chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

Paul Keres vs Efim Geller
"Keres Seen" (game of the day Oct-02-2017)
Keres - Geller 2nd place Candidates Playoff (1962), Moscow URS, rd 8, Aug-25
Queen's Gambit Declined: Semi-Tarrasch Defense. Pillsbury Variation (D41)  ·  1-0
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 71 times; par: 44 [what's this?]

Annotations by Stockfish (Computer).      [11522 more games annotated by Stockfish]

explore this opening
find similar games 36 more Keres/Geller games
sac: 20.Nxg6 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can step through the moves by clicking the < and > buttons, but it's much easier to simply use the left and right arrow keys on your keyboard.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

THIS IS A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE.   [CLICK HERE] FOR ORIGINAL.

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Sep-21-14  visayanbraindoctor: <Sally Simpson> Thanks for the correction.

Botvinnik may have said something similar for Smyslov for a time span in the 1950s.

Botvinnik strikes me as a very political person, yet he seems to be quite honest and frank when it comes to opining about his chess colleagues.

<plang: Spassky defeated Geller twice in Candidate matches in 65 and 68 both 3-0 with 5 draws>

Spassky IMO was approximately as strong a chess player as Keres.

Although he was being honest, Botvinnik may have been wrong about Geller. In the late 1960s, I think that Spassky was by then already stronger than Geller.

Keres strikes me as a World Champion caliber chess player whose chess strength exhibited a long high plateau, but no peaks. It's notable that a top chess master would often only obtain the Title in that part of his career that his strength experiences a sudden peak, after which his chess strength usually falls off back into his high plateau, and sometimes down into the valley of the ordinary.

It was Keres' supreme misfortune that he during his high plateau of almost 3 decades, there were always players whose peaks went over his. In the mid 30s to early 40s Alekhine, although visibly declining, was always stronger than him; and IMO he would have lost in a WC match even if he got to play one against AAA. In the mid 40s to early 50s, Botvinnik was stronger than him. He would probably have lost a WC match to Botvinnik even if he got one. Then he got in the way of a peaking Smyslov, Tal, and Petrosian, and was bounced off; even though in most of their careers, I believe that Keres was stronger than them. After 1964, Keres' chess strength began to decline. By 1965, Spassky was already stronger than him and beat him in their Candidates match, and in the Soviet Championship that year he was never a contender to win.

The best chance for him to win the Title would have been in the years 1937 to 1963. For example, if it was him that got to play Euwe in the 1937 WC match instead of AAA, I believe that Keres would have won the Title. Theoretically Euwe could have chosen him as it was the right then of the World Champion to choose his Challenger. Later on, if just a bit fortunate, Keres might have won any number of Candidates events in the 1950s, but no such luck.

Even so if the declining Keres somehow managed to pull off a win against a peaking Spassky in the Spassky - Keres Candidates Quarterfinal Match (1965), he might have just been inspired to put an all out effort to win the Candidates, and maybe beat Petrosian. This was his last practical chance to get a Title shot.

Sep-21-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <visayan: Botvinnik may have said something similar for Smyslov for a time span in the 1950s.>

In an interview given to New In Chess in the mid 1980s, Botvinnik stated that in the mid fifties, Smyslov was the strongest player in the world.

Hard to argue with consecutive wins in candidates tournaments, followed by finally overcoming his bugbear.

Sep-21-14  Olavi: <Sally Simpson: "...Geller was the strongest chess player in the 1960s." Slight mis-quote if we follow Wiki: it was the late 1960's.

"Former champion Botvinnik stated that, in his opinion, Geller was the best player in the world in the late 1960s.">

Wiki gives no source either.

<visayanbraindoctor:

Although he was being honest, Botvinnik may have been wrong about Geller>

Where exactly was he being honest? If he ever said that, it would be such news that it deserves to be sourced.

Sep-21-14  visayanbraindoctor: <Olavi> I actually read it from a kibitzer's post here in CG, I just forgot where. I understand your point that the source is unverified. So let's just say Botvinnik never uttered it.

It doesn't change the gist of my core statements about Keres.

Sep-22-14  Olavi: I think that from about 1952 Keres would have had an even chance against Botvinnik, only Smyslov and Tal were in the way. 1962 perhaps... Similarly I'd make Korchnoi the favourite in a match against Petrosian in the 60's. In the first among equals era it was not always the case that if A beats B and B beats C, then A beats C.
Sep-22-14  Petrosianic: <I think that from about 1952 Keres would have had an even chance against Botvinnik,>

Why do you think so?

