< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Aug-14-10|| ||fetonzio: Nh1 very cute|
|Aug-14-10|| ||Ratt Boy: Wait a second. They always told me that a Knight on the Rim is dim. Were they lying to me all these years?|
|Aug-14-10|| ||Phony Benoni: No, they were right. There just happens to be another saying of higher priority: <"A rook in a pin is sin.">|
|Aug-14-10|| ||blueofnoon: A game like this makes you feel like trying KID, but it's only then you realize how difficult it is to play this opening.|
|Mar-25-11|| ||Lennonfan: This is one of Kasparovs finest ever games,top 5 definately...i see everyone above has run this game through engines and from what i can tell even they found nothing...dont know much about piket though|
|Mar-25-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @Lennonfan
the story behind the game is interesting too. Piket had been winning game after game in this variation with a plan of transferring his bishop to the c8-h3 diagonal. Kasparov's 17th is his improvement on 17...h5 which had been played up until then.
John Nunn noted that the move activates the rook, leaves h5 free for a knight and that 21...Nh5 justified black's play. ("The Classical King's Indian")
I really love this game too, although I am more thrilled by Huebner - Kasparov, OHRA 1986. Like others, I wonder how much of this game was preperation. I've only seen Nikitin's Informator notes (48/819) and not Garry's, verbal, comments.
|Mar-25-11|| ||Lennonfan: <simonwebbstiger> il check out the huebner Kasparov game you refered to,im not familiar with it...but i think this game comes after the topalov 99 and karpov 85 (game 16 or 17 i think?),but is surely to be ranked up there,after all his most famous of games..
And even though piket had been winning game after game in this variation,you'd have thought he'd of known playing "arguably" the greatest ever player with over a 100 point rating gap,he'd have known Kasparov was far from likely to follow the path of his previous opponents in this variation?
There's actually 2 pikets in this database also!|
|Mar-25-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @lennonfan
The story gives an example of an important theoretical novelty from Kasparov. In 1988-89 some people were being put off a bit by Piket's wins in this line. I suppose one could argue that Jeroen was playing what he knew worked but was under no illusions of a forthcoming improvement. (As an aside, I guess the moral is also to avoid playing the same lines all the time or following something which seems to give an advantage in variations a to z as you never know if there is an improvement, the latter point once made by Bronstein.)
The game I mentioned is
Huebner vs Kasparov, 1986
(a link would be easy!)
|Mar-25-11|| ||BobCrisp: <Like others, I wonder how much of this game was preperation.>|
About 95% I would say and by that measure alone I don't agree it can be considered one of <Kasparov>'s best game. The same goes for Kasparov vs Anand, 1995 and Kasparov vs Anand, 1991.
<And even though piket had been winning game after game in this variation,you'd have thought he'd of known playing "arguably" the greatest ever player with over a 100 point rating gap,he'd have known Kasparov was far from likely to follow the path of his previous opponents in this variation?>
Well, this was played before computer DBs became de rigueur, when even the top players had narrower repertoires but, nonetheless, against <Kasparov>'s preparation, the expression that comes to mind is <You can run, but you can't hide!>
There's also an instinctive curiosity about top chessplayers that can override competitive considerations. <Piket> was probably masochistically pleased to discover what was wrong with his pet variation.
|Mar-25-11|| ||ughaibu: An Englishman: not only Kasparov: Keene vs Stein, 1967|
|Mar-25-11|| ||Lennonfan: <bobcrisp>...the Kasparov anand 95 game you've given a link to,is the same game where he offers the knight to blacks queen is it not?? Maybe a lot of that was home prep but that particular game i think is brilliant...|
|Mar-25-11|| ||BobCrisp: <the Kasparov anand 95 game you've given a link to,is the same game where he offers the knight to blacks queen is it not??>|
What, you can't look yourself?
|Mar-25-11|| ||Lennonfan: Busy!|
|Mar-25-11|| ||BobCrisp: Whereas clearly I've got nothing better to do.... Ballcocks!|
|Mar-25-11|| ||Lennonfan: Then dont answer my question or put any links up....il survive!....carry on with your buisness,i didnt ask you to comment....have a nice stressless day..all the best,good luck with your chess..|
|Mar-25-11|| ||Lennonfan: I looked myself now i have time,no worries mate,not the game i was thinking of....still a good game nonetheless|
|Mar-25-11|| ||Lennonfan: <bobcrisp>...in fact when you got time check it out for me plz old pal...
(P.S...What ARE ballcocks??)|
|Jul-14-11|| ||DrMAL: 15.cxd6 is not the best, if nothing else it loses time. One better plan (among several) is simply 15.Nd3 aiming for Nc4. Anyone know of a top level game where this was played? 21.hxg3 was better than 21.Nxa8 but after 24...Qxa8 several moves (e.g., 25.b5) keep white in the game. Piket simply collapsed.|
|Jul-15-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @DrMal
they've been playing 15. cxd6 for decades -- it's well established theory.
13. b4 is probably not the acid test of this variation. 13. a4 with the idea of a5 and Nc3-b5-a7 has surplanted the Piket line.
|Jul-15-11|| ||DrMAL: <SimonWebbsTiger> Yes I know 15.cxd6 is part of theory. I also saw your post above on how 17...Bf8 was meant to be an improvement on 17...h5 and found it interesting. 13.b4 and 15.cxd6 are both certainly well playable but I still think the latter is less promising than moves like 15.Nd3 cheers.|
|Jan-13-15|| ||Conrad93: The Ng3 sac is actually quite common in the KID, but Kasparov is definitely the innovator.|
|Jan-13-15|| ||Conrad93: Compare this game to Larsen vs Tal, 1969.|
|Jun-01-15|| ||SpiritedReposte: What a winning move!|
|Nov-10-16|| ||bobfenris: Oh my god!,Garry is like count Dracula !|
|Apr-16-17|| ||hudapri: A knight in the corner is not a mourner|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·