|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 48 OF 48 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-09-13 | | Rama: Kevin88, it is the Anand game so far. Agree? |
 |
| Mar-09-13 | | jancotianno: Game of the century is good but how about "crashed and byrned"? :P |
|
Mar-09-13
 | | RandomVisitor: After 11.Be2:
click for larger view Rybka 4.1 x64:
[+0.15] d=26 11...Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Nfd7 13.Qa3 e5 14.dxe5 Qe8 15.Be2 Nxe5 16.0-0 Nec4 17.Qb3 Qe6 18.Bc1 Rad8 19.f3 Bd4+ 20.Kh1 Rfe8 21.Rfe1 Bf2 22.Bg5 Bxe1 23.Bxd8 Ne3 24.Qxe6 fxe6 25.Rd6 h6 26.Bc7 Kf7 |
|
Mar-09-13
 | | FSR: <Abdel Irada: I've always been impressed by the role reversal in this game. The older and more experienced Byrne is the one who plays naïvely: leaving his king in the center too long, moving his dark-squared bishop twice while remaining incompletely developed, deploying his queen to the vulnerable square c5 while his center remained insecure.... Add this all up, mix in Fischer's skills and style, and the dénouement comes to feel inevitable. You may not know exactly *what* in the early stages, but plainly *something* is going to happen to Byrne, and when it does, it will be exquisitely brutal.> To my previous comment, I would add that Byrne only played <one> weak move in the opening: 11.Bg5? Had he played 11.Be2, he'd be better. Houdini assesses that move as +0.37 (small advantage White), and Mega Database 2013 has 11 games with it, in which White scored +8-3. Byrne probably would have handed Fischer (who had scored =1-3 as Black thus far in the tournament) his fourth defeat as Black. The sages would have nodded knowingly and said, "Fischer is just as weak in the Gruenfeld as in the King's Indian. The line he played is too passive. It's no surprise that Byrne crushed him." But after 11.Bg5? Na4!! White is already lost or very close to it (-1.47 according to Houdini). And 11...Na4!!, which I daresay never entered Byrne's head, is the only move to give Black a meaningful advantage (the second-best move, 11...Re8, is -0.23). As <sfm> observed: <Imagine if somebody in the audience had said:"If Byrne plays 11.Bg5 he will be under constant fire, until he is mated!" The bystanders knowing anything about chess would have shaken their heads.> Larry Evans once observed that White can usually afford one minor mistake in the opening. To me, it is shocking that 11.Bg5? is so bad as to swing the position from a small White advantage to close to a winning Black advantage - roughly equivalent to blundering two pawns. It's easy to say, "White shouldn't have moved the bishop twice in the opening." - but it's mind-blowing that the move is not merely inferior, but pretty much a decisive blunder. |
|
| Mar-09-13 | | Just Another Master: D Bryne was a great player for that time, however F Marshall would have beaten him in a match so I dont get carried away with this game of blunders.... |
|
| Mar-10-13 | | LIFE Master AJ: "Game of the Day" for march 9th?
This just proves what I said earlier. (That this game is both wonderful AND timeless!!!) |
|
Mar-10-13
| | FSR: 18.Bxb6? was a strange choice by Byrne. Maybe he miscalculated something, or thought that Fischer would take the draw by perpetual. It should have been apparent to him that he is getting rolled in this line. 18.Qxc3 Qxc5 or 18.Bd3 Nb5 are both bad for White, but not nearly so bad as 18.Bxb6?, which results in a slaughter. |
