< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Jul-01-08|| ||devioustalfan: is move 16 the knight sac then?|
|Jul-01-08|| ||HannibalSchlecter: When Kasparov is taken out of his home preparation he really does pussyfoot around giving Anand the better position. Kaspy, d5 deserves to be smashed, not tip-toed around with.|
|Jul-01-08|| ||dx9293: I don't play the opening, so I don't want to come off as an apologist, but 1...d5 is not a bad opening. Can White get an advantage against it WITH ACCURATE PLAY? Yes. But that can be said about any Black defense to 1.e4. Even the overused Najdorf doesn't promise equality if White knows his stuff.|
I start my students with 1.e4 for White and with 1...e5. Once they play some tournaments, if they want to change to something else, I let them do it. Caro? Fine. French? Fine. Sicilian? Fine. Pirc? Fine. Even the Alekhine? Fine. I have a couple of students who like the Scandinavian, and I have no problem with it.
Hell, Radjabov plays the Jaenisch Gambit against the Ruy Lopez for crying out loud! And his 2700-2750 opponents have not been able to "bust" it!
|Jul-02-08|| ||keypusher: <HannibalSchlecter: When Kasparov is taken out of his home preparation he really does pussyfoot around giving Anand the better position. Kaspy, d5 deserves to be smashed, not tip-toed around with.>|
Care to share the refutation with us?
|Jul-02-08|| ||newton296: kasparov is like a computer here . don't understand why so much hate on his play ! |
his open wasn't the best but it was enough to confuse anand and get the win !
|Jul-08-08|| ||devioustalfan: <whiteshark>the knight move 27.Ne5 was an OFFER not sac in my book as the knight was never taken.|
|Oct-03-08|| ||27 super goats: It's dubious to call it even an offer of a sacrifice because of Bxd8.|
|Oct-03-08|| ||Aspirador: There's still 2 knights on the board at the end of the game. Thus, there was not a single knight sac in the whole game!|
|Oct-28-08|| ||JediKush: white wins?! first of all... i dont see why?! black has a few excellent moves..|
Nc7.. forking rook and pawn then with the eventual plan of after NxA6 Nb4 Nd3 Nf4. .. Nc3 attacking the rook, to Ne2 then Nf4...
|Dec-30-08|| ||just a kid: <jedikush>41...Nc7 then 42.Rd8+ followed by Rc8 and Bg3|
|Mar-11-10|| ||gareeb: first of all i thought of Nc7 .. but its finish to white win ...|
so fritz mention Rc3 and its going to be a draw ..!!
maybe anand felt the pressure in this match ..!!
|Mar-11-10|| ||ounos: Perhaps your fritz has a virus in it. Have you ever scanned it?|
|Feb-18-11|| ||HeMateMe: Master of the open positions.|
|Nov-26-11|| ||serenpidity.ejd: Hey, why is there no one here giving his analysis on 27).....fe5.?|
|Nov-26-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @<serendipity>
I could start the ball rolling with what Kasparov had to say (his notes from Informator 64/90).
Firstly, Garry gave 27...Qe6 an exclam.
<27...fe5 28. fe5 Ne4 29. Bd8 Rd8 30. g4! hg4 31. Bg4 Bg4 (31...Bh6 32. Bf5 gf5 33. Rc2 unclear; 31...Qh7 32. Bf5 Ng3 33. Kg1 Nf5 34. Qg4 unclear) 32. Qg4 Nf2 33. Rf2 Qf2 34. Qg6 Bg7 35. Qe6 Kf8 (35...Qf7 36. Qf7 Kf7 37. Rc7 ) 36. Qg4 with compensation>
Later, GK gave lengthy analysis, arguing 30...Bg4 leads to equality whilst Anand's 30...Ne4 was dubious. He regarded 31...Bh3 as a clear mistake, giving more lengthy analysis showing 31...Qd6 was strong , leading to unclear play.
Something for people to run through Houdini to see if Kasparov was right?
|Nov-26-11|| ||serenpidity.ejd: Thanks<SimonWebbsTiger>for the input.|
This was game 14 of the match. It was said that Kasparov offered a draw after 16) Nxd5.
|Jul-12-12|| ||Check It Out: <Dec-07-05 bobo7up: When Anand played 1...d5 Kasparov took his jacket off and started making faces!>|
Anyone have video of this?
The running show with <whiteshark> and <devioustalfan> is entertaining.
BTW, is a piece "offer" a piece sacrifice, particularly if it's not accepted? :D
|Jul-13-12|| ||e4 resigns: devioustalfan made me laugh|
|Aug-08-14|| ||Rascal Nikov: I think it was still holdable with 40. ..Rc3|
|Mar-19-16|| ||Hawkman: I bet this was the last WC game where the Scandinavian was played.|
|Mar-19-16|| ||Granny O Doul: Now, Scandinavians play in WC matches.|
|Jun-04-17|| ||sassydad4u2luv: When I started playing chess 30 years ago, I played the Scandinavian. Back then, we called it the Center Counter and every book claimed it was unsound. My chess "friends" gave me the name of garbageman because I played this defense. But I knew it was better than its reputation and kept playing it. Now with super strong engines and strong players analyzing it, the Scandinavian has withstood the test of time.|
|Jun-05-17|| ||Petrosianic: <sassydad4u2luv>: <When I started playing chess 30 years ago, I played the Scandinavian. Back then, we called it the Center Counter>|
They still do in the US.
<and every book claimed it was unsound.>
I don't remember ANY books calling it "unsound", only weak. Unsound means "unplayable", "refutable", "You're going to lose if your opponent knows this".
<But I knew it was better than its reputation and kept playing it.>
Well, if you believed that it had the reputation of being unsound, then you were right. It is better than that reputation. That doesn't make it a good opening, though. Although at the club level, it can be decent, especially if black knows it well and white doesn't.
|Jun-05-17|| ||Howard: Forty years ago, one of the best books on the Center Counter was the late Larry Evans' The Chess Opening for You. He analyzed that opening very extensively in that book.|
After all these years, the book is no doubt a bit out of date. But Evans' was probably quite correct in assessing the opening as quite playable for Black.
|Jun-05-17|| ||ChessHigherCat: One interesting thing here is that Kasparov doesn't try to gain an advantage with Bd2 (with the "threat of a discovery" on the queen), which is almost always a big waste of time.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·