chess openings

Chess Openings

Share and you will uncover!
Funky name, real matters
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
morphy ♡ 25 ( +1 | -1 )
best move... Some time ago,someone wrote which was the best move ever?Well,for what its worth,no one mentioned the game Alekhine v Feldt (1916),his fifteenth move nf7 was quite breathtaking,even now.If anyone wants the moves,let me know.
v_glorioso12 ♡ 1 ( +1 | -1 )
i want them
tulkos ♡ 9 ( +1 | -1 )
I would like the moves! The chess greats--- playing through their games is such an enjoyable thing!
a_professional_idiot ♡ 8 ( +1 | -1 )
if you like great moves You should watch Levitzky-Marshall
I think that Marshall's 23... Qg6 was incredible
p8ntballjunky1 ♡ 4 ( +1 | -1 )
i would love that move!
honololou ♡ 8 ( +1 | -1 )
Is it true… that this (Alekhines move) was played blind in a
simultaneous exhibition?
honololou ♡ 18 ( +1 | -1 )
here is the game… White: Alekhine,Alexander
Black: Feldt
Event: Tarnopol blind sim
Date: 1916
(C11 French D)

1 e4 e6
2 d4 d5
3 Nc3 Nf6
4 exd5 Nxd5
5 Ne4 f5
6 Ng5 Be7
7 N5f3 c6
8 Ne5 0-0
9 Ngf3 b6
10 Bd3 Bb7
11 0-0 Re8
12 c4 Nf6
13 Bf4 Nbd7
14 Qe2 c5
15 Nf7 Kxf7
16 Qxe6+ Kg6
17 g4 1-0
v_glorioso12 ♡ 1 ( +1 | -1 )
its nice...... but not amazing......
caldazar ♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 )
I've always liked 31. Kh2 in Short-Timman, Tilburg, 1991 has always struck me as a pretty interesting move. Talk about inviting everyone to the party.

Marshall's 23... Qg3 had a very large "wow" factor, but wasn't he winning after any reasonable queen move?
edmaster ♡ 3 ( +1 | -1 )
BLACK:...1 P-QB4
tonlesu ♡ 22 ( +1 | -1 )
caldazar Whats your point? Are you suggesting he should have made a reasonable queen move that would probably win instead of an unbelievably fantastic queen move that nailed his opponent to the wall.
caldazar ♡ 26 ( +1 | -1 )
No, not really Just that Levitzky would have resigned (or should have, anyway, since there's no way for White to recover the piece) no matter what Marshall played. So that the flashy queen move, while impressive, was not really necessary.
macheide ♡ 9 ( +1 | -1 )
a_professional_idiot Dear friend,

I agree with you, the move was atonishing, but was ...Qg3!!!

Best wishes,

tonlesu ♡ 23 ( +1 | -1 )
caldazar If you let your opponent hang around long enough, who knows what may happen. If you have the "coup de grace" you should use it. And if such a move immortalizes your name in chess books---Learn to live with it!
caldazar ♡ 64 ( +1 | -1 )
Tonlesu I suppose I just don't consider Marshall's queen exchange to be all that impressive (because that's all 23... Qg3 was). In my mind, the winning blow worthy of notice happened on move 20 when Marshall realized that, due to his knight on d4, Levitzky's bishop on h3 was loose, and so a rook skewer against White's queen and bishop picked up a piece.

Certainly it was a nice piece of tactics and calculation of the kind Marshall was famous for and definitely something worth looking at and studying. But it is a fairly common theme, using tactics to force an exchange of pieces. And 23... Qg3 wasn't the only continuation, as I said; all other reasonable continuation seemed just as promising to me.
macheide ♡ 34 ( +1 | -1 )
caldazar You are right, my friend. And Marshall could had win the game in a more economic way. But ...Qg3!!! was played for the spectators, it was made to delight not only to win. It is the same case of many famous tactical masterpieces: in "The Evergreen Game", Anderssen made the inmortal Rad1!!, but he could have won in less moves but also in a less impresive way.

Best wishes,

caldazar ♡ 3 ( +1 | -1 )
macheide Yes, that is a good point.
tonlesu ♡ 66 ( +1 | -1 )
hey gentlemen Ya got a minute---You're both wrong. Marshall played the strongest move on the board, isn't that what you're supposed to do. Playing for the spectators?? More like he was playing for his supper. If those guys didn't win, they didn't eat.

The "Evergreen Game" has been analyzed, re-analyzed, retro-analyzed, Fritzed de-fritzed etc., etc., for one hundred and fifty years and of course they are going to find ways to win in less moves. Put any of the old masters games under the microscope and you're going to find mistakes. But this does not mean they were playing for the spectators. You guys are really good if you really can tell what was in a players mind when he played his move.

macheide ♡ 58 ( +1 | -1 )
tonlesu Dear tonlesu,

I do belive that Marshall made that move for the spectators. His daily food ration wasn't in danger because the move wins anyway.

In more recent times, one journalist asked Tal how dis he find his moves, Tal asked: " I just seat down and imagine what of the moves (Good moves, obviously!) will people would like the most".

Of course, Tal's food was provided by the Communist regime, IF AND ONLY IF HE WON GAMES, TOURNAMENTS, and he did it, in the way he knowed: "Making GOOD moves that AMAZE his public".

Best regards,

tonlesu ♡ 56 ( +1 | -1 )
macheide One Tal story deserves another.

"He was a player who always wanted to play. Once, long ago, he was in Amsterdam for a few days on a tour of simultaneous exhibition and surprised me by saying: "If you want to play some blitz games, just call me at the hotel." Just like that, as in a story for children you, ex-world champion,play with me, beginning young master? I didn't know then that he always wanted to play chess, if necessary---With the waiter!"
Hans Ree writing about Tal 'Human Comedy of Chess'
Play well my friend, Jim
ufo84 ♡ 7 ( +1 | -1 )
easy My favorite is......8. P-KR3. Tarrasch vs. Showalter Vienna 1898 Hungarian Defense.