Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 05:57 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,536
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3 b - - 0 0

The above position is from Grenewald v. Lematschko, Swiss Championship
2000. James Plaskett in his book claims the best continuation
is...you figure it out...but it involves a pseudo Queen sac at the
knight. He however fails to find the best move, which is
paradoxically Qf7. I guessed Rf2+ then Qf7, but Plaskett wrongly
thinks the King must go to g1 (and mate in 3). In fact, this is mate
in three. Play through it and see what I mean. A computer, after
Rf2+, gives up the queen, and so Rf2 is a good move without Plaskett's
continuation.

I am taking full credit of 5 points for this...another cook in
Plaskett's book.

Hint: the position fools you due to an optical illusion...key hint:
is anything protecting the White N besides the rook?
  #2   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 06:10 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 292
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On 30 June, 17:57, raylopez99 wrote:
8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3 b - - 0 0

The above position is from Grenewald v. Lematschko, Swiss Championship
2000. *James Plaskett in his book claims the best continuation
is...you figure it out...but it involves a pseudo Queen sac at the
knight. *He however fails to find the best move, which is
paradoxically Qf7. *I guessed Rf2+ then Qf7, but Plaskett wrongly
thinks the King must go to g1 (and mate in 3). *In fact, this is mate
in three. *Play through it and see what I mean. *A computer, after
Rf2+, gives up the queen, and so Rf2 is a good move without Plaskett's
continuation.

I am taking full credit of 5 points for this...another cook in
Plaskett's book.

Hint: the position fools you due to an optical illusion...key hint:
is anything protecting the White N besides the rook?


The omniscient Master might be shocked at your posting this.

He felt sure

1) that you are Phil Innes (you're not, of course)

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec...b7497e70?hl=en

and

2) that you'd left, as he indicated in another ****witted post of his,
he

http://groups.google.co.uk/group/rec...9d663c7f?hl=en

ROFL
  #3   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:04 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On Jun 30, 12:57*pm, raylopez99 wrote:
8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3 b - - 0 0

The above position is from Grenewald v. Lematschko, Swiss Championship
2000. *James Plaskett in his book claims the best continuation
is...you figure it out...but it involves a pseudo Queen sac at the
knight. *He however fails to find the best move, which is
paradoxically Qf7. *I guessed Rf2+ then Qf7, but Plaskett wrongly
thinks the King must go to g1 (and mate in 3). *In fact, this is mate
in three. *Play through it and see what I mean. *A computer, after
Rf2+, gives up the queen, and so Rf2 is a good move without Plaskett's
continuation.

I am taking full credit of 5 points for this...another cook in
Plaskett's book.

Hint: the position fools you due to an optical illusion...key hint:
is anything protecting the White N besides the rook?


Didn't he play quarterback for the Oakland Raiders?
  #4   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:06 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 292
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On 30 June, 19:04, None wrote:
On Jun 30, 12:57*pm, raylopez99 wrote:





8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3 b - - 0 0


The above position is from Grenewald v. Lematschko, Swiss Championship
2000. *James Plaskett in his book claims the best continuation
is...you figure it out...but it involves a pseudo Queen sac at the
knight. *He however fails to find the best move, which is
paradoxically Qf7. *I guessed Rf2+ then Qf7, but Plaskett wrongly
thinks the King must go to g1 (and mate in 3). *In fact, this is mate
in three. *Play through it and see what I mean. *A computer, after
Rf2+, gives up the queen, and so Rf2 is a good move without Plaskett's
continuation.


I am taking full credit of 5 points for this...another cook in
Plaskett's book.


Hint: the position fools you due to an optical illusion...key hint:
is anything protecting the White N besides the rook?


Didn't he play quarterback for the Oakland Raiders?


At Oakland or LA?
  #5   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:10 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On Jun 30, 2:06*pm, Mark Houlsby wrote:

Didn't he play quarterback for the Oakland Raiders?


At Oakland or LA?-


Mox nix, both stadiums offer Chardonnay on tap.


  #6   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:13 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 292
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On 30 June, 19:10, None wrote:
On Jun 30, 2:06*pm, Mark Houlsby wrote:



Didn't he play quarterback for the Oakland Raiders?


At Oakland or LA?-


Mox nix, both stadiums offer Chardonnay on tap.


chuckle
  #7   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:16 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,256
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On Jun 30, 12:57*pm, raylopez99 wrote:
8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3 b - - 0 0

The above position is from Grenewald v. Lematschko, Swiss Championship
2000. *James Plaskett in his book claims the best continuation
is...you figure it out...but it involves a pseudo Queen sac at the
knight.


Yes, after 1...Rf2+ 2.Kh1 Black can sac the queen with 2...Qxe4+
3.Rxe4 Rf1+ etc., or sac the rook with 2...Rf1+ 3.Rxf1 Qxe4+ etc. BTW,
one does not say "a sac /at/ the knight." The queen is sacrificed /
for/ the knight.

*He however fails to find the best move, which is
paradoxically Qf7.


Why "paradoxically"?

*I guessed Rf2+ then Qf7,


That works against either king move, but I don't recommend it
against 2.Nxf2.

but Plaskett wrongly
thinks the King must go to g1 (and mate in 3). *


Are you sure he says mate in 3 after 2.Kg1? Or do you mean Kh1? Mate
in 3 is possible only in the latter case.

In fact, this is mate in three.


Eh? Plaskett's wrong to say it's mate in 3, yet you say "in fact
this is mate in three"?

