|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-02-04 | | dragon40: <catfriend> WEll, as theroy stand right now, March of 2004, the whole line beginning with 5...g6, all variations and sub-variations in the Caro-Kann, Panov attack are not recommended OR considered sound at all!! The answer why is: Because White simply has a solid, very secire plus in the main line! There are attempts once in a while by mainstream GMs or high rated players to revive it, but as far as I know, it has not been successful at all!
White wins that d5 pawn as in this game and just completely overwhelms Black most of the time, if not makes his life miserable. Back when this game was played, it was still emerging theroy...even thought Tal completely dominates the game, as do most good players with White against this line..check some popular game collections, databases, etc..you shall see:)
I hope this helped ? |
 |
| Mar-06-04 | | catfriend: Yep:) Thank you a lot! I did all you recommended - and now I'm even more sure 5..g6 is simply senseless. |
|
| Mar-07-04 | | dragon40: <catfriend> You are more than welcome!! ANYTIME!!
You can e-mail me at JeffJ45862@aol.com if you wanna talk more Chess or get a game going...its up to you :)
Good chess to you@! |
|
Dec-12-05
 | | talisman: this game evened the score between these two.for those of us around when tal lost in 61-words can't describe the shock-we always thought he would re-climb the mt. |
|
| Dec-12-05 | | aw1988: Well, at the time I found it no secret that Tal lost, and that he would still be an exceptionally strong player, but the throne belonged back to Botvinnik. |
|
| May-30-06 | | ArturoRivera: Tal was ill in the rematch, no more needs to be said |
|
| May-30-06 | | whatthefat: <ArturoRivera>
True, but an oversimplification I think. Botvinnik was also a stronger opponent the second time around. As I see it, the 60 match was between an in-form Tal and an out of form Botvinnik. The 61 match was between an out of form Tal and an in-form Botvinnik. The fact that the score lines were so similar (12.5-8.5, 13-8) seems to support this. |
|
| Aug-09-06 | | PivotalAnorak: 21. e3?!
21. e8+!  g7 22.e3!  If then 22... d7 23.xc6 xe8 24.xe8 |
|
Aug-09-06
 | | Marmot PFL: The 5...g6 line has never been that popular, but by 1966 Botvinnik was semi-retired and probably wanted to avoid main lines. I would have played 5...e6 and Bb4 to head for a Nimzo-Indian type position. |
|
| Aug-09-06 | | euripides: The line had been played in the world championship match that year: Spassky vs Petrosian, 1966 |
|
| Jun-02-08 | | dTal: <whatthefat> Botvinnik was simply blown away by the 1960 Tal. Nobody could withstand Tal that time, he was just unplayable. The whole world stood back in awe and just gaped at his brilliance. In 1961, Tal's Riga doctors strongly advocated delaying the return match because of serious kidney trouble. Botvinnik behaved as if he still was the champion, and demanded that he be examined by doctors in Moscow. Tal heard of this and instead of decrying the unsportsmanlike behaviour of "big Mischa" (Tal never used ill health as an excuse in his life) laughed it off and told Averbakh, "forget it, I will beat him as it is". Nevertheless history records that he was ill enough for it to be a factor. He also propounded what Kasparov calls the "disastrous theory of the clear head", preferring to appear relatively unprepared but with a fresh mind; i.e. "its better to appear fresh than with a sackful of theoretical novelties but a jaded mind" or words to that effect. Alas, his mind wasn't that clear either, and a fired up thoroughly prepared Botvinnik was a match for a sick, under-prepared Tal.. |
|
Jun-21-08
| | talisman: <dtal> when reading kasparov you have to be careful and you have to read between the lines. |
|
| Jun-21-08 | | vraja: look at this beauty ! I just wish God hadnt tormented Tal with this kidney trouble. We could have seen a full blown healthty Tal and God only knows how much he could have accomplished....... |
|
| Jun-21-08 | | M.D. Wilson: <whatthefat: <ArturoRivera>
True, but an oversimplification I think. Botvinnik was also a stronger opponent the second time around. As I see it, the 60 match was between an in-form Tal and an out of form Botvinnik. The 61 match was between an out of form Tal and an in-form Botvinnik. The fact that the score lines were so similar (12.5-8.5, 13-8) seems to support this.> I agree with this. I'm sure Tal's health affected his playing ability, especially in matches. I'm also sure that Botvinnik's age and the fact that he had to play younger opponents for decades affected his practical results, too. This only serves to remind us how great they both were. |
|
Jun-21-08
| | talisman: kinda makes ya wonder why Tal didn't treat the caro-kann this way in 60 and 61. |
|
| Jun-21-08 | | Alphastar: <dragon40: WEll, as theroy stand right now, March of 2004, the whole line beginning with 5...g6, all variations and sub-variations in the Caro-Kann, Panov attack are not recommended OR considered sound at all!!> The 5. ..g6!? has never been refuted, but the line starting with 6. Qb3! is critical. After any normal move by white (like Nf3) the opening is simply a Tarrasch QG with reversed colors and a tempo less. This just results in 'easier equality'. The reason that the line 5. ..g6 is not played much is that white usually reaches a favourable position by in time returning the d5-pawn by playing d5-d6 (as in the game). |
|
Jul-03-08
 | | pawn to QB4: <kinda makes ya wonder why Tal didn't treat the caro-kann this way in 60 and 61.> "On the eve of that meeting Botvinnik had been showing his best form, defeating Smyslov, Keres and Spassky; and against Tal again made use of his favourite Caro-Kann. For the first time against his great rival Tal replied with the Panov variation. And he achieved an astonishingly easy victory. There were some who thought with melancholy, he should have done that long before..." (Svetozar Gligoric). |
|
| Jul-03-08 | | RookFile: Well, that system that Tal was playing back then, involving a piece sacrifice on e6, also looked promising. |
|
Jul-03-08
 | | stoy: This game is Tal's only tournament victory against Botvinnik, thus evening their lifetime score. |
|
Jul-27-08
| | talisman: <aw1988> how right you are and by the way come back...we all miss you and the wolf. |
|
| Oct-15-08 | | Mikhail Tal fan: the end of one of the strongest rivalities in the world of chess , from Steinz-Lasker, Capablanca-Alekhine...Kasparov-Karpov ..to Anand-Kramnik nowadays .. i wish i had met Tal before his Death..R.I.P |
|
| Jul-29-09 | | WhiteRook48: 5...g6 is stupid |
|
| Aug-24-09 | | WhiteRook48: Tal should have played this variation as many times as possible in the 1961 rematch |
|
Apr-19-10
 | | DrGridlock: < dragon40: <catfriend> WEll, as theroy stand right now, March of 2004, the whole line beginning with 5...g6, all variations and sub-variations in the Caro-Kann, Panov attack are not recommended OR considered sound at all!!> Maybe not so unsound after all.
In the last year (2009) the 5 ... g6 variation has been used for the Black pieces by Grischuk: M Meinhardt vs Grischuk, 2009
and Kamsky:
Ehlvest vs Kamsky, 2010 |
|
| Jul-18-12 | | LoveThatJoker: Guess-the-Move Final Score:
Tal vs Botvinnik, 1966.
YOU ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF TAL.
Your score: 75 (par = 73)
LTJ |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
