| Mar-14-05 | | watchchess79: After exchanges Fischer seems to win with the extra pawn. |
 |
| Mar-14-05 | | darook: <watchchess79> That and the fact that Fischer has also a huge positional advantage (BTW, in 'modern' chess I suspect this would be called 'dynamic advantage' to make it sound more Coo1). |
|
Mar-14-05
 | | keypusher: Not sure the game will get to an ending, e.g. 41  a1 g3+ 42  h1 xh3+ 43 g1  g3+ 44 g2 e1+ 45 f1 h1+ |
|
| Mar-14-05 | | Saruman: <keypusher> If 41.a1 g3+ 42.h1 xh3+ 43.h2 (43.g1?? g3+!) xg4  . |
|
| Aug-03-05 | | RookFile: I think they said at the time, 12. Nd2 is no good.
|
|
| Jan-14-06 | | dbriz: Why did Pet resign? Why not 41 Qf2? |
|
Jan-14-06
 | | crafty: 41. f2 e4+ 42. h2 xe5+ 43. g2 e4+ 44. h2 d3 (eval -9.11; depth 14 ply; 250M nodes) |
|
| Mar-24-07 | | Helios727: <crafty>: Does that "-9.11" mean that black has a positional advantage of 9.11 points? |
|
| Jan-19-08 | | Dr. Siggy: My Fischer favorite, and one of the most perfect examples of how relentlessly the late World Champion exploited even the most insignificant advantages against first rate opposition. After a somewhat colorless opening, Petrosian misses the most accurate move with 17. Bb3, and Fischer snatches the initiative out of his hands right away with 17... b5! Unable to take the b-pawn because of 18... Bxe4, Petrosian (already two points behind in the match...), instead of just defending himself with 17. f3, launches an attack on the King's wing with 19. f4. The way Fischer stifles this attack and goes for the win is very instructive: - first, with 20... b4!, 22... Bc3! and 23... Rxc3, he forces the entry of the Queen's Rook and wins a pawn (because if 24. Ba2 Re3 or if 24. Bc4 Qd4); - next, with 26... d4!, 29... Be4 and 31... d3, he pushes forward the passed d-pawn as far as possible piling up an almost unbearable pressure over his opponent (and with a very pretty combination in mind, by the way: if 27. Rfb1 Qc6 28. Rxa7 d3! 29. Rg1 Re2 30. Qxd3 Qxg2+! 32. Rxg2 Re1+); - last but not the least, with 36... Rb1, 37... Re2 and 40... Rb3!, he threatens to pick up all but one of the enemy pawns, thus forcing Petrosian to resign. |
|
| May-29-09 | | totololo: Look to the similarities with the game from round 6. Still the d pawn is passed and the finish goes for the king....
I think that Fischer had the art to bring his opponent in a position that Fischer likes regardless of the opening.... A great game is done by two great players..... |
|
| Jun-27-09 | | BraveUlysses: <dbriz: Why did Pet resign? Why not 41 Qf2?> 41...Qe4+ if 42.Kf1 Rf3, if 42.Kg1 Rb1+ 43.Kh2 Qxe5+ and wins simply 41...Qxe5+ wins too (42.Rxa7? Rb2) |
|
| Jun-27-09 | | DWINS: <Dr. Siggy>,
< 23... Rxc3, he forces the entry of the Queen's Rook and wins a pawn (because if 24. Ba2 Re3> Najdorf says that after 24...Re3 25.Qd2 Rxe4 26.dxe6 fxe6 27.f5 would be good enough to draw. Robert Byrne also gives 24.Ba2 exd5 25.Bxd5 Bxd5 26.exd5 as sufficient to halve the point. Later on, Fischer set an ingenious trap that Petrosian spotted. If 33.Rc3 Qd4 34.Kf1 (34.Kh2 Qxf2 35.Qxf2 d2 36.Qf3 Re1) 34...Re2!, and wins at least a rook. |
|
| Apr-20-10 | | Everett: Fischer smartly played the Tarrasch, an opening that Spassky used to put doubts - and losses - in Petrosian's head. Fischer is quickly rewarded when Petrosian, yet again in the match, goes in for a tame line with e3. To me, this is Fischer's best game of the match. |
|
Apr-20-10
 | | HeMateMe: One doesn't see this Tarrasch set up so often at high level chess, these days. More common is the Slav and semi Slav. BF had no problems at all with a resulting isolated pawn. Petrosian avoided center exchanges, probably to find a better way to activate his dark square bishop. He waited so long, Fischer strangled him. |
|
| Apr-20-10 | | Petrosianic: <Fischer smartly played the Tarrasch, an opening that Spassky used to put doubts - and losses - in Petrosian's head.> This is a Semi-Tarrasch. Spassky had played the Tarrasch Proper in 1969. |
|
| Apr-20-10 | | The Famous Chess Cat: I feel Fischer got the idea to play the Semi-Tarrasch from Paul Morphy, whom he seemed to idolize. Morphy made it his sole weapon against 1.d4 from what I can tell. |
|
| Apr-21-10 | | Everett: <Petrosianic> Exactly. The reason why this is a Semi-Tarrasch is because of Petrosian's choice on move 5. If Petrosian plays 5.cxd4 it transposes, so he had a choice, and he chose to avoid those same positions with which Spassky outplayed him in '69. |
|
| Apr-21-10 | | Petrosianic: Had he played 5. cxd4, I don't think Fischer would have played exd4, resulting in a true Tarrasch. He'd probably have played Nxd5. The difference between the Tarrasch and the Semi-Tarrasch is that in the Semi, Black doesn't have to deal with an isolated Queen Pawn. Petrosian got some good games against the Tarrasch in 1969, and probably blew at least one game, but in the end, didn't score any wins against it. However, he was on the BLACK side of a Semi-Tarrasch in the same match: Spassky vs Petrosian, 1969
Probably everyone knows the Semi-Tarrasch Fischer played in 1972, with his 8...Nc6 line: Spassky vs Fischer, 1972
Less well known is that Petrosian and Korchnoi discussed the line in their 1977 match. Korchnoi played Fischer's line again, and equalized fast: Petrosian vs Korchnoi, 1977
But he only played it once, probably fearful of an innovation. When he went back to the old line, Petrosian beat it: Petrosian vs Korchnoi, 1977
(Petrosian and Korchnoi are probably the only two Top GM's who have checkmated each other in classical games) But Petrosian usually avoided the cxd4 lines against the Semi-Tarrasch, preferring to keep the center tension longer as in games like this one. |
|
Mar-06-13
 | | Garech: Beautiful game; interesting that, with his opening choice, Fischer was perhaps intending on giving Petrosian an IQP - yet, as the game progressed, it was black's IQP that decided the result! -Garech |
|
