Jun-07-05
 |
| fred lennox: <chessgames.com> 7...Ne7 is an error. Correct is 7...Be6. 10.Be3 is a brilliant move. While it causes white to have an iso, it gives two outpost at d4 and c5, making the bishop rather useless. |
 |
| Jun-07-05 |
| Shams: are you trying to say the game score is wrong? |
|
| Jun-07-05 |
| offramp: I think he is. But how does black then play 16...Ng6? |
|
Jun-07-05
 |
| keypusher: Haven't looked at this in a long time. Really imposing play by Botvinnik. I am curious about the late resignation -- surely Boleslavsky didn't think Botvinnik didn't know the Lucena position? |
|
| Jun-07-05 |
| Shams: or 12...0-0, for that matter.
anyway, I found his comment instructive. that isolated e-pawn looks ugly but Botvinnik's knights are wonderful. Amusing that Boleslavsky asks him to prove that he knows how to win the Lucena position before he resigns! |
|
| Jun-07-05 |
| Shams: <keypusher> you *just* squeaked in ahead of me. |
|
Jun-08-05
|
| fred lennox: My blunder. 7...Nge7 is correct. On my screen it shows the Nce7. I've seen this a few times before and would of pass making comment on it. For some reason I thought 7..Be6 was correct. |
|
| Jun-10-05 |
| Runemaster: I like the 30.Qxe8+ combo - I think it's the sort of idea that is often difficult to see OTB. |
|
| Jun-13-05 |
| sitzkrieg: I find it hard to believe 10.Le3 (more eccentric then brilliant if you ask me) is the best move or is really changing the position into better for white.
Besides black has a nice outpost for his knigt too and can get there maybe with Nf5-d6 or something attacking iso at same time. Or am I wrong here? |
|
| Jun-13-05 |
| sitzkrieg: nice concept with Le3 though of course |
|
| Nov-17-05 |
| PARACONT1: Luckily bronstein beat boleslavsky and spared him the agony and shame of being crushed by botvinnik in 1951. |
|
Nov-17-05
 |
| Honza Cervenka: Superb game of Botvinnik. 25...Bd7 was a tactical mistake, 25...Bh5 would have been better. |
|
Jul-01-06
 |
| notyetagm: <keypusher: Haven't looked at this in a long time. Really imposing play by Botvinnik. I am curious about the late resignation -- surely Boleslavsky didn't think Botvinnik didn't know the Lucena position?> Yes, it does seem that Boleslavsky thinks Botvinnik is Lucena-ignorant. The Lunena position is reached with 62  g8 and Botvinnik can reach this position by force several moves before that. |
|
Jul-01-06
|
| notyetagm: This is really a well-played game by Botvinnik. both strategically and tactically. |
|
Jul-01-06
|
| notyetagm: <The defensive power of a pinned piece is merely illusory>, said Nimzowitsch. 27  xc6! is a good example of this principle. The Black e5-knight only -pretends- to <DEFEND> the c6-pawn since it must meet the more important threat of <BACK RANK MATE> on e8 by <BLOCKING> the e-file. |
|
| Mar-04-07 |
| Whitehat1963: What happens if 41...Kxb6? |
|
Mar-04-07
 |
| plang: "What happens if 41...Kxb6?"
The K & P ending looks like an easy win for white. |
|
| Mar-08-07 |
| syracrophy: <Whitehat1963: What happens if 41...Kxb6?> 42. b1+ c7 43.x x 44.f5
click for larger viewAnd now the White march e6-f7 can't be stopped and he will win both black  's, winning easily |
|
| May-30-07 |
| outsider: this game illustrates the remark that botwinnik once made on the style of boleslavsky (of course, in a very polite wording): he lacks tactical vision and is too passive when choosing schemes for the black |
|
May-30-07
|
| plang: Boleslavsky was obviously a very strong player. His match with Bronstein to determine the 1951 challenger could not have been any closer. |
|
Nov-28-07
|
| notyetagm: <Honza Cervenka: Superb game of Botvinnik.> Botvinnik lets forth a torrent of tactics: 27 c3xc6!, 29  f3xe5!, 30 c6xe8!. Wow.
|
|
| Jul-21-08 |
| vikinx: At the end, White creates a Lucena Position. White builds a bridge with Re4. But whart if Black destroys the bridge with ...Kd5(after ...Kd6)?
click for larger view
White plays Re7! followed by Kf8, finally g8=Q |
|
| Nov-09-09 |
| Plato: One of my favorite Botvinnik games. It features great opening, middlegame and endgame play from "The Patriarch." Fearing Boleslavsky's preparation, he deviates from their round 1 encounter by playing 11.Bxc6 instead of 11.fxe3, though it's doubtful that this is an improvement. 24...Kh8?! was a mistake (24...Bh5 would have maintained rough equality), and it's aesthetically pleasing that 25.Kh1! was the way to take advantage of it. After that White is threatening 26.Nd3 (whereas 25.Nd3 Bf5 was a problem before). Botvinnik goes on to win a pawn and wins with impeccable technique. 30.Qxe8! is not the only way to win but it is the simplest, if you know your rook and pawn endgames -- and Botvinnik knew his rook and pawn endgames... A quote I found on <Pyke>'s profile: <"From Mikhail Botvinnik one can learn that it is necessary to prepare seriously for each encounter. Here is a little example: Before the tourney for the world championship in 1948, I was acting as Botvinnik's second. Botvinnik included in his program the study of all rook endgames with f- and h-pawns. I was astonished: Why? That happens only once in a lifetime. <'No, if I am not acquainted with such endings, I do not have the right to participate in the world championship'>, said Botvinnik. I had to search for all examples of this endgame!"- Salomon Flohr (Source: Fide Review #3, 1961)> Of course 1948 was seven years after this game, but Botvinnik already had excellent technique. |
|
