May-03-04
 | | Bobsterman3000: Ouch. I bet Beliavsky thought he was winning after 21Re7... |
 |
May-03-04
 | | Whitehat1963: Is there no continuation? What about 28. Qe6+ forcing an exchange of queens or 28. Nd4? Or Qe6+, queen exchange, followed by Nd4? |
|
May-04-04
| | Cyphelium: <Whitehat1963> I think there is no way for white to avoid a losing endgame. The first rank is so hopelessly weak. A/ 28. Qe6+ Qxe6 29. Rxe6 Rc8 30. Re1 (only move) Rc2 31. Rf1 Bg7 followed by Rxb2, winning. B/ 28. Nd4 Rf4! and now
(1) 29. Qa8+ Bf8 and white loses the knight or the rook. (2) 29. Re8+ Kf7 and white loses the knight, since there is no useful check. (3) 29. Qe6+ Qxe6 30. Nxe6 Rxf2 and white cannot parry the threat of Rf1 mate. |
|
Jul-14-05
 | | Peligroso Patzer: Other sources give two additional moves for each side before White's resignation, as follows: 28. Nd4 Rf4 29. Qa8+ Bf8 (0-1). |
|
Jul-14-05
| | OneBadDog: Why not 11 exd5, preventing the Black  devekoping to e6? White could hve castled kingside afterwards. |
|
Jul-14-05
 | | tpstar: <OneBadDog> There are 5 games in the db, and all 5 are 11. Nxd5. Opening Explorer Maybe if 11. exd5 Nb4 threatening 12 ... Nc2+ plus 12 ... Nbxd5, since 13. Nxd5 Qxd5 or 13. Bxf6 Nxf6. |
|
Apr-19-08
| | aazqua: Bow down before the master Beliavsky. One can understand how the GMs used to be terrified of playing Gary. |
|
| Jan-06-09 | | Extremophile: what a defense by Gazza! |
|
| May-02-09 | | chesswatcher1: Did Beliavsky waste a potential chance to take a huge advantage by making a mistake on move 21? Below is my thought process: 21. Ng5 Bh6 22. Qxh6 Rf7 23. Rxf7 Qxg7 24. Nxg7 ...
I couldn't see a better possible situation for Kasparov after 21. Ng5. Am I possibly missing something? The final result seems like a point advantage for Beliavsky. |
|
May-18-09
| | Peligroso Patzer: In the line you propose, <chesswatcher1:>, after 21. Ng5, it seems to me that simply 21. ... h6 holds everything together for Black. White then really has nothing better than to retreat with 22. Nf3. Black can then play 22. ... g5, and White's pieces are being driven back. The apparent weakness of the light squares around Black's king cannot be exploited in the absence of White's light-square bishop (which was sacrificed on move 19). |
|
May-18-09
| | Peligroso Patzer: BTW, <chesswatcher1:>, the need to have ... h6 available is the reason why Kasparov captured with the f-pawn on move 19. After 19. ... hxg6?, 20. Ng5 would be winning for White. |
|
May-19-09
| | AnalyzeThis: It takes great skill to play like this against Beliavsky. A lesser player would have been blown right off the board. |
|
| May-13-10 | | SpiritedReposte: One of my favorite Kasparov games. Not just his usual slashing attack, he uses tactical shots to snuff out white's initiative and leaves him in a totally lost position like magic. White being Beliavsky, who is a chess monster, makes Garry's play that much better! |
|
Sep-25-10
 | | sevenseaman: <SpiritedReposte and AnalyzeThis> You are dead right. Beliavsky is a roaring lion (a monster) and sure would have swallowed up any lesser opponent. <Peligroso Patzer> That is a fine point about the need to have h6 available; I am wiser. Such subtleties are the difference between winning and losing. When the Black Q was being crowded for space by the rooks it was hard to see a Black win. It was the bishop check from h6 that turned the tide.
..23. Qc6 is a rare and brilliant move from the Master. It gives momentum to the Black's cause. A gem of a game! Thanks. |
|
| Aug-09-11 | | DrMAL: <Bobsterman3000: Ouch. I bet Beliavsky thought he was winning after 21Re7...> No doubt. Beliavsky had home-prepared his fascinating novelty from the opening, and Kasparov refuted it OTB (21...Bh6!). One tempo meant the difference between won and lost. Amazing "miracle" by Kasparov! |
|
| Aug-09-11 | | shach matov: Yes absolutely great game. vaguely remember seeing it but just a superficial look blows you away! Tal's and Kasparov's games always make me want to start analyzing chess seriously again; alas there are other priorities. The Art, science and sport of chess at their most exulted! That's why when Kasparov was retiring Nakamura said that chess was dead. |
|
| Aug-09-11 | | DrMAL: <shach matov> Perhaps the most amazing thing, if true, about this game is that it seems to me as if Garry actually anticipated and invited this sac when he moved 16...Qc8. Otherwise, 16...Qe6 seems a more logical and stronger choice (that compels 17.Rd6 which, after 17...Qe7 discourages 18.Qh4 required for the sac to have any meaning). By "compel" I mean that white had to do this because, without Rd6 (say, Rd1 or a4) then b5 and/or Nb4 is coming with advantage for black. |
|
| Jan-09-12 | | deadlyduck: Another neat point is that if Beliavsky had tried 23. Re1 Kasparov would still have time for 23..Qc6, when White can't play 24. Qxh6 because of the very attractive 24.. Rd1+! 25. Rxd1 (else the queen must be given up) ..Qe4+ and either mate on c2 by the Queen or a smothered mate by the knight (26. Ka1 Nc2+ 27. Kb1 Na3+ 28. Ka1 Qb1+ 29. Rxb1 Nc2++) |
|
| Jun-05-12 | | vinidivici: what happen if white 18.Qxb5 , the free pawn? is it any risk? |
|
| Jun-05-12 | | vinidivici: somebody please? |
|
| Jun-05-12 | | Jim Bartle: 18. Qxb5, then 18...Nc7 maybe. |
|
| Jun-06-12 | | vinidivici: damn, i missed that fork. |
|
sac: 25...Qxd6
