|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-03-09 | | uaregg: this game is just amazing |
 |
Feb-03-09
 | | Eyal: <Peligroso Patzer: Keene and Simpole in "Petrosian vs. the Elite" (Batsford 2006) at page 205 give a line beginning with 23. ... exf2+ that they claim wins for White: 24. Rxf2 Bxh2+ 25. Kxh2 Qxf2 26. dxe7+ Kg7 27. Qg4+ Kf6 28. Qc4 Kxe7 29. Rf1, but 28. ... Kg5 (in lieu of ... Kxe7) threatening to force an exchange of Queens would be an improvement that would give Black reasonable chances to hold.> Actually, White does have a clear win after 28...Kg5 in this line (which means that 28.Qc4 is good enough) - it would be quite incredible if he didn't, with the black king so exposed... 29.Rd5+ f5 (29...Kf6 30.Qe4) 30.Qc3! (aiming for Qg7+ and removing the threat of the queen exchange by Qh4+) is utterly hopeless for Black; e.g. 30...Rhg8 31.Rd3
Rg6 32.Rg3+ Kh6 33.Rh3+ Kg5 34.Bf7, or 30...Qf4+ 31.Kg1 Rhg8 32.Rd4 Qe5 33.Rg4+. |
|
| Mar-04-10 | | feitang: Fantastic game by "Tiger" Petrosian |
|
Mar-04-10
 | | HeMateMe: This game reminds me of a comment of one of BFs biographers about how "Fischer has great confidence in his powers of defence." He was remarking on Fischer's taking material in dangerous postions, perhaps a poisoned pawn, stuff like that. Here, one would guess Fischer had calcualted that both winning the exchange on the 2nd rank and defending against whites mating threats were possible. Seems odd to see the Bob miscalculate, especially with not so many pieces on the board. |
|
| Mar-13-10 | | The Rocket: move 22 e2... from fischer instead of qe2 as played in the game and black is better according to chessmaster(-0.57). with the idea 23.rxd2.. bxh2!........ Cant beliave how fischer could not see this. |
|
Oct-15-10
 | | Travis Bickle: <The Rocket: move 22 e2... from fischer instead of qe2 as played in the game and black is better according to chessmaster(-0.57). with the idea 23.rxd2.. bxh2!........ Cant beliave how fischer could not see this.> According to Fritz 11 your line loses badly for Black.
22. e2 Rxd2 23. Bxh2+ 24. Kxh2 exf1=Q 25. d6 Qe1 26. Qf4 f6 27. Qh6+ Fritz resigns. |
|
| Oct-15-10 | | Elsinore: 15. Qxc5 gets the pawn back for Fischer, but his defense is blown up by 16. Nxf5. Funny how BF didn't move either of his rooks once in this game. That said, it was a great game. BF's 25. exd1=Q was the finale of a wonderful combination, and then Petrosian comes back with 27. Rf1, 28. Qb3. And, I think that Nf6, G6, D5, Bg7 should be called the Fischer Defense. |
|
| Oct-15-10 | | eightbyeight: This is the winner of the Pun Submissions! I remember voting for it a few days ago. |
|
Oct-15-10
 | | kevin86: Fischer forks the rooks and queens a pawn,but still loses to the Tiger. |
|
Oct-15-10
 | | Eisenheim: by move 26 black's development is destroyed and white is all over the board |
|
| Oct-15-10 | | Riverbeast: The game that broke Fischer's 20 game winning streak Can't win EVERY game, Bobby...But we all know you tried! |
|
Oct-15-10
 | | scormus: <jessicafischerqueen> I agree completely, a great GOTD and many rich possibilitirs for a weekend puzzle (have there been?) Bobby played like Fischer and Tigran played like .... Fischer? |
|
| Oct-15-10 | | Diocletian: From as early as move 6 or 7 Fischer is behind in development, and because of this I think it was not such a good game. I watched these games live on a demonstration board with moves delivered by telephone. As I recall, Fischer was sick with a bad cold during this time and drew the next three games. When he recovered he changed hotels for a new room with no windows. Commentators who knew Fischer well said this was a very good sign. Then he won the next four games beginning with the 66-move struggle of game 6. Exciting days, never to be repeated. |
|
| Oct-15-10 | | WhiteRook48: fischer vs the russians... |
|
| Nov-14-10 | | Tigranny: The reason why Fischer lost this game to Tigran was because he loved his queen too much and didn't castle to safety. |
|
