< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Jul-15-09|| ||CharlesSullivan: <IMlday> correctly noted: <Less clear is the line: 57.Rh7 c6 58.Rd7+ Kc5 59.Rd1 c3 60.f5 Rd8 (! you punctuate) since after 61.Rc1 Kd4 62.Kf4 Kd3 63.f6 Kd2 64.Ra1 Ra8 (again punctuated !, but doesn't it fail to 64.Rxa8 winning?).>|
My mistake! I transcribed the variation incorrectly. I plan to post a corrected variation soon.
My thanks to IM Lawrence Day for catching this. It's nice to know that there is at least one reader who looks at the (ugly) details!
|Jul-16-09|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: Hello Charles
I wonder if Dvoretsky has looked through your amazing work? It wouldn't surprise me if he has got it earmarked for one of his training sessions. If it proves one thing, those simple positions are anything but!
|Jul-16-09|| ||CharlesSullivan: Thanks to <IMlday>, I've posted a correction on my website to the error he noted. As he gave it, the line begins 57.Rh7 c6 58.Rd7+ Kc5 59.Rd1 c3 60.f5 Rd8 61.Rc1 Kd4 62.Kf4 Kd3 63.f6 Kd2 64.Ra1 <and now 64...c2 65.g5 must be inserted and then the rest is right:> 65...Ra8! 66.Rh1 Re8! 67.f7 Re1!=|
Thanks to <SimonWebbsTiger>, and yes, those simple positions are difficult -- just think how much we don't know about the complicated ones!
|Jul-20-09|| ||CharlesSullivan: By the way, Karsten Müller has found a refutation for White in the same line that IM Day questioned on July 15th: 57.Rh7 c6 58.Rd7+ Kc5 59.Rd1 c3 60.f5 Rd8 (so far, the 60...Kb4! variation has not been refuted) 61.Rc1 Kd4, etc. He probably will be posting the new variation in his ChessCafe column in mid-August.|
|Aug-13-09|| ||WhiteRook48: 8 d4 looks like it's wasting time|
|Aug-22-09|| ||nescio: <WhiteRook48: 8 d4 looks like it's wasting time> |
It appears as if Petrosian loses a tempo, but I think he may have counted on winning a tempo instead as Nh5 is out of play. In Petrosian vs Vasiukov, 1956 he had tried the slow 8.Rb1, but was squeezed. Look at the Fischer quote under that game.
|Mar-16-10|| ||redwaz: Not good enough to comment on the game itself. The only comment I will make is "look at that clock, man"!!(in the image that is)|
|Jul-25-10|| ||tentsewang: A boy of such passion and determination during that time with a draw against the best in the would was certainly one of Fischer's most memorable games. Believe in good moves my friend !!|
|Jul-13-11|| ||joelsontang: Perhaps 23.b4 should add more pressure and cramp on Black disallowing 23...a5. Then Petrosian could have attempted to lock the Q-side and focus on the K-side particularly the weak black f-pawn. Could Petrosian pursueing this plan have forced a win?|
|Jul-13-11|| ||rannewman: When you point out and ask about an idea which was pointed out at bobby's book, it looks like you are just trying to show-off with some suprior insight that you don't acutally posses. If you actually havn't read the book tho, it's realy good book :)|
|Feb-07-12|| ||MrMacisu: can you see that watch? too bigggg|
|Aug-15-12|| ||Cemoblanca: Here is the photo solution:
"Then-15-year-old chess star Bobby Fischer, left, and Russian grand master Tigran Petrosian play a PRACTICE game at Moscow's Central Chess Club, June 30, 1958."
|Aug-15-12|| ||TheFocus: Actually, this is a blitz game, not a practice game. The occasion was Bobby's trip to Moscow as a guest of the Soviet Union.|
Tigran was called in to play against Bobby as Bobby was scoring quite well against the Soviet masters, showing them up at blitz chess, as it were. Bobby was scoring over 60% in the games.
Petrosian was one of the best blitz players in the Soviet Union.
|Aug-15-12|| ||Petrosianic: Isn't blitz a kind of practice?|
|Aug-15-12|| ||TheFocus: Kinda. Sorta. Maybe.
But PRACTICE to me infers an informal game, not blitz.
Depends on how you define "practice."
|Aug-29-12|| ||TheFocus: This is game 3 in Fischer's <My 60 Memorable Games>.|
|Dec-28-13|| ||offramp: The guy on the left is a Portorozian.|
|Apr-19-15|| ||Howard: Fischer claimed that 25.Bh5 would have "tied (him) up completely."|
Would that have been a forced win ?
|Jul-28-15|| ||NeverAgain: The photo for this game is most likely correct. The little of the position on the demonstration board that can be made out against the overhead lamp's glare matches the in-game position after 7. d3.|
Further reasons why this could not be a photo from Moscow:
a) If this were indeed a casual blitz/training game there wouldn't be signs with players' names at the playing tables, much less flags.
b) The most conclusive evidence against the Moscow scenario is the words "a potezi" visible on the demonstration board. It's not Russian or even Cyrillic. It's "and moves" in Serbo-Croatian.
|Jul-28-15|| ||RookFile: Such masterful play by Petrosian in this game. Fischer did very well to survive this.|
|Jul-31-15|| ||Howard: For those of you with engines, would
25.Bh5 had won ?
|Aug-08-15|| ||Howard: Just can't help but suspect that Petrosian should have come closer to a win than he actually did.|
|Aug-11-15|| ||NeverAgain: Howard:
25. Bh5 Ne7 26. Ne3 Kh8 27. Rh4
Kg8 28. a3 a4 29. Rh1 Kh8 30. Be2 Qe8 0.89/35 (Stockfish 6, 171M nodes)
click for larger view
|Aug-26-15|| ||Howard: Thanks much, not to mention for your helpful comments regarding Portisch-Huebner, 1979 !|
|Aug-26-15|| ||NeverAgain: You are welcome.
A few days later I ran the position after 25.Bh5 through Komodo 6, a little longer this time (between 400 and 500mN), and while the proposed lines were slightly different the eval was similar.
The thing all those lines had in common was that both engines sought to redeploy the Bishop to the b1-h7 diagonal ASAP, which leads me to think that 25.Bh5 is a dead end. After Black plays 25...Ne7, which is part of his plan anyway, the Bishop is not doing much on h5.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·