*Play through it and see what I mean. *A computer, after
Rf2+, gives up the queen, and so Rf2 is a good move without Plaskett's
continuation.


Plaskett recommends 1...Rf2+, and yet you fault Plaskett because
there's more than one reason it's a good move?

I am taking full credit of 5 points for this...


As well you should, since you chose the move he recommended.

another cook in
Plaskett's book.


True, 1...Qf7 also wins, but in real games, as opposed to composed
problems, this is often the case.

Hint: the position fools you due to an optical illusion...key hint:
is anything protecting the White N besides the rook?


I fail to see the relevance of the question, nor do I see any
"optical illusion" that might fool people. In neither line 1...Rf2+
or 1...Qf7 is defense of the Ne4 very important. The important fact
for the 1...Rf2+ line is that to avoid mate White must play 2.Nxf2,
thus losing his queen.
While 1...Qf7 may be objectively stronger, in practical human terms,
1...Rf2+ is by far the more attractive move. It is direct, forcing,
and perhaps most important it allows only three legal replies, and
these need be analyzed only a few ply ahead to be seen as winning. In
contrast, 1...Qf7 is a quiet move allowing many different replies,
making it much harder for a human brain to analyze with confidence.
  #8   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:33 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,256
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On Jun 30, 2:04*pm, None wrote:
On Jun 30, 12:57*pm, raylopez99 wrote:





8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3 b - - 0 0


The above position is from Grenewald v. Lematschko, Swiss Championship
2000. *James Plaskett in his book claims the best continuation
is...you figure it out...but it involves a pseudo Queen sac at the
knight. *He however fails to find the best move, which is
paradoxically Qf7. *I guessed Rf2+ then Qf7, but Plaskett wrongly
thinks the King must go to g1 (and mate in 3). *In fact, this is mate
in three. *Play through it and see what I mean. *A computer, after
Rf2+, gives up the queen, and so Rf2 is a good move without Plaskett's
continuation.


I am taking full credit of 5 points for this...another cook in
Plaskett's book.


Hint: the position fools you due to an optical illusion...key hint:
is anything protecting the White N besides the rook?


Didn't he play quarterback for the Oakland Raiders?


You are probably thinking of Jim Plunkett, who played for the
Raiders 1978-86. The Raiders moved from Oakland to LA in 1982, so
Plunkett's stint included both cities.
  #9   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:39 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 292
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On 30 June, 19:33, Taylor Kingston
wrote:
On Jun 30, 2:04*pm, None wrote:





On Jun 30, 12:57*pm, raylopez99 wrote:


8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3 b - - 0 0


The above position is from Grenewald v. Lematschko, Swiss Championship
2000. *James Plaskett in his book claims the best continuation
is...you figure it out...but it involves a pseudo Queen sac at the
knight. *He however fails to find the best move, which is
paradoxically Qf7. *I guessed Rf2+ then Qf7, but Plaskett wrongly
thinks the King must go to g1 (and mate in 3). *In fact, this is mate
in three. *Play through it and see what I mean. *A computer, after
Rf2+, gives up the queen, and so Rf2 is a good move without Plaskett's
continuation.


I am taking full credit of 5 points for this...another cook in
Plaskett's book.


Hint: the position fools you due to an optical illusion...key hint:
is anything protecting the White N besides the rook?


Didn't he play quarterback for the Oakland Raiders?


* You are probably thinking of Jim Plunkett, who played for the
Raiders 1978-86. The Raiders moved from Oakland to LA in 1982, so
Plunkett's stint included both cities.


Yes, I remember Plunkett from the LA days. In the early to mid 80s
Channel 4 in Britain showed NFL games basically by rebroadcasting
CBS Monday Night Football. But on Tuesday. We Brits seem always
to be behind you guys.
  #10   Report Post  
Old June 30th 10, 07:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.analysis
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,256
Default Another cook in Plaskett's book: 8/6k1/1p1Q2q1/p1pP1r1p/P1PbN1p1/1P4P1/6KP/4R3b - - 0 0

On Jun 30, 2:39*pm, Mark Houlsby wrote:
On 30 June, 19:33, Taylor Kingston
wrote:

Didn't he play quarterback for the Oakland Raiders?


* You are probably thinking of Jim Plunkett, who played for the
Raiders 1978-86. The Raiders moved from Oakland to LA in 1982, so
Plunkett's stint included both cities.


Yes, I remember Plunkett from the LA days.


I remember him back from his college days. I watched him lead
Stanford to victory over my UCLA Bruins at the LA Coliseum in 1970. He
went on to win the Rose Bowl and the Heisman trophy. I got a measure
of revenge when I watched my San Diego Chargers use Plunkett and Kenny
Stabler for tackling dummies en route to a 30-10 victory in 1979. But
then Plunkett got the last laugh, beating my Chargers at the one game
I ever attended in Oakland in 1980, then doing it again in the AFC
Championship, and eventually winning the Super Bowl.
Still, I found it hard to dislike Plunkett (unlike many of his
Raider teammates). He was a pretty nice guy.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First Draft: Blue Book Encyclopedia of Chess samsloan rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 9 February 29th 08 03:55 PM
First Draft: Blue Book Encyclopedia of Chess samsloan rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 4 February 16th 08 03:46 PM
First Draft: Blue Book Encyclopedia of Chess samsloan rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 4 February 16th 08 03:46 PM
Introduction to 365 Selected Chess Endings by Hartleb and Norman T. Whitaker samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 9 June 2nd 07 09:42 PM
Keene confronts his critics [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 6 May 3rd 06 11:18 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017