|Aug-07-05|| ||popski: Rook endings always looks so drawish, probably because they are so hard to understand.|
|Sep-23-05|| ||Runemaster: The rook ending was interesting, but there were a lot of fascinating manouvres from Chig. earlier in the game. |
Overall, this game is a good illustration of what I understand by <IMLDay>'s distinction between "Closed" thinking (Tarrasch) vs "Open" thinking - Tarrasch is usually trying to make a given position conform to the rules and patterns, Chig. is usually trying to break out of the confines of rules and create new patterns.
|Sep-23-05|| ||IMlday: <Runemaster> Yes, Tarrasch had his 'principles' he'd written about, general patterns that were true more often than they were false. With tactical sense one can follow the principles and reach 2150ish elo. The problem is that, even if the principle is true 90% of the time, it sets oneself up for the opponent who deliberately steers into that other 10% where adhering to the 'principle'
runs into the exceptional case. Suttles' certainly exploited this weakness in the 1960's. Masters who could play 1.e4 e5 at 2500 level were totally adrift facing 1.e4 g6. It just didn't conform to their understanding at all. Tarrasch, insulted his principles were ignored, would have tried to refute it; overplayed White's position. The 1893 match Chigorin-Tarrasch was a great clash of styles. All the games are very instructive.|
|Sep-23-05|| ||RookFile: I guess the point of 62. Kd4 is, it
'builds a bridge', which is the term used in these rook and pawn endings.
62. Kd4 Rc1 63. Ra5+ Kg6 64. Rc5 and
the bridge is built.
|Sep-23-05|| ||IMlday: Yes, 'bridge-building' works technically here at move 64. Tarrasch thought he should have played 56..f4 but after 57.gxf4+ Kh4 58. Kd6 Rd1+ 59. Ke7 Rc1 60.Kd7 Rd1+ 61.Kc8 g3 63.c8=Q Rxc8 64. Kxc8 Kg4 65.Rf7! Kf3 66.f5 g2 67.Rg7 wins according to Chigorin. Grekov's 1952 book has both Chigorin's notes and Botvinnik's critique. Tarrasch seems to have 'over-played' the opening, looking for an edge that wasn't there.|
|Feb-24-06|| ||McCool: 22. ..♘e2+ What was that about?
51. ..♖c5? Give me a break?
|Feb-24-06|| ||mack: <22. ..e2+ What was that about?>|
Cheers for that, Seinfeld.
|Feb-24-06|| ||Pawn and Two: Tarrasch made a serious error with 20. Q-c5?
Instead, Tarrasch states in Three Hundred Chess Games, that he should have played 20. Qxg2 21. Bf3 Qxg3 22. hxg3 Nd5 23. Nxd5 exd5 24. Bxd5 Be6, enabling Black to maintain a good position. Fritz 9 evaluates this position as slightly favoring White.
At move 22. Ne2+, Tarrasch states that this was his best move.
Fritz 9 strongly agrees that 22. Ne2+ is Black's best option in a bad position, evaluating the position in favor of White (1.93) (18ply).
If instead, Black played 22. Bd7, then 23.Rxf4! or if 22. Nd5, then 23. Nxd5 pxd5 24. Qxd3.
At move 51. Rc5 is Black's only option to continue the game.
|Jun-19-06|| ||GeauxCool: The opening has a rather strange look to it.|
|Feb-13-17|| ||Straclonoor: < Tarrasch thought he should have played 56..f4 but after 57.gxf4+ Kh4 58. Kd6 Rd1+ 59. Ke7 Rc1 60.Kd7 Rd1+ 61.Kc8 g3 63.c8=Q Rxc8 64. Kxc8 Kg4 65.Rf7! Kf3 66.f5 g2 67.Rg7 wins according to Chigorin. Grekov's 1952 book has both Chigorin's notes and Botvinnik's critique.>|
After 56....f4 57.gxf4+ Lomonosov TB7 gives 'White mates in 45 moves'