|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Sep-15-03 | | boowillo: I guess it's mate in two if white doesn't move his king. |
 |
| Oct-27-03 | | talchess2003: Korchnoi blundered.... I would have liked to see how Fischer would have played it out. He would definitely have played on the kingside, on the many weak light squares, with an attack that probably would be worth that pawn. |
|
Oct-27-03
 | | Eggman: Korchnoi was a time-trouble addict. This might explain 32.Rc1?? |
|
| Oct-28-03 | | drukenknight: well supposedly he used that time trouble to think long and hard about moves at this pt. in the game. ANother move worth considering is 31 Qb2+ |
|
| May-29-04 | | ConLaMismaMano: <boowillo> It's mate in three. 45.b7 Rg1+ 46.Kh3 Kh5! (threatns Ng5++) 47.g4+ fxg4++ |
|
| Feb-20-05 | | iron maiden: One of Korchnoi's biggest blunders. This loss knocked him out of the lead. |
|
| Aug-26-05 | | RookFile: Korchnoi had a clear advantage before 32. Rc1. |
|
| Dec-21-05 | | s4life: yup, instead 32.Qa6 followed by 33.Kc4 would have put black on the ropes. |
|
| Dec-21-05 | | lopium: I guess you mean 33.Nc4. |
|
| Oct-26-07 | | Pragmatist: Another nice way to mate is:
45.b7 Kg4! threatening Rg1 mate, so 46.h3+ Kg5 again threatening Rg1 mate since white took away his escape square on h3, 47.h4+ Kg4 and mate with Rg1 next move is forced (white can only delay it by one move if he sacs his rook with 48.Rb1 Rxb1 49.Any Rg1 mate |
|
Feb-23-08
 | | notyetagm: (VAR) Position after 22  f1-a1??
click for larger viewHere is a variation from the above game in which Korchnoi (White) has just doubled on the a-file with 22 f1-a1??. Why is this move a blunder? Because the Black b6-queen and h6-bishop are <COORDINATED> on the e3-square, which just happens to be <LINED UP> with the White g1-king and <UNDEFENDED> White d2-knight. So Fischer (Black) would have struck hard with 22 ...  h6xe3!, the main point being the <RELOADER> 23 f2xe3  b6xe3+ 24  g1-h1 e3x d2, winning two healthy pawns for nothing. (VAR) Position after 22 ... h6xe3!
click for larger view(VAR) Position after 23 f2xe3 b6xe3+ <reload on e3>
click for larger view(VAR) Position after 24 g1-h1 e3xd2
click for larger view |
|
Feb-23-08
 | | Tomlinsky: <Here is a variation from the above game in which Korchnoi (White) has just doubled on the a-file with 22.Rf1-a1??.> <notyetagm> You're losing me. 22.Rf1-a1?? <wasn't> played so you mean that it <would> have been a blunder <had> it been played right? In which case, the opportunity for analysis on blunders that weren't actually ever played in games is mind-blowing! 8) |
|
Feb-23-08
| | notyetagm: <Tomlinsky: ... You're losing me. 22.Rf1-a1?? <wasn't> played so you mean that it <would> have been a blunder <had> it been played right? In which case, the opportunity for analysis on blunders that weren't actually ever played in games is mind-blowing! 8)> You missed the point entirely.
This variation shows you why Korchnoi -cannot- double rooks on the open a-file with 22 f1-a1??, because of the <RELOADER> on the e3-square. Doubling rooks on the open a-file with 22 f1-a1?? is <STRATEGICALLY> desirable but fails for <TACTICAL> reasons. |
|
| Feb-24-08 | | Helios727: <s4life>, After 32. Qa6, would that not leave black ahead by a knight after 32... Ne5 ? The way I see it, white's best move was 32. dxc6. |
|
Feb-25-08
| | notyetagm: Position after 44 ... e5-f3 0-1
click for larger view<ConLaMismaMano: <boowillo> It's mate in three. 45.b7 Rg1+ 46.Kh3 Kh5! (threatns Ng5++) 47.g4+ fxg4++> Position after 45 b6-b7 d1-g1+ 46 g2-h3
click for larger viewPosition after 46 ... g5-h5! ( 47 ... f3-g5#)
click for larger viewPosition after 47 g3-g4+ f5xg4#
click for larger view |
|
| Mar-09-08 | | Helios727: <notyetagm>: How do you do the triangle icon like you did above? |
|
Mar-10-08
| | notyetagm: <Helios727: <notyetagm>: How do you do the triangle icon like you did above?> Simply put the word "threat" (not with double quotes) into the standard curly braces for making figurine notation. I tried this for other Chess Informant symbols (box for only move, etc.) but it did not seem to work. |
|
Apr-11-09
 | | waustad: It is interesting that in the database for Fischer vs Korchnoi, black had five wins and only one loss. |
|
Apr-30-10
 | | thegoodanarchist: It is also interesting that Korchnoi does not have a "minus" record versus Fischer. |
|
| Mar-23-11 | | newzild: This game should be used as the definition of "swindle". Playing through the games between these two, I reckon Viktor had Bobby's measure. I would be interested to hear Viktor's thoughts on Bobby as an opponent. |
|
| Mar-23-11 | | fab4: Korchnoi blundered. and that's that.. and that's chess. This is no swindle. As for Victor's record against RJF, again it's a case of wins in the early 60's when Fischer was young and arrogant... The lack of play amongst the elite back then protected korchnoi.. To suggest korchnoi had Fischer's number is just silly. |
|
| Mar-23-11 | | ewan14: Sorry but Fischer's wins against Korchnoi were in the early 60's as well i.e. Stockholm interzonal & Cuaracao
1967 Souzze ( ? ) draw
1970 draw |
|
| Mar-23-11 | | fab4: Yes that's true. It's a shame they did'nt meet more often. There encounters were always fascinating. |
|
Mar-23-11
 | | pawn to QB4: <I would be interested to hear Viktor's thoughts on Bobby as an opponent.>
From his autobiography it's clear he thought very highly of his abilities: "one sensed Fischer was developing into a very powerful force": this from the mid 60s, when he seems to think Spassky, for instance, underestimated the danger. Korchnoi declined to be help Petrosian in his candidates' final v Fischer, commenting that he'd expected more grief for this refusal than he got from the Soviet authorities...speculated that they went easy on him "because they knew the devil himself couldn't help Petrosian against Fischer" - and this at a time when he regarded Petrosian as a formidable opponent for himself. So clearly he had a high regard for Fischer's ability, which, of course, was the correct estimation. |
|
| Mar-25-11 | | newzild: < fab4: Korchnoi blundered. and that's that.. and that's chess. This is no swindle. As for Victor's record against RJF, again it's a case of wins in the early 60's when Fischer was young and arrogant... To suggest korchnoi had Fischer's number is just silly.> I don't understand why it is "silly" to suggest Korchnoi had Fischer's measure. As pointed out by <ewan14>, the last two games between these two were drawn. Of the other four, Korchnoi won two and should have won a third (this one). Have you studied those games? Because I have - all six of them. Korchnoi had a scrappy playing style that seemed to trouble Bobby. |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
