|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Dec-22-09
 | | Hesam7: In case you were wondering Kasparov had prepared the Grunfeld if Karpov was to play 1. d4 in this game. |
 |
Dec-23-09
| | Hesam7: <<19...g6(4)>
click for larger viewA position that was little known at that time has arisen: it had been reached by transposition in only two previous games. Looking for ways to develop his initiative, Karpov thought here for 44 minutes. For the greater part of this time I circled around the stage or sat in the rest room. In the corridor leading to it I chanced upon a placard which had been made in advance with the inscription: 'Anatoly Evgenevich, congratulations on your victory!' But this creation had the opposite effect - not at all that for which it was hoping...> |
|
Mar-01-10
 | | mjmorri: Karpov's game begins to unravel at move 31. Absolutely needing to win, he had to spurn the repetition of moves which would have been the logical outcome of the position. His desperate 31.Rh4 allows Kasparov to play 31...g5 opening the game up in his favor. Spassky faced the same predicament in his final game against Fischer.
Spassky vs Fischer, 1972
Faced with needing to win in a drawish position, he sacrified a piece to sharpen the game, but Fischer defended accurately and claimed the title. |
|
| Mar-09-10 | | soothsayer8: This might be my favorite game from Kasparov, I think I even prefer it to Kasparov's immortal. This game proved that Garry wasn't just a brilliant tactician, his foresight and understanding of positional play is brilliant. Notice he didn't play scared and try something like the Petrov to secure a draw, he took the fight to Karpov and won in resounding fashion. |
|
Mar-09-10
 | | HeMateMe: The KK match games just age better, like cognac or scotch. Does anyone know which game this was? There is, perhaps, a disclaimer--Kaspy started winning, after Karpov was losing weight, taking postponemnts, and checking into a sanitarium, the long match was taking its toll. Would this same game have happened if played in games 1-10? We'll never know, but a wonder example of Kasparov's long vision of the chessboard. |
|
| Mar-09-10 | | soothsayer8: HeMateMe -- I think you're thinking of the 1984 WC match that was never finished, Karpove had to drop out due to health reasons. This was the 1985 match with the set 24 game limit, and this was the 24th game, Kasparov only needed a draw to win the title. |
|
Mar-09-10
 | | acirce: Actually, the 1984-85 match was halted by Campomanes despite protests from both Kasparov and Karpov. The real reasons are disputed (although unfortunately Kasparov's propaganda version has become "conventional wisdom" for much of the public) and will probably never be known for sure. |
|
Mar-10-10
| | HeMateMe: tx, soothsayer. I thought the first match ran from '84-85 and round 2 began in 1986. Since this match had a set number, both players well rested, the quality of the games is even more remarkable. Kasparov had lost 4 of the first 9 games in the original match. I guess he's a fast learner! |
|
Aug-07-10
 | | Eggman: A YouTube channel called "Searchbucket" (http://www.youtube.com/user/SearchB...) features many clips of chess on TV (apparently taken from the BBC), as well many other things such as parallel universes and mathematical limits that might be of interests to geeks and pointy-headed intellectual types. One of the vids is a then-live feed of this most historic game, in three parts. Part one is here: http://www.youtube.com/user/SearchB... |
|
| Aug-20-10 | | Grantchamp: After watching a video on this game on chess.com. I realize that f5!! is the brilliant start of a combination. |
|
Sep-27-10
 | | sevenseaman: 'Brisbane Bombshell' is certainly better. |
|
| Oct-13-10 | | freakclub: What would have happened if Karpov played 23. f5!... ? We surely don't know. Rybka 4 gives White the upper hand after this move. Two choices for Black, after 23.f5:
click for larger view1.  (0.70): 23...gxf5 24.exf5 Bxg2+ 25.Kxg2 Bxc3 26.bxc3 Na2 27.Qh4 exf5 28.g6 Qc4 29.Qxh7+[] Kf8 30.g7+ Ke7 31.Bg5+ Nf6 32.Qxf5 Qc6+ 33.Rhf3 Kd8 34.Nd4 Qc5 35.Bxf6+ Kc7 36.Qxc5+ dxc5 37.Nf5 Re2+ 2.  (0.87): 23...exf5 24.exf5 Bxg2+ 25.Kxg2 Nf8 26.f6 Bh8 27.Rd1 Qc6+ 28.Kg1 d5 29.Nd4 Qd6 30.Bf4 Qc5 31.Be3 Does anyone see any improvement for Black here? |
|
Nov-09-10
 | | whiteshark: Here is a game related picture. It's the <historical moment> when Karpov resigned and Kasparov became Worldchampion: http://www.chessbase.de/2010/25jahr... |
|
| Dec-26-10 | | Wayne Proudlove: Kasparov's immortal move 23...Re7, so deep. |
|
| Jan-30-11 | | oshkar72: Nobody refutes 23. f5... Karpov must played this, instead 23.Be3? a lost of time. |
|
| Feb-15-11 | | seeminor: is there any film footage if the games in this match? I have seen footage of immediately after this game, and some other bits and pieces, but no extended film. I would love to see Kasparov play 42.Nd4 and then claim victory! |
|
Apr-03-11
 | | jessicafischerqueen: <IM Sam Shankland> reckons that Garry's <25...f5!?> in this game is the Greatest Move ever played in chess history.
