Dec-16-18

mifralu : According to the BDE, Capablanca won after 38 moves. Additional moves < 36. ...Rxf7 37. b8=Q+ Kh7 38. Rxh6+ 1-0 White 2h 6 min

Black 2h 26 min >

https://bklyn.newspapers.com/image/...

Dec-30-18

HarryP : Marshall lost, but this game was a testament to his courage and inventiveness. It was a heroic loss.

Apr-11-19

Ron : Assange had tweeted a position from this famous game. Capablaca weathered the storm in this game. Assange was mistaken in thinking that he weathered the storm against him.

Mar-31-20

MissScarlett : C.N. 11754, the latest addition to https://www.chesshistory.com/winter..., quotes Shipley effectively in support of Marshall's later contention (in the March 1943 Chess Review) that he had been toying with the Marshall Gambit for years before this game. Doesn't this mean that the now derided myth (see Capablanca vs Marshall, 1918 (kibitz #21)) that Marshall stored this debut up for a long time is substantively, even, one might say, essentially true? I don't find it too great a leap of the imagination to believe that he did indeed have Capablanca as his eventual target.

Jun-19-20

wordfunph : "I thought for a little while...knowing that I would be subjected to a dangerous attack, all the lines of which would be of necessity familiar to my adversary. The lust of battle, however, had been aroused within me. I felt that my judgment and skill were being challenged by a player who had every reason to fear both. I considered the position then and decided that I was in honor bound, so to speak, to take the P and accept the challenge, as my knowledge and judgment told me that my position should then be defensible." - Jose Raul Capablanca

Source: Chess Life 1985 September

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 10)



search thread:

