< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Jan-31-07|| ||keypusher: <morphyvfischer> 11...e5 is the main line today, according to OMGP V. Karpov (as Black) tried 10...Re8 and 11...e5 against Korchnoi in Baguio and lost. In the Montreal 1979 tournament book he criticizes his own play and makes clear that he was eager to try this line as White.|
Spassky does himself no favors with his ...Rfc8, ....Qd8 manuever. Note that 17...Rxc6 is forced because if 17...bc, 18. Ba6 wins the exchange. Once the knights are off and Karpov's bishops are perfectly placed on the long diagonals, Black is all but doomed.
Here is the Baguio game.
Korchnoi vs Karpov, 1978
|Jul-30-07|| ||sanyas: He played a similar yet superior (in my opinion) game later in Korchnoi vs Karpov, 1981.|
|Jul-30-07|| ||RookFile: Well, this is a nice game.|
|Jul-11-09|| ||ToTheDeath: Excellent game- Karpov learned from the greats: Botvinnik vs E Zagorjansky, 1943|
The key breakthrough 36.e4! becomes possible once the Bishop is driven from the e6 square.
|Jan-18-12|| ||zakkzheng: Karpov was able to destroy the blacks position and win a piece and when black made his desprite try,white was already preprared for the killing isult.White was good enough to win the isolated d pawn really fasonted.|
|Jul-06-12|| ||Howard: In the recently-published book that has Karpov's best games up through 1985 (followed by a subsequent volume by the same authors, which gives his best efforts from 1986 to about 2010), the authors point out a move that Karpov missed, which would have netted him a pawn. |
They also point out a move near the end where Spassky could have put up more resistance.
Nonetheless, a very good game---no question about that. So was their other Montreal encounter, where Karpov played a strong endgame!
|Feb-18-13|| ||whiteshark: Daniel ♔ annotates this game in his Powerplay CD: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeyV...|
|Apr-17-14|| ||Lossmaster: This game was played on round 4, on April 15th 1979. It was my 14th birthday, and I was there in the audience! I still have the scorebook where I wrote down the moves as I was watching the game. Strangely, in my handwritten score, the move order for Black is not exactly the same as above: instead of 30...a5, 32...Qb5 and 34...Qc6, I have 30...Qb5, 32...Qc6 and 34...a5. Should I blame it on my youth?|
|Apr-19-14|| ||Lossmaster: Out of curiosity, I've just looked up the game in the official tournament book, written by Gligoric (the tournament director), and in another book on the same event, written the same year by Gilles Brodeur et al. Well, both books agree with my scorebook and disagree with the database: the move order for Black should be 30...♕b5, 32...♕c6 and 34...a5 instead of 30...a5, 32...♕b5 and 34...♕c6.|
|Apr-19-14|| ||john barleycorn: <Lossmaster> keep those notebooks! :-)|
|Apr-19-14|| ||Howard: Hmmmmm, maybe I should check both the Informant for the first half of 1979, plus that aforementioned book on Karpov's best games. Seems to be some disagreement on the score.|
|Apr-19-14|| ||Eusebius: Karpov...one of the greatest|
|Apr-19-14|| ||Sally Simpson: Just checked my 1979 Informator. No. 27. Game 522.
It has the move order as given in the main score on here. Has a note after Black's 34th move 34...Qc6 indicating 34...Rd6 was better.
|Apr-19-14|| ||Sally Simpson: Forgot to add, the notes are by Geler (sic).
I'd trust the eye-witness account.
|Apr-19-14|| ||perfidious: One would imagine that Black was played by Spaski--that guy who played a match with someone called Korcnoj barely a year before this event.|
|Jul-14-14|| ||Tatumart: MONTREAL 1979 Tournament pf Stars
Pergamond Press Translation 1980 K. P. Neat from the original Russian edition entitled Turnir Svyezd published by Fiskultura i Sport 1979
The game above has the original notes by Karpov, and the moves are as shown in the complete game above
|Jul-31-14|| ||Howard: Is that "Tournament of Stars" book (written by Tal I believe) still available.....at a reasonable price ?|
|Jun-20-17|| ||Mateo: 38...b5?? was an awful blunder for such a player as Spassky. Unbelievable.|
|Jun-20-17|| ||Petrosianic: Yeah, whoever heard of a blunder right before Move 40? Unbelievable.|
|Jun-20-17|| ||perfidious: Spassky might, instead, have gone the whole hogger and blundered again at that other favourite spot: move 41, had he decided to prolong matters.|
|Jun-20-17|| ||Retireborn: Spassky probably expected 41.dxe7 Rxd3 and had missed 41.b3! when he played 38...b5 - it's bad but not the worst blunder I've seen a GM make.|
As for the move order, I too have seen the game given with the <Lossmaster> move order in various books, including (I think!) at least one book by Karpov himself.
It's easy to imagine Geller reconstructing the game entirely from memory and not getting it quite right.
|Jun-23-17|| ||Mateo: <Petrosianic: Yeah, whoever heard of a blunder right before Move 40? Unbelievable.> For a patzer, it happens quiet often, but Spassky was a former World Champion.|
|Jun-23-17|| ||Mateo: <Retireborn: Spassky probably expected 41.dxe7 Rxd3 and had missed 41.b3! when he played 38...b5 - it's bad but not the worst blunder I've seen a GM make.> There are GMs and GMs. The difference of strengh between GMs can be very big. Spassky, as a former World Champion, was not a common GM. He blundered very rarely. He was not in his best shape at Montreal.|
|Feb-19-19|| ||Howard: Classic case of Alekhin's gun ! The latest issue of NIC had an article on that concept, and it briefly alluded to this game.|
|Feb-19-19|| ||Howard: Make one wonder if Spassky should have simply just conceded the d-pawn, and thus hoped for a draw in the endgame.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·