online chess board

Online Chess Board

Tag and you will reveal!
Funny name, real interests
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
pamela024 56 ( +1 | -1 )
Stunning Rook Sacrifice Larry Christiansen won the 2002 US Invitational Championship in January of this year. In an early round match with Igor Foygel, Christiansen makes what the columnist Robert Byrne (NYT, 1/27/02) later said was a stunning rook sacrifice (14. Re6):
1. e4 g6 2. d4 Bg7 3. Nc3 c6 4. Nf3 d5 5. h3 Nf6 6. Bd3 de 7. Ne4 Ne4 8. Be4 Bf5 9. Bf5 Qa5 10. c3 Qf5 11. 0-0 Nd7 12. Re1 e6 13.Qb3 Qb5 14. Re6 fe 15. Qe6 Kd8 16. Bg5 Kc8 17. Re1 Rf8 18. Qe7 Kc7 19. Qg7 Rf3 20. Re5 Qb2 21. gf and Foygel resigned. In his review Byrne comments that among the losing strategies open to Foygel after Christiansen's sacrifice was: 17...Qf5 18. Qd6 Bf6 19. Bf4 Bd8 20. Re7 Bb6 21. c4 c5 22. dc Qb1 23 Kh2 Nc5 24. Rc7! Was Byrne correct in his analysis that the rook sacrifice was winning? What one move by black changes the rook sacrifice into good chances for a draw?
gramario 15 ( +1 | -1 )
Stunning...? I am still looking at things here, but on a quick glance what is wrong with 17...Qd5?
Don't all bark at once if I have missed something.
gramario 12 ( +1 | -1 )
Stunning I know that I am the only one who replied here, Pamela024, but would you let me have your answer please?
pamela024 25 ( +1 | -1 )
To tell you the truth I haven't gotten to it yet. It was a question given to me by my chess coach and I have been playing too much. But the hint he gave me was that Byrne's line beginning 17...Qf5 was in error in some way. I appreciate you responding; it didn't get much attention!
tulkos 0 ( +1 | -1 )
lets give this oldy some attention!
acne 8 ( +1 | -1 )
i don't understand 19...Bd8. it seems 19...Qa5 would be better 'cause at least white can't play Re7 yet.