tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23075362.post5629496882252512957..comments2024-01-29T13:41:11.764-05:00Comments on Blunder Prone .... Imagination, Inspiration and Improvement: Part 4: Dr. Emanuel Lasker: MultitaskingBlunderPronehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08316158004635698398noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23075362.post-90425233596365128502011-07-06T14:16:57.606-05:002011-07-06T14:16:57.606-05:00Marco wasn't in the field at London 1899. The...Marco wasn't in the field at London 1899. The second-place finishers were Janowski, Pillsbury and Maroczy. Marco finished 7-9 at Paris the following year. <br /><br />http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1010517<br /><br />http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1012305<br /><br />I didn't realize Lasker didn't get his doctorate until 1902 -- interesting to know. Anyway, great website!keypusherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176947522040838625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23075362.post-5446370269448694582011-05-13T13:24:40.576-05:002011-05-13T13:24:40.576-05:00George, it's great to see you putting out this...George, it's great to see you putting out this wonderful chess history material. I have been away for some time. <br /><br />Dept. of FWIW: I reopened my old chess blog, minus the politco/philosopho balthering, at <a href="http://rlpchessblog.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">Robert Pearson's Chess Blog</a>.Robert Pearsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01357942424904415208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23075362.post-25642179239468346922011-05-01T21:50:55.810-05:002011-05-01T21:50:55.810-05:00I'll say why I think Napier lost that game, he...I'll say why I think Napier lost that game, he couldn't stick with a plan, one plan.<br /><br />...Bg4 was correct, but before playing ..d5. He wanted to play ..d5, he wanted ..Bg4, he wanted ..Bxb2, he wanted ..gxh, he wanted to hang his knight, he didn't want to take one of White's pieces right away, he wanted this, he wanted that...PICK SOMETHING AND STICK TO IT!<br />;-)<br /><br />This isn't a smorgasbord, it's a chessgame. I've done the same thing myself, refrained from making good moves because I only got one game to try to get everything in, and I wanted to see more possiblities, and....a lot of chess is just about how one accepts their fate, you get to pick a line and the rest is reams of analysis which never gets played or ends up in opening book sidenotes.LinuxGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15764940044950170053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23075362.post-53659872431139352252011-05-01T21:41:05.351-05:002011-05-01T21:41:05.351-05:00I looked at the Napier game, a lot of suttle error...I looked at the Napier game, a lot of suttle errors you wouldn't expect so much these days.<br /><br />h3,g4 is not a system for attacking the Dragon. h3, f4, 0-0 okay, or h4 with 0-0-0 also sensible.<br /><br />Black could have played ..Nh5, ..Ne8 is a bit of an over-reaction, still fine, yet not so modern.<br /><br />NxBg7 is virtually a gimme response these days, not Ne7.<br /><br />I looked at it with Crafty and the error was fxe4? followed by Bxb2?? Lasker should be winning for taking the Nc3 and losing for not taking it. <br /><br />I looked at Be8xh5 first, then found a more positional move, but I overlooked one thing, White has to take on h5 where it's great or horrible, no advanced calculation required. One reason, material, other replies lose too much of it and that move takes at least a pawn.<br /><br />The mate threat started to look obvious, but you have to admit that Lasker simply outplayed his opponenent and aside from playing the opening like he was without having much experience, still deserved the win. Interesting game to analyze.LinuxGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15764940044950170053noreply@blogger.com