|Feb-03-04|| ||Honza Cervenka: Adorjan's attack was simple, quick and deadly. The threat 23.Qg7+ Bxg7 24.hxg7+ Kg8 25.Rh8# is unavoidable. |
|Feb-27-04|| ||Whitehat1963: How quickly this game ends up looking like something Morphy or Tal played. |
|Feb-24-05|| ||aw1988: No, simply a sharp Sicilian. |
|Mar-07-05|| ||Giearth: Not really, Ribli was overconfident and got careless or... he was not familiar with the variation. |
|May-11-05|| ||TheAlchemist: I don't want this to sound the wrong way, but I would really like someone to explain to me, what good comes of these Nc4 moves by Black in the English attack? The light square bishop is usually a problem piece for White (or at least it seems so), so Black just helps White get rid of it, while connecting rooks at the same time. Am I missing something? Thanks.|
|Jul-24-05|| ||Giearth: I think the problem is Ribli allowed the move 15.g5. You should check the game between Chocenka,D-Zagorskis,D 2005(not yet in database). Zagorskis chose 13... h6 instead of 13... Nc4 above. I found this in www.chesslab.com|
|Jun-21-06|| ||Xuorarch: I think one might argue that playing Nc4 is good because it trades a pair of minor pieces, and White loses the bishop pair. I do agree that Nc4 is bad, though.|
About 13...h6, this seems to sort of open up Black's kingside. For instance, 13...h6 14.g5 hxg5 15.h6 gxh6 16.gxh6 Rxh6 exposes Black's king. Of course the players have many more options than this, but any pawn moves in front of the king's casted postion risk exposing him to attack, and the pawn can become a target for sacrifices and such.
|Mar-31-12|| ||Manofglory: How about 17...f5?|
|Mar-31-12|| ||chesscoach1: chesscoach1: 17... f5 is refuted by 18. h6 and the king will be exposed. 16.. f5 would be better than 16..Qc7
A high quality analysis of this game can be found in www.chess-university.blogspot.com
Also Kasparov has analysed this game in the "Revolution in the 70s" book.
|Jan-28-13|| ||shakman: 13. ... Nfd7 was played V Iordachescu vs V Neverov, 2005|