Most spectacular blown win (and problem like finish) I've ever seen
RayLopez99
wKf2,Qf5,Nf3,h4,Ba1,Rd7,Pa3,c4,e3,e5,f4/
bKg8,Qa8,Na6,c7,Rb3,f8,Pa4,c5,f7,g7,h6
Grinshpan-Kaminsky, Poznan, Poland, 1961 1-0 (if anybody has the
complete game please post here)
Above is the most amazing finish (and blown win) I've seen in years.
It's exercise Diagram 150 from the excellent book "Test Your Tactical
Ability" by Yakov Neishtadt (1981, Batsford).
The author wrongly claims that a cascade of spectacular sacrifices
wins for White by forced mate, starting with 1.Ng5! (???--RL) hg 2.
Ng6! fg 3. Rxg7! Kxg7 (???--RL, instead Kh8! wins for black) 4.e6+ and
White won says Neishtadt.
I always double check my answers with Fritz when I got this one wrong
I checked my answer with Fritz's and found it was the same (1.e6, Ne6
2.Qe6 +- 1.66 Fritz). Then I checked the proposed (and actually
played) moves, and found they lose, but in a spectacular way:
After the correct 3...Kh8! (not Kxg7, a forced win for white), there
is a very nice line for black that is not at all obvious here:
1.Ng5 hg 2. Ng6 fg 3. Rg7 Kh8 4. Qg6 (Rf7 is loses slower for white, -
+2.66)
All hope seems lost for black in this line, as white threatens mate in
one with no clear way out for black, until this seeming spite check is
found: 4...Rf4+!! which leads to a mate in five! Also nice in most
of these lines is the problem like self-blocking move Ne6 by black,
which forces white to capture on e6 and thereby block its own pawn.
I nominate this game as the best finish I've ever seen. You also know
it wasn't a staged game, since the players did not play the proposed
finish (or if they staged it, they did not see the above line).
Any disagreements? If you don't like this game you should tip your
King and resign from playing chess again!
RL
RayLopez99
Cross posting to computer as well.
ChessFire
> wKf2,Qf5,Nf3,h4,Ba1,Rd7,Pa3,c4,e3,e5,f4/
> bKg8,Qa8,Na6,c7,Rb3,f8,Pa4,c5,f7,g7,h6
>
> Grinshpan-Kaminsky, Poznan, Poland, 1961 1-0 (if anybody has the
> complete game please post here)
Very hard to find - seems like the national championship was in Poznan
in 1962, the Junior in Poznan 1961. I spent half an hour googling for
variants of Grinshpan-Kaminsky, Poznan 1961.
No result, though many pages requesting 'translation into English'
Wouldn't it be good if someone here could set up a site and then
accept diagrams for discussion? Diagrams are easy to make and
transcendent of media.
Anyway, good luck searching for the full game score.
Phil
Andrew B.
Haven't got any software to check this: what does Black do against
4.Qxg5 ?
RayLopez99
> > All hope seems lost for black in this line, as white threatens mate in
> > one with no clear way out for black, until this seeming spite check is
> > found: 4...Rf4+!! which leads to a mate in five! Also nice in most
> > of these lines is the problem like self-blocking move Ne6 by black,
> > which forces white to capture on e6 and thereby block its own pawn.
>
> Haven't got any software to check this: what does Black do against
> 4.Qxg5 ?
Good one Andrew B, if you did this from memory. Fritz says Black
still wins, because of this line:
4. Qxg5 Qh1 5. Rxg6 Qh2+ 6. Kf3 Qh3+ then Qf1+ (or I would trade
queens, still ahead -4.00), etc. -7.00
if 6. Qg2, Rxf4! (the rook cannot be captured since it's mate in 6).
RL
Andrew B.
Thanks - I thought that 4....Rxf4+ and 4....Kxg7 didn't work, but
overlooked 4....Qh1!
Very interesting position.
RayLopez99
> Thanks - I thought that 4....Rxf4+ and 4....Kxg7 didn't work, but
> overlooked 4....Qh1!
> Very interesting position.
Yes, I thought so. I don't see these kind of busts that often--a rule
of thumb is that two piece sac is rare, but here, a three piece sac,
is as rare as hen's teeth or unsound (as is the case here).
RL
Andrew B.
> wKf2,Qf5,Nf3,h4,Ba1,Rd7,Pa3,c4,e3,e5,f4/
> bKg8,Qa8,Na6,c7,Rb3,f8,Pa4,c5,f7,g7,h6
>
> Grinshpan-Kaminsky, Poznan, Poland, 1961 1-0 (if anybody has the
> complete game please post here)
Why not ask Edward Winter at Chess Notes? Since this involves trying
to find a missing game score to a position with a dramatic tactical
finish and shows an error in a book, it sounds right up his street :-)
raylopez99
>
> Why not ask Edward Winter at Chess Notes? Since this involves trying
> to find a missing game score to a position with a dramatic tactical
> finish and shows an error in a book, it sounds right up his street :-)
Well I hope he's reading this...and if so he'll respond.
RL
Taylor Kingston
I've never known Winter to post on this newsgroup, and I doubt he
reads it much, if at all. Decades ago he used to post on a group
called Leisure Linc, but that's about the extent of his online
arguing, as far as I know with respect to chess. I would suggest
writing to him directly. If he does not know the actual provenance of
the game, he may post a request for help on Chess Notes.
