< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Feb-16-09|| ||slomarko: it was 1978 and he didn't won the title but defended it.|
|Feb-17-09|| ||swarmoflocusts: Karpov tries for a Swarm of Locusts on the queenside. When it doesn't work, he tries for one on the kingside. His mistake was a simple one, and easily corrected: The point of the Swarm is to checkmate the KING. The KING is on the KINGSIDE (why else would we refer to it as such?). Therefore, we swarm first on the KINGSIDE, continuing on to the queenside if our opponent castles in that direction.|
Just kidding, by the way.
|Feb-17-09|| ||JuliusCaesar: Karpov doesn't have many weaknesses. But here's one of them on display: An occasional complacency that allowed him to miss out-of-the-blue tactics (36...Bxh4!). Kasparov punished him quite a few times for this in their many encounters.|
|May-27-09|| ||Domdaniel: I cannot accept that white's first 25 moves were played by Karpov. A pawnstorm on the queenside, followed by another on the kingside? Impossible -- this is the strategy of a Tal or a Topalov, or one of their many imitators.|
I suspect Karpov used a double -- the soviets always had doppelgangers for VIPs -- to begin the game. But the double got too ambitious -- and the real Karpov arrived too late.
In fact, an attacking player could have continued in the same style with reasonable chances of success: 26.h5!? is one option. Or Rg4 on move 26 or 27. Of course, once Bf4? was played, Rg4 was no longer possible.
Karpov-2 actually played some nice Karpovian moves after that -- his knight maneuver to f2 is excellent, and the queen-for-rooks exchange is a good try. But it just wasn't his type of game, and a few hesitant over-cautious moves handed Larsen the initiative. And Bent knew what to do with an initiative.
The whole story will be found in the book <I Was Karpov's Double> ... some day. Although this particular double was probably shot for advancing all those pawns.
|May-27-09|| ||Open Defence: maybe Lev Alburt was onto something|
|May-27-09|| ||keypusher: <Domdaniel: I cannot accept that white's first 25 moves were played by Karpov. A pawnstorm on the queenside, followed by another on the kingside? Impossible -- this is the strategy of a Tal or a Topalov, or one of their many imitators.>|
Karpov vs Spassky, 1974
Karpov vs Yusupov, 1993
Karpov vs Nunn, 1982
Those are awfully slow to be called pawn storms, though. More like pawn slogs.
|May-27-09|| ||Domdaniel: <keypusher> I've only looked at one game on your list so far: Karpov vs Nunn. I enjoyed it so much I had to check out their 17 or 18 other encounters as well. One, at least, is not in the CG database.|
But the 1982 game is among the best. I'd seen it before -- I've got the tournament book. For some odd reason, even though I was (a) playing chess, and (b) frequently in London in 1982, I didn't drop in to watch them play.
It's pure Karpov, though. He builds up a huge positional advantage over 20-something moves, and only when he's clearly winning does he go a bit gonzo with g4. Allowing just a little counterplay. Unlike our ringer here, who was gonzo from the start.
I agree: a slow storm isn't really a storm.
|May-27-09|| ||smaragdus: Scandinavian is absolutely beautiful for black, but it requires exquisite technique and and deep positional insight. It is a shame that almost no one of the so called super grand masters keeps it within their inventory. A similar beauty of a game that shows how marvellous Scandinavian Defense is-
Topalov vs Nisipeanu, 2007
This is the bravest answer to the ugliest and cowardliest of all chess moves- the abominable E4. Study Scandinavian, study Chess!
|May-28-09|| ||Domdaniel: <smaragdus> -- <the abominable E4.>
Absolument. A move for a Yeti. And not a GM Yeti.
*Smaragdine* is one of my favorite words, btw. What opening do they play in the Emerald City? Perhaps the Icelandic Gambit... the not-in-Kansas-anymore Variation, of course.
Has Anand totally given up the Scandinavian? It must be the creeping neurosis that overtakes world champions.
Some never play again, like Fischer. Some get lazy, like Petrosian. Some play more carefully, like Spassky after 1969 or Kramnik after 2001. (I know the *fetal drawnikoids* can't believe it, but he *was* a dashing and exciting player as a teenager).
And some feel they should act dignified as befits their high office, so they stick to 'respectable' and Orthodox openings. Anand is one of these.
The best model I can think of is Karpov, who broadened his range after becoming world champ, and regularly revamped his openings while winning many tournaments.
