< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Jul-02-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: <what was the decisive move?>|
Timman analyzed this game to death, but I don't remember his conclusions.
What I do remember is that at the time, it was thought that Fischer's cute little 32. Qc3, getting the queens off the board, so that he wouldn't be mated, could have been prevented.
The idea was:
click for larger view
In this position, Spassky played ...Rh8, but he should have played the intermediate move ...Rd8, forcing white to play c3. Then, he can play ...Rh8, which is not a time loss, because c3 didn't do anything.
It was thought that this little finesse would have given Spassky a terrible attack, since Fischer doesn't have Qc3 to save the day.
By the way, Fischer showed great defense to hold this game.
|Jul-16-09|| ||dejan: Rd8?What about Nxe6,followed by Rxd8?|
|Jul-16-09|| ||dejan: Oooops,Qe1+...Bg1+,sorry.|
|Jul-25-10|| ||birthtimes: Someone asked earlier in this thead why Fischer played 7. Bb3? This may help answer that...|
Repertoire Explorer: Robert James Fischer (white)
|Nov-27-10|| ||birthtimes: 16.Qe3! b4 17.Nb5! Ba6 18.a4 Qc8 19.Rf3 Bxb5 20.axb5 Bc5 21.c3 bxc3 22.bxc3 Bxd4 23.cxd4 a4 24.Ba2 Qc2 25.Rf2 Qg6 26.d5 exd5 27.Bxd5 Rae8 28.e6 fxe6 29.Rxf8+ and White won on move 52...|
Voitsekhovsky (2475) vs. Ulibin (2555) 1997.05.05
|Mar-22-11|| ||hottyboy90: I love how Fischer treats the white side of this sicilian with the setup of bishops on b3 and e3 and the queen on d3 it all looks so elegant,what exactly does Spassky's novelty b5 do though? Yes it loses a pawn that much is obvious but where is the compensation for it thats what I can't figure out??|
|Mar-22-11|| ||fab4: @ <hottyboy90>
Fischer was staring into the abyss in this game.. by luck, by sense of danger,he managed to escape. But Spassky's opening play should've won the game...
|Mar-23-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @hottyboy
Spassky's bishops were monsters.
|Mar-23-11|| ||hottyboy90: I admit that this game wasn't perfect from Bobby(what game is?)and that he looked like he went wrong a number of times but he was clever enough to exchange off the queens at the right moment although Spassky could have won but come on, the fact is Spassky never found the win over the board and made many more mistakes in this match than Fischer did hence the resignation of the WC and Fischer fully deserved the title plain and simple!|
|Nov-07-11|| ||DrMAL: Thanx <JoergWalter> for pointing out game but I do not understand your comment <Spassky had already "forgotten" the continuation after 13.... a5!> in Fischer vs Spassky, 1972 Spassky played with extreme accuracy, it was Fischer who made someerrors here (in particular 19.Qe2?! instead of 19.Qg3). First move I saw that, with computer, could be considered inaccurate was 21...h5 that evaluates as strong but not best.|
Houdini_20_x64: 28/71 09:07 5,860,039,634
+0.54 21. ... Be3 22.Nd4 Qxe5 23.Nf3 Qf4
+0.48 21. ... Rd8 22.Rxd8+ Qxd8 23.Bc4 Qg5
+0.34 21. ... h5 22.Nd6 Ba8 23.Bc4 Rd8
And with 23...h4 instead of 23...Be3 game evaluates basically equal. Then Fischer went 24.h3?! instead of 24.Ne4 giving back some advantage but 26...g5 instead of 26...Bg5 or 26...Qxb2 lost some of it again. 27.Qg4?! instead 27.Qe1 gave opportunity and 27...Bc5 was strong. There are usually some small discrepancies with computer, both played quite accurately especially Spassky who kept good edge from shortly after opening throughout game. Maybe 27...Bf4! would have started something more decisive, this sharpens position and 28.Bd3 is easily missed.