| Jun-17-11 | | DrMAL: This game is a favorite for its fabulous quality of positional play, Petrosian in his forties simply outplays Fischer this way. A comment above on the 1986 Kasparov-Karpov rematch caught my attention. Kasparov prepared Grunfeld for game 24 in 1985 and this game was familiar to him. He chose 10...Qxd2 closer to an endgame, knowing Karpov's strengths. Objectively, the two moves are quite close in value. For example, Rybka 4.1 scores 10...Qa5 at +0.27 and 10...Qxd2+ at +0.42 at d=23 after a billion positions. I agree Kasparov's choice was unwise. In this game, Fischer plays 10...Qa5 for more tactics. Recapturing with 12...Nxc5 was probably better and Petrosian plays along at first by avoiding (better) 13.Bxe5 to preserve his bishop pair. But then after 13...Bf5 (instead of taking the pawn or castling short) white decides on 14.Bxe5 for a brilliant combination having positional advantage. After 17.O-O opposite color bishops and imbalanced pawns result where white has superior pawn structure. 17...Qa5 was part of a slightly inferior plan, better was 17...Qc7 or castling short. Both players execute their plans with great accuracy and after 23...Qh5 the advantage of white's plan over black's becomes more apparent. Here Petrosian makes a fascinating choice. Instead of simpler 24.dxe7+ or 24.fxe3 he plays 24.f4 objectively a lesser move, but it baits white for potentially bigger positional advantage. Instead of responding correctly with 24...Bf6 Fischer takes the bait with 24...e2 a decisive mistake. Petrosian demonstrates his own genius when the line that follows plays out, black could have resigned on move 27 quite amazing! |
|
Aug-17-11
 | | Hesam7: <Tigranny: The reason why Fischer lost this game to Tigran was because he loved his queen too much and didn't castle to safety.> Well actually it was more due to the fact that back then even Fischer did not know as much as we do today about openings. Black has no problems in the main line: 7. ... dxc4 8. Bxc4 O-O 9. Nf3 Qxc5 10. Bb3 Nc6 11. O-O Qa5 
click for larger view |
|
| Aug-17-11 | | Tigranny: Sorry Hesam7. |
|
Aug-17-11
| | Hesam7: <Tigranny: Sorry Hesam7.> No need to be sorry. I find it amusing how much opening theory has developed in recent years. 15 years after Fischer, Kasparov repeated the same line (7. ... Ne4) in a world championship match: Karpov vs Kasparov, 1986. Consider another game from the same match and same opening: Karpov vs Kasparov, 1986, the legend has it that the exchange sacrifice Karpov played (15. Rxc6) was prepared by Petrosian's second for the Fischer - Petrosian match in 1971 but the position never arose in that match and so it was not used. Can you imagine a prepared novelty surviving 15 years in Gruenfeld defense these days? |
|
| Feb-13-12 | | RookFile: This is a wonderful game by Petrosian. |
|
| Apr-07-12 | | falso contacto: Terrible whether. Actually October is nearly the best month. |
|
| Oct-01-12 | | ChessYouGood: 10 queen moves out of 31 and absolute inactivation of both rooks. Terrible play. |
|
Nov-13-12
 | | Cemoblanca: <Sylvester: It's true Fischer lost one game. But he went on to crush the patzer like all the rest!> Man, if I could play like Petrosian (or half as good) I would even go so far to change my surname to "Patzer"! :D |
|
Mar-29-13
| | Hesam7: 17...Qa5? is the losing move, however Kasparov's alternative in OMGP 3, 17...f4 18 ef4 Bd6 19 Rfe1 O-O-O 20 Re4 Kb8 21 g3, is hardly any better. Black ends up a pawn down with no counterplay. My engine comes up with 17...a5! (which is not even mentioned by Kasparov) as Black's best defense: 
click for larger viewAfter 18 Qd3 Qc8 19 c4 a4 20 c5 O-O 21 f4 Bg7
click for larger viewBlack is definitely worse but unlike the game continuation or Kasparov's line he is far from lost. |
|
| Mar-29-13 | | Olavi: <Hesam7> The Mednis/Kasparov line denies the white centre any mobility and stabilizes the situation, blocking the pawn duo on black squares. This is what a defender needs to do in opposite coloured bishops situations, the fact that white is eternally a pawn up and that black has no counterplay is less important. There's very real hope. Your second diagramm is hopeless. The a-pawn is irrelevant, the pawns in the centre are out of control, white has complete command of the initiative; he's a bishop up on the white squares, while the black bishop can do nothing on the black (as opposed to the Mednis line, where it is an excellent blockader). Not to mention the black kingside. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