Here is his video analysis of the game:
Part One:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SPd...
Part Two:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW0m... (thanks chancho!) |
|
| May-22-11 | | SMCB1997: What a game from KAsparov. Its seriously hard to believe that Kasparov turned the postion after move 20 into a winning postion. Great game from Kaspy :) |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | DrMAL: MUCH has been written on this game. Kasparov's description of it in his video (DVD #5 of "My Story") was also great to watch. Towards the end of this video, Kasparov admits to 38...Rxb2? as drawing. After an amazing and totally exhausting game, he still had a few minutes left on his clock while Karpov's flag was about to fall. 40.e5? produced the win. Kasparov deserved to win anyway, it was game #72 of their 84-85 double match, with its terrible 4-0 start, an amazing recovery, cancellation and a new match with different rules. Despite the East-West clash from Fischer, it's political implications and unusually large publicity to the non-chess world, I think this was the match of the century (certainly the longest and most grueling) with two titans battling their best: a reigning WC already a legend in his prime versus a record-setting-aged challenger becoming new WC. It does not get better than this! |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | SimonWebbsTiger: @<DrMal>
it is no surprise that Ray Keene loved the Nimzowitsch like "mysterious rook moves" when he commented on the game at the time for British TV. Just took a look at Kasparov's notes in Informator 40/300. 23. f5 gave Karpov a slight edge, after characteristic lengthy analysis by Garry! He gave 23. Be3 a big fat <?> |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | DrMAL: <SWT> LOL, yes I remember reading this about move 23. He was very "animated" in his video as well, with analysis biased by emotion, but it was still informative and fun to watch, Jim Plaskett adds his touch. I think 23.f5! gives a pretty sizeable edge, whereas 23.Be3 was around equal (23.Qh4 too) I will put in on Houdini and let it compute overnight for grins. |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | DrMAL: Here is a deep computation eval (23.Qh4 shows a repetition that would be avoided by white): Houdini_15a_x64: 26/73 6:47:25 95,238,920,763
+0.53 23.f5 exf5 24.exf5 Bxg2+ 25.Kxg2 Nf8
+0.14 23.Be3 f5 24.gxf6 Bxf6 25.f5 exf5
Where Houdini bounced between 23...f5 and 23...Re7 (preferred at depth 25/73). 23...Re7 was indeed a great move. Kasparov may be rather abrasive at times and show tons of ego, but what he DID has to be praised, including his heaps of analysis a quarter of a century ago that basically shows what computers show today (if one is skilled enough to understand the computer output). This position is very complicated and difficult to analyze even for a high level player sans computer. From this one might think that Kasparov was overly dramatic in his assessment. There is more to it than two numbers, although clearly white has to win, and 23.Be3 is drawish so, as such, it's a blunder provided 23.f5 was truly a winning chance. I think it was. After 23.f5 black can take either way but 23...exf5 is preferred because, after 23...gxf5 24.exf5 black is compelled to take 24...exf5 and 25.Qh4! probably wins as he showed in his video. After 23.f5 exf5 (which Kasparov said he would have played) and 24.exf5 problem for black is that, after trading bishops, what to do about white's pawn on f5? Taking the pawn with 24...gxf5 results in the same position where 25.Qh4! probably wins so, whether or not the bishop on g2 is first eliminated, Nf8 seems the best choice but then f6! hems in the bishop on g7. If this occurs black is essentially playing a piece down. I will use Houdini's help to deeply re-analyze this game further after 23.f5! cheers. |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | DrMAL: One other point to bear in mind concerning Kasparov's condemnation of 23.Be3 has to do with style. This is maybe best appreciated by watching his video from beginning to end (perhaps several times) where he so lucidly explains the revolution in chess that he and Tal (and Fischer along with others to lesser extent) brought about. I think his manner of explaining it in terms of 3-D material versus time (tempo) versus quality is best. Karpov was more of a "classical" player valuing material and quality over tempo this style basically defines his legendary great Positional play. Attacking players value tempo more, this basically defines the style. 