Houdini_20_x64: 25/73 17:28 11,482,742,924
-0.67 28.Bd3 Qxb2 29.Qh5 Qg7 30.Nc4 a4
-0.89 28.Qe2 Rd8 29.Nb5 Rxd1+ 30.Qxd1 Qxb2
-1.77 28.Qh5 Qe3 29.Nxf7 Rxf7 30.Qg6+ Kf8
In any event, game 6 was completely different in that Spassky had preparation to give advantage and he did not use it, eventually losing, cheers.
|Nov-07-11|| ||ewan14: Just to put the knife into Boris even further I believe his team had '' warned '' Boris about the knight f6 - h5 Bobby played in the Benoni 3rd game !|
|Nov-07-11|| ||ewan14: Please see current kibitzing regarding game 6 and Boris , allegedly , ignoring Geller's Qb7|
|Jun-12-12|| ||OhioChessFan: <wwall: Gligoric thinks 31...Rh4 instead of 31...Bd6 wins. After 31...Rh4 32.Rf1 Rf4 33.Qd2 (or 33.Qe2) Rxf1+ 34.Qxf1 Qxb2 35.Bd3 Bxa3 36.Qe1 a4 37.c4 Bc5 38.Qb1 Qd4 39.Qf1 a3 40.Bb1 Qb2 41.Qe1 Bf2 42.Qd1 a2 wins for Black. Are there improvements here for White>|
Fritz10 quickly picks 31...Rh4 as best, about 60 centipawns better than 31...Bd6. He prefers 32. Be2 for White. That doesn't seem much better for White, since it allows:
31...Rh4 32. Be2 Qxb2 33. Qg3 Be7
click for larger view
and the Queenside Pawns are already terminal. I understand nobody plays perfect chess, but this is a game Spassky really should have won.
|Jun-12-12|| ||OhioChessFan: <AnalyzeThis: In this position, Spassky played ...Rh8, but he should have played the intermediate move ...Rd8, forcing white to play c3. Then, he can play ...Rh8, which is not a time loss, because c3 didn't do anything. >|
c3 supports a subsequent b4, so I think the immediate Rh8 is best. 30 plies on Rybka might prove me wrong.
|Jun-12-12|| ||OhioChessFan: Per the last post, after 29...Rd8 30. c3
click for larger view
|Oct-16-12|| ||fkahlo: This is for kingscrusher and i posted it here because he blocked me from his channel. So i am very angry at the guy and I just wanted to get it out of my system in some way. I want to say that for a guy who is trying to get people interested in chess he did it for a very strange reason. I was leaving too much comments on one of his games (This game) IN OTHER WORDS I WAS TO INTERESTED IN CHESS?! So this is the guy that should really think hard about logic of his way of thinking. And i also worked really hard on the analysis of the game so i just wanted people to see them. All this is after the variation 31...Rh4 32.g4 Bd6 33.Qg2 Bb8 34.Bf1 Qb2? which is allegedly much better for black. (And the question in the text was of course intended for him).|
White have 35.Qd2 and after both 35...Qe5 and Kh6 36.Qd4 the best is 35...f6 but after that 36Qd7+ Kh6 37.Bd3 Rxh3+ 38.Kg2 (not 38.Kg1 Qb6+ which would probably be mate in few moves) Rg3+ 39.Kf1 Rf3+ 40.Kg2 But what do you think about 34...f5 35.gxf (35.Qd2 fxg (Qe4+!?...) 36.Qd7+ Kh6 37.Rd2 Qe1 38.Kg1 Rxh3) g4 36.Qd2 (Qg1 Qe4+ 37.Qg2 Rxh3+ 38.Kg1 Ba7+) Qe4+ 37.Kg1 (Bg2 Rxh3+ 38.Kg1 Ba7+ 39.Kf1 Qxf5+ 40.Ke1 Re3+) 37...Ba7+ 38.Kh2 g3+ 39.Kxg3 Bb8+ 40.Kf2 Rf4+ 41.Kg1 Ba7+ 42.Kh2 Rf2+
|Oct-16-12|| ||AnalyzeThis: <OhioChessFan: c3 supports a subsequent b4, so I think the immediate Rh8 is best. 30 plies on Rybka might prove me wrong. >|
b4 isn't particularly relevant when your king is getting overrun. Fischer saved himself because he could play Qc3 and get the queens off. With the pawn on c3, he can't do that, and Spassky's attack wins.
