|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-15-10 | | Petrosianic: <If one side has a backward, isolated pawn, why not play on a few moves?> In a heavy piece ending, that's not as big a disadvantage. There are no minors to probe, and no way for White to advance pawns to create further weaknesses. |
|
| Jul-13-12 | | Zugzwangovich: In the 1965 edition of "Profile of a Prodigy", Frank Brady says of White's 12th, "Most interesting at this point is the speculative sacrifice 12.QxB!? which gives White a very strong attack." Aside from the fact that such speculative moves were anethema to Fischer, is this a valid statement or one of Dr. Brady's "wholly unsubstantiated claims" to which Larry Evans referred? |
|
| Jul-13-12 | | Shams: <Zugzwangovich> After this game was played but before Brady wrote those words, a famous game was played in that line:
Nezhmetdinov vs O Chernikov, 1962 |
|
| Jul-13-12 | | unferth: <HeMateMe: If one side has a backward, isolated pawn, why not play on a few moves?> <Petrosianic: In a heavy piece ending, that's not as big a disadvantage. There are no minors to probe, and no way for White to advance pawns to create further weaknesses.> the technique I learned years ago for exploiting a backward isolani was for the attacker to trade OFF all the minors, pile up his pieces on the pawn's file, and then win it by advancing his own pawn to exploit the inevitable pin on a defensive heavy piece. could Fischer not have tried Re3/d3-f4-e5 etc.? |
|
Jul-13-12
 | | gezafan: Reshevsky was able to play this accelerated Dragon because Fischer was disinclined to play the Maroczy variation (c4), which gives white an advantage. I think black, more or less, equalizes in the variations played by Reshevsky. This game shows that Fischer was usually willing to accept a shattered pawn structure for the 2 bishops. The last game of his match with Spassky is another example. |
|
| Jul-13-12 | | Zugzwangovich: <shams> Thank you very much for that information! |
|
| Jan-18-13 | | RookFile: Nobody had more of a talent for grinding out small advantages than Fischer. If he took a draw, it's because there's nothing to see here and time to move it along. Naturally everybody looks at the d pawn, but how do you make progress with white? Advance the kingside pawns? - That comes with risk in a major piece ending where often king safety trumps all other considerations. I think Fischer did the right thing by taking the draw here. |
|
| Jan-18-13 | | RookFile: <unferth: then win it by advancing his own pawn to exploit the inevitable pin on a defensive heavy piece. could Fischer not have tried Re3/d3-f4-e5 etc.?> Ok, let's give this the benefit of every doubt, and assume that somehow you win the d pawn. Being a pawn down is not the end of the world, which anybody who plays the Marshall Gambit can tell you. A probem with this as white is that as soon as you move that f pawn, you leave the 2nd rank vulnerable. It requires no great deal of imagination to see a rook coming to c2 and a queen lined up somewhere against g2 in order for black to generate dangerous threats. I think Reshevsky would be happy to have the black pieces in such a situation. |
|
| Mar-26-15 | | zanzibar: Here is a picture of this game, just after 10...Qa5: http://www.worldchesshof.org/upload... |
|
Mar-27-15
 | | keypusher: <zanzibar: Here is a picture of this game, just after 10...Qa5: http://www.worldchesshof.org/upload... Just a quibble, but it's after 12.Qg4, no? Sammy is on the clock. Thanks for this picture. Somehow I pictured a slightly grander setting for this match. This is an interesting and surprising (to me) game. Can Black really get away with 16....Bxc3? I'm sure Reshevsky knew what he was doing, though. I agree with those who say older Fischer would have played on in the final position. |
|
| Mar-27-15 | | zanzibar: <Keypusher> Ha, you may be right. I just blindly copied the original caption from where I found it. Yes, the setting was somewhat dinky, stuck in a corner. http://www.worldchesshof.org/upload... The caption for this photo said just after 12.Qg4. |
|
| Mar-27-15 | | Everett: <Thanks for this picture. Somehow I pictured a slightly grander setting for this match.> Perhaps there are diamond-filled chandeliers and fire-breathing Dragons just outside the frame... |