23.Be3 was a Positional move, it certainly was a good one in terms of quality. However, the timing was such that, 23.f5! was superior. In making his "Karpovian" 23.Be3 as Kasparov dramatically emphasizes in his video, the point is driven home. I don't think Kasparov's objective was to disparage Karpov or even build himself up so much as to simply emphasize the importance of understanding this. I agree with him and, even if he gets dramatic at times (we all have our communication styles), I can very much appreciate his teachings here. His play and his many analyses define the biggest contribution he gave to chess. And that overall, I think, has not been equaled by any other player. |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | DrMAL: After 23.f5! the sequence computed deeply as best by Houdini is exactly what Kasparov shows in his year 2000 video (including intermediate move Bxg2): 23.f5! exf5 24.exf5 Bxg2 25.Kxg2 Nf8 26.f6 Bh8
Now black is basically playing without the DS bishop. From here, 27.Rd1 and 27.Rh4 and 27.Kg1 likely transpose (in one of several ways) Karpov would probably choose 27.Kg1 (+0.50) but I chose 27.Rd1 (+0.55) first since, delaying (or even ignoring) Kg1 best attacks the weakness on d6. Kasparov presented 27...h5 this also computes deeply as best. 27.Rd1 h5 28.Rh4 a5 29.Nd4! Ne6 30.Nxe6 Rxe6 31.Rhd4 d5 32.Bf4 Qd7 There's really nothing better for black to do here, it's a game that Karpov plays best white's pieces are more active and the position is ripe for one of his famous positional squeezes. It's fairly straightforward from here to play out a strong example such as below. 33.R1d2! Rc5 34.h3 Qc8 35.Re2 Kh7 36.Kh2 Rcc6 37.Rdd2 Rxe2 38.Rxe2 Re6 39.Rd2 Where the in-between move 36...Rcc6 was suggested by Houdini as very slightly better for black. Taking the rook on e2 was also verified by Houdini under deep computation. Rook takes back looked better to me but Q takes would also win.
click for larger view There are two "best" moves now, 39...Qd7 and 39...Qf8 leading to different lines, that are given the same numerical evaluation by Houdini (depth 25/81 at 11 billion positions). The latter leads to earlier trade of the bishop on h8 for two pawns whereas the former hangs on to try and attack the pawn on c2 (unsuccessfully). I'm sure someone like both players here would see both of these OTB given time to do so, in any event I leave it to anyone reading to finish white's win as they choose. While 23.Be3 was not the best move here, Kasparov's point about it being "Karpovian" (in terms of a good positional move) seems true, he played it. It draws, he needed a win. 23.f5! wins by force. Kasparov surely saw this at least after he first analyzed it. So, he gave 23.Be3 a question mark it drives home his point. |
|
| Sep-07-11 | | Sacsacmate: <DrMAL> It was enlightening to read your posts. I can't help asking 2 Qs.
1) 23.f5! exf5 24.exf5 gxf5 25. Qxf5 Nf8 - (I can hardly doubt the analysis but just curious to know about your opinion - also I wonder if it is covered in any lines by Kasparov!) How does the position look ? h7 is covered, so is f7 & if required it can additionally be supported along 7th rank & also DSB does not get hemmed in.. 2)<While 23.Be3 was not the best move here, Kasparov's point about it being "Karpovian" (in terms of a good positional move) seems true, he played it> If it is about style, then in Seville 1987(hope I am correct)when Kasparov had to win last game to remain WC he decided to play it cool & opened with Nf3. Can it be said that he managed to change his style..?? When I first read about that episode in a book (by David Bronstein) I was surprised that how could Karpov lose that game, how could he keep his pawns on white squares;towards the end; with Kasparov's LSB still on board...I believe the 'psychology' factor must have come into play... |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