|Oct-17-12|| ||fkahlo: It seems that after all 32.g4 is the best defense against 31...Rh4 (after this it only looses because of the analysis from my previous post.)|
Black no more have 32...Qxb2 because of 33.Rd7 and he have to exchange the queens 33...Qf6 (if Qc1+ simply 34.Bf1) 34.Qxf6+ Kxf6 35.Rd3
Black could try to lure white in to something like 33...Kh6? 34.Qxf7 Qc1+ 35.Bf1 Rxh3+ but after 36.Kg2 he loses
|Oct-17-12|| ||fkahlo: What i said earlier about this game is:
Actually Boris was completely wining and Fischer played poorly. This was because he underestimated Spassky and played for a win when he should have fight for a draw every chance he got.So he played 19.Qe2?? when 19.Qg3 trying to exchange the queens was a must. 13Qd3 was a wery bad move (I am under the impression that Bobby played first things that popt in to his mind), with it he got in to the Soviet analysis. And then he calmly took the pawn?!
|Oct-17-12|| ||RookFile: Well, Fischer was outplayed in the opening, of course. However, Timman analyzed the daylights out of this game and had high praise for Fischer's defense from that point forward.|
|Oct-17-12|| ||HeMateMe: Spassky gets nice open lines in the early middlegame, but Fischer covers all of his bases. I don't see where Spassky "lost it"--there is no forced win for black. |
If some computer engine thinks it found a win, 30 moves later, that's just nonsense, because no two players will exactly duplicate the "best" moves, found by the computer. Displaying long lines by Fritz or Rybka is fun, but is completely irrelevant in predicting a win, from a point so early on in the middlegame.
|Oct-22-12|| ||fkahlo: This is my comment on DrMAL post above:
First i want to say that i am not the fan of computers. Yes they have lifted chess on another level but only in one aspect - science (calculation.) Humans could not go that far in that aspect. Because computer calculation constantly change evaluations of positions, and that is big part of human play, that is also big improvement.
But, there are equally important aspects of chess. Art (imagination and intuition) and psychology and i do not think that computers will go there. That is why chessmaster is my favorite computer. There was at least a try to merge computer whit human elements of play so this computer is most fun :)
First, evaluation of the position after nineteenth move is very easy. Black have powerful bishops that are aiming at the white king, queens are still on the board, white peaces are stranded on the other side and the e5 pawn is week. Whites only card is a pawn and his majority on the queenside. So black has very big advantage, maybe even wining position.
Plans of the both sides are also clear. Black wants to exchange rooks to weaken the back rank and use his initiative as quickly as possible, leaving the queens on the board. White wants to get his peaces on the kingside and exchange one or both bishops. For example as DrMAL points on one place 24.Ne4 Qxe5 25.Nxc5 Qxc5 was better but Fischer as a unreasonable person that he was wanted a win. This all eases calculation proces for a human very much.
|Oct-22-12|| ||harrylime: < fab4: @ <hottyboy90> |
Fischer was staring into the abyss in this game.. by luck, by sense of danger,he managed to escape. But Spassky's opening play should've won the game...>
I agree with everything in this post.
|Oct-22-12|| ||RookFile: It's not unlike game 1 of Fischer's match with Petrosian. Petrosian had black in a Sicilian and caught Fischer with the novelty of the year. Against a lesser player, Petrosian wins - but Fischer digs in and finds resources.|
|Oct-22-12|| ||harrylime: < RookFile: It's not unlike game 1 of Fischer's match with Petrosian. Petrosian had black in a Sicilian and caught Fischer with the novelty of the year. Against a lesser player, Petrosian wins - but Fischer digs in and finds resources >|
Fischer digs in and finds resources indeed.
Because that is what Fischer did over the chessboard.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·