06.11.2013, 21:03
Lieber Christoph,
Das berühmteste Beispiel eines Einstellers ist wohl Petrosjans Dame, das ich hier in
schlechter Kopie beigefügt habe.
[Event "Candidates Tournament"]
[Site "Amsterdam/Leeuwarden"]
[Date "1956.03.28"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Petrosian, Tigran V"]
[Black "Bronstein, David I"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E65"]
[Annotator "ChessBase"]
[PlyCount "72"]
[EventDate "1956.03.27"]
[EventType "tourn"]
[EventRounds "18"]
[EventCountry "NED"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "1999.07.01"]
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. Nf3 c5 6. O-O Nc6 7. d4 d6 8. dxc5
dxc5 9. Be3 Nd7 {This move rightly has a bad reputation.} (9... Qa5 {was
better.}) 10. Qc1 Nd4 $2 {After the obvious reply Black is practically forced
to play ... e5, which creates weaknesses on the d-file.} 11. Rd1 e5 12. Bh6 {
White's plan is simple; he wishes, after exchanging the dark-square-bishops,
to drive away the knight from d4, and then to intensify the pressure on the
opponent's position.} Qa5 {Threatening 13...Qxc3.} 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. Kh1 Rb8 {
Black has a difficult position, since it is not apparent how he can develop
his queenside. On} (14... Nxf3 {White can play} 15. Bxf3 Nf6 16. Qg5 {or 15.
exf3 followed by 16.f4.}) 15. Nd2 a6 16. e3 Ne6 17. a4 h5 18. h4 f5 19. Nd5 Kh7
20. b3 (20. b4 cxb4 21. Qb2 {was also possible, but White did not want to
allow his opponent the c5 sqare.}) 20... Rf7 21. Nf3 Qd8 22. Qc3 Qh8 {Black
defends tenaciously.} (22... e4 {was weaker because of} 23. Ne5 {Having
defended his e5 sqare, Black is now ready to play ... e4, which would greatly
improve his position.}) 23. e4 $1 {[#] Now the game is opened up, and all the
drawbacks of Black's position are clearly revealed. It is not apparent what he
can do against the threat of 24. exf5 or 24.Re1 followed by 25.exf5.} fxe4 {On}
(23... f4 {White gains advantage by} 24. Ng5+ Nxg5 25. hxg5 fxg3 26. fxg3) 24.
Nd2 Qg7 {Capturing the f2 pawn would have allowed White to create direct
threats after 25.Rf1.} (24... Rxf2 25. Rf1 $40) 25. Nxe4 Kh8 26. Rd2 Rf8 27. a5
Nd4 28. b4 cxb4 29. Qxb4 Nf5 30. Rad1 Nd4 {Black has no useful moves, und
White, without harrying, selects a target against which to strike the decisive
blow.} 31. Re1 Nc6 32. Qa3 Nd4 33. Rb2 Nc6 34. Reb1 Nd4 35. Qd6 Nf5 36. Ng5 $4
{This move does not require any commentary. A comic aspect of the blunder is
that White leaves his queen en prise to the opponent's only active piece.} Nxd6
0-1
Ich kann mich an zwei eigene Partien erinnern, wo ähnliches geschah; ausnahmsweise war ich nicht der Leidtragende.
Ich bin mir aber nicht sicher ob "Einsteller", auch einzügige und "Schachblindheit" quasi Synonyme sind. Ich glaube der letztere hat noch eine ganz andere Qualität. Aber welche?
Gruß Wolfgang
Das berühmteste Beispiel eines Einstellers ist wohl Petrosjans Dame, das ich hier in
schlechter Kopie beigefügt habe.
[Event "Candidates Tournament"]
[Site "Amsterdam/Leeuwarden"]
[Date "1956.03.28"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Petrosian, Tigran V"]
[Black "Bronstein, David I"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E65"]
[Annotator "ChessBase"]
[PlyCount "72"]
[EventDate "1956.03.27"]
[EventType "tourn"]
[EventRounds "18"]
[EventCountry "NED"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "1999.07.01"]
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 O-O 5. Nf3 c5 6. O-O Nc6 7. d4 d6 8. dxc5
dxc5 9. Be3 Nd7 {This move rightly has a bad reputation.} (9... Qa5 {was
better.}) 10. Qc1 Nd4 $2 {After the obvious reply Black is practically forced
to play ... e5, which creates weaknesses on the d-file.} 11. Rd1 e5 12. Bh6 {
White's plan is simple; he wishes, after exchanging the dark-square-bishops,
to drive away the knight from d4, and then to intensify the pressure on the
opponent's position.} Qa5 {Threatening 13...Qxc3.} 13. Bxg7 Kxg7 14. Kh1 Rb8 {
Black has a difficult position, since it is not apparent how he can develop
his queenside. On} (14... Nxf3 {White can play} 15. Bxf3 Nf6 16. Qg5 {or 15.
exf3 followed by 16.f4.}) 15. Nd2 a6 16. e3 Ne6 17. a4 h5 18. h4 f5 19. Nd5 Kh7
20. b3 (20. b4 cxb4 21. Qb2 {was also possible, but White did not want to
allow his opponent the c5 sqare.}) 20... Rf7 21. Nf3 Qd8 22. Qc3 Qh8 {Black
defends tenaciously.} (22... e4 {was weaker because of} 23. Ne5 {Having
defended his e5 sqare, Black is now ready to play ... e4, which would greatly
improve his position.}) 23. e4 $1 {[#] Now the game is opened up, and all the
drawbacks of Black's position are clearly revealed. It is not apparent what he
can do against the threat of 24. exf5 or 24.Re1 followed by 25.exf5.} fxe4 {On}
(23... f4 {White gains advantage by} 24. Ng5+ Nxg5 25. hxg5 fxg3 26. fxg3) 24.
Nd2 Qg7 {Capturing the f2 pawn would have allowed White to create direct
threats after 25.Rf1.} (24... Rxf2 25. Rf1 $40) 25. Nxe4 Kh8 26. Rd2 Rf8 27. a5
Nd4 28. b4 cxb4 29. Qxb4 Nf5 30. Rad1 Nd4 {Black has no useful moves, und
White, without harrying, selects a target against which to strike the decisive
blow.} 31. Re1 Nc6 32. Qa3 Nd4 33. Rb2 Nc6 34. Reb1 Nd4 35. Qd6 Nf5 36. Ng5 $4
{This move does not require any commentary. A comic aspect of the blunder is
that White leaves his queen en prise to the opponent's only active piece.} Nxd6
0-1
Ich kann mich an zwei eigene Partien erinnern, wo ähnliches geschah; ausnahmsweise war ich nicht der Leidtragende.
Ich bin mir aber nicht sicher ob "Einsteller", auch einzügige und "Schachblindheit" quasi Synonyme sind. Ich glaube der letztere hat noch eine ganz andere Qualität. Aber welche?
Gruß Wolfgang