| Mar-24-05 |
| RookFile: I can't BELIEVE that nobody has commented on this game! What a GREAT game this was! Excellent insight into the position by Fischer. But then, the great
Reshevsky rises to the occasion,
showing remarkable TENACITY to pull
a draw out of this game.
It is games like this the point out
the LIE of Kasparov about how the 'modern' GM games have more fight
and tenacity than older guys like Fischer
and Reshevsky.
ANY Fischer game was a fight to the
death... and when you had a GREAT FIGHTER like Reshevsky, you had a ton of modern looking fights like this one. And I haven't even mentioned this, but some very deep analysis was done into the final positions from this game, that broke new ground in endgame theory! |
 |
| Aug-31-06 |
| MyriadChoices: Why wouldn't Fischer exchange rooks of 52 or 53 and head in B and P v R and P? It'd seem like he'd be able to pull off something. |
|
| Aug-31-06 |
| RookFile: Well, that is very complex. I think for like 25 years it was believed that this approach would win the game. But, if I remember right, some analysis showed a miracle draw for white with the bishop, based on stalemate themes. |
|
| Aug-31-06 |
| alaTurca: This game was part of a match that was arranged between Fischer and Reshevsky. After the 11th game, which is this one, Fischer stopped playing and the result was eventually declared in favour of Reshevsky. At the point both sides had two wins actually. In an interview with Reshevsky that was conducted a few years before his death, he gives details of the game. According to Sam, when the game was adjourned, Fischer had no doubt of the victory and declared that he would win. Reshevsky 'stayed up a little bit that night' and found the way to draw. The next day Fischer was disappointed. Reshevsky says that this incident was the reason Fischer quit. This supposedly broke his spirit. When the interviewer raised the objection that Fischer was a great fighter, Sam said: "Well it is something to declare that you will win but it is completely different when you say that you will and then get a draw." |
|
Jan-28-07
 |
| norami: In his book Fischer claimed he could have won by trading rooks on move 53. That would leave a 6-man endgame which is now covered in the computer tablebase, so I checked it out and it said Black could force mate in 44 more moves. |
|
| Feb-16-08 |
| HOTDOG: Evans suggested 53...Txe3+ 54.Bxe3 h5 as a win for Black,and Fischer gave a long variation until move 75 winning for Black.54...h5 is really winning in 45 moves,and now the best continuation for both sides is:
55.Kf4 Ra5 56.Bd2 Rf5+ 57.Ke4 Kf6 58.Bf4 Ra5 59.Be3 Ra4+ 60.Kf3 Kf5,as Fischer himself suggested.however Fischer suggested a long variation beginning with 55.Bf4,that's:
55.Bf4 Kf5 56.Bd6 Rb2(according to the database,56...Ra5! wins a move faster)59.Bf4 Rb3+ 58.Kg2 Kg4!(other moves draw)59.Bd6 Rb2+ 60.Kg1 Kh3 61.Be5(slightly better resistance with 61.Kf1)Rb4 62.Bc7 Rg4 63.Kf2 Kh2 64.Be5(but 64.Bf4! holds 4 moves longer)Kh1(and now 64...Rg5! wins four moves faster)65.Kf3 Rg8 66.Bf4 Rf8?(other rook moves as Rg6,Rg4,Rc8 and Ra8 are winning,as also 66...Kg1)67.Kf2?(67.g4!! leads to a draw)h4?(the best way to win is 67...Kh2,but a lot of rook moves are winning too)68.Kf3 h3 69.Kf2 h2 70.Kf1 Ra8 71.Kf2?(this move loses,but 71.Be3,Be5,Bd6 or Bc7 draw)Ra2+ 72.Kf1 Ra3! 73.Kf2 Rf3+!! 74.Kxf3 Kg1 75.Be3+ Kf1 and wins |
|
| Feb-16-08 |
| RookFile: I wish I knew where it was, but my understanding is that somebody demonstrated a miracle draw, even still, in this line. |
|
| Feb-17-08 |
| HOTDOG: Fischer's analysis in M60MG is wrong in the moves 66...Rf8?(66...Rg6!Rg4!Rc8!Ra8! or 66...Kg1!),67.Kf2?(67.g4!!),67...h4?(67...Kh2 or some rook moves win)and 71.Kf2?(71.Be3,Be5,Bd6 or Bc7) |
|
| Feb-17-08 |
| MichAdams: <Rookfile>, are you referring to Murey's analysis? http://www.chessbase.com/columns/le... In which case, <HOTDOG> has it covered. |
|
| May-09-08 |
| CharlesSullivan: <HOTDOG> is right -- after 53... xe3+! 54. xe3, then Black has a forced mate-in-45 beginning 54...h5! |
|
Aug-08-09
 |
| Joshka: "Too often I have heard remarks such as "Fischer doesn't back up his comments with sufficient play", so for all those pundits try out this 48...e2 !! 49. Re1 Re7 50. Kg2 Rd5 51. a6 Ra5 52. Bd6 Re6 53. Bf4 Raa6 54. Bd2 Rad6 55. Bb4 Rd1 56. Kf2 Rf6+! 57.Ke2 Re1+ 58.Be1 Kg6 59. Bc3 Ra6 60. Bd4 Kf5 61. Kf3 Ra3+ 62. Kg2 Kg4 63. Be5 h5 64. Bd6 Ra2+ 65. Kf1 Kh3 66. Bf4 Ra4 67. Be5 Rg4 68. Kf2 Kh2 69. Bf4 Kh1 70. Bd6 Rg5 71. Bf4 Rg7 72. Kf3 Kg1 73. Be3+ Kf1 74. Bf4 Ra7 75. Bd2 Rf7+ 76. Bf4 Rf8 77. Ke3 Kg2 78. Bc7 Re8+ 79. Kd3 Re7 80. Bf4 Kf3 81. Bb8 Rg7 82. Be5 Rg3! and Black wins." Fischer and his notes from 2007, page 333 "My 61 Memorable Games" |
|
Aug-11-09
 |
| PinnedPiece: <Joshka: Fischer and his notes...> There is some grave doubt in the chess community that these are Fischer's notes.... For example, See: User: M61MG Wrestler . |
|
Aug-16-09
|
| Joshka: <grave doubt> by whom?....in the chess community, as you say?....name a titled player who has read the book, and says it's forged??......we have IM Larry Day who will stand by the book's authenticity....score 1-0....wanna give your negative author's assessment?? |
|
Aug-16-09
 |
| chancho: Doesn't matter what IM Day says about the book's "authenticity." Einar Einarsson said Bobby did not write it.
Find someone, anyone, from the RJF group who can refute that statement, and the debate continues. If not, it's all just idle speculation, and waste of time arguing over the issue. |
|
| Aug-16-09 |
| robmtchl: < Joshka: <grave doubt> by whom?....in the chess community, as you say?....name a titled player who has read the book, and says it's forged??......we have IM Larry Day who will stand by the book's authenticity....score 1-0....wanna give your negative author's assessment??> WHy don't you give us a number to call to buy a copy... other than Ed Trice. Maybe someone will. "The Publisher" has not made gratis copies available to reviewers for assessment.Bruce, please step back into the light. Don't play Vader to Trice's evil Emeperor. |
|
