< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jan-11-06|| ||morpstau: hey Blingice when did you join OUR conversation!??|
|Apr-23-06|| ||orio24: Really beautiful game, unbelievable play (from both sides). I am surprised I didn't know this game before.|
|Jul-18-08|| ||notyetagm: <orio24: Really beautiful game, unbelievable play (from both sides). I am surprised I didn't know this game before.>|
|Aug-15-08|| ||ToTheDeath: Great game, Karpov subtly lured Kamsky's pieces into his camp, only to trap them and then go after the defenseless Black king.|
|Aug-15-08|| ||Woody Wood Pusher: This is a fantastic game and is featured in My Great Predecessors. I will analyze 43...Nb8 and see if I can find the winning line...|
|Aug-16-08|| ||ToTheDeath: After 43... Nb8 44. f6 Qf8 45. Bf1 Black is helpless, his Bishop on a3 is useless and his knights can only shuffle back and forth- so White is in effect up three pieces in his attack. He can play h5, hxg6, Bd3 (threatening to sac on g6), then Nd2, Nf3, Ng5, Qh2 etc.|
For example: 45... Ndc6 46. h5 Qc8 47. hxg6 hxg6 48. Bd3 Na7 (48... Qe8 49. Nd2 Na7 50. Nf3 Nbc6 51. Ng5 followed by Qh2 ) 49. Qh2 Qf8 50. Bh6 winning.
|Aug-16-08|| ||Woody Wood Pusher: I analysed the position with Master Chess (32 bit 20 MHz) for 12 h 30 mins and it's favourite line after 43...Nb8 is 44. f6, Qf8 45. Qd2,Nd7 46. Nxa3, bxa3 with a +0.7 eval but I don't think it fully understands the position (it never seems to understand Karpov positions lol)|
I'm not sure about your line though ToThe Death because 46. h5, Qc8 47.hxg6?? hangs the white queen to 47...Qxc2
MGP gives '43...Nb8 would have allowed black to avoid immediate losses, although after 44. f6, Qf8 45. Bf1 (Krasenkow) or 45 Nd2 followed by Nf3 and Bf1 (Karpov) he can no longer hold out'
|Aug-16-08|| ||Woody Wood Pusher: oops my bad i forgot about the knight on c6...i only just got up though lol.|
after 43...Nb8, 44. f6, Qf8 45. Nd2, Qe8 46. Nf3,Nbc6 47. Bf1, Qd7 48. h5,Nb7 49. hxg6, hxg6 50. Qh2, Qd8 51. Ng5, its mate in 4 and time for somebody to change career LOL
|Oct-04-08|| ||notyetagm: <aulero: This game is a real gem. Kamsky played sharply, but Karpov was deeper. It is a rather exceptional example of Karpov's art.
Worth of notice are:
A) 17.b3 and 19.g4 to neutralize black's knights;
B) The incredible way Karpov stopped the black's queen side activity with the moves 24.Nb1 and 25.Qd2 (forecasted when he played 21.f5);
C) The Karpov's typical slowly improvement of position (compare positions after 25th and 31st moves);
D) The smart tactical way used by Kamsky to free the queen side (b6-a5-Nb4: white cannot play 34.Qxb2);
E) The fantastic and humorous way Karpov exploited the bad position of black queen in g7, that is, exchanging all rooks in order to take the control of 'c' file with the queen!! The only Black weapon was the double rooks on 'c' file!
F) The tardy but significant Kamsky's attempt to create a counterplay (43...Nxe5);
G) The elegant and precise finish (be aware of 53.Kh3?? Qf5+).
I rarely saw a game so well played by both players.>
It should come as no surprise to you that this game won a Chess Informant Best Game Prize.
|Oct-04-08|| ||fictionist: <This game is to boring to have time wasted on its insignificance. I mean why waste time analizing a couple of Patzers. Karpov would have been baffled and embarrased to face the mighty Giant Bobby Fischer!!!>|
As if the only one who plays chess is Fischer. The one who posted the above message learned his chess maybe by playing only Fischer games.
|Feb-12-09|| ||notyetagm: One of my favorite games.|
|Feb-12-09|| ||Everett: <notyetagm>
FYI, <aulero>'s comments are almost directly lifted, verbatim, from Secrets of Spectacular Chess. A shame he didn't site properly.
|Feb-12-09|| ||WhiteRook48: <morpstau> must not realize how powerful Karpov was in chess back then|
|Apr-17-09|| ||WhiteRook48: funny|
|Sep-25-09|| ||WhiteRook48: 54 Kh3 Qc3+ 55 Bf3+|
|Jun-16-12|| ||Howard: One of many games that I've been meaning to play over, especially after seeing Kasparov's extensive notes in Volume V of MGP. But there's at least one other book which makes interesting observations about this game.......Andy Soltis' book of the 100 greatest games of the 20th century.|
To keep this point fairly brief, this
finely-tuned game of Karpov's does NOT make the Top 100 list. However, Soltis acknowledges the game in an unusual way. In this volume, he gives roughly 15 additional games that did not make his T100 list and explains why....