Alekhine gets the runner-up spot, for drinking milk to beat Euwe. Now that's smaragdinous.
|May-28-09|| ||Domdaniel: My award includes all of Karpov's doubles, of course, including those who were shot for playing gambits or exiled to Siberia for developing an unsightly paunch.|
Siberia was surprisingly good for the figure, if your idea of physical beauty tends to the skeletal.
|Jun-22-09|| ||TheChessGuy: This is the only game Karpov lost in Montreal 1979, sharing first with Misha Tal. Strange how he had White against the player who took last place.|
|Jul-18-09|| ||tranquil simplicity: Ladies and Gentlemen! It is very interesting to me that Domdaniel used the words over-CAUTIOUS moves to describe Karpov's loss. I will not even go as far as considering the KARPOV DOUBLE story as I do not believe at all! Karpov the man, is certainly one of the strongest Chess Masters of all time. However he has to me, an overly CAUTIOUS, PROPHYLACTIC, DRY and TECHNICAL STYLE that is considered elegant by some but that i find dull. So I believe in this game, it was Karpov the man who overextended himself in the opening (perhaps assuming the Scandinavian defense is weak) but failed to nail Larsen quickly, then became his old CAUTIOUS self. Unfortunately it was too late!!|
|Aug-08-09|| ||ToTheDeath: I like Karpov's play actually- 26.h5 and 31.Nde5 Rf5 32.hxg5! look promising for White. Karpov simply overestimated his position and fiddled around for too long, allowing counterplay on the F file.|
|Oct-17-09|| ||dannygjk: Even as late as move 46, it seems White can get an even game with, 46.Rde1. The rooks support each other and work together to prevent/create threats.|
|Oct-17-09|| ||bravado1: Karpov seems to have big problems when someone plays against him a less popular opening (of course Scandinavian is quite common, but rare on a grandmaster level). This poses a question whether his strength was not in the endgame technique, as it is believed, but in a good opening preparation.|
|Oct-19-09|| ||dannygjk: Hi, <Bravado1> ya, that makes sense, since masters/gm's perform better if a chess position, 'makes sense', if it is, 'normal'. This is proven by studies involving masters/gm's and players who have not made chess their life study.|
|Oct-19-09|| ||Jim Bartle: Interesting point, danny. Any place to look up those studies?|
|Oct-19-09|| ||dannygjk: ya, start with DeGroot :)|
|Sep-11-10|| ||Atking: I like the way Larsen negociated this opening. Rooks came first on d file then on e file an finaly on f file...|
|Feb-18-12|| ||RookFile: In the opening, Karpov didn't want to play an early Nf3, meeting Bg4 with h3, and playing g4 after the bishop goes to h5. But that's exactly how you get an advantage.|
|Nov-16-13|| ||offramp: I love the rope-a-dope style. I LOVE using it but - my friends - I have been annihilated scores of times! But that is my opponents' fault!|
|Jul-28-15|| ||tivrfoa: hi. what is the sequence after 37. Bxh4?|
|Jul-28-15|| ||TrollKing: tivrfoa, if 37. Bxh4? then 37 ... Rxd3!
If 38. Qxd3?? then 38 ... Nf4+ picks up the Queen.
|Jul-29-15|| ||tivrfoa: <TrollKing: tivrfoa, if 37. Bxh4? then 37 ... Rxd3!
If 38. Qxd3?? then 38 ... Nf4+ picks up the Queen.> Nice =). Thanks a lot.|
|Aug-10-17|| ||JoseTigranTalFischer: I happened upon this game looking at some of the tournaments on the list ChessBase did of the 50 greatest of all time that was put out like, 15 years ago (so really not all time, at this point) and I'm trying to wrap my mind around how Karpov - World Champion Karpov, undefeated since taking the title again earlier that year - loses only one game in what could be argued to be the strongest tournament competition every brought together for a tournament, and that loss is at the hands of the dead last tournament finisher. I don't mean to say that Larsen was not a great player but it can hardly be argued that he had anything but a disappointing tournament overall. How does that happen?? Larsen draws with white and wins with black?? To the World champion and co-tournament winner?? The only one in that entire field of brilliance that takes a win and a draw from the games against the contest winner?? I'd actually like to read what Larsen had to say about this tournament cuz that's just so unusual and unbelievable. Those two games versus Karpov game as many tournament points as the six games against the three players who tied for next-to-last ahead of him (Hort, Huebner, Kavalek). I've just never seen anything like that. Was Larsen's only goal at Montreal to knock Karpov around while ignoring the other 6 exceptionally strong players....|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·