|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 13 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-23-10 | | elohah: And if 17...g5! (instead of 17...Re8)
an absolUTEly precise sequence will shoot this infuriating try down: 17 Bxc5 g5!
18 b3! Na5
19 Bxe7! gf!
(Not 19...Rf7? 20 Bxg5 wins)
20 Rhg1!
(Yes, the main threat can wait)
20 ... Rf7
21 Bb4!
WINS! - trapping the knight.
Note that wrong is 21 Bf6? Kf8
22 Bh5 Bxf6! 23 Bxf7 Bxe5! hits
two White pieces, when Black may win!
Precise Chess, kids. Once again, good Chess is good technique! |
|
| Jul-20-10 | | lepietrejoueur: 44...Rc7 was played by fischer.
Why not 44...Kh6! then 45...Kg7 and with this system I would say that the position is better for Blacks than what fischer played. Now the Blacks's king becomes useful and it will be decisive for them. |
|
| Jul-21-10 | | lepietrejoueur: 44...Rc7 was played by fischer.
Why not 44...Kh6! :
Then 45...Kg7 and with this system I would say that the position is better for Blacks than what fischer played. Now the black king becomes useful and the opposing king finds himself blocked (because the black rook and the black pawn in g6), moreover, the black rook checks the line 7 to defends his pawns and could help our black king. And if there is an exchange of tower, it will be finish for whites, so the Blacks's king will be important and it will be decisive for them. But wait for some days I will really try that. |
|
| Jul-21-10 | | lepietrejoueur: I have that after 44...Kh6!
45.Rc3 Rf7
46.a4 Kg7
47.Rc6 Rf6
48.Rc7+ Rf7
49.Rc6 Kf8
50.a5 bxa5
51.Ra6 Ke8
52.Rxa5 Kd8
53.f4 Kc8
54.Kf3 Re7
55.Re5 Rd7
56.Ke4 Kb8
57.h4
here the link after 57.h4 but the position is again "∞" because the pawn in h4. here the diagram:
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/58... |
|
Jul-29-10
 | | GrahamClayton: <morphynoman2>Photo of this game, here: <morphynoman2>,
That link appears to be dead. Here is the photo:
http://files.chesscomfiles.com/imag... |
|
Jul-29-10
 | | HeMateMe: Someone above posted a bunch of Rybka stuff, but it wasn't in english. In this titanic struggle between the electical engineer and the budding vocalist, did someone miss a win, as proven by a deep search computer program? |
|
| Aug-21-10 | | dinekum: I remember reading somewhere Botvinnik mentioning that Fischer only spoke 2 words to him ever, which were "Fischer" to introduce himself at the start of the game and "draw?" at the end of the game. |
|
| Aug-21-10 | | TugasKamagong: Actually, 3 words. "Fischer" to introduce himself. As they sat down to play, they nearly bumped heads as Fischer was very tall, hence the 2nd word, "Sorry." Then "Draw?" |
|
| Mar-08-11 | | jackmandoo: Anybody know which move this game was adjourned on? |
|
| Mar-08-11 | | michael104: Move 45. 45...Rc5 was the sealed move. |
|
Apr-18-11
| | HeMateMe: I wonder if the sealed move is inferior, or is it Fischer's later play? In "Endgame" Brady says Fischer thought the game was won at adjournment, and didn't analyse it that evening. |
|
May-15-11
 | | jessicafischerqueen: Here is film footage of the end of this game-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3TM...
Notice how disgusted Bobby looks as he leaves the board. Notice how ecstatic Botvinnik looks after securing the draw- Botvinnik and several strong Russian GMs had spent most of the previous night analyzing the adjourned position, and had found the draw- As Botvinnik entered the hall to resume play, he was asked if Fischer had winning chances- he replied only "Nischia" (draw) |
|
| May-15-11 | | WiseWizard: When did having an army of analysts help you win a game become honorable and accepted in Chess? Who was the first fraud to use all his helpers homework? How isn't that cheating? Nowadays you need a wide-angle lens for a player to take a picture with his seconds and the computer carries him for the first 25 moves. I respect Magnus Carlsen as a man of principle for refraining from frail-man activities such as these. |
|
May-15-11
| | jessicafischerqueen: <Wise Wizard> this was pre-computer era, the "age of adjournments." It was considered perfectly acceptable by all players to enlist the help of seconds to analyze adjourned games. |
|
May-15-11
 | | Pawn and Two: <jessicafischerqueen & WiseWizard> Even in the "age of adjournments", it was not always considered acceptable to employ seconds, or even to analyze adjourned games. I have found the following examples in just a few minutes, I am sure others can expand on this list: London 1883 - Tournament Rule 13 included the following: <"Consultations and analysing moves on a Chess-board during adjournments are strictly prohibited, and any competitor proved guilty of the same will be expelled from the Tournament, and will forfeit his entrance-fee and deposit."> New York 1889 - Tournament rule XII - Adjournments - included the following: <"Consultation and analyzing moves on a Chess board during the adjournments are strictly prohibited, and any competitor proved guilty of the same shall be expelled from the Tournament by a three-fourths vote of the Jury."> Hastings 1895 - Regulations of the International Tournament - rule on adjournments included the following: <"Analysing of moves on a chess-board during the adjournment, and consultation with anyone, is strictly prohibited. Any player proved guilty of an infringement of this rule will be expelled from the Tournament, and will forfeit his right to a prize or to consolation money."