|Oct-03-03|| ||Honza Cervenka: 31...Rfe8 is a nice silent move. If 32.Bxd3 (what else?), then 32...Rxe4 33.Rxe4 Qg5+ 34.Kf1 Qg2+ 35.Ke1 Nxd3+ and 36...Nxb4 |
|Oct-03-03|| ||drukenknight: what about 32 Nf6+ in your line? |
|Oct-03-03|| ||Honza Cervenka: If 32.Nf6+, then simply 32...Qxf6. The threat 33...Qg5+ seems to be unavoidable. |
|Oct-04-03|| ||drukenknight: Going back a bit, Honza, look at move 22 and the relationships of the Q to one another. Do ever see that pattern when you play q side games like the Dutch? I see that fairly often. I think white has a much better move there. |
|Dec-01-03|| ||rndapology: Or if 32. Ng3 Rxe1 33. Qxe1 Qh3 34. Qf1 Rc1 ends it for white. |
One wonders whether Keres forsaw all of this and pondered it deeply from move 20 ... Bd6, when he created the fork that he sacrificed his knight as a result of, or if he merely decided to play on as a result of the exposed appearence of white's king on move 24 ... Nxh3. Notice he repeats the position once after Nxh3, then stops. Could this be when he saw somethign worth playing on for?
|Dec-01-03|| ||Dr Young: Gm's often repeat moves to gain time. I think Keres had it all planned when he sacrificed the knight. |
|Apr-19-06|| ||AdrianP: Marin (following a recommendation of Keres') gives 19. Bxh6! gh 20. Qd2! as giving White a very promising attack.|
|Jul-12-08|| ||tomfoolery: <AdrianP> I'm suprised Geller didn't play that immediately. The gaping hole on f5 is a big clue.|
|Jul-12-08|| ||Pawn and Two: <AdrianP & tomfoolery> Fritz evaluates the variation 18.Bxh6 gxh6 19.Qd2 Rfd8 20.Qxh6 Rxd5 21.Re4 as: (-.04) (21 ply) 21...Rh5 22.Rg4+ Nxg4 23.Qxh5 Nf6 24.Qg5+ Kf8 25.Qh6+, (.15) (22 ply) 25...Ke8 (not 25...Kg8?? 26.Ng5 Bf8 27.Qxf6) 26.Qh8+ Kd7 27.Bf5+ Kd6 28.Bxc8 Qxc8 29.Qxc8 Bxc8 30.Nxd4 Nc6, with an almost equal position.|
The Soviet tournament book gave the suggested variation 18.Bxh6! gxh6 19.Qd2 Rfd8 20.Qxh6 Rxd5. At this point, it was indicated that White's best move was 21.Re4!. Alexander Konstantinopolsky's name was shown with the move 21.Re4!. I cannot read Russian, but based on this reference, I believe 21.Re4! was Konstantinopolsky's suggestion.
|Jun-15-10|| ||thickhead: < rndapology: Or if 32. Ng3 Rxe1 33. Qxe1 Qh3 34. Qf1 Rc1 ends it for white. > how do you like 32.Ng3 Qh3 ? Is it not prettier and simpler?|
|Aug-01-10|| ||birthtimes: This was Geller's 3rd straight defeat versus Keres in the Spanish game, with Geller being White in all 3 games!|
|Sep-17-11|| ||Kasparovsky5: Instead of 31. ...,Rf-e8 (which is of course quite good) Keres had the following beautiful continuation: 31. ...,Rc4. 32. Qd6,d2.33. Qxd2 (33.Nf6+,Qxf6+!!),Rxe4!!. 34.Rxe4,Qg5+ 35. Kf1,Qg2+. 36. Ke1,Qg1 mate.|
|Oct-15-14|| ||doctork: After 18.Bxh6! gxh6 19.Qd2 Rfd8 (or 19...Rfe8 20.Qxh6 Bf8 21.Rxe8 Rxe8 22.Qxf6 Bg7 23.Qh4 ) 20.Qxh6 Rxd5 Houdini 31-ply finds 21.Ng3 (not 21.Re4 Rh5! when Black survives to an ending with two bishops vs. rook and two pawns).|
|Oct-15-14|| ||Olavi: An illuminating example. Keres gave 21.Re4 Rh5 22.Rg4+ Nxg4 23.Qxh5 Nf6 24.Qg5+ Kf8 25.Qh6+ Ke8 27.Bf5 as decisive; such positions were often judged simply by the looks of it. But had he spared a thought for the absolutely forced 27...Nd7, he would quickly had seen that it's not so simple. Similarly, after 21.Ng3 he gives 21...Bf8 22.Qxf6 Bg7 23.Qh4 d3 with a good game for black. Exploring the possibilities of 24.Bxd3 Rxd3 25.Nf5 would have been entirely within his capabilities. Even in analysis, you couldn't study everything.|