< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-21-05|| ||Sneaky: One might argue he was a little bit afraid that he might be coaxed into revealing an aspect of his preperation, but if you ask me, he was just showing off. Like a guitarist who picks up a banjo every now and then to prove that he can do it.|
|Dec-21-05|| ||refutor: maybe he was expecting something other than a slav v. hort. hort probably suspected something and played 2. ...c6 instead of his usual 2. ...g6 or 2. ...e6 Repertoire Explorer: Vlastimil Hort (black)|
|Dec-21-05|| ||KingG: <if you ask me, he was just showing off> If he really wanted to show off, he should have played something more ambitious than the Exchange Slav.|
In the last couple of years of Fischer's career, he started experimenting a bit more, and played 1.c4 from time to time, usually transposing into 1.d4 lines. I don't know why he preferred 1.c4 to 1.d4, but if he could play one, it's not surprising that he could play the other.
In my opinion, Fischer may have actually been even better suited to 1.d4 than 1.e4. Fischer played 1.e4 in a very positional way, similar to Anand in a way(who i think should also switch to 1.d4). Compare Fischer's Ruys to Tal's or Kasparov's for example. I definitely think Fischer's positional understanding was his strongest point. This is just a personal opinion, and i could be wrong. Anyone else have a view on this?
|Dec-21-05|| ||keypusher: <if you ask me, he was just showing off> Fischer also opened games in this tournament 1 f4 and 1 g3. Maybe he didn't take blitz seriously?! Perish the thought!|
|Dec-21-05|| ||KingG: < Fischer also opened games in this tournament 1 f4 and 1 g3. Maybe he didn't take blitz seriously?!> Larsen played these moves in classical games. I'm sure he took those seriously. Fischer was known to use opening novelties in Blitz games, so i think he took blitz more seriously than most. Can you imagine Kasparov using opening novelties in blitz??|
|Dec-21-05|| ||keypusher: <KingG> <Can you imagine Kasparov using opening novelties in blitz??> You know, he beat me in a simul without using ANY novelties whatsoever. I was very hurt.|
<In my opinion, Fischer may have actually been even better suited to 1.d4 than 1.e4.>
Fischer was intellectually wedded to 1 e4 -- not that I am telling you anything you don't know. He was the last of the opening absolutists, the last really strong player to believe there was a "best move" even in the starting position. I think his use of 1 c4 and Alekhine's and Pirc's at the end of his career was purely pragmatic. If he had kept playing he would have had to broaden his repetoire. But I don't think he ever would have played 1 d4 with white or say, the French or Caro-Kann with black. He just didn't believe in them!
I think you have a point re his style. The Ruy was almost perfect for him -- pity we never saw him play it against Karpov! That would have been fascinating. But obviously he loved forcing lines too, and 1 e4 gave him a lot of scope for those.
In general, (and I know you and <danielpi> discussed this in detail) I don't think you can decide that a player should choose 1 e4 or 1 d4 based on whether you characterize his style as positional or tactical. Karpov was a tremendous 1 e4 player, while Kasparov and Shirov made their names as attacking players using 1 d4. Kasparov liked to build up his attacks into great crescendoes, while keeping the position as complex as possible (who would have believed that 4 a3 in the Queen's Indian could be an attacking move?), while Karpov and Fischer tended more towards multiple sharp little struggles with clear resolutions within each game. Maybe that is the difference between 1 d4 and 1 e4 (to the extent there really is a difference) -- 1 d4 tends more towards the former type of game, and 1 e4 the latter.
|Mar-13-06|| ||zev22407: Fischer played d4 against Tal in this blitz tournament ,in a book I have with all Fischer game the first moves where (Fischer white)
1)d4 N-f6 2)Nf3 g6 3)g3 and so on,
whith d4,f4 c4 unusual moves for him he used a a surprise weapon .
|Mar-13-06|| ||Boomie: In rounds 6, 8, 12 and 14 of the world championship against Spassky, Fischer opened c4. These games quickly transposed into queen's gambits or English in the case of round 8. This was Fischer's secret weopon against Spassky. When he played 1. c4 in round 6, a minor earthquake was caused by jaws dropping all over Russia.|
|Mar-17-06|| ||Ludamad: <a minor earthquake was caused by jaws dropping all over Russia.>
We can only imagine our fate if he played 1. f3.|
|Apr-14-06|| ||Maatalkko: This is probably the simplest Fischer game I've ever seen. I won't be so arrogant as to critique his play, but I really have no idea how he hoped to get an advantage in this game. Of course, it was blitz, and maybe he wasn't after an advantage anyway.|
|Apr-14-06|| ||Gypsy: Well, if you say: <Best by test!>, you need to have some control sample, don't ya? :-).|
Looking at Fischer's opening stats, it indeed looks like the <1.e4> is the (second) best opening ... when Fischer is White. When Fischer is Black, <1.e4> turns out to be the (second) worst way to open a game!!! (In both cases, <1.e4> trails <1.f4> for the ultimate best/worst honor.)
Repertoire Explorer: Robert James Fischer (black)
|Apr-14-06|| ||IMDONE4: Fischer disliked d4 because although a safer choice than e4, it gives black many more equalizing chances. For example here, this game was a very quiet draw, as one would imagine this to be played by Petrosian or Schlecter. Im actually quite amazed that their would be so many kibitzes on this game.|
|Apr-14-06|| ||Gypsy: <IMDONE4> In Slav QGD, after the <1.d4>, bland and drawish Exchange is a White's choice, not Black's. If White foregoes the Exchange, there is nothing bland or drawish about Slav. On the other hand, Petroff or Berlin, after <1.e4>, are for practical purposes fully Black's choices.|
|Apr-14-06|| ||IMDONE4: I'll keep that in mind :)|
|Apr-14-06|| ||Gypsy: Always happy to help. :-))|
|Oct-02-06|| ||Tenderfoot: He probably had the King and Queen in the wrong place and thus moved the wrong pawn. I've done that before and my opponent wouldn't let me take it back. Surely this happens at the professional level as well.|
|Oct-02-06|| ||Tenderfoot: Also, I'm going to have to agree with <Knezh>...this is some pretty boring chess.|
|Oct-02-06|| ||keypusher: < Im actually quite amazed that their would be so many kibitzes on this game.>|
Probably the best comment on this thread.
|Oct-02-06|| ||RookFile: Hort was a strong player. My guess is that Fischer didn't want to see a particular variation on the board after 1. e4. Not that he was afraid of whatever it was, of course, but maybe he didn't want to reveal his best weapons against it.|
|Jan-15-07|| ||GufeldStudent: This may be Fischer's least memorable game.|
|Sep-10-07|| ||D4n: I agree with GueldStudent on this one...|
|Sep-10-07|| ||RookFile: The final position is one of pure symmetry.|
|Jan-23-08|| ||porgue: wow fischers only d4 database game went pretty badly... (R.I.P)|
|Jan-24-08|| ||RookFile: But during those days, nobody needed to apologize for getting 'only' a draw against Hort - he was a very strong player.|
|May-06-08|| ||KingG: <keypusher> I know it was a while ago, but very good post.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·