> Paris 1900 - The tournament rules included the following adjournment rule: <"All analysis and consultation in the interval is forbidden, with the threat of expulsion from the tournament."> London 1900 - The tournament adjournment rules included the following: <"Analysis on a board by a player of his adjourned game, and consultation with anyone with regard thereto is strictly prohibited."> In Botvinnik's game with Fischer at Varna 1962, Botvinnik had an all-star adjournment team of almost unbelievable quality and quantity. In the book, "Russians versus Fischer", Tal stated that in one room, he worked on the adjourned position with Boleslavsky and Spassky, while in an another room, Botvinnik, Geller, Keres and Furman, toiled through the night. Finally, Tal could report: <"Towards five o'clock in the morning, Geller's fantastic idea - to battle with two isolated pawns against two united pawns in a rook ending - had been fully worked out, and we decided that there were considerable drawing chances."> I believe the old rule of prohibiting adjournment analysis was better than allowing team analysis, but the old rule was almost impossible to enforce. Finally, "in the age of the computer" adjournments have become a thing of the past, perhaps it is for the better. |
|
| May-15-11 | | fab4: Fischer was 'cheated' out of a win in this game. How many uber elite players was he up against ??! Who or what was he playing??? |
|
| May-15-11 | | Jim Bartle: Well, it was an Olympiad, a team event. It's natural that both teams would analyze the adjourned position. It was bad luck for Fischer that the American team (except for Fischer himself) was weaker than the Russian team at analysis. |
|
| May-15-11 | | DWINS: <Jim Bartle>, According to the post by <HeMateMe>, <In "Endgame" Brady says Fischer thought the game was won at adjournment, and didn't analyze it that evening.> If that's true than it wasn't the case that the American team was weaker at analysis than the Russian team. It was just a particularly poor decision by Fischer to not bother analyzing the adjourned position. |
|
| May-15-11 | | Jim Bartle: Thanks. So how in the world was Fischer "cheated" out of a win? |
|
| May-16-11 | | TheFocus: Bobby was not "cheated". He had the opportunity to analyze the adjourned position either with the U.S. Team or by himself. Over-confidence on Bobby's part here led to his downfall. |
|
| May-16-11 | | parisattack: Rook endings are incredibly complex; even if they look simple on the surface. True Story: I knew a fellow who had been big on chess into his 20s but had to give up the game when life called. He was USCF 2300 in his day; perhaps equivalent to 2400+ now. When he retired (in 1999) he told me he wasn't going to go back to OTB chess but spend his time 'really learning' the endgame. 'I want to play GM strength endgames!' So, he began with pawn endings which (given he had much spare time) he figured two years. He spent five before he was satisfied.
Then he began on rook endings. He figured five years. When I spoke to him around the holidays I asked him how it was going on rook endings as he had spent already six on them. 'I need another 20 years!' |
|
Jul-22-11
 | | keypusher: <DWINS: <Jim Bartle>, According to the post by <HeMateMe>, <In "Endgame" Brady says Fischer thought the game was won at adjournment, and didn't analyze it that evening.>> I just can't believe that. Look up Fischer's notes to this game in 60MG: Gligoric vs Fischer, 1959
Or consider this game:
Fischer vs Geller, 1962
Surely Fischer knew better than to take this ending for granted. Maybe he didn't work on it as hard as he should have. But it looks like he made his important mistakes before adjournment. |
|
| Jul-22-11 | | TheFocus: Varna Olympiad Team Captain Eliot Hearst said that the U.S. team DID analyze the adjournment and considered it a win. I am sure that Fischer was analyzing it with them. |
|
| Aug-25-11 | | Mysteriod: Fischer miscalculated because later on kasparov refuted fischer's claim and stated it was drawn. |
|
| Aug-25-11 | | Petrosianic: <Thanks. So how in the world was Fischer "cheated" out of a win?> He wasn't, but he claimed he was. Check Eliot Hearst's column in the July 1964 Chess Life. The way Botvinnik tells the story, after Fischer made the big blunder that threw away the win, Botvinnik got up, walked over to his team captain, Abramov, and said one word: "Draw!". According to Hearst, the way Fischer told it, Botvinnik was getting outside help, and asked for a formal protest to be filed. Everyone else regarded it as too incredible to imagine that Botvinnik would even listen to, much less solicit help from someone so much weaker than himself (not to mention that it happened after Fischer made the big boo-boo) and so no protest was filed. According to Hearst, many US players who had been willing to listen to Fischer's charges of collusion at Curacao became much less open to it afterwards. Every time Fischer suffered a reverse, in his mind it was always a conspiracy. After he won the title, most of this was forgotten, of course, and as much history as possible got rewritten to make it part of Fischer's grand struggle against the Russians, that culminated at Reykjavik. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 13 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
