|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-30-11
 | | Kinghunt: This was Kasparov's only loss in Wijk aan Zee 1999. That particular tournament is best known for Kasparov's fantastic victory over Topalov in the fourth round, Kasparov vs Topalov, 1999, but even beyond that, it was an excellent tournament for Kasparov. He finished with what I believe is still a record 8 wins, and even with this loss, finished clear first with +7 and 10/13. |
 |
Sep-01-11
 | | plang: Although Sokolov got off to a slow start (-2 after 4 rounds) he rebounded strongly at the end to finish in a 4 way tie for 4th at +1 with Piket, Shirov ans Timman. After the game Kasparov remembered that he had seen the stronger defense 21..Kf8 played in a junior team championship 25 years earlier by his team mate Rajik Tavadian against Agorov. The game continued 22 Qe4..f5! 23 Qh4..Rxh7 24 Qf6+..Ke8 25 Rae1+..Kd7 26 Re5..Qd6 27 Qxd6+..Kxd6 28 Bxd4..Rdh8 and White resigned. 25..Kh7? lost immediately; Ftacnik gave 25..Qh5 26 R1g2..Re8 27 Qg1..Qe5 28 Rg8+..Rxg8 29 Rxg8+..Kh7 30 Rf8..Qg7 31 Qb1+..Kh6 32 Bc1+..Kh5 33 Be3 and Blacks position is "rotten" but not yet resignable. Several people have referred to this game as Sokolovs "masterpiece". I doubt he would agree - this was a relatively easy game for him. His knowledge on this old line was superior to Kasparov (doesn't happen often) and there was little work to do after the game left theory. Sokolov has had a long successful career and has played many nice games. For instance, his win over Anand at Wikk-Aan-Zee 1996 is a really nice game. |
|
Nov-20-11
 | | FSR: I like the pun. |
|
Nov-20-11
| | FSR: <plang: ... After the game Kasparov remembered that he had seen the stronger defense 21..Kf8 played in a junior team championship 25 years earlier by his team mate Rajik Tavadian against Agorov.> It's mind-blowing what you have to remember (in this case, alas, belatedly) to be a world-class player. I have a very good memory, but I can't imagine remembering something like this. There are very few opening lines that I know 20+ moves deep. |
|
| Nov-20-11 | | Eric Farley: If what people say here is true : that kasparov lost this game because his opening preparation didn't take this variation into account and he was surprised by that, then he may not have been the great player that some people advertise him to have been. He is supposed to solve OTB problems using his talent. Capablanca and Alekhine did it. As a matter of fact, his endings left a lot to be desired, so many blunders, more than would be acceptable for a player of his --supposed -- caliber. A chess player is to be rated based on his overall knowledge not just by the opening novelties he introduces here and there. I'm beginning to suspect that it wasn't he who was great, but his contemporaries that were poor. And if you check the Tal Memorial going on now, you'll understand what I mean. Nakamura and Nepo kept on playing for 85 moves in a position well-known as a book draw. A position found in The ABC of Rook Endings in Korchnoi's book "Practical Rook Endings." The Vancura position. |
|
| Nov-20-11 | | newzild: < Eric Farley: If what people say here is true : that kasparov lost this game because his opening preparation didn't take this variation into account and he was surprised by that, then he may not have been the great player that some people advertise him to have been. He is supposed to solve OTB problems using his talent. Capablanca and Alekhine did it. As a matter of fact, his endings left a lot to be desired, so many blunders, more than would be acceptable for a player of his --supposed -- caliber. A chess player is to be rated based on his overall knowledge not just by the opening novelties he introduces here and there. I'm beginning to suspect that it wasn't he who was great, but his contemporaries that were poor. And if you check the Tal Memorial going on now, you'll understand what I mean. Nakamura and Nepo kept on playing for 85 moves in a position well-known as a book draw. A position found in The ABC of Rook Endings in Korchnoi's book "Practical Rook Endings." The Vancura position.> I couldn't disagree more. Kasparov was world champion for 16 years and set a record high elo rating that is yet to be beaten. Only Fischer is a credible candidate as a stronger player. As for Naka and Nepo playing on in a drawn position, isn't this what chess players have been demanding for years? I've read dozens and dozens of forum threads in which chessplayers have complained about players agreeing to quick draws and refusing to play out positions for the enlightenment of lesser mortals, like ourselves. |
|
Nov-20-11
| | FSR: <Eric Farley: ... A chess player is to be rated based on his overall knowledge not just by the opening novelties he introduces here and there. I'm beginning to suspect that it wasn't [Kasparov] who was great, but his contemporaries that were poor.> That is certainly a novel perspective. Few people would consider the likes of Karpov and Anand to be "poor" players. |
|
Nov-20-11
 | | scormus: Appearances can be deceptive. What looked to me like W dictating play after 21... Rxh7 was (according to Rybka) rather finely balanced ... albeit on a knife edge. Even after 25 Qc1 B's position was just about defendable, about +1.1 in favour of W. Qf5, Qh5, Rh7 all seem playable, but Kh7? lost directly. As with other recent GOTDs the loser's game was objectively OK, as long as best play from both sides. OTB the loser was the one whose position demanded greater accuracy, and was less forgiving of mistakes. 21 ... Kf8 would not have been easy to find. If B didnt know it, or didnt remember it, he was condemned to a very difficult position to defend. |
|
Nov-20-11
 | | lost in space: +I don't know if I like the pun as I don't get it. |
|
Nov-20-11
| | FSR: <lost in space> There's an expression "Put a sock in it." - basically a more colorful way of saying "Shut up." |
|
| Nov-20-11 | | I play the Fred: And today's pun very often applies to the player with the black pieces. :D |
|
| Nov-20-11 | | meppi: just a quick kizblitz here, please view move 25 my instinct tells me that here Kasparov was trying for a combination involving sacrificing the queen with 26. Nxf3 - See the R Q and N are like hammers towards h2 square. That is why Kasparov played 25. Kh7 to make the King away from the queen with check. But can someone with a computer soft ware please inspect this possibility or is it unsound |
|
| Nov-20-11 | | vajeer: Can Black hold by
23....Qf4 followed by
24...f6 removing the pin on the knight and also attacking white's weakness on f3? |
|
Nov-21-11
| | lost in space: <<FSR:> <lost in space> There's an expression "Put a sock in it." - basically a more colorful way of saying "Shut up."> Merci for the explanation. |
|
Nov-21-11
 | | kevin86: Here is a rare case where Kasparov is the victim of a good attack-instead of the victor. |
|
| Nov-21-11 | | King Death: < Eric Farley: If what people say here is true : that kasparov lost this game because his opening preparation didn't take this variation into account and he was surprised by that, then he may not have been the great player that some people advertise him to have been.> Who can know everything? Kasparov never played the Nimzo much as Black, so it isn't that surprising that he didn't know all of the ins and outs. < He is supposed to solve OTB problems using his talent. Capablanca and Alekhine did it.> What's your point here? That you're way better than Kasparov? < As a matter of fact, his endings left a lot to be desired, so many blunders, more than would be acceptable for a player of his --supposed -- caliber.> Again, are you rated 4000 or something?
