|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-13-12 | | Everett: <24.Nb1! is also a great example of Makogonov's Rule- All other things being equal in a position it is necessary to improve the position of your worst placed piece.> ?? This is news to me. Always thought the crux of this idea was originally Tarrasch, who was always keen on swapping underperforming pieces and making active and effective the remaining army. |
 |
| May-23-12 | | King Death: This is a game that I remember very well, who could forget the strange looking retreat 24.Nb1 that's the beginning of the end for Black? After Karpov plays c3 Black's best piece gets pushed to the side of the board and Karpov improves his position with every move. |
|
| May-23-12 | | RookFile: Of course, if Spassky doesn't make 4 mistakes in this game, it might have been a little tougher. |
|
| May-23-12 | | Everett: <RookFile: Of course, if Spassky doesn't make 4 mistakes in this game, it might have been a little tougher.> So what?
Not as bad as Spassky's outright blunders capping poor play vs Fischer in the first half of their '72 match. And game 6, considered a gem in that match, Spassky plays a half-dozen inferior moves. Though comps pick out mistakes quickly, sometimes it takes a human genius to make each mistake costly. Karpov does that here, just as all the best do. |
|
| May-24-12 | | King Death: < Everett: Not as bad as Spassky's outright blunders capping poor play vs Fischer in the first half of their '72 match. And game 6, considered a gem in that match, Spassky plays a half-dozen inferior moves...> What a way to talk about <RookFile's> boy Fischer especially because you're right. Game 5 was a good example with the terrible strategical mistake in the early middle game and the one mover to end the game. <...Though comps pick out mistakes quickly, sometimes it takes a human genius to make each mistake costly...> For sure and Karpov had no mercy when it came to taking advantage of mistakes. There was nothing spectacular about his play but he was one tough player. |
|
| May-24-12 | | Anderssen99: After the beautiful moves 19.Bg4! and 24.Nb1!! Karpov planned a lovely termination, i.e. 35...,Rxd8. 36.Be7,Re8. 37.Qxf6+,Kh6 (...Kh7. 38.Qf7+,Kh6. 39.Bg5 Mate). 38.Nh4,Rg8. 39.Nxg6!! (39.Nf5+ also mates),Rxg8. 40.Qh8 mate. Karpov said that this is one of his ten best games. |
|
| May-24-12 | | RookFile: <Though comps pick out mistakes quickly, sometimes it takes a human genius to make each mistake costly. Karpov does that here, just as all the best do.> I have no doubt that if Petrosian was playing white, the same thing happens, move for move. |
|
May-24-12
 | | keypusher: <RookFile: Of course, if Spassky doesn't make 4 mistakes in this game, it might have been a little tougher.> This was a stupid comment back when you made it in 2007. There was no reason to make it again. Unless you want to remind people that you once went through Mednis' book of the match, counted up the question marks, and recorded the number on the game page for each of Spassky's losses. You know, lest anyone realize that Spassky played better against Karpov than against Fischer and still got crushed. <RookFile: <Though comps pick out mistakes quickly, sometimes it takes a human genius to make each mistake costly. Karpov does that here, just as all the best do.>I have no doubt that if Petrosian was playing white, the same thing happens, move for move.> I try to leave you off ignore, but you're just too dumb. |
|
| May-24-12 | | Petrosianic: <I try to leave you off ignore, but you're just too dumb.> That's a mistake, you know. If your time is more valuable than his, then you lose in the trade-off. But hey, if you're still reading Rookfile, a few years back, he was working on a Master Database of excuses for all known Fischer defeats. Could you ask, and then pass on the answer, what the excuse is for Najdorf-Fischer, 1966? I knew this at one point, but have forgotten it. |
|
| May-24-12 | | Everett: <I have no doubt that if Petrosian was playing white, the same thing happens, move for move.> Is this some kind of failed diss? "Oh yeah, any ol' player who was able to hold the WC for 6 years could have played these exact moves." |
|
| May-28-12 | | RookFile: <keypusher: This was a stupid comment back when you made it in 2007. > No it wasn't. Analyze it with a computer, and you'll see it point out one mistake after another. It annihilates Kasparov's comment that Spassky somehow played better chess than usual but lost anyway. |
|
Jun-13-12
 | | zakkzheng: Why resigns? |
|
| Jun-13-12 | | Jim Bartle: 35...Rxd8 36. Be7, followed by Qxf6. |
|
Jun-13-12
| | keypusher: <zakkzheng>
<Anderssen99: After the beautiful moves 19.Bg4! and 24.Nb1!! Karpov planned a lovely termination, i.e. 35...,Rxd8. 36.Be7,Re8. 37.Qxf6+,Kh6 (...Kh7. 38.Qf7+,Kh6. 39.Bg5 Mate). 38.Nh4,Rg8. 39.Nxg6!! (39.Nf5+ also mates),Rxg8. 40.Qh8 mate. Karpov said that this is one of his ten best games.> |
|
Jul-02-12
| | zakkzheng: Thank you Jim Bartie. I was just not looking at the position and posted that comment |
|
| Jul-02-12 | | King Death: < Petrosianic: ...But hey, if you're still reading Rookfile, a few years back, he was working on a Master Database of excuses for all known Fischer defeats. Could you ask, and then pass on the answer, what the excuse is for Najdorf-Fischer, 1966? I knew this at one point, but have forgotten it.> You're a sharp guy, I can't believe you'd forget that. Maybe it's time to look up every Fischer loss to see what
excuse he's provided unless I find that magic button again. There's nothing like the gift that keeps on giving. |
|
| Jul-03-12 | | rilkefan: "His play is dry"...
