< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Nov-28-08|| ||Brown: <sitzkreig> <percyblakenly>|
It seems this game... Karpov vs Kasparov, 1990 ...saw Karpov squander winning positions on move 26 as well as move 28.
|Dec-22-08|| ||Inf: <matingthreat> Thank you very much for that link! I have always wanted to see how a GM "thinks" during a match on a video... of almost 3 hours!|
|Dec-23-08|| ||Inf: Were computers being use by these 2 during this time? Or not?|
|Dec-23-08|| ||AnalyzeThis: Not for analysis, as computers at that time were IM strength, at very best weak GM strength. But they may have used computers for database reasons.... (games and openings).|
|Dec-23-08|| ||littlefermat: <Inf: Were computers being use by these 2 during this time? Or not?>|
Maybe. There was a minor controversy over the outcome of this game:
Kasparov vs Karpov, 1990
and relevant kibitzes:
<SetNoEscapeOn: It's really interesting that during this game, there was a great controversy over whether or not Kasparov analyzed the adjourned position with a computer. For myself, I don't see the difference between looking at an adjourned position with a computer or with seconds (other strong grandmasters).
Some people have lamented the end of adjournments but I prefer chess as a competition between two players.>
< Eyal:...This was pretty much the view expressed by Karpov following the match, when he said that he had the impression Kasparov was determined to adjourn the game a second time (on move 89) because he couldn't find the winning plan by himself over the board, and needed the help of his seconds (http://video.google.com/videoplay?d... at 45:40). Recently, however, Karpov has been lamenting in an interview the loss of adjournments as hurting the quality of the game...>
|Dec-24-08|| ||acirce: Of course computers could be used for basic blunder-checking if nothing else.|
|Aug-17-09|| ||ozmikey: <pacorrum> I just noticed that too. The first WC match without a black win in 80 years, if the database is correct!|
The mid-eighties Kasparov might have tried for a win in games 15 and 19, though.
|Aug-29-09|| ||Hesam7: A 2 hour and 45 minute long video on this match with commentaries from Kasparov and Karpov: http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...|
|Nov-27-10|| ||Pravitel: In the latest book Kasparov vs Karpov 1988-2009 Kasparov claims that he himself won against Karpov almost always after a great big battle where he showed his playing superiority whereas Karpov's victories came after Kasparov's blunders and were basically gifts that didn't reflect the real playing strengths..
It is true that Kasparov's points came usually after a bigger fight, but this happened, because after committing some mistake(s) that led to a bad position, Karpov started to fight like a madman and seeked every change. The image of Karpov being a extremely tenacious defender is no myth, after reading this series of Karpov's and Kasparov's encounters it has become clearer than ever.
In contrast, when Kasparov commits some mistake that leads him to a equally bad position he is often unable to find the most stubborn moves. And just maybe Karpov plays more accurately with the advantage...
|Dec-17-10|| ||VladimirOo: I completely agree with Pravitel. The way Kasparov systematicaly lessens Karpov in his "Modern Chess" Series amazed me a lot. I could not find a single mark of admiration or of fair-play whenever he lost a game: always "I played wrong, it was not that he played great but because i played like a fool". On the contrary, his wins are always great clashes, titanic and epic battles where he "outplays" his opponent. |
Not to mention this story about Vladimirov's spying that should excuse all his defeats (as if opening preparation should determine the game's outcome).
|Jul-17-11|| ||talisman: in the WCC on chessgames... why is 1990 listed as karpov-kasparov?|
|Dec-26-11|| ||Everett: <Pravitel: In the latest book Kasparov vs Karpov 1988-2009 Kasparov claims that he himself won against Karpov almost always after a great big battle where he showed his playing superiority whereas Karpov's victories came after Kasparov's blunders and were basically gifts that didn't reflect the real playing strengths.. Quite funny.> |
This line of thinking by Kasparov may be a necessary fiction that helped his success. He took perhaps extreme responsibility for his wins and losses, stemming from his huge ego, yet resulting in the greatest career of any chess player ever.