< A chess player is to be rated based on his overall knowledge not just by the opening novelties he introduces here and there. I'm beginning to suspect that it wasn't he who was great, but his contemporaries that were poor.> Guys like Karpov really couldn't play. They're just lucky I got bored and didn't hit the international circuit. There, that sounds as stupid as your statement. < And if you check the Tal Memorial going on now, you'll understand what I mean. Nakamura and Nepo kept on playing for 85 moves in a position well-known as a book draw. A position found in The ABC of Rook Endings in Korchnoi's book "Practical Rook Endings." The Vancura position. > There's nothing wrong with making a man play it out. That's a personal choice, and I wouldn't show any mercy either. |
|
| Nov-22-11 | | kasparvez: Alekhine, Capablanca were all extraordinary practical players, but its an exaggeration to say that they didn't have problems with opening surprises. Since in their times opening theories were still under construction they prepared more on general grounds. Thus they hardly faced middlegame novelties connected with opening lines, except perhaps, from Rubinstein and Euwe. Post-Fischer chess, we know, places a high value on opening schemes, always connected to middlegames and in some cases, even endgames. In such a high stake 'all-know-all' system novelties play a very powerful role, often practically deciding a game by itself. It is absurd to demand of Kasparov, the man who authors the most number of middlegame novelties in history, to refute prepared surprises every time he faces them. And no chess player is complete. Kasparov surrendered many endings, Fischer lost many double edged positions, Alekhine played prosaic positions worse than most. The point is, their overall playing strength was of such magnitude that these particular weaknesses didn't make much difference. |
|
| Feb-10-12 | | kamalakanta: Vajeer, I think 23...Qf4 is a good try, but it hangs the c-pawn, which supports the d4-knight, after 24.Qxc5. |
|
Jun-13-12
 | | wordfunph: missed my source..
<1999 Wijk aan Zee: When Garry Kasparov, with a 7.5-0.5 score and a 3000-plus performance rating met Ivan Sokolov in the 9th round, the Bosnian GM went straight into a Nimzo-Indian
variation that had been analyzed for 50 years. Sokolov was unaware that Kasparov and his trainer had analyzed the key line out to a win for black in 1973, following an obscure Soviet
game. When the key position arose after Sokolov's 21st move, Kasparov's hand moved too quickly. "I should have stopped, taken a sip of coffee, taken a breath, and I would have recalled the game." Kasparov said afterwards. But he played a rook move instead of a king retreat he had analyzed --- and resigned six moves later. Jan Timman told him, "Sometimes you need to check old analyses." Kasparov concluded, "No. You simply need to produce them at
the board.">
:-) |
|
Jun-28-12
 | | outplayer: 27...Qe6 is a blunder. 27...Rh7 is correct. |
|
| Nov-12-12 | | Jim Bartle: Kasparov wrote down Sokolov's last move on his scoresheet before it was played. And made sure Sokolov saw it. Wonder what his point was. |
|
Jan-03-13
 | | perfidious: <Jim> Wonder whether that could be regarded as illegal, as is writing down one's own move before making it, under FIDE rules. |
|
Jan-03-13
| | perfidious: <outplayer: 27...Qe6 is a blunder. 27...Rh7 is correct.> Hard to agree with this conclusion after 27....Rh7 28.Qg2 Qe8 29.Rg7 Qf8 30.Rxh7+ Kxh7 31.Bxd4 cxd4 32.Qh3+ Qh6 33.Qf5+ Kh8 34.Rg5. |
|
| Jan-03-13 | | FISCHERboy: The bishop on b2 is annoying. |
|
| Jan-03-13 | | bobbylee: For some reason, Kasparov's play on the black side of the Nimzo-Indian has generally always left something to be desired. Almost as if he has never been comfortable in with that opening. He had defeats on the back side in several notable games, such as in his first candidates match with Beliavsky and in his world title match against Kramnik. Both times he got a bad position out of the opening and went down hard. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