Karpov vs A Zaitsev, 1970 |
|
| Jul-03-12 | | King Death: <rilkefan> Here's another dry game from the early days (Karpov vs Quinteros, 1973). |
|
| Jul-03-12 | | The Big Lebowski: Looking at this game you can see the effects of what Fischer did to Spassky's ego in the '72 WCC, he broke it! While Karpov plays a great ending, Spassky was never in the game. The Sicilian is supposed to be all about attacking but Boris's defense is weak from the get go. With Sterile B's on d7 & e7 and an enemic N on b4. Also the horrible B on c6 and black is going nowhere. To cap off this disaster is Spassky's dark squared B with nowhere to go. |
|
| Jul-03-12 | | drnooo: strange perspectives here: to say Spassky was broken is fatuous, first of all he him self said he lost desire, pfft, the vital ingredient that took him to top.
He did fine until then. So if suddenly those who want to claim the same for Fischer, that he had basically got everything he wanted from chess, who is to say he also would not have been beaten by Karpov. Karpov's results against Spassky was even better and more convincing, I would say rather that at that point once he had the crown he just flat out didn't care as much as before: a real tyrant would have been his insisting that the match be terminated after Fischer's antics. And who can say that THAT would not have broken, truly broken Fischer.
Fischer happened to get lucky, when he a didn't have to meet Korchnoi or Geller, whom he might well have beaten but certainly not six zip then he got to play all the other rivals when basically they didn't quite care enough.
Spassky until that match was every bit the equal of Fischer and finally deep down just had had enough. That's always been my take. He wanted even more than the crown just to get the hell out of town. And that's exactlywhat he did. |
|
Jul-05-12
 | | chessgames.com: Let's please keep the comments civil and on the subject of the game. If you want to discuss the career of Boris Spassky use his player page. Thanks. |
|
Jul-05-12
| | keypusher: <chessgames.com: Let's please keep the comments civil and on the subject of the game. If you want to discuss the career of Boris Spassky use his player page. Thanks.> You're denying the world "caissic coitus interruptus"? |
|
Jul-06-12
 | | harrylime: <The Big Lebowski: Looking at this game you can see the effects of what Fischer did to Spassky's ego in the '72 WCC, he broke it! While Karpov plays a great ending, Spassky was never in the game. The Sicilian is supposed to be all about attacking but Boris's defense is weak from the get go. With Sterile B's on d7 & e7 and an enemic N on b4. Also the horrible B on c6 and black is going nowhere. To cap off this disaster is Spassky's dark squared B with nowhere to go.> Karpov did not meet the all conquering Spassky of the 60's.. Karpov met a shadow of that.. a broken man who had lost inspiration and motivation. Karpov meanwhile had all that in abundence, plus the Soviet establishment to boot. |
|
Aug-25-12
 | | perfidious: < The Big Lebowski: Looking at this game you can see the effects of what Fischer did to Spassky's ego in the '72 WCC, he broke it!....> Guess that explains how the 'broken' Spassky won the '73 Soviet championship by a full point, with all the top players participating. |
|
Sep-12-12
| | perfidious: < keypusher: You're denying the world "caissic coitus interruptus"?> To deny this gem to the world would be criminal. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