....for this game, he concedes that in terms of the finesses involved, this "may have been Karpov's greatest game". But he goes on to state the overall game is "not aesthetically pleasing", however. In other words, it's a bit boring and characterized by
typical, extensive Karpovian manuevering. Well-played ? Absolutely ! Interesting/exciting? Not exactly.
On a final note, a book reviewer on Jeremy Silman's website makes the perceptive point in reviewing this book that (get ready for this one!) NONE of Karpov's games made the T100 list.....unless you include three games on the list all of which he lost! The reviewer states that Soltis was never one of Karpov's greatest fans and seems to believe that this fluky occurrence (no Karpov wins' making the Top 100) was no accident.
|Dec-03-12|| ||SirChrislov: <Howard> Every author has their own eye for excellence. From the book: |
<"Perhaps Karpov's greatest for its accuracy and finesse. But the game simply lacks the sparkle and energy of a beautiful game. It is akin to a finely tuned calibrated machine-not a work of art.">
I can agree with Soltis except for the "not a work of art" part. It is a work of Karpovian art as opposed to say, a Kasparov masterpiece. The game is skillfully conducted and Soltis awards it five(!) exclamations despite the fact it didn't make his "100 Best".
|Dec-03-12|| ||Blunderdome: Of course it's beautiful.|
|Dec-19-12|| ||SirChrislov: <Blunderdome> Beautiful as far as strategic depth, yes indeed. It's a flawless performance by white, and black did not defend at all bad. A masterpiece demo of the Karpov style.|
|Mar-11-13|| ||Westcoast: I appreciate all commets, but dont share it at all. This game is incredibly. And is a Karpov's style definitely. Is notable on all its fases. And talking about strategy and tactics I think is the best all times game that applicates the theme of attraction. First is attracted a knight, and later all pieces are attracted, a bishop, two rooks. In this way this game is just unique.
Also is a game against the rules of chess. White attack and succeed by the queen side against the rule to play foward the most advanced pawn, which was the "e" one. The control was since the side where black is theorically stronger. I sustaine like once said Pete Townsend: is un uncanny masterpiece.|
|May-10-14|| ||PJs Studio: I saw this game 20+ years ago and had forgotten it. I stumbled across it today as a reference to Karpov's ability to let his opponents taste the initiative before luring them in for the kill.|
I truly believe this game is a positional masterpiece. Karpov grips the talented Kamsky like a python and convincingly crushes him slowly. Fantastic play by GM Karpov
|Nov-01-14|| ||krippp: Been studying chess for 9 years, and this game struck me more than any game has for a long time.|
Would be nice to see what moves AND PLANS the "not energetic enough" critics suggest instead. What they seem to be missing is that THERE IS NO "ENERGETIC ATTACK" here; Kamsky's defense is very masterful, and Karpov's play is probably as energetic as GOOD play could be here.
Maybe Kasparov has shown some "energetic" improvements in OMGP V (I don't know). But while a quick analysis with Stockfish 5 does suggest some more aggressive moves as "better" than Karpov's moves, in the end those suggested lines lead to worse situations than Karpov's play. An example is <25.a3 ?!>, instead of <25.Qd2!> which stops Black's counterplay AND ATTACKS (his queenside-pieces). I don't see how allowing counter-play can be seen as "more energetic"; it just begins to look ugly after your masterful opponent finally FORCES you to respond.
I think Karpov understood this game better than Stockfish. And DEFINITELY better than Andy "barely GM" Soltis. I think Soltis' critique shows an unprofessional lack of understanding. Prefer reading Lasker, Euwe, or some other top players, instead.
About Karpov's "missed mate in 5 with <52.Qxf7>".
I think Karpov simply chose the prettiest checkmate there was. Kg3 Kh3 was simply beautiful, visibly showing what Karpov's main-plan was, instead of <52.Qxf7 and resigns>, which looks more like merely winning on material.
|Nov-01-14|| ||Everett: Karpov likely didn't miss anything. His 52nd is a simpler move and also leads to mate. No need to calculate complicated lines when a simple win is available. One must think of the energy saved for other games as well.|
|Oct-20-15|| ||eyalbd: A strategic masterpiece by Karpov.
He explains his ideas in this video:
|Oct-20-15|| ||Howard: GOTD ? It's debatable, in my view, but I'm going to nominate it right now.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·