< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Dec-01-10|| ||kevins55555: ANAND?? VISWANATHAN ANAND, THE CURRENT WORLD CHAMPION?"??? |
LOL LOL LOL LOL
i do not understand why 6.e2 and black resigned just because losing a minor piece in petroff defence lose minor piece variation means so much that World champion, Yes, World champion,
uh, just because of losing a or .
|Dec-01-10|| ||kevins55555: Just shorter than four move checkmate; 1.e4 e5 2.c4!? c6 3.h5?! f6?? 4.xf7#!!|
|Dec-01-10|| ||kevins55555: <somitra> LOL for that game
|Dec-01-10|| ||Benzol: It's nice to know that even the great can slip on the banana skins sometime.|
|Dec-01-10|| ||HeMateMe: He gave Anand the boot!|
|Dec-10-10|| ||rapidcitychess: Oops...|
|Jun-06-11|| ||chesssantosh: <kevins55555>.ya i agree.Anand should have continued to play so that it would later become "lose minor piece" variation in petroff defence.i m sure kramnik will give a try on this variation !!!!|
|Jun-23-11|| ||Fusilli: Can someone tell me what tournament this was? When I google chess biel 1988 I get this one:|
No Zapata or Anand, so wrong tournament.
|Jun-23-11|| ||Sastre: It was the Biel-B 1988 tournament - http://www.365chess.com/tournaments....|
|Jun-23-11|| ||Fusilli: <sastre> ha! it was right around the corner (from where I first looked). Thanks!|
|Jun-23-11|| ||FSR: Someone asked earlier about the shortest master game. The shortest decisive master game not lost because of a protest or forfeit is Z Djordjevic vs M Kovacevic, 1984 (3 moves).|
|Sep-02-11|| ||scormus: Anand was always, IMO, a gentleman. A rogue would have tried 6 ... Qe7 and hoped for 7 Qb5+, attacking the Bf5.|
|Sep-02-11|| ||scormus: And as a gentleman he would have taken his lumps, even when he lost because he made a "typo"|
|Sep-05-11|| ||MaczynskiPratten: See Anand's amusing explanation of why he resigned, at the start of page 3 (as well as the background to the debacle as explained on page 1)|
|Sep-05-11|| ||perfidious: <MaczynskiPratten> That's priceless.|
|Sep-08-11|| ||scormus: <MaczynskiPratten: See Anand's amusing explanation of why he resigned>|
Thanks! Ah yes, Oh dear,. A very understandable choice he made to resign and get out fast. I dont blame him at all, I would have done the same.
But the explanation? I would never have admitted I blindly followed Informator (OK I never saw Informator, more like an outdated MCO).
I would have cited what actually DID happen to me once .... as I made my 4th or 5th move my mind was wandering (as it does) to a different variation where some other move is played. Then I looked at the board in horror and saw I actually played that other move :O
In my game the unintended move wasnt immediately losing so I played on and tried to bluff it out, pretending it was a prepared new move. Got away with it too ;)
|Nov-28-11|| ||Reisswolf: <hedgeh0g: Ah...<<the blunder variation of the Petrov>>.>|
Maybe it's because I haven't had enough sleep in the last several days, but I can't stop laughing at that description.
|May-08-12|| ||solskytz: I can see Capablanca playing on for 46 moves, later getting a couple of pawns as some compensation for the piece, and then... |
but of course, not a pleasant situation to find oneself in
|Jun-20-12|| ||KKsystem: The world chess champion is renowned for his lightning speed in chess not only in his wins but also in his losses it seems LOL!|
|Sep-02-12|| ||Dionysius1: Could someone just clarify this game for me? I don't get how B has to lose a piece. If 6...Qe7 then 7 d3 Nc5 8 Qb5+ Bd7. Or 7 Nd5 Qe1 and there's only the Q attacking the N on e4 which is defended by the bishop.|
|Dec-11-12|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <Dionysius1>: If <6. ... Qe7>, White plays <7. Nd5> < >.|
Anand supposedly went into the ultra-dubious (viz., totally losing) <5. ... Bf5> line based on having seen Miles vs Christiansen, 1987 in Informantor and (sans analysis) having concluded it was a good way to equalize. In doing so, there were two keys points the future World Champion failed to take into account: (1) never play a line without analyzing it (now possible even for someone as lazy as myself thanks to engines); and (2) the Miles-Christiansen game was a pre-arranged draw.
In the 1987 game, Miles saw the refutation with <6. Qe2> (and polished the e2 square with his finger for a length of time to make sure Christiansen would realize what he had walked into), but he ultimately honored the agreement to a GM draw by playing the innocuous <6. Nxe4>.
|Sep-19-13|| ||zavariz: Hard to believe.|
|Jun-01-14|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Believe or not !|
|Jul-17-14|| ||GM Rounak Pathak: Irrational!|
|Jul-17-14|| ||jhelix70: This game is a great example of the difference between "knowing theory" and "understanding an opening"|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·