Both Rybka 3 UCI and Fritz8 agree with Ray's analysis of the
position.
raylopez99
wrote:
> I've never known Winter to post on this newsgroup, and I doubt he
> reads it much, if at all. Decades ago he used to post on a group
> called Leisure Linc, but that's about the extent of his online
> arguing, as far as I know with respect to chess. I would suggest
> writing to him directly. If he does not know the actual provenance of
> the game, he may post a request for help on Chess Notes.
> Both Rybka 3 UCI and Fritz8 agree with Ray's analysis of the
> position.
Thanks TK. Decades ago? It sounds like Winter is a real Luddite. I
did buy one of his books though. If he's as backward as described,
perhaps I need to find his postal mail address and write him a letter
the old fashioned way by hand. Winter--in my mind he lives in
Switzerland and is an irrascable (sic) old man who rails at every
slight, LOL.
RL
Taylor Kingston
>
> Thanks TK. Decades ago? It sounds like Winter is a real Luddite. I
> did buy one of his books though. If he's as backward as described,
> perhaps I need to find his postal mail address and write him a letter
> the old fashioned way by hand. Winter--in my mind he lives in
> Switzerland and is an irrascable (sic) old man who rails at every
> slight, LOL.
His Chess Notes website (which gives his e-mail address) is common
knowledge:
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/index.html
The Edward Winter who 'lives in your mind' is very different from
the one who actually lives in Switzerland.
None
wrote:
Larry Parr used to hoot that you, Taylor Kingston, was to be in fact,
Ed Winters. Do you deny that accusation?
Taylor Kingston
I do not recall that Parr ever made such a claim. However, Sam Sloan
did, even going so far as to put this silly notion on Wikipedia. No, I
am not Edward Winter.
Chvsanchez
There is a White pawn on h2!
sd
wrote:
> On Dec 30, 3:00 pm, raylopez99 <raylope...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 29, 4:23 pm, "Andrew B." <bull...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Why not ask Edward Winter at Chess Notes? Since this involves trying
> > > to find a missing game score to a position with a dramatic tactical
> > > finish and shows an error in a book, it sounds right up his street :-)
>
> > Well I hope he's reading this...and if so he'll respond.
>
> I've never known Winter to post on this newsgroup, and I doubt he
> reads it much, if at all.
He has called what appears in the newsgroups "catlap."
Given what Phil and Parr post here, not far off the mark.
raylopez99
> > I nominate this game as the best finish I've ever seen. You also know
> > it wasn't a staged game, since the players did not play the proposed
> > finish (or if they staged it, they did not see the above line).
>
> > Any disagreements? If you don't like this game you should tip your
> > King and resign from playing chess again!
>
> > RL
>
> There is a White pawn on h2!
Double checking the position in the book, I see that YES MY AR FRIEND
YOU ARE CORRECT! MY BUST HAS BEEN BUSTED?!! But wait...
OK, no, it's still good! But Chvsanchez is right...there is a pawn on
h2 and it does change the analysis...
Here is the corrected position:
q4rk1/2nR1pp1/n3P2p/2p2Q2/p1P2P1N/Pr2PN2/5K1P/B7 b - - 0 1
Now, the analysis is different but the conclusion is still the same--
the sacrifice was unsound (but Black does not win by force, instead,
it's equal this time).
Crafty19 and Fritz 5.32 both agree:
best move is, as before, 1. e6. But if White plays the game move of
Ng5, here is what you get:
[Event "1961"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2009.12.31"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Grinshpan"]
[Black "Kaminsky"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Annotator "Fritz 5.32"]
[FEN "q4rk1/2nR1pp1/n6p/2p1PQ2/p1P2P1N/Pr2PN2/5K1P/B7 w - - 0 1"]
1. e6 (1. Ng5 hxg5 2. Ng6 Qe8 (2... fxg6 3. Rxg7+ Kh8 4. Qxg5) 3. Ne7+
Qxe7 4.
Rxe7 gxf4 5. exf4 Rxa3) 1... Nxe6 2. Qxe6 =
As you can see, declining to capture the knight in the move 2. Ng6,
and instead moving the queen to e8, will result in a nearly equal game
for black + 0.81.
Thanks! I lucked out with this double busted cook, as I often do in
chess.
RL
Taylor Kingston
If so, that changes some things. The double knight sac then seems to
work, if accepted: 1.Ng5 hxg5 2.Ng6 fxg6 3.Rxg7+ Kh8 4.Qxg5 and Rybka
says mate is forced in no more than 8 moves. 4...Qh1, the saving line
Lopez gave above, no longer works, since with a pawn on h2 it allows
5.Qh6#.
With the pawn on h2, Black should decline the second knight by 2...
Qe8, after which Rybka gives best play as 3.Ne7+ Qxe7 4.Rxe7 gxf4
5.exf4 Rxa3 6.e6 Nxe6 7.Rxe6 fxe6 8. Qxe6+ Kh7 9.Be5 Nb4 10.Qe7 Nd3+
(not 10...Rg8?? 11.Qh4+ Kg6 12.Qg4+ Kf7 13.Qd7+ Kg6 14.Qe6+ Kh7
15.Qf5+ g6 16.Qf7+ and wins) 11.Ke2 Nxe5 12.Qxf8 with an advantage of
about +1.60 for White.
However, the h2-pawn does not change the best line for White, 1.e6!
Nxe6 2.Qxe6! and wins, as Lopez gave earlier.