|
| Mar-10-13 | | Tigranny: I fail to see the immortality of this game when the brilliant moves came simply after Byrne's blunders that other pros wouldn't even consider in the opening, like Bg5. |
|
| Mar-10-13 | | RookFile: Bg5 has logic to it, to inhibit the typical Nfd7 maneauver of the Gruenfeld. Na4 is not exactly the first move that leaps into your head in reply. |
|
Mar-10-13
| | FSR: <Tigranny> To each his own. As I've said, 11.Bg5? was Byrne's only real mistake in the opening. If he'd simply played 11.Be2, he'd be better. It required brilliant play by young Fischer to exploit Byrne's seemingly small error. Many other famous games were won by much more experienced players, and involved exploitation of much larger errors by the opponent (the Immortal Game, the Evergreen Partie, the Opera Game, etc.) They also sometimes involved significant errors by the winner (see the Immortal Game). But if you consider the game no big deal, so be it. |
|
| Mar-12-13 | | LIFE Master AJ: <Tigranny> This reminds me of the commoner - who viewed the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel - and thought it to be a child's drawings. |
|
Mar-12-13
 | | AylerKupp: Such is unfortunately the emotional reaction to all things Fischer that if D.Byrne had played this game against anyone else, much less another 13-year old, then there would be unanimity and praise for the players with the Black pieces. |
|
Mar-12-13
 | | perfidious: <AylerKupp>: Levy's reaction to this game may have been posted here, but in case I am wrong, check out the kibitzes on the final page of Tal vs Smyslov, 1959 for an emotional, apparently jealous response. |
|
| Mar-12-13 | | LIFE Master AJ: I think you are probably right, Fischer did a lot of damage to himself (and his reputation ... both as a person and even as a chess player) with his comments after 9/11. |
|
Mar-12-13
| | FSR: <AylerKupp> I agree. Compare people's reaction to Aronian vs Anand, 2013. Glorious game, to be sure, but the key moves were computer-assisted home analysis. D. Byrne-Fischer wasn't home analysis, it was created OTB - and by a 13-year-old kid. It was Hans Kmoch who called it <The Game of the Century>. He was not some Fischer fanboy, and had been around the block a few times by 1956. (He was 62, and had played the likes of Tarrasch, Rubinstein, Alekhine, Capablanca, Nimzowitsch, Euwe, Botvinnik, Marshall, Maroczy, etc.) |
|
Mar-13-13
| | RandomVisitor: After 11.Be2:
click for larger view Rybka 4.1 x64:
[+0.18] d=29 11...Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Nfd7 13.Qa3 e5 14.dxe5 Qe8 15.Be2 Nxe5 16.0-0 Nec4 17.Qb4 Qe6 18.Bc1 Rfd8 19.Rfe1 Rxd1 20.Rxd1 Bxc3 21.Qxc3 Qxe4 22.Bf1 Re8 23.Rd4 Qe6 24.Qb4 a5 25.Qc5 Qe1 26.Bf4 Qb4 |
|
| Mar-13-13 | | LIFE Master AJ: <RV> Thanks. I once had said - during a lecture/simul in Tampa - that Byrne would have been OK after 11.Be2. (Several players challenged that ... this occurred in the age before computers. Nowadays, the box settles all such arguments.) |
|
| Mar-13-13 | | LIFE Master AJ: I always enjoy RV's contributions. Since about 2007, chess has truly become (at least partly) a scientific endeavor, subject to exact analysis and strict number-crunching guidelines. |
