< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Nov-28-11|| ||OhioChessFan: <stanleys: Then I looked at 20...Qh4 (instead of 20...f5?!) and it seemed very promising to me (well I am analyzing without a program and this should be checked)The d4-pawn is attacked.If white plays 21.Rfd1,we double the rooks on the a-file 21...Rfa8.If now 22.Bb3,we could take many times on d4 and answer Rxd4 with ...Rxb3 getting a won ending.And if 22.Bb1 white's pieces are bad placed and we have the possibility to play ...R8a4 at a given moment,winning the b4-pawn|
Anyone could check all this?>
I'd be inclined to play 20...b6. I tossed it in Fritz and he gives a consistent eval of about -.85 to -1.00. He came up with 20...Qh4 21. Rfd1 Rfa8 22. Bb3 Rxb3 23. Bxd4 Bxd4 24. Rab1
Still a lot of work to do but the evals have improved a bit for Black.
click for larger view
|Nov-28-11|| ||harrylime: 20.. b6 is pointless..and just bad.
20.. Qh4 looks aesthetically better than f5. And looks a very typical 'Fischer' move.. strange it was'nt played.
|May-18-12|| ||LoveThatJoker: GOTD: Tenacious D
|May-18-12|| ||Boomie: <<SimonWebbsTiger: @<perfidious> |
the line given in the Wade & O'Connoll book was based on Fischer's analysis. They gave (I've put it in algebraic):
<88. Rh7! e.g. 88...Nd3 89. Be4 Nf2 90. Bg2 Be5 91. Rh5 Bf4 92. Rh8 Kc7 93. Rh7 Kc8 94. c7 h1=Q 95. Bxh1 Bxc7 96. Kc6 Be5>>
I was curious why black didn't play 96...Bd8. So I loaded the game into Houdini and found that white missed a winning forced line earlier.
88. Rh7! Nd3 89. Be6+ Kd8 90. Rd7+ Ke8 91. Bf7+ Kf8 92. Bd5 Be5 93. c7 and it's over. Houdini says mate in 66! Heh.
|Sep-18-12|| ||marljivi: Yes,88.Rh7 wins,after 88...Nd3 89.Be6 there is also funny subvariation 89...Kb8 90.c7Bc7 91.Rh8Ka7 92.Bd5Bb8 93.Rh7 .But anyway,I really admire Fischer's stubborn defence in this endgame.|
|Sep-18-12|| ||harrylime: Gotta say Fischer had reached a level in chess whereby yes... he would toy ...|
|Nov-15-12|| ||Howard: Not at all surprisingly, Browne includes this game in his recent
|Nov-18-12|| ||Cemoblanca: A 1/2 against Fischer @ his best is like a 3/4 win! ;) Very entertaining game! Congrats Mr. Browne! :)|
|Dec-07-12|| ||Gottschalk: If 94 Bg2 Nc4check.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||5hrsolver: wow!! seeing this game for the first time. Browne had fischer on the ropes here but he survived. I wonder who offered the draw.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||SugarDom: Actually saw the movie, featuring Jack Black. Funny!|
|Dec-07-12|| ||Abdel Irada: I was aghast to see Fischer playing the Alekhine, which I don't believe was ever part of his characteristic repertoire.|
The final position in the endgame, however, made me chuckle. It reminds me a great deal of an ending I played (from the Black side) against a 2175 in the 1988 Santa Cruz Open.
By one of those ironic twists that do seem to arise with unexpected frequency, this game saw me pitted against a fellow local, who held a one-zero positive score against me in tournament games to date, the other having been a French in which I chickened out of a queen sac which later proved a probable winner (although the position was complex enough that the controversy was never fully resolved), preferring instead to blunder a rook with check and lose immediately.
In this game (also an Alekhine), I had been thoroughly outplayed and was two pawns to the bad. But I surprised my opponent by exchanging down into a minor-piece ending — this because I foresaw the resulting position, in which my knight and king (the latter placed on c6, the only square from which it could manage this feat) could hold off the bishop and two pawns.
