|Aug-27-04|| ||offramp: Karpov says that with 28.c4 he could have won the game 'literally within a few moves'. I have never understood that, but he must have had something specific in mind. I wonder what it was? |
|Aug-28-04|| ||Lawrence: <offramp>, Junior 8 doesn't understand it either. Thinks that 28.Qc4 is the best move but it only gets a +0.37. 28.Qd3 get a +0.06. (10 min. search) |
|Jun-28-06|| ||KingG: Kasparov claims that after 22.Nf3! Black's position would have been hopeless. I'm not sure if that's true or not, but it certainly looks bad, especially when played OTB.|
|Mar-24-07|| ||Fisheremon: <KingG: Kasparov claims that after 22.Nf3! Black's position would have been hopeless. I'm not sure if that's true or not, but it certainly looks bad, especially when played OTB.> That could be quite true, e.g. 22...Nc5 23.Nxc5 Bxc5 24.Ne5 Ba8 25.f3 Nh5 26.Bf2|
|Mar-24-07|| ||Fisheremon: <Lawrence: <offramp>, Junior 8 doesn't understand it either. Thinks that 28.Qc4 is the best move but it only gets a +0.37. 28.Qd3 get a +0.06. (10 min. search)> e.g., 28...Qb7 29.Qc7 Qb5 30.Nd3. Here Black has three choices 30...Bd8, 30...Rd8, 30...Nxg3 all with very hard endgame (quite likely lost) for Black. BTW same on 30 move: 30.Qc7!? and on 35 move: 35.f3!? with huge advantage and chances to win. <lopezexchange> In the final position White still has some advantage and he should fight more.|
|Mar-25-07|| ||Brown: I think, looking at this game, and the subsequent histories of the two, that the only reason Kasparov became champ as early as 85 was because of the unlimited match rule. |
Karpov was clearly better in 84, and the only reason Kasparov was able to improve so quickly was because he had 48 chess lessons with the greatest player of the time WITH NO CONSEQUENCES. In 85 he gets to do it again and succeeds.
A shame, really. Kasparov probably should not have been champion until '87, and there would be no guarantees that he would win that match.
|Mar-25-07|| ||HannibalSchlecter: Karpov lost the match because he played like a wuss, refusing to go for it with such a big lead. He thought the strategy of treading water and waiting for mistakes would win for him. Sorry Charlie, vulture chess is out! Kasparov learned that if he just plays solid, Karpov has no bite. No wuss deserves to be champion. Put your cajones in a jar and hand them to the man with more testosterone, Kasparov!|
|Mar-25-07|| ||Brown: <HannibalSchlecter> How eloquent. This must go for all the Grunfeld's Karpov shoved down Kaspy's throat from '87-'02.|
|Mar-26-07|| ||HannibalSchlecter: <Brown> You mean where Kasparov played the Grunfeld? That's my point,Kasparov is the one taking all the chances. Karpov doesn't go for the jugular, he hovers around like a vulture waiting for someone to die. He's great at this strategy but in my opinion, this unambitious style is not worthy of a champion.|
|Mar-26-07|| ||Brown: <HannibalSchlecter> His style in his prime, from 74-95, was not unambitious. He played for equality as black, but played to win as white. One can be ambitious without being reckless. In fact, this is the precise way one can characterize Karpov as white.|
When he would try to play for unbalanced positions as black against Kasparov (perhaps listening to someone who agrees with you in his camp) he got repeatedly blown up with the Lopez Zaitsev instead of sticking with the Breyer.
Karpov and Kasparov are different players. You don't have to like his style, but he is not considered by many to be "unambitious" during most of his career.
|Mar-26-07|| ||HannibalSchlecter: <Brown> His style by many is considered boring which I'm sure you've heard said many times before. "unambitious" I don't think is too different from the popular sentiment of "boring". But he's not just that, I'll go one further. He's "Mr. Waiting Move", He's "Mr. Don't Hurt Me!", He's "Mr. I haven't taken a risk in chess since I hit puberty!", He's "Mr. Call off the match, all this chess is making me sickly!" He's "Mr. Estrogen without a comb!" Do you realize many doctors have cured patients with insomnia by proscribing them to go over one of Karpov's games? Come on! Wake up and smell the blandness!|
|Mar-28-07|| ||Brown: <HannibalSchlecter> Enjoy your ignorance!|
|Apr-06-07|| ||M.D. Wilson: Karpov boring? Hannibal must be Úlan and chance incarnate.|
|Apr-12-08|| ||Knight13: 13...Nxc5's gotta be better. Black has more initiative here than on move 18 (both with IQP).|
|Oct-09-08|| ||Eyal: <HR [Hanon Russell]: Let's spend a little bit of time on games thirty-one and thirty-two. After game thirty-one, which was a draw, you still hadn't won a game, yet you write on page 175 "This draw was a great moral victory for me... it marked a psychological turning-point." Can you elaborate on that?|
GK: When you play matches, especially long matches, the psychology is very important, because it brings the pendulum to one side or another. No doubt before game thirty-one, you could see in the audience, in this Hall of Columns, Karpov had to be crowned again. Every element of his game, his body language showed that's it. The people in the hall, the cameras - moral - everything was there. They built up big expectations. And he got an excellent position. Not a winning position, actually this book refutes the myth that he was winning and just blundered. But he had very good winning chances. The difference with other games that were lost at the beginning of the match was that I didn't panic. I was playing to the very end. It was the last game if I would have lost, but I never had the feeling that it would be the last game of the match.
HR: That's a very interesting comment because at that point any game could be the last game.
GK: Karpov was close, but the fact was that he couldn't deliver the final blow. I could sense this during the game that he was almost shocked. The draw for him was a major psychological defeat, because he expected to win and it failed. Not that it was the turning point of the match, but game thirty-one should be discussed with game thirty-two, because in game thirty-two Karpov also wanted to win. He wanted to finish the match. He knew that the trend was changing. In game thirty-two he wanted to take some risk with black. He was looking for complicated positions, even with substantial risk. Remember that in game two and game six he was in terrible trouble and I failed to benefit form Karpov's risky and sometimes dubious moves. That's why these two games signify the end of this part of the match.> (http://www.chesscafe.com/skittles/s...)
|Aug-17-10|| ||GrahamClayton: Kasparov's comments from "Unlimited Challenge":
"The crunch was to come in game thiry-one. That was their plan. Karpov had put on a new suit for the occasion. His whole retinue had turned out in their Sunday best. The USSR Chess Federation had a laurel wreath standing by. On that day, Karpov played the first half of the game really well. He gained a big positional advantage and soon won a pawn. Then something extraordinary happened. He just panicked. I was the one who should have been in a panic, but I was completely calm. To make sure, I even took my jacket off.
Karpov was on the point of winning hands down. It was a standard position and he was a pawn up. But he couldn't take the initiative. He waited for me to lose instead. But it happened differently. I got a chance to hit back, and took it. Karpov's advantage quickly evaporated.
When he got into time difficulties I offered a draw and he agreed. According to eyewitnesses, his hands were trembling and he seemed strangely relieved to accept the draw. The initiative had just crossed the table between us, I was in no doubt about that. He may have sensed it too."
Kasparov on Kasparov: Part I