< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
|Nov-18-13|| ||Rama: I remember a funny comment on this game: "After 20. ... Qa5, black threatens 21. ... Ra8."|
|Nov-18-13|| ||perfidious: <Everett>: There have been times I wished the self-delete feature lasted longer than one hour on posts outside one's own forum page. It has crossed my mind that, perhaps, I should blow the whistle on a few of my posts!|
|May-28-14|| ||Dobril: I think if a match between Fischer and Kasparov would have been held in the beginning of the 1980s, Bobby would have won, his endgame playing was far more superior than Garry`s at that time.|
|May-28-14|| ||AylerKupp: <Dobril> But, as Tarrasch said, "Before the endgame, the Gods have placed the middle game". Fischer would first have to reach a playable endgame against Kasparov.|
|May-28-14|| ||Dobril: He could surely do that plenty of games. Not necessary to remind that his middle game was also superior and even better than Karpov`s.|
|Oct-10-14|| ||yurikvelo: Stockfish deep evaluate:
|Apr-01-15|| ||wassimgh: Why didnt ksparov take aposition when karpov played B a6 its rather weak|
|Apr-01-15|| ||Trouble: Karpov is brutal in this game...makes Gary look like an amateur.|
|Apr-01-15|| ||Trouble: < Dobril: I think if a match between Fischer and Kasparov would have been held in the beginning of the 1980s, Bobby would have won, his endgame playing was far more superior than Garry`s at that time. >|
< AylerKupp: <Dobril> But, as Tarrasch said, "Before the endgame, the Gods have placed the middle game". Fischer would first have to reach a playable endgame against Kasparov. >
A match between Fischer and Kasparov would have been strange. Fischer was the best at using his calculating ability to simplify into technical positions where he had the advantage. Kasparov was the best at using his calculating ability to find surprising tactical ideas in the midst of combinations which his opponents were likely to miss. It's also interesting to note that their choices of defense were identical and that they both opted to play sharp and dynamic opening lines whenever possible. Of course, one must assume that Fischer would have an equal level of knowledge about opening theory relative to Kasparov when the match was undertaken. If we assume the match would have taken place in the early to mid 80's, I think Kasparov with White might have the advantage in King's Indian positions because the positional complexity suits Kasparov's playing style better and also because a good antidote to the Bayonet attack wasn't discovered until the early 2000's by Radjabov. In Gruenfeld positions, Bobby Fischer might have been better since Gruenfeld positions tend to be dynamic but more technical. Fischer as White would have certainly played e4 and a Najdorf defense or Scheveningin would have been likely(although Kasparov might have tried to switch his opening repertoire to confuse Fischer). I think by the mid 80's the Fischer Sozin variation was out of style but I could be wrong. The English attack was not known yet, so maybe they would have played a bunch if Najdorf's with Bg5...who knows. In any case they probably would have played some great games and it's hard to pick a favorite in these lines.
|Aug-04-15|| ||fisayo123: Almost identical endgame with a similar pawn structure and similar moves.|
This was one of those pre-arranged games in this match, according to the great Bobby Fischer.
|Aug-05-15|| ||offramp: <fisayo123: Almost identical endgame with a similar pawn structure and similar moves.
This was one of those pre-arranged games in this match, according to the great Bobby Fischer.>
That was mentioned here, Kasparov vs Karpov, 1984, on page 2.
|Aug-24-15|| ||der623: This may seem trivial, but after Karpov's 20th move, There are 7 pieces on the A file and 5 of them are Karpov's.|
|Sep-21-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: This game is a demonstration of how Karpov won against Kasparov early in the match. Karpov, with either White or Black, rapidly gets his pieces more active than Kasparov's, and then wins material. |
By denying Kasparov the initiative, Karpov neutralizes his opponent's best weapon.
