Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Robert James Fischer vs Bent Larsen
"Game of the Dane" (game of the day Jul-16-2009)
Palma de Mallorca Interzonal (1970), Palma de Mallorca ESP, rd 9, Nov-20
Sicilian Defense: Fischer-Sozin Attack. Leonhardt Variation (B88)  ·  0-1


Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 19 times; par: 77 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 13 more Fischer/Larsen games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" button below the game.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <RookFile: Ok, it's settled. Max Pavey was the greatest player in the history of chess.>

Abe Turner was pretty tough too.

Aug-23-16  Howard: Well, he wasn't "tough" enough to withstand a knife wound.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: "Maybe this is Larsen's high water mark in chess."

Does winning this not count.

Biel Interzonal (1976)

And this one caused a minor sensation.

Karpov vs Larsen, 1979

In some eyes that 6-0 loss to Fischer damaged his reputation but never his own belief in himself. A great player, we could do with his like and attitude today.

Aug-24-16  Howard: Sally Simpson, let's not forget Larsen's huge victory at Buenos Aires, 1979, in which he shellacked the rest of the field !

Then, there's also his brilliant second-place finish at Niksic 1983, ahead of the likes of Portisch, Timman and Seirawan.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Howard,

I knew there were other success's but my two was to show he was not washed up after 1971.

His 'Move by Move' book was mentioned (wonder when they will get around to doing seems Everyman are doing a 'Move by Move' on everyone.)

So what's is the routine here. Plug in a computer, it finds obscure improvements and the 'author' tarts up the text.

Don't have any of the 'Move by Move' series but have considered getting Beonstein's Move by Move because it is done by Steve Giddins and he is of my generation and can write in an entertaining manner (when he wants to). Hopefully he won't be so computer savvy and reliant on Houdini. You may get some human input.

Having said that he also has a 'Move by Move' on Alekhine. That is one too many.

These things should be a labour of love, a one off. Written by a dedicated fan.

They are churning them out quicker than you can say: "If only you had Houdini, you could do this yourself."

Think I'll stick to Alkehine's Best Games and his 'warts an all' comments. I know who is doing the talking there.

Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: I like the "Move by Move" books.
The Alekhine book is welcome because Alekhines notes are certainly flawed.

Still a number of greats not done: Kasparov (perhaps a lower priority due to Stohls excellent books), Lasker (also perhaps a lower priority due to Nunns recent book), Smyslov, Keres, Geller.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Plang,

That was part of the fun (and learning) in Alekhine books, 'some' of the notes are very dodgy. Actually very few, Your task was to discover them.

I'll give Bronstein a go. Only because it's Steve Giddins. I'll be disappointed, nay...furious (I'll send the book back to them.) if the pages reek of silicon.

I have Smyslov, Keres and Geller's (and Bronstein's) best games.

If they ask nicely I'll do Tarrasch for them and there will not be one computer variation in the whole book.

On second thoughts I'd be competing with the great man's 300 games.

Sorry boys. I'm up for a quick buck and fleecing mugs as much as the next man but I draw the line there.

Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: Tough to find a book that doesn't rely on computers to at least some extent.

The Keres anthology is one of my favorite - he is a great chess writer.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Plang,

Should it not be:

"Tough to find a book 'nowadays' that doesn't rely on computers to at least some extent."

Keres, Tartakower, Tarrasch, Alekhine Purdy certainly did not use them and turned out some classics.

Had this discussion with a strong GM and author, he is of the opinion that if your analysis is not checked with a computer then you are doing the reader a dis-service.

I agreed, but in some cases is it the writers analysis being checked or is it solely computer variations with no human thought or ideas at all. The computer in these cases are not a tool but a crutch.

Soon books will have the the make of the computer on the cover (in bold) along with 'operated by' the player's name.

Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: I agree with you 100%. I will take GM analysis over computer analysis every time.

But I like modern players supplementing the analysis of historical games as many things have changed about the way chess is played. John Nunn is particularly good at this.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Plang,

Honestly I'm not a nit-picker so please forgive me if I correct very slightly this bit:

" many things have changed about the way chess is played."

Can we read it as:

" many things have changed about the way chess is analysed."

I use to really enjoy the pre-computer days when some relatively unknown chap had a Mr Thomas moment in a magazine.

Fischer vs Reshevsky, 1961

See also here:

Mr Thomas was not the first to spot 28.Nd2.

In lesser well known cases an improvement was often followed by months of variations being swapped back and forth.

These days of course all arguments are settled on the spot with a miserable computer. They have taken the fun out of chess.

Regarding John Nunn.

Yes, but some things are best left alone as tinkering and tampering may indeed break it.

Him and his cronies sticking their snouts into Fischer's 60 was a disaster resulting in the book being withdrawn, pulped, reissued and apparently unsoiled by Nunn and his merry band of butchers.

Edward Winter had a field day.

