< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
|Nov-16-11|| ||talriga25: for an old and unhealthy genius that game is ok..|
|Nov-16-11|| ||DrMAL: <FSR> I would not call "naive" but instead "classical" but maybe it means same thing. Thanx for article, quote from Kasparov, <As Kasparov once said (about a sacrifice on c3 in the Sicilian Defense), "the
question of sacrificing the exchange is a question of chess culture!"> means what I am trying to write. Karpov was fabulously great player, best example IMO of that style. But, as Kasparov has pointed out on other occasions, he was classical player and that style was shown to be insufficient (main battle was in 1985 WC). I think best single example was Karpov's 23.Be3? in Karpov vs Kasparov, 1985 move that made Kasparov undeniably WC, see discussion with <SWT> in that game, maybe you will have some comments to add, cheers.|
|Nov-17-11|| ||DrMAL: Funny thing about rude comments and insults from <Richard Taylor> is that position around move 12 of sac was simply not important part in this game. Instead, "all seeing" player (even when drunk and asleep) had no comment on moves 20-22 where position WAS important and key errors DID occur.|
|Nov-18-11|| ||HectorChess: <DrMAL: ... on moves 20-22 where position WAS important and key errors DID occur.>
says who? you or fritz?|
|Dec-20-11|| ||talisman: i believe Tal's last win over botvinnik was in a caro and in a similar panov...wonder how different 61 would have been if he had used the panov and not the advanced variation?|
|Dec-20-11|| ||King Death: <talisman> Here's their final game, but it was very different from the line played in the game above: Tal vs Botvinnik, 1966. It is funny though that Tal never played the Panov much against the Caro Kann.|
|Dec-20-11|| ||Mudphudder: This game almost seemed too easy for Tal. Tal has had far more impressive games than this. I'm rather surprised that this was a game against someone as good as Karpov....|
|Dec-21-11|| ||FSR: <Mudphudder> It was only a blitz game, so I wouldn't attach too much significance to it.|
|Dec-22-11|| ||talisman: <King Death> your game was not a blitz game and i thank you for that.|
|Jun-23-12|| ||master of defence: 24.Nf6! wins more faster, after 24...Qxe1+ 25.Kh2 Qe5+ 26.g3 h6 27.Qg6 followed by Qh7# Or iīm wrong?|
|Jun-23-12|| ||beatgiant: <master of defence>
24. Nf6 Qxe1+ 25. Kh2 Qe5+ 26. g3 <Bh6> and then what? 27. Qxh6 Rf7. Still might be a faster win, but I don't see it yet.|
|Jun-23-12|| ||Shams: 26.f4 in <m.o.d.>'s line is better. Both 24.Nf6 and 22.Nf6! have been pointed out previously on the thread.|
|Jun-24-12|| ||master of defence: Can it be, <beatgiant>, but if 25...Bh6 in the game, black could draw. See it: 26.Bxh6 Rf7 27.Bxh7 Rc6 28.Bc2 Rxh6 29.Qxh6+ Kg8 30.Qg6+ Kf8 31.Qh6+ Ke8 32. Ba4+ Nc6 33.Bxc6+ bxc6 34.Qxc6+ Kf8 35.Qh6+ Kg8 36.Qg6+ is a draw by perpetual check.|
|Jun-24-12|| ||master of defence: And tell me if I'm wrong on that line, whether they agree or not, and other possibility of draw in the game.|
|Jun-25-12|| ||beatgiant: <master of defense>
I haven't waded through all 7 pages of previous kibitzing to check whether 25...Bh6 has been analyzed yet. Nor have I checked with an engine yet.|
But, it looks like your suggestion wins for Black, eg. 25...Bh6 26. Bxh6 Rf7 27. Bxh7 Rc6 28. Bc2 <Qe6> seems to consolidate (29. Bg5+ Kg8 30. Bb3 Rc4). If you still see a draw, please post.
|Jun-25-12|| ||master of defence: <beatgiant> Black canīt win here. If 28...Qe6 29.Bg7+! Kxg7 30.Qh7+ Kf6 31.Qh8+ Rg7(Kg5 32.Ne4+ Kf4 33.g3+ Kf3 34.Qh5+ Qg4 35.Ng5+ wins)32.Nh5+ Kg5 33.f4+ Kg4 34.Qxg7+ Kxh5 35.Qg5#. Say if agree with me or have a better line for black.|
|Apr-09-14|| ||RookFile: <But, as Kasparov has pointed out on other occasions, he was classical player and that style was shown to be insufficient (main battle was in 1985 WC).>|
Tell that to a computer. Those things are as classical as you can get.
|Dec-26-14|| ||TheBish: Not that it matters much, but Tal missed a quicker mate (by one move) with 28. Bh7+ Kxg7 29. Qg6+ followed by 30. Qg8#. Of course in a blitz game, if you see a forced mate, you're not going to spend any time looking for a quicker one!|
|Jan-27-16|| ||yurikvelo: This gameplay had 3 phases:
1) Due to inacurate move-by-move Karpov's opening, by 17th Tal had positional advantage enough to win. But on 17th Tal missed winning Bd2 (or h4 transposition) and played dead draw Nd2
2) Karpov continue serie of inferior moves 17. ... Kh8? (.. Qc7! draw), 19. ... e5? (Rf8!), 20. ... exd4 (h6!) and 21. ... gxh5?? (forced M42).
But Tal didnot see forced +M42 22. Nf6! and played for draw again.
3) Third time Karpov blunder in one move 25. ... h6?? (Bh6! - perpetual, or d3?! try to fight for draw) which Tal didnot forgive.
More multiPV: http://pastebin.com/sQ7sxK3v
|Mar-27-16|| ||kramnov: 24. Nf6 the is finish|
|Mar-27-16|| ||kramnov: 24. Nf6 the game is finish|
|Nov-01-16|| ||Alex Schindler: I was just about to ask, before reading to the bottom of comments, why not 24. Nf6? seems to make the mating h7 square very hard to protect. i'm still analyzing the response ...h6 but it looks pretty ugly for black.|
|Nov-01-16|| ||Alex Schindler: I also wonder about 15 Qb3 instead of Qe2, but that would have made for a very different game, and I guess Tal had his sights set on the kingside from move 1.|
|May-31-17|| ||User not found: |
click for larger view
Nf6! I just forgot about that Bishop on the b3-g8 diagonal and I don't think black can defend.
click for larger view
Ng3 here would have stunned me, I didn't see it or what it achieved at first.. Great little game.
|May-31-17|| ||User not found: Sally Simpson.. Wherever you are??
See that Qxh5 move? I saw Nf6 first really!! <The only reason> I said nothing was because I wanted to comment on a fine tactical adventurous game and I KNEW someone would come along calling me a liar if I said I looked at Nf6 first. Maybe I've been through this game before and it was somewhere stored in my remarkable cranium, I don't know don't care, I just wanted to avoid a patronising fool who "colours me unimpressed with their AJ Goldsby impression" Lol.. I aren't one of those who has to win at chess unless it's OTB with someone who is above or on my level. Online chess, online chess sites is full of paranoid people who think that if they can't see a tactic then how can the other guy who did, it's playground stuff but it annoys me that <the day I decided not to mention I saw a move!!> was the day someone accused me of using an engine to go through a 1900 rated chess game when I played down a GM game!!? I know you're a decent enough bloke so it's unfortunate you're copping earache but you shouldn't assume something when you don't know me
Genuinely missed the Ng3 shot though, lol.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·