<only Smyslov and Tal were in the way.>

And Bronstein, and Geller, and Korchnoi, and others who might have had chances to beat Botvinnik. There were maybe about 10 people who were dangerous to Botvinnik then, all in the Soviet Union. That's why he pushed the "Four Soviets" rule, that would eliminate more of them sooner, leaving him with fewer possible challengers to prepare against.

<1962 perhaps... Similarly I'd make Korchnoi the favourite in a match against Petrosian in the 60's.>

Neither the ratings nor the results tend to bear that out. It wasn't until 1973 that Korchnoi finally surged ahead of Spassky and Petrosian.

<In the first among equals era it was not always the case that if A beats B and B beats C, then A beats C.>

True, but Korchnoi was +1-4 against Petrosian at the end of 1962, and didn't get ahead of him until 1974. If you look at the 1968 Spassky-Korchnoi match, Spassky is clearly ahead of him, not only in results, but in positional understanding.

Sep-22-14  Olavi: <Petrosianic: <I think that from about 1952 Keres would have had an even chance against Botvinnik,> Why do you think so?>

Looking at their ganes with each other, and the tournaments they played. I am convinced that 1937-39 Botvinnik would have won comfortably, even more so ten years later.

<
Similarly I'd make Korchnoi the favourite in a match against Petrosian in the 60's.>

<Neither the ratings nor the results tend to bear that out. It wasn't until 1973 that Korchnoi finally surged ahead of Spassky and Petrosian.>

<In the first among equals era it was not always the case that if A beats B and B beats C, then A beats C.>

<True, but Korchnoi was +1-4 against Petrosian at the end of 1962, and didn't get ahead of him until 1974. If you look at the 1968 Spassky-Korchnoi match, Spassky is clearly ahead of him, not only in results, but in positional understanding.>

Korchnoi beat Petrosian twice just before the -66 match. This was my point: he could not cope with Spassky, but he would have had a good chance against Petrosian.

Sep-23-14  EdZelli: "but he would have had a good chance against Petrosian." Fat Chance ! Boris dominated the Chess World from the
mid 60's to late 60's but lost in 1966 by the best master tactician. Just look at game seven of the Petrosian-Spassky match in 1966.

By 1966, Tigran had been there, done that and sold the T-shirt twice in row. No live chess player could claim that.
What else was there to prove?
Victor was a sick-in-the-head, chip-on-the-shoulder cry baby that would resort to nasty antics at his matches just to get a win. Just check his behavior in matches against Karpov, Spassky and Petrosian to name a few.

Sep-23-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: After three days I think I understand it. Is it based on Carries the Ball?
Oct-05-14  dernier thylacine: OFFRAMP:
I could not understand what you do not or do not want to understand. For me, even I am a Frenchman whose english is poor, it did not need three minutes before I undestood the com. of EdZelli. So what? Again a mental pyramid for you?
Oct-06-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: <dernier thylacine: OFFRAMP: I could not understand what you do not or do not want to understand. For me, even I am a Frenchman whose english is poor, it did not need three minutes before I undestood "Keres the Ball" (game of the day title Apr-22-07)>

Can you explain "Keres the Ball" to me then? That's what I was talking about. I <thought> it was based on Carries the Ball but you obviously disagree.

It may help that Keres is pronounced "Keresh" - but it may not.

Nov-20-14  disasterion: <Conrad93: It's too bad this game is refuted by computer analysis.>

Two years down the line, but I'm going to rise to this. 'Refuted' in what sense? If you mean that Keres's magnificent attack is somehow flawed, you're going to have to post some analysis - my version of Stockfish can find nothing wrong with white's play after 18... f6.

If on the other hand you mean that Geller's play is less than perfect, you could make the same accusation about ever game in the chessgames database that doesn't end in a draw (or a loss on time); so it's a pretty empty assertion.

Other people up the thread have pointed out that 18... f6 is an error. You don't need a computer to see that. But what follows is glorious.

