Yes I was thinking of 0-0. Didn't quite catch the start of this but I think I got it right. Yesterday Short was saying how last week against Ray Robson he made 2 moves in a row! His excuse was that he had gone away from the board and upon coming back saw the demo board showing K on g8 rather than on h8 where it was. As Kg8 was a decent move he assumed it had been made. Apparently didn't check on the actual board or indeed check to see whose clock was running! Andrew
I believe PG has it, although there was also some 'afters' viz-a-viz an appeals committee rumpus iirc. Perhaps EJH will shed some light tomorrow.
Funnily enough, I've had this in my 'to blog' file for at least two years and never quite got around to it. Justin found it independently and put it up there.
Presumably Superchess as you knew when and where the game was played but nothing of why it was interesting, you simply put the position in Chessbase to find out what it was. And the point of that is?
Anonymous: I was present at the game and witnessed Rxf4 - well actually, the move was never completed as when Murray picked up the Rook, Motwani said"check!" - Murray went slightly red but to avoid further discomfort Paul resigned. He knew he was busted anyway after the forced Kf7. Most spectators and other players thought the resignation was a little premature but it was not. I don`t think you will find the move Rxf4 recorded anywhere and this is simply a case of the story getting a little less accurate on each recounting. I was unaware that there had been a stewards enquiry after the event and find it hard to believe not only because every strong player knows that once the scoresheet is signed that`s that but also as both players seemed to enjoy their postmortem together.
My 'knowledge' of this event comes from the report on the Zonal tournament in Chess at the time. I'll dig it out and remind myself exactly what it says.
I have in fact written to both players about the incident and Murray Chandler has been kind enough to reply, confirming that he did play an illegal move which went unnoticed by both players until after the scoresheets had been signed. So Superchess' recollection does not seem to be right.
Somewhat later than intended ... from the pages of Chess (Aug 1990, vol 55 #5), our old friend Nigel Davies reports on the Blackpool Zonal and includes this on page 22
"Black to move played 30 ... Rxf4!? afer which Motwani resigned; seeing that 31 gxf4 would be answered by 31 Rg8 when White "loses" his knight. WHat neither player had seen was that 30 Nxg7 was check!
This error was discovered after the game but Stewart Reuben ruled that the resignation had to stand. This decision was upheld by the appeals committee."
14 comments:
30....0-0 ?!
I know this one. Motwani-Chandler ended Rxf4 and white resigned thinking he was losing after gxf4 Rg8. Astonishing!
PG
Yes I was thinking of 0-0. Didn't quite catch the start of this but I think I got it right. Yesterday Short was saying how last week against Ray Robson he made 2 moves in a row! His excuse was that he had gone away from the board and upon coming back saw the demo board showing K on g8 rather than on h8 where it was. As Kg8 was a decent move he assumed it had been made. Apparently didn't check on the actual board or indeed check to see whose clock was running!
Andrew
SuperChess is right:- it's Motwani-Chandler ...
but s/he's also wrong, White didn't resign before Black replied.
I believe PG has it, although there was also some 'afters' viz-a-viz an appeals committee rumpus iirc. Perhaps EJH will shed some light tomorrow.
Funnily enough, I've had this in my 'to blog' file for at least two years and never quite got around to it. Justin found it independently and put it up there.
"I must away to shed more light", as John Hurt said in I Claudius.
Presumably Superchess as you knew when and where the game was played but nothing of why it was interesting, you simply put the position in Chessbase to find out what it was. And the point of that is?
It's an intertesting point, but it's also interesting that it was made anonymously, which isn't necessarily good form when making a personal critcism.
Anonymous: I was present at the game and witnessed Rxf4 - well actually, the move was never completed as when Murray picked up the Rook, Motwani said"check!" - Murray went slightly red but to avoid further discomfort Paul resigned. He knew he was busted anyway after the forced Kf7. Most spectators and other players thought the resignation was a little premature but it was not. I don`t think you will find the move Rxf4 recorded anywhere and this is simply a case of the story getting a little less accurate on each recounting. I was unaware that there had been a stewards enquiry after the event and find it hard to believe not only because every strong player knows that once the scoresheet is signed that`s that but also as both players seemed to enjoy their postmortem together.
Now isn't that an interesting account. I shall have to check this out further....
Evening all.
Thanks for the update Superchess.
My 'knowledge' of this event comes from the report on the Zonal tournament in Chess at the time. I'll dig it out and remind myself exactly what it says.
J
I have in fact written to both players about the incident and Murray Chandler has been kind enough to reply, confirming that he did play an illegal move which went unnoticed by both players until after the scoresheets had been signed. So Superchess' recollection does not seem to be right.
Somewhat later than intended ... from the pages of Chess (Aug 1990, vol 55 #5), our old friend Nigel Davies reports on the Blackpool Zonal and includes this on page 22
"Black to move played 30 ... Rxf4!? afer which Motwani resigned; seeing that 31 gxf4 would be answered by 31 Rg8 when White "loses" his knight. WHat neither player had seen was that 30 Nxg7 was check!
This error was discovered after the game but Stewart Reuben ruled that the resignation had to stand. This decision was upheld by the appeals committee."
Post a Comment