|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-03-09 | | kooley782: This is an interesting game, surprising that Euwe was able to defeat 14 year old Fischer in a mere 20 moves. Euwe is a very underrated Grandmaster, but he was one of the strongest players of his day. What was his rating? |
 |
| Sep-03-09 | | AnalyzeThis: Well, they didn't have Elo ratings until the 1960's, when Euwe was well past his prime. Just my opinion, but a guy who put 20 wins up on the board against Alekhine must have reached a strength of at least 2700 at some point. |
|
Sep-03-09
 | | Boomie: For what it's worth, Chessmetrics reckons Euwe's rating at 2620 at the time of this match. Fischer was at 2452. His highest rating was 2769 after the first Alekhine match. http://db.chessmetrics.com/CM2/Play... |
|
| Sep-03-09 | | kooley782: Cool, thanks! |
|
Jan-11-10
 | | chancho: This is game one of a three game match played in New York.
(which Euwe won.)
Of course the kid from Brooklyn was still years away from becoming the phenomenon that he later became. |
|
Jan-11-10
 | | TheFocus: <chancho> <This is game one of a three game match played in New York. (which Euwe won.)
Of course the kid from Brooklyn was still years away from becoming the phenomenon that he later became.> Actually a two game match. Bobby drew the second game. Nor would I say years away. He did win his first US Championship that same year a few months later. |
|
| Jan-11-10 | | Petrosianic: Yes, it was a two game match, and the second game was never printed. That's surprising, you'd think that a prominent junior star getting a draw with a former world champion would have been big news. But from Euwe's comments about the game, one gets the feeling that he gave Fischer a draw in a winning position, which would explain why they never bragged about it. Euwe commented that he'd been in trouble, but pulled off "something of a swindle", and stood "rather better" when the game ended. Read between the lines a little... |
|
Jan-11-10
| | chancho: Yeah, it was two games.
I looked at the total number: 1/2 and 1/1/2 total and confused it as a third game.
Mea culpa.
<The Focus> I had a feeling someone would make a mountain out of a molehill with the comment I posted. I was referring to Fischer in the 1970's and what he accomplished on his run to the world title.
Winning the US Championship at the age of 14 was a notable accomplishment. |
|
Jan-11-10
| | TheFocus: <Petrosianic>< Yes, it was a two game match, and the second game was never printed. That's surprising, you'd think that a prominent junior star getting a draw with a former world champion would have been big news. But from Euwe's comments about the game, one gets the feeling that he gave Fischer a draw in a winning position, which would explain why they never bragged about it. Euwe commented that he'd been in trouble, but pulled off "something of a swindle", and stood "rather better" when the game ended. Read between the lines a little...> Where did Euwe make these remarks about the drawn game? I haven't seen them. |
|
Jan-11-10
| | chancho: <The score of this game is not available,(second game) but Euwe remembers that the game followed Botvinnik v Euwe Leningrad 1934, for some way, Fischer got some advantage, Euwe pulled off something of a swindle and stood rather better when the draw was agreed.> Complete Games of Bobby Fischer pg 123. |
|
Jan-11-10
| | TheFocus: Chanco, the second game draw is available here at CG. I don't know why Complete Games does not have it. It was certainly available then. Fischer – Euwe, M.
Ruy Lopez
match game 2
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.c3 Be7 10.Nbd2 O-O 11.Qe2 Nc5 12.Nd4 Nxb3 13.N2xb3 Qd7 14.Nxc6 Qxc6 15.Be3 Qc4 16.Qd2 draw. Fischer deviated at move 15...Qc4 from the Leningrad game. Too bad we don't have the remaining moves. It was poorly reported in both Chess Life and Chess review. |
|
| Jan-11-10 | | Petrosianic: That's not a complete game, it's only the opening moves, which Euwe remembered when asked years later. |
|
Jan-11-10
| | TheFocus: Euwe annotated his win in Bobby Fischer: The Greatest?. Kmoch annotated it in Chess Review. |
|
Jan-11-10
| | chancho: <The Focus> what <Petrosianic> said. |
|
Oct-25-11
 | | FSR: As most of you know, the Fischer-Euwe game is now available at Fischer vs Euwe, 1957. |
|
| Nov-04-11 | | lemonadepawn: Splendid game! |
|
| Jan-15-12 | | Zugzwangovich: Some of my sources for RJF games call the opening to this game a Nimzo-Indian, some call it the Ragozin variation of the QGD. Ditto for the 1st Fischer-Spassky game at Reykjavik. Can a clear distinction between these openings be made? |
|
Jan-15-12
 | | Garech: <Zugz>
It's defiinitely not a Nimzo-Indian, and strictly speaking it's not a Ragozin either (no Nf3) but it's closer to the latter than the former. I would call it the Exchange Variation of the QGD. -Garech |
|
| Jan-15-12 | | Zugzwangovich: <Garech> Thanks, Sean. Looks to me like you need to update your bio; you have two games on chessgames.com now. |
|
Jan-16-12
| | Garech: <Zugz> No worries, and will do! Cheers, -Garech |
|
| Mar-24-13 | | wachter123680: Fischer could have taken the knight at 12. the same piece was instrumental in mate |
|
| Mar-24-13 | | wachter123680: and Fischer's 7c5 was a total waste of an up m.o. |
|
| Mar-24-13 | | RookFile: <Fischer could have taken the knight at 12. the same piece was instrumental in mate> But that is a nasty pin on the f6 knight. Qd3 is going to happen with that nasty pin. I don't know what the GM opinion is, but I suspect that it can't be right for black later to play Qb6. It really didn't even slow Euwe down, he just ignored the queenside pressure. |
|
Mar-29-13
 | | 4play: Hi, was just wondering if after 20Nxd5 Qa5 as a response. Do yal think that could be played for black? |
|
Mar-29-13
 | | perfidious: <4play> Welcome to our happy family! The move 20....Qa5 leaves a mate on with 21.Qh8. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
sac: 18.a3