|
| Mar-15-13 | | 14DogKnight: <Infohunter>
Were you a member of the old Riverside (CA) Chess Club? I was a member from 1977-mid 1980's |
|
| Mar-15-13 | | 14DogKnight: I commented on the Perry Youngworth page also. |
|
Mar-22-13
| | RandomVisitor: After <11.Be2>, a 31-ply Rybka4.1 run gives the same result that I posted on March 13 - the first few moves are a likely game continuation: <11...Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Nfd7 13.Qa3 e5 14.dxe5 Qe8 15.Be2 Nxe5 16.0-0> 
click for larger view Where we now have the top three choices:
<16...Qe6> [+0.29] d=28 17.Bc1 Nec4 18.Qb3 Rad8 19.Rfe1 Rfe8 20.f4 Bd4+ 21.Kh1 f6 22.Bf3 Qe7 23.Rd3 Kg7 24.Qc2 Bc5 25.Red1 Rxd3 26.Qxd3 Nd6 27.b3 Rd8 28.Bb2 Nf7 29.Qe2 <16...Nec4> [+0.30] d=29 17.Qb3 Qe6 18.Bc1 Rad8 19.Rfe1 Rfe8 20.f4 Bd4+ 21.Kh1 f6 22.Bf3 Kg7 23.Rd3 Qe7 24.Red1 Bc5 25.Na4 Nxa4 26.Qxc4 Rxd3 27.Rxd3 Nb6 28.Qc2 Nd5 29.Qd2 f5 30.e5 Rd8 <16...f5> [+0.60] d=21 16...f5 17.Qb3+ Qf7 18.exf5 Qxb3 19.axb3 gxf5 20.Rfe1 Rfd8 21.g3 Kf7 22.Kg2 Rxd1 23.Bh5+ Ng6 24.Rxd1 Bf6 25.Be3 Rd8 26.Ra1 Nc8 27.Bxa7 Rd2 28.Nd1 Nxa7 29.Rxa7 Rd7 30.Nc3 Ke6 31.b4 |
|
Mar-23-13
| | RandomVisitor: After 11.Be2
click for larger view Rybka 4.1 x64:
<[+0.26] d=32 11...Bxf3> 12.Bxf3 Nfd7 13.Qa3 e5 14.dxe5 Re8 15.Be2 Qe7 16.Qxe7 Rxe7 17.f3 Nxe5 18.Bg5 Ree8 19.Kf2 Nec4 20.Bc1 Red8 21.g4 Bd4+ 22.Kg3 Be5+ 23.Kh3 f6 24.Kg2 Kg7 |
|
Mar-25-13
| | RandomVisitor: After 11.Be2 black also has:
Rybka 4.1 x64:
[+0.18] d=27 11...Re8 12.Qa3 Nfd7 13.e5 Nf8 14.0-0 Ne6 15.Be3 Nc7 16.h3 Bf5 17.Ng5 Ncd5 18.Qb3 Rf8 19.Nxd5 Qxd5 |
|
Mar-30-13
| | RandomVisitor: Continuing the investigation of black's best move after the improvement 11.Be2: 11...Bxf3 and 11...Nfd7 both suffer a bit after deep investigation - next best is 11...Re8, and even 11...e5 and 11...Qe8 are worth a look. Rybka 4.1 x64:
[+0.18] d=29 11...Re8 12.Qa3 Nfd7 13.e5 Nf8 14.h3 Be6 15.Ng5 Bd5 16.0-0 Nc4 17.Bxc4 Bxc4 18.Rfe1 Bd5 19.b3 h6 20.Nge4 |
|
Apr-08-13
| | RandomVisitor: 11.Be2 analysis Rybka 4.1
[+0.18] d=32 11...Re8 12.Qa3 Nh5 13.Be3 Qc7 14.e5 e6 15.0-0 f6 16.exf6 Nxf6 17.Rfe1 Nbd5 18.Bg5 Bf5 19.Ne5 a5 20.Bd3 Qb6 21.Nxd5 Nxd5 22.Bc4 h6 [+0.21] d=32 11...Nfd7 12.Qa3 Re8 13.e5 Nf8 14.Be3 Be6 15.Ng5 Bc4 16.Bxc4 Nxc4 17.Qb3 b5 18.0-0 a6 19.h3 Qc7 20.Nce4 h6 21.Nf3 Ne6 22.Qc3 Red8 [+0.26] d=32 11...Bxf3 12.Bxf3 Nfd7 13.Qa3 e5 14.dxe5 Re8 15.Be2 Qe7 16.Qxe7 Rxe7 17.f3 Nxe5 18.Bg5 Ree8 19.Kf2 Nec4 20.Bc1 Red8 21.g4 Bd4+ 22.Kg3 Be5+ 23.Kh3 f6 24.Kg2 Kg7 [+0.29] d=29 11...a5 12.0-0 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 Nfd7 14.Qa3 e5 15.dxe5 Nc4 [+0.33] d=28 11...Qc8 12.0-0 Re8 13.Qa3 Nfd7 14.Be3 e5 15.d5 cxd5 Note that the continuation 11.Be2 Nfd7 12.Qa3 Bxf3 13.Bxf3 e5 14.dxe5 Qe8 15.Be2 Nxe5 16.0-0 has this likely continuation: a) 16...Qe6
[+0.26] d=32 17.Bc1 Ned7 18.f3 Rfe8 19.Qd6 Qxd6 20.Rxd6 Be5 21.Rd2 Nc5 22.Rfd1 Rac8 23.Kf2 f5 24.exf5 gxf5 25.g3 Kg7 26.Bf1 Kf6 27.Kg2 b) 16...Nec4
[+0.36] d=32 17.Qb3 Qe6 18.Bc1 Rad8 19.Rfe1 Rd4 20.f4 Rfd8 21.e5 g5 22.Bxc4 Qxc4 23.Qxc4 Nxc4 24.Rxd4 Rxd4 25.b3 Nb6 26.fxg5 Nd7 27.Ne4 Bxe5 28.Bb2 Rxe4 29.Rxe4 Bxb2 30.Re7 Nc5 31.b4 Kf8 32.Rc7 |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 48 OF 48 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Annotations by 
sac: 17...Be6
