|Jul-31-04|| ||Dick Brain: Even I would be embarassed to have played 27...f6? as Spassky did here. |
|Jul-31-04|| ||Calli: Hard to understand. Maybe he meant to play 27..Nxd4 28.Bxd4 f6 and transposed the order. I say that because 27...Nxd4 28.Bxd4 Bxd4?! exd4 is more difficult to win for Black so perhaps Spassky got lost in figuring out the easiest win and blundered. |
|Jun-05-05|| ||SnoopDogg: Spassky demonstrated he had about equal skill level and talent as Fischer in this match Kramnik says. He said that Spassky had lost his nerves and made terrible blunders in equal and sometimes winning positions. A close study of these games show that Kramnik was right and that Spassky was probably just as strong as Fischer yet psychologically he was lost and caused him to make blunders an 1800 player wouldn't make.|
|Jun-05-05|| ||Renfro the STRANGE: <SnoopDogg>
Long matches produce more blunders than tournament play. Its all a partof chess. What about Fischer's B x Rp in game one, where he got his bishop trapped, like a beginner?
I think the quality of Fischer's play, the pressue he put people under, accounts for a lot of the blunders.
After losing this match, Spassky was barred from international play/travel for a year by his masters. In his "my life" book, Korchnoi says that Spassky had to have a big result to get out of the doghouse, and he did it by winning the USSR championship in 1974 (or 73). By far, he still had great talent, to win a super strong event like that.
|Jun-05-05|| ||SnoopDogg: I wasn't arguing that, Kramnik was. But besides that its a fact that all the Fischer no shows cost Spassky alot of paranoia so much that he had the chairs checked for spy waves damaging his play!|
|Nov-16-06|| ||Billy Ray Valentine: So if black doesn't blunder with 27...f6, is there a win here for him? Or is it unclear whether or not he can win?|
|Nov-17-06|| ||DWINS: <Billy>, In the book "Extreme Chess", Purdy says that the continuation envisaged by Fischer was 27...Nxd4 28.Bxd4 Bxd4 [28...Kf8 29.Kf1 f6 30.Ke2 Ke7 31.Bxb6 axb6 32.Ra1 and White should probably draw with his aggressive rook] 29.exd4 Rb8 30.Rxc6 Rxb4 31.Kf1|
Now if 31...Rxd4 32.Ra6, with a draw-type rook ending as Black's passed pawn is not remote enough to win.
If 31...a5 32.Rc5 a4 33.Rxd5 a3 34.Ra5 Rb1+ 35.Ke2 Rb2+ 36.Ke3 a2 37.Ra7 and White draws.
Purdy concludes that if there is a win for Black somewhere, it is a difficult one.
|Dec-20-06|| ||chezzy: <chessgames.com> In the analysis of this match in a book by Euwe/Timman, moves 28-32 are given as:
28.Bxf7 Nxd4 29.Bxd4 Bxd4 30.exd4 Rb8 31.Kf1 Rxb4 32.Rxc6 Rxd4|
|Feb-29-08|| ||Knight13: <27...f6?> Yeah, that move's a oversighted didn't-mean-to-play-it-first kind of move that every player does one time or another.|
|Jul-16-08|| ||PAWNTOEFOUR: after reading <dick brain's> comment,i was kind of curious myself......crafty,after 1.6 million nodes comes up with this..pv 27...Bxd4 28.Bxd4 Nxd4 29.exd4 Rb8 30.Kf1 Rxb4 31.Rxc6 Rxd4 32.Ra6 g6 33.Rxa7 Kg7 34.Ke2 Re4+ 35.Kd3 Kf6 36.g3 Re7 37.Ra6+ Kf5 38.Kd4 -153 Crafty|
|Jul-16-08|| ||Boomie: <PAWNTOEFOUR: after reading <dick brain's> comment,i was kind of curious myself......crafty,after 1.6 million nodes comes up with this..pv 27...Bxd4 28.Bxd4 Nxd4 29.exd4 Rb8 30.Kf1 Rxb4>|
Fritz 11 prefers 30...Rb6 but neither move leads to a clearly won game. The engines are notoriously useless in endgames.
|May-04-09|| ||WhiteRook48: ideal teasing of rooks|
|May-05-09|| ||Marmot PFL: One of the worst games in world championship history. Both players were probably affected by the tension of the previous game.|
|May-05-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: It's not a great game, but there have been worse, whether it be Chigorin overlooking mate in two or Topalov throwing a rook out the window to lose to Kramnik.|
|May-05-09|| ||Riverbeast: I think it was quite ballsy of Fischer to play the Queens Gambit, an opening he had NEVER played before, in a world championship match. |
This was not a great game.....But the most beautiful game of the match was the Queens Gambit Fischer played in Game Six
|Jun-16-09|| ||talisman: <AnalyzeThis> <It's not a great game but there have been worse> Man...fischer,spassky,... You...You must be pretty good!|
|Jun-09-11|| ||lost in space: <<Riverbeast>: I think it was quite ballsy of Fischer to play the Queens Gambit, an opening he had NEVER played before, in a world championship match.
This was not a great game.....But the most beautiful game of the match was the Queens Gambit Fischer played in Game Six>|
Hmmmm, if Fischer played a close to perfect Queens gambit in game six of this WC-match, it is impossible that he played his first Queen Gambit game at game 14 in the same WC-match.
|Jun-09-11|| ||Riverbeast: <lost in space> Obviously I was referring to Game 6, as the first time he played it|
Not this game
|Jun-12-13|| ||Everett: <This was not a great game.....But the most beautiful game of the match was the Queens Gambit Fischer played in Game Six>|
That game is actually greatly over-rated, considering how many second best moves Spassky made.
The one very great game in this match was the Game #13 Alekhine's Defence, where we see Spassky play a great game only to have Fischer play near-perfect. In many of the other Fischer wins Spassky played some howlers.
|Jul-07-14|| ||Ke2: It's worth noting that either 12 or 13 Nxd5 loses. It appears a simple discovery, but after
either 12 or 13 Nxd5 Qxd5
Rxe2 Bc4 skewer
Maybe a soviet prepared secret? Or is this well known?