The game went on for over five hours because my opponent couldn't believe he'd allowed a draw; he even sacced a pawn at the optimum moment to entice my king out of his remaining pawn's way and nearly corral my knight. But, as in this game, he ultimately had to bow to the fates: I had just enough mobility left, and just enough control of the path to the queening square, that he abandoned his quest for zugzwang and accepted the draw offer I'd made as I moved my king to c6 some fifty-two moves earlier. He then stood up and shook hands like a gentleman, but the curse in his eye would have daunted the Ancient Mariner.
I wonder if Browne felt the same sense of frustration here.
|Dec-07-12|| ||Shams: <Abdel> Not part of his repertoire, no, but I'm sure you remember this legendary game:|
Spassky vs Fischer, 1972
|Dec-07-12|| ||Eggman: I like the pun for this Game of the Day. Call me a curmudgeon, but the offerings lately have been largely substandard, I must say. The last year or so it's like someone has gone through the database, found a player named, say, Haast, thought of the pun "Haast Makes Waste", and then looked for a game that would sufficiently suit that pun. It's gotten a little tiresome. In the past many of the puns were real works of art.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||OhioChessFan: <Eggman: I like the pun for this Game of the Day. Call me a curmudgeon, but the offerings lately have been largely substandard, I must say.>|
I am more of a curmudgeon on that point. I think they've been bad for a long time. To be fair, having to come up with one every day can't be easy. And even if "many" were works of art, there were far more that weren't. I sort of wonder if they should try one pun a week and let the other 6 just be untitled.
<The last year or so it's like someone has gone through the database, found a player named, say, Haast, thought of the pun "Haast Makes Waste", and then looked for a game that would sufficiently suit that pun. It's gotten a little tiresome. In the past many of the puns were real works of art.>
I have also suspected the same thing about searched out puns, and think it's usually pretty obvious when that was the methodology. In the user nominated 20 puns of a few years back, I thought maybe 3 were remotely interesting. "Men Without a Country" was genius. The rest were what really makes a bad pun-being obvious. Some topical news reference, a literary reference, a song title, such things are interesting. Finding a player named Kavalek and creating the pun "Kavalanche"? Really, now, that's one of the 20 best the membership can come up with?* Okay, back to being a curmudgeon.
* I really like the person who submitted that pun, and have typed out/deleted similar posts a number of times in the past, but I guess they'll get over me not liking their pun.
|Dec-07-12|| ||JonathanJ: Someone explain the pun please.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||Abdel Irada: <Shams: <Abdel> Not part of his repertoire, no, but I'm sure you remember this legendary game:|
Spassky vs Fischer, 1972>
I do indeed. That's exactly why I was aghast, because I also remembered that he subsequently described his playing the Alekhine in the game you cited as essentially an "accident."
(In fact, if the Spassky game is ever picked as GOTD, maybe it should be titled "An Accidental Alekhine?")
|Dec-07-12|| ||Llawdogg: Regarding the pun, D is for Defense. Fischer played tenacious defense in this game. It's a saying in sports. It is also the name of a comedic band made up of Jack Black and Kyle Gass.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||kevin86: Fischer gains the draw through tenacious play.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||drnooo: seems like a simple win for rook h 7, hardly tough to see, perhaps looming clock problems for Browne???|
|Dec-07-12|| ||karnak64: I confess to not having seen this game before today. Heckuva contest. Glad I now have played it out.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||TheFocus: Browne deeply annotates this game in his new autobiography <The Stress of Chess>. I played through the notes last weekend.|
|Dec-07-12|| ||RookFile: I'm not sure if I've ever played through a better defensive effort than this game.|
|Dec-08-12|| ||weisyschwarz: Funny how such a "lousy" pun like "Haast Makes Waste" is remembered days after it was posted. In that game, I think it was exactly what she did.|
|Mar-11-13|| ||Fusilli: <RookFile: I'm not sure if I've ever played through a better defensive effort than this game.> I am wondering the same thing.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·