|
| Jun-23-15 | | berbanz: Sanguan-Sol Cruz in Manuel M Lopez Cup 2012 continued with 8 OO. |
|
Jun-23-15
| | keypusher: <berbanz: Sanguan-Sol Cruz in Manuel M Lopez Cup 2012 continued with 8 OO.> Nobody cares. |
|
Jun-23-15
 | | perfidious: <keypusher> The only surprise is that <rjsolcruz> is not posting--must be a shill of some sort. |
|
| Sep-17-18 | | Petrosianic: <unferth>: <the technique I learned years ago for exploiting a backward isolani was for the attacker to trade OFF all the minors, pile up his pieces on the pawn's file, and then win it by advancing his own pawn to exploit the inevitable pin on a defensive heavy piece. could Fischer not have tried Re3/d3-f4-e5 etc.?> Sometimes that works. Take a look at Game 9 of the 1981 Championship Match for a good example of it working. In this case, I think the problem is that White would have to expose his own King too much to make the advance. Also that Black doesn't really end up tied to the d pawn. White has to play f3, Re3, and Rd3 to build up on it, and on that time, Black plays Rfc8 threatening Rc2 with counterplay. He'd probably end up abandoning the d pawn and getting something else while White is grabbing it. This might be a good ending to try playing out, though, just to see the nuances. |
|
| Sep-23-18 | | Howard: Game 9 of the 1981 match was certainly an exemplary example of Karpov's technique. And his 7th move was rather profound I thought. |
|
| Jan-17-20 | | Petrosianic: <gezafan>: <This game shows that Fischer was usually willing to accept a shattered pawn structure for the 2 bishops.> Yes, sometimes. Although in this case he gives up the two Bishops two moves later to straighten the pawns out again. |
|
| Jan-17-20 | | SChesshevsky: Here seems more like it shows Reshevsky willing to give up one of his two Bishops and noticeably weakening his dark squares with 16...Bxc3 for I guess compensation of messing up White's pawns at least temporarily, control of the c-file and queenside light squares especially c4. Probably can't be harmful but is it best plan? Appears the early ...Ng4 Accelerated Sicilian idea was majorly first tested against an early white c4 Maroczy Bind by guy called Stolz in the late 1940's, from the cg database. Then it looks like the Soviets experimented with it in the mid to late 1950's. Seemed to appeal to Petrosian as I know he played it at least a few times in important events. Keres vs Petrosian, 1959 I'm not sure of the subtle plusses or minuses between the Maroczy Bind verison and this Bc4 version. |
|
| Jan-17-20 | | Petrosianic: There seems like a lot of shilly-shallying by both sides in this one (or maybe it's "Jockeying for Position"). In the first 15 moves, Fischer's queen goes d1-g4-h4-g4-d1-d3-d2. I think the reason Fischer was never big on the Maroczy was just because he preferred sticking his Bishop on c4 in all Sicilian lines. I think that Reshevsky's 22...Qxe5 (rather than dxe5) showed that he knew even then that the isolated d pawn would be no weakness in the upcoming endgame. The fact that Fischer didn't even try to play it out seems to bear that out. But I haven't looked at it deeply, and there may be some problem with 22...dxe5 that I haven't seen. |
|
| Jan-17-20 | | SChesshevsky: <...In the first 15 moves, Fischer's queen goes d1-g4-h4-g4-d1-d3-d2...> This was still a pretty young Fischer and I'm guessing he wasn't quite sure how he wanted to handle ...Ng4 follow up in these early match games. Appears later he just goes to shut it down with Be2 and even accepts c4 Maroczy which I believe he admitted might've been best in MSMGs. Think the positional questions like this that Reshevsky put to Fischer in this match was a big step in Fischer's improvement. |
|
| Feb-05-22 | | Chesgambit: Playing well doesn't mean you win the game |
|
| Feb-05-22 | | lentil: I'm no GM, but it seems like 22 Re3 threat Rh3 wins. Where am I wrong? |
|
Feb-05-22
 | | MissScarlett: Black gets to move, as well. Qd2 pins the rook. |
|
Feb-05-22
 | | moronovich: <lentil: I'm no GM, but it seems like 22 Re3 threat Rh3 wins. Where am I wrong?> Good idea.But black plays 22-Rc3 (!) and is fine. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