Here is another example, Karpov's first win of the match:
Karpov vs Kasparov, 1984
|Oct-16-15|| ||seeminor: Incredible to realise that on move 69 for black Re3+!! is the quickest winning move eg 70.Kxe3 g1=Q or 70. Kd2 Rg3|
|Oct-16-15|| ||offramp: <seeminor: Incredible to realise that on move 69 for black Re3+!! >|
That was mentioned here, at www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1067139&kp-
|Oct-17-15|| ||beatgiant: <seeminor>,<offramp>
I seem to be missing something. With 69...Re3+ 70. Kxe3 g1=Q+ Black gets a queen for a rook, but in the game line black will go up a whole rook, which is a larger material advantage. <quickest winning move> means you checked a tablebase and it leads to mate in fewer moves?|
|Oct-17-15|| ||Howard: Either way, beatgiant, Karpov wins quickly. It's just a matter of taste.|
|Oct-17-15|| ||beatgiant: <Howard>
I did check a tablebase, and <seeminor> and <offramp> are right that their line leads to mate in fewer moves. Karpov's choice is a more human preference (<rook vs nothing> is a little easier than <queen vs rook>).
|Oct-17-15|| ||offramp: <beatgiant: <Howard>
I did check a tablebase, and <seeminor> and <offramp> are right ...>|
However, I do agree with you that, "in the game line black will go up a whole rook, which is a larger material advantage," because for a human Q v R can be very tricky. But K+R v K is totally straightforward.
Kasparov would not, however, have tried out the World Champion's knowledge of Q v R if Karpov had played 69...Re3+, especially as I believe an adjournment was due at move 72.
So I believe Karpov played the best move, definitely the one that made his opponent resign the soonest.
|Oct-18-15|| ||Howard: Oh, I couldn't agree more ! As a computer demonstrated earlier that year, in 1984, when playing Q v R against the late Walter Browne, that ending can be a lot trickier than some people realize.|
Karpov definitely made the smarter choice.
|Oct-18-15|| ||seeminor: Yeah 69.Re3+ is mate in 19 apparently,
|Mar-25-16|| ||mhand: I think that Kasparov missed a good opportunity to obtain a draw as follows:Rg8+Kh3(ifRg5-Rxg5+Kxg5-Kf2 wins the pawn.And ifKf4-Rxg2 draw).So the black must continue with Kh3 to protect the pawn so Rh8+Kg3-Rg8+Kh2-Rh8+Kg1 and now afterRg8 the white haven't to fear anything because their king controls the squares f2 and g2.If Re5+ Kf3 inhibits the black's king movement. And if Rf2+Ke1-Rf1+Ke2-Kh2 to release the pawn encounters again the rook's checks:Rh8+Kg3-Rg8+(if Kf4??Rxg2)Kh2-Rh8+Kg1 draw.|
|Mar-26-16|| ||offramp: <mhand: I think that Kasparov missed a good opportunity to obtain a draw as follows:Rg8+Kh3(ifRg5-Rxg5+Kxg5-Kf2 wins the pawn.And ifKf4-Rxg2 draw).So the black must continue with Kh3 to protect the pawn so Rh8+Kg3-Rg8+Kh2-Rh8+Kg1 and now afterRg8 the white haven't to fear anything because their king controls the squares f2 and g2.If Re5+ Kf3 inhibits the black's king movement. And if Rf2+Ke1-Rf1+Ke2-Kh2 to release the pawn encounters again the rook's checks:Rh8+Kg3-Rg8+(if Kf4??Rxg2)Kh2-Rh8+Kg1 draw.>|
Your idea is a very good one, but it can still be beaten by driving the white king away.
This is the final position:
click for larger view
click for larger view
click for larger view
If you play on from there you'll see that the black king can't be prevented from going to h1 or f1, followed by the pawn queening. The black manoeuvre is well known and is called <building a bridge>.
|Apr-18-16|| ||mhand: Thank you Mr Offramp for your comment,I didn't se it at all.Well your maneuver to bring away the white king from the square e2 is excellent,I agree with you 76...Rf5+ 77Kg4.Rf7 and now78Kh3?? loses after78...Kf1 79Rxg2...Rh7+! 80Kg3...Rg7+winning the rook.So the white will not play that and continue with:78Ra8(if 78...Kh1 79Rh8+...Kg1 again and if78...Kf1 79 Ra1+...Kf2 80Ra2+....And the pawn will never Queen.|
|May-01-16|| ||Howard: By the way, it wasn't discovered until many years later (probably by a computer) that 56...Rh2 would also have won. The Informant, in fact, claims it only would have drawn.|
But the books Anatoly Karpov: Endgame Virtuoso and also Karpov's Strategic Wins (Volume 1) both point out that 56...Rh2 would also have been good enough for the full point.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·