|Dec-26-11|| ||talisman: please disregard my Jul 17 post...in regard to MGP...it seems GK does not do justice to Tal and Fischer. 2 people who often have the word genius applied to them. explaining Fischer's 6-0 score against Larsen was due to a "heat wave" in Denver was the last straw for me.|
|Dec-26-11|| ||Everett: <Talisman> I've read over those parts in the book, I thought he discussed more issues involved, especially Larsen's optimism backfiring, and his chess-match character flaw of not being able to play for a draw when it was the only thing available. He also credits Fischer with being completely locked-in and focused. Are you sure those sentiments are not in the book? I may need to have my memory tested.|
|Dec-26-11|| ||King Death: Larsen also said that the heat in Denver didn't agree with him. I think that we can chalk this one up to the long list of players who couldn't take a loss, learn and move on. Wasn't it Tartakower who wrote that he'd never beaten a healthy opponent? I also remember Tarrasch making some lameass excuse for getting his teeth kicked in by Lasker.|
|Dec-26-11|| ||Everett: It could be that we all have to tell stories to ourselves to get through some uncomfortable times. Truth hurts!|
|Dec-26-11|| ||talisman: <Everett> i agree they are. i was eagerly awaiting each installment and my overall reaction was dissapointment. it seemed to me he had only left handed compliments for tal and made fischer's 20-0(counting Panno) run sound like a fluke. i think that GK was too great a player to even semi have to try to put somebody else's light out to have his shine brighter.|
|Dec-26-11|| ||King Death: <talisman> Kasparov was a great player, but one of the demons that drove him may have been feelings of insecurity. I'll bet if you look at the lives of great chess players or other sportsmen that many came from broken homes and/or grew up poor. The feelings of insecurity can make somebody try a hell of a lot harder than the kid down the street who has everything their way (if that person doesn't get swallowed whole first). At the same time, some can only feel better about themselves by putting others down.|
|May-23-13|| ||Everett: Regarding adjournments, it is likely that players like Alekhine, Botvinnik, Fischer and Kasparov really made the most of them. These guys had fanatical work ethic. Combined with amazing practical ability OTB, they each were likely quite happy to enter an adjournment to save a draw or win the game through analysis away from the board. No wonder they were so formidable.|
On the other end, other players likely benefitted less so, such as Capablanca, Bronstein, Spassky and Karpov. These players seem not so much into homework compared to simply duking it out OTB.
|Sep-08-13|| ||RedShield: Waitzkin's <Mortal Games> recounts a bizarre story from the first leg of the match.|
<One afternoon, during Kasparov's last week in New York, Andrew Page received a phone call from grandmaster Ron Henley, who was one of Karpov's trainers. According to Page, Henley said that he was calling from the office of the man who produced the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and that they had come up with an idea for a promotion that would involve Garry and Anatoly going down to Atlantic City, or possibly to Las Vegas, for a month. The two grandmasters would set up shop at one of the casinos and play all comers at speed chess for a thousand dollars a game. Presumably, they would win most if not all of the games, and the money would go into a big glass cage. At the end of the month, they would play a match for the money. "This idea was totally out of context. Completely frivolous," recalls Page. After all, Garry was depressed and playing terribly, in danger of returning the world championship to Karpov. While Henley talked, Page was thinking, "This is a trap. Someone is taping this conversation. They are trying to sucker Garry into something preposterous while he is down." It seemed to Page like a trick, an elaborate distraction. Karpov would know that Garry would never agree to this stunt.
"I asked Henley, 'Does Anatoly know about this?' and he put Karpov on the line. He may actually have been on another extension the whole time. Karpov said this was a great way to see America and make a lot of money, that he and Garry could go on tour together from casino to casino. It was mind-boggling that while Kasparov and Karpov were engaged in this grim struggle, with so much at stake, Karpov was proposing this....fluff. I said to him that I would give the idea consideration and hung up. I didn't know what to think." Maybe the former world champion truly believed that there was money to be made with this Ninja Turtle producer, Page calculated. For if it were some kind of trick, Karpov wouldn't have gotten on the phone, he wouldn't have wanted to get his fingers dirty.
[...] But after one more phone call from Henley, the idea was never alluded to again.>
|Sep-08-13|| ||thegoodanarchist: <RedShield> Thanks for that interesting post!|
|Sep-08-13|| ||RedShield: All my posts are interesting!|
|Sep-08-13|| ||nok: <Karpov said this was a great way to see America and make a lot of money, that he and Garry could go on tour together from casino to casino.> Quite the businessman.|
|Sep-08-13|| ||Everett: Karpov is hilarious! In the middle of a WC match! While Kasparov was busy studying chess to win the match, Karpov was busy cutting deals.|
|Sep-09-13|| ||thegoodanarchist: <RedShield: All my posts are interesting!>|
Well, this one is so so...
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·