< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Aug-05-04|| ||Calli: <Whitehat1963> true! <:-| *wears dunce cap* |
|Aug-13-04|| ||acirce: <Whitehat1963> Kramnik vs Kasparov, 2001 is an example. |
|Jan-02-06|| ||oao2102: What about 40. Nxg5 If 40..Rxg5? 41 Rh8+! wins the queen for a rook. Otherwise, white wins a pawn, opens the g file, threatens the queen and increases attacking lines. Any thoughts?|
|Nov-04-06|| ||aazqua: Oao that is exactly what I was thinking. 40 nG5! I guess white just isn't as good as we are.|
|Nov-04-06|| ||Resignation Trap: <oao2102> and <aazqua> On 40.Nxg5, doesn't Black have 40...Rd1+! (White's Queen is unprotected)?|
|Apr-25-07|| ||sfm: <ughaibu: Botvinnik joins the victims of a mate in one.>
Right, but g2 is as good as any other move. There's not even resistance left.|
|May-24-07|| ||vizir: When playing his last move Tolush said : "It's maa-ate mr Botvinnik" and for ever the name of Tolush would sound as an insult to Botvinnik's ears.|
When Kasparov won in an acrobatic style in a world championship game against Karpov, Botvinnik was the only one unhappy and said "You played in the style of Tolush !!!" which was not really a compliment :-)
|Jul-06-07|| ||luzhin: I suppose the logical end to the struggle would have been 55..Qh7 56.Rxf7 Qxf7 57.Qh8 mate.|
|Feb-17-08|| ||offramp: Is 39.Qc4 a loss of a tempo or is there a point to it?|
|Feb-18-08|| ||whiteshark: <offramp: <Is 39.Qc4 a loss of a tempo or is there a point to it?>> |
<40.Qe4!> would have made a point to it. 40.Qb3 was a weaker move but the answer 40...Nd8 was a blunder. Maybe mutual timetrouble.
|Apr-12-08|| ||ToTheDeath: White missed the powerful blow 32.Ne5! which gives him a large advantage.|
A sloppy game, but a nice finish- 55...Qh7 56.Rxf7!
|Apr-12-08|| ||talisman: sloppy is 1 adjective that does not apply to 1944 and to these 2.|
|Apr-13-08|| ||ToTheDeath: <talisman> I respect your statement that they are both great players but objectively this game has MANY errors by both sides.|
|Jun-22-08|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Even the great Botvinnik could get caught up in the tank officer's recklessness (losing on the Black side of a Center Game?!). Incidentally, I wonder if Tolush was still in the army when he played in this tournament, and if so, did he receive permission to play or was he already on some kind of leave.|
|Dec-07-08|| ||whiteshark: It was not the opening...|
|Jan-24-09|| ||whiteshark: <acirce: <Whitehat1963> Kramnik vs Kasparov, 2001 is an example.>
Not really a serious example as it was --> Botvinnik Mem <Blitz> Match 2001|
|May-13-09|| ||WhiteRook48: why did Botvinnik allow himself to be checkmated?!|
|May-13-09|| ||whiskeyrebel: Perhaps he was following "orders"..|
|May-13-09|| ||Granny O Doul: Korchnoi once asked a bitter-ending simul opponent "don't you know it is the greatest shame to be mated?". |
Kramnik against the computer (with ...Qe3??, Qh7#) would be an example from a more serious game, assuming Kramnik was in fact the WC (as opposed to just in it a lot).
|May-13-09|| ||blacksburg: hehehe this is something you don't see every day, Botvinnik getting mated.|
|Aug-29-09|| ||WhiteRook48: especially by Tolush|
|Sep-03-09|| ||WhiteRook48: hey Botvinnik offended Capablanca in his win in the AVRO 1938|
|Apr-06-14|| ||Phony Benoni: Black could at least have set a trap instead of playing <55...g2>:|
click for larger view
If he interposlates <55...Qh1+ 56.Ka2 Qh7>, White can't play 57.Rxf7 because 57...Qxf7 is check. However, White has other ways to win.
|Oct-31-16|| ||allan.dinglasan: FOUR YEARS AFTER HE was checkmated he became the undisputed World Champion in 1948. |
Active world champ that was checkmated in 2006 is notably Vladimir Kramnik, He was checkmated by Fritz Computer.
|Jun-29-18|| ||tpstar: <Botvinnik joins the victims of a mate in one.>|
<It was not the opening ...>
... but the ending!
<55 ... Qh1+ 56. Ka2 Qh7 57. Rxf7? Qxf7+>
Worth a try.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·