Nov-20-14
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <disasterion> By no means does <donkrad> need anything vaguely resembling proof to wave the bloody shirt; unsubstantiated blather is well within his capabilities, along with what you elegantly term empty assertions.
May-17-15  RookFile: I guess the goal of 15....Bb4 was maybe to play Bc3 and get rid of the b2 bishop. But, he never got close. So, the move has to be considered a waste of time.
May-05-16  ewan14: Keres supreme misfortune was to be Estonian , a people not too popular with Stalin
Apr-11-17  Everett: <Olavi: I think that from about 1952 Keres would have had an even chance against Botvinnik, only Smyslov and Tal were in the way. 1962 perhaps... Similarly I'd make Korchnoi the favourite in a match against Petrosian in the 60's. In the first among equals era it was not always the case that if A beats B and B beats C, then A beats C.>

If you're looking at match play, Bronstein hardly ever lost one, and was never an easy opponent for Keres.

It would have been interesting to see Bronstein in match play in the 50's. Not sure Smyslov beats him there.

Oct-02-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  offramp: Four years ago the pun for this game was "Keres the Ball" which was only understood by User: dernier thylacine.

Today we have evolved up to "Keres Seen".

That is probably based on Kerosene, a liquid which is known in most of the world as paraffin.

You have to slightly mangle the pronunciation of Keres, and ignore who or what is supposed to have <seen> Keres, in order to really find that pun funny.

Normally, if chessgames.com is desperate for a game to be GoTD, it simply takes the winner's name and selloptapes the word Immortal after it.

Here this <cannot be done> owing to the dreadful Buzz Killington <double S> involved in <Keres's Immortal>.

Oct-02-17  morfishine: <offramp> Undoubtedly, you are a national treasure

*****

Oct-02-17  goodevans: <18...f6> looks to be such an ugly move, weakening g6 which proved to be fatal. The trouble is it's hard to find anything better for black. Against most alternatives white has <19.Qh5> initiating a similar attack as in the game only now the a1-h8 diagonal is also open.

Maybe <18...h6> held out better chances?

Oct-02-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <offramp: Four years ago the pun for this game was "Keres the Ball" which was only understood by User: dernier thylacine.

Today we have evolved up to "Keres Seen"...

You have to ... ignore who or what is supposed to have <seen> Keres, in order to really find that pun funny.>

I don't know, having some unknown entity "stalking" Keres is not funny, but disturbing.

Oct-02-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: <Today we have evolved up to "Keres Seen"... >

Since black's king looks like a chalk outline with yellow police tape.

I would have preferred:

"Keres Scene"

Oct-02-17  schnarre: ...Good one <diceman>!
Oct-05-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  kevin86: Late double check ends it.
May-08-18  edubueno: Keres ganó brillantemente ante un jugador tan fuerte como Geller. En esta partida se vió cómo Geller juega bien al ataque pero flojo en la defensa.
Jun-22-19
Premium Chessgames Member
  Fusilli: A look at this position, after 18.Ne5, gives support to that quote about tactics flowing from a superior position. (Who said that?)


click for larger view

Geller has been either reckless or overly optimistic. His three minor pieces are all committed to the queenside, where nothing is really happening. Keres' three minor pieces are all aimed at Geller's kingside. Add that the white side is being handled by one of the strongest attackers of all time, and the writing is on the wall.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 3)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Game 25
from Move by Move - Keres (Franco) by Qindarka
d4 : QGD : Semi Tarrasch Variation
by ISeth
Who Keres
from 51a1_IQP on d4 by Jaredfchess
Simply gorgeous
by Kublo
ervindr's Favorite games
by ervindr
98_D40-D42_Semi-Tarrasch
by whiteshark
QGD Semi-Tarrasch Def. Pillsbury Var (D41) 1-0 N sac Kside attk
from Tar Pools Fredthebear Stepped In by fredthebear
fm avari viraf's favorite games
by fm avari viraf
Game 46
from Garry Kasparov's On My Great Predecessors (2) by AdrianP
26 Bg6-h7++! Black g8-king will be trapped,mated on h7-square
from KING AND QUEEN ARE TOO VALUABLE TO DEFEND by notyetagm
Game 46
from On My Great Predecessors 2 (Kasparov) by Qindarka
Brilliant Games
by ALL
Keres unstoppable
from bluealchemist's favorite games by bluealchemist
Best Chess Games of All Time
by JoseTigranTalFischer
Two Diagonals
from Positional Chess Handbook II by isfsam
Keres brilliant attack
from Rookiepawn's favorite games by Rookiepawn
1. d4! Compiled by Lau
by fredthebear
the classical King's attack out of the Semi-Tarrasch ... or so
from seriously attacking the King by JoseRaulAkiba
Game collection: d4
by savya2u
October 2: Keres Seen
from Game of the Day 2017 by Phony Benoni
plus 109 more collections (not shown)


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC