< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Sep-04-10|| ||talisman: Well Fine actually claimed the championship.Said Fine and Keres should share the title, in his book, before the '48 tournament.|
|Sep-05-10|| ||AVRO38: <talisman>
Fine had no valid claim to the title as Keres was the clear winner at AVRO. What book are you referring to?
|Sep-05-10|| ||talisman: <AVRO38> You're right of course about Fine's claim. Now the book I read I cannot remember the name.30 yrs. ago. I do know that Fine was the author. I'll google it this weekend.|
|Sep-05-10|| ||rapidcitychess: That is a fine (pun not intended) attacking game.
The most amazing thing is to the average player: The attack never happened.
The king never was threatened with mate.
The center attack is sometimes stronger than the mating attack. Why you may ask? The domination of the center leads to the cramping of the pieces, which allows for many chances of attack, and winning material voluntarily by black in order to free the bind in which he is in.
The quiet attack is often stronger than the vociferous one.
|Sep-19-10|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Is amazing when you realize that blacks are hopeless in only eleven moves !!|
|Jan-21-12|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Is amazing when you realize (according to Fine) that blacks are hopeless in only twelve moves !!|
|Jan-21-12|| ||King Death: This was an impressive game by Fine, it wasn't often that Botvinnik was outplayed this way.|
|Jan-21-12|| ||parisattack: Scary in its depth if all of Fine's annotations are correct. Anyone do a deep engine analysis of this game - hope for Botvinnik along the way somewhere?|
Fine was definitely WC material - and he seemed to have pouted about the missed opportunity most of his life. I guess I best pull out 'Lessons From My Games' and revisit things.
|Jan-21-12|| ||Ulhumbrus: Fine foresaw that Black's QB would have no future on a6 because of White's ability to play the move c4 and that Black lacked time to develop his QB to g6. This is much more impressive than I make it sound.|
|Jan-21-12|| ||King Death: < parisattack: ...Fine was definitely WC material - and he seemed to have pouted about the missed opportunity most of his life...>|
The war did a number on a lot of things but afterward he chose to take his doctorate and not play in the match tournament.
|Feb-08-12|| ||parisattack: Yes, the operative phrase is 'he chose' I think. Why is not too clear from various responses he provided over the years. Perhaps he just preferred that direction. After all, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.|
|Nov-23-12|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Is amazing when you realize (according to Fine) that Botvinnik are hopeless after twelve moves !!|
|Nov-23-12|| ||Fusilli: Beautiful positional game. Black is indeed strategically lost after just 12 moves.|
|Feb-04-13|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: Positional clearness !|
|Feb-04-13|| ||JimNorCal: I was just pondering how weak White's pawns were looking when Fine suddenly explained he had a won game.
Deep and impressive insight, indeed!
The pun is a Spooner-ism on "swine flu"?
|May-07-13|| ||Check It Out: <parisattack> It's not deep engine analysis, but Shredder12 says that black is okay after 14.Bd2 [+0.34], but dislikes 14...f6 [+1.01].|
Black is still in it after 17.Qe1 [+0.60] but after 17...a5 [+1.29] Fine plays all the top 1 or 2 engine moves all the way to the end.
|May-07-13|| ||parisattack: <Check It Out:> Thank you! Just me, I would have judged White just 'better' if having not seen Fine's notes. And we know Fine could resort to hyperbole at times...to say nothing of having a fine ego. I wonder if Fine ever shrunk himself? :) |
On the one hand it is difficult to believe Botvinnik is truly lost after 12 moves; on the other, probably the type of position an engine may not see the 'positionally' lost aspect? Either way, Fine played brilliantly here!
|May-07-13|| ||RookFile: It might be interesting to see the deep analysis.|
|May-07-13|| ||maxi: I checked the position after 14.Bd2 with Houdini 3x64. If Black plays 14...f6 the computer says that that White has an advantage of a bit less than 1. However, and this is kind of interesting, if Black plays 14...a5 followed by the development of the Bishop at a6, it gives zero advantage to White after 96/70, about 9.5 billion plys. So it seems that Fine was wrong, and Black's position was OK. The culprit was 14...f6.|
|May-07-13|| ||parisattack: <Maxi... So it seems that Fine was wrong, and Black's position was OK. The culprit was 14...f6.>|
Thanks for digging so deep for us!
A variation of the 'beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact.' At least it sounded good; Chernev would have loved it!
|May-07-13|| ||Olavi: <maxi> It wouold be nice to see some lines; after the simple 14...a5 15.Bxc3 16.Qxd8+ 17.0-0 white has what any strong player would automatically assess as a big positional advantage.|
|May-07-13|| ||maxi: No, <Olavi>. I am sure that if you take a careful look at the board you'll see that is certainly not the case. After 14...a5 15.BxB dxB 16.QxQ+ KxQ 17.0-0 Ke7 the position is equal. If 18.Rfa1 Rd8 19.Nd4 Rd5 and the position is more dangerous for White than for Black.|
|May-08-13|| ||maxi: But you are right, I should give some lines. I will if I get the chance.|
|May-08-13|| ||Olavi: Yes, it's easy to have a glance at the board, decide that there will be a black square blockade and not look any further. Of course 16.0-0 or even 16.Rd4 might be better, and in that line 18. Rd1 Rd8 19.Rd6. If I understand correctly Kasparov analyzes this on OMGP IV, I wonder what he says.|
|May-08-13|| ||Olavi: I now see this exchange on the first page: <Botvinnik gave 14..a5! 15 Bxc3..dxc 16 Rd4..Qe7 17 Rd6..Bc6 18 Qd4..Rb8 19 Qxc3..Rb1+ 20 Rd1..Rxd1+ 21 Kxd1..0-0 as playable for Black.> <White could improve with 15.0-0 or 16.Qd6 in that line.>|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·