It's a shame John has that on his CV his notes to games in BCM are brilliant. But that is just me highlighting one classic case where 'supplementing the analysis of historical games' blew up in their faces.

In his Book on the Four Knights he is looking at the Belgrade gambit and honestly admits a computer had found a line that busts one variation clean off the table. Others may not have been so honest and taken the 'glory' for themselves. (and don't tell me that has never been done....poor computer never gets any credit.)

I've also had a pot at the Doc here.

Morphy vs Duke Karl / Count Isouard, 1858 (kibitz #782)

Seems he does not like the 'Morphy at Opera Game.' The game is one of his pet hates.

Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: I really love Nunn's book on Lasker - seeing games played 100 years ago through a modern perspective is interesting.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sally Simpson: Hi Plang,

I have the Soltis book on Lasker which is very good.

Sep-01-16  Howard: Nunn's book on Lasker is probably even better---I have that one, and it's very well-done.
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: Have not seen Nunn's book on Lasker, but he is a fine writer, besides being able to play a little.
Sep-18-16  Howard: Come to think of it, I wonder if Kasparov's MGP has these above-mentioned corrections included. He does analyze this game, as I recall.
Sep-19-16  Howard: Nope! Those improvements, which Larsen and Kasparov apparently missed, are not included in MGP. Just consulted the book last night.

Computers have apparently come a way since 2005, when that volume came out.

Sep-07-17  Saniyat24: Not a single check against Larsen's King by Fischer...that's incredible...!
Sep-07-17  RookFile: I guess that's the advantage of this type of setup for black over the Dragon Sicilian Larsen chose in a famous game before against Fischer.

Fischer vs Larsen, 1958

Mar-04-18  Olsonist: "Taimanov (who, of course, bought his way into the Candidates)"

Taimonov came in equal 5-6th in the 1970 Palma de Mallorca Interzonal Tournament.

Aug-02-18  ewan14: Bent Larsen career highlights ; winning the first '' Chess Oscar '' in 1967 , playing board 1 for the Rest of the World v USSR in 1970 obtaining a plus score v Spassky and Stein , beating world champion Petrosian twice in 1966
Premium Chessgames Member
  sfm: <ewan14: Bent Larsen career highlights ; winning the first '' Chess Oscar '' in 1967 , playing board 1 for the Rest of the World v USSR in 1970 obtaining a plus score v Spassky and Stein , beating world champion Petrosian twice in 1966> Well, winning "Chess Oscar"s and playing first board is fine, but I think Larsen would have smiled. Let's instead mention the stream of tournament top placements and wins in among the world's elite, including every world champion of the days. See the tournament list on his page.
May-05-19  N.O.F. NAJDORF: I don't get this.

Presumably, Fischer intended to meet 26 Qc8 with

27 Rxd6

but he decided that after 26 Qc4

27 Rxd6 wouldn't work

I can't see where the difference lies.

After 26 Qc8

. 27 Rxd6 Re7

what would white have played?

Premium Chessgames Member
  beatgiant: <N.O.F. NAJDORF> On 26...Qc8 27. Rxd6 Re7? White has <28. Qxg7+> Rxg7 29. Rxg7+ Kh7 30. Rdxd7, and to stop the mate threat it looks like Black will have to play 30...Qxd7 31. Rxd7. White ends up with an extra knight.
Premium Chessgames Member
  beatgiant: <N.O.F. NAJDORF> While on 26...Qc4 27. Rxd6, Black can reply <27...b3> 28. c3 Rxa4. It looks like White will lose the knight with a worse position than in the game.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 6)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Master of Attack--Best Games of Bent Larsen
by Ron
Game 42
from On My Great Predecessors 4 (Kasparov) by isfsam
by simonstuhler
Why Fischer Lost
from Sicilian Defense : Najdorf : Velimoric Attack by ISeth
98_B86-B89_Fischer-Sozin Attack
by whiteshark
fisherklein's favorite games
by fisherklein
Game of the Dane - The Last Game Before Their Candidates Match
from Fischer Favorites by Micah Tuhy by micahtuhy
Mil y Una Partidas 1960-1974
by K9Empress
Do you believe?!
from Some chess art and knowledge of play ! by onemorechessplayer
Fischer loses to Larsen
from Sicilian: Fisher-Sozin/yugoslav attack by inlimbo777
Complex games
by JoseTigranTalFischer
Bobby Fischer's Path To World Champion
by LionHeart40
My Great Predecessors by Garry Kasparov
by JoseTigranTalFischer
OneBadDog's favorite games
by OneBadDog
Game 70
from Miroslav Filip - All World Is Learning From Them by nakul1964
Complex favorites
by Whitehat1963
Fischer, Palma (1970). Larsen gave Fischer his only loss
from Holding the Fort by whatthefat
Game 17
from Move by Move - Larsen (Lakdawala) by Qindarka
My Great Predecessors by Garry Kasparov
by LionHeart40

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC