< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-24-06|| ||Father Merrin 1: The simple fact is Short was a weak challenger - possibly the weakest ever - and didn't deserve the shot at the title in the first place. He was just an average GM level player who happened to get to the final match when other superGMs hit poor form and age caught up with them.|
|Dec-25-06|| ||plang: Of course he deserved a shot at the title. He defeated Gelfand, Karpov and Timman consecutively to earn the right. Who could you possibly suggest as an alternative? As for Karpovs age he went on to win Linares the next year in his greatest tournament performance.|
|Mar-15-07|| ||piroflip: "didn't deserve the shot"!!!!!!!!!!
give me a break, if Nigel won his qualifying matches and reached the final that's good enough to play the W/C in anyone's book.
"average GM" ,,,,Nigel was ranked number 4 in the world for a while. Hardly average.
|Aug-18-07|| ||MUG: <Minor: Kaspy offered Short a draw when he had 15 minutes left on the clock and Short had only 10. Short declined for some reason and they ran into severe time trouble in this game.>|
"Here <move 38> Kasparov offered me a draw but I felt I was a pawn up for nothing, so I said nothing. I just made my move in response. If only I had a few more seconds left to think." - Short
|Apr-13-08|| ||seeminor: "Father Merrin 1: The simple fact is Short was a weak challenger - possibly the weakest ever - and didn't deserve the shot at the title in the first place. He was just an average GM level player who happened to get to the final match when other superGMs hit poor form and age caught up with them."|
Kramnik became champion even though he lost to Shirov in the match to decide the challenger, i think he is the least deserving for a shot at the title. Short played who he was paired with, their form was their problem not his. To beat Karpov in the candidates was a great success, only kasparov had managed to beat him in a series of games up to that point.
|Aug-10-08|| ||eisenherz: Its a pity to see, how Short could so amazingly defeat Karpov and fall so easily to Kasparov. |
His performance against Karpov was world-champion like. Thanks for that magical games, Short !
|Dec-17-08|| ||Nf6: I was at this game, see link below
|Jun-29-09|| ||Knight13: 22...b3 was better. ...h6 seems like a waste of move!|
|Sep-27-09|| ||djbl: knight13...you say 22...b3 is better than ...h6, you are very wrong, this would certainly be losing for black. white can simply take the pawn cxb3 and black can't retake ...Rxb3 due to Qe8+ etc. following cxb3 white simply reinforces the pawn and builds a solid barrier on the queen side.|
|Sep-27-09|| ||djbl: in fact 22...h6 is essential due also to Bxb4.|
|Aug-21-10|| ||echever7: I was in Russia at that time, and remember having read an interview with Karpov that was playing Timman in a paralel match. Karpov was asked his opinion about that Kasparov-Short match. His answer was (I remember hat answer literally, but my English is not very good): "According to how the Englishman was playing black, he's in catasthrophically bad shape. Besides in chess understanding he lags far behind Kasparov. Only in tactical game they seem to be equal". At the moment of that interview Kasparov and Short were playing something about the 12-th game in their match ( Their 'private' match called it Karpov)|
|Aug-21-10|| ||Jim Bartle: Karpov was certainly well positioned to evaluate both Kasparov and Short, having played matches to both in the past three years. Both close, but both losses.|
|Aug-21-10|| ||HeMateMe: Was this game a time forfeit?|
|Aug-21-10|| ||Jim Bartle: Yes, it was.|
|Oct-30-10|| ||Ulhumbrus: The move 13 Nf1?! invites 13...Bxc4 14 dxc4 Qe6 15 b3 Nd7 16 Be3 ( else 15...Nc5) 15...Nc5 ( anyway) 16 Bxc5 dxc5 17 Qd5 Rfd1 18 Qxe6 fxe6 followed by ...Bd6 or ...Bf6 and then ...Nd4 with equality at least for Black|
|Nov-12-10|| ||Knight13: <djbl> Thank you for the explanation.|
|Nov-14-10|| ||Tigranny: Didn't Short lose on time?|
|Nov-14-10|| ||TheChessGuy: Yes, that's correct.|
|Dec-05-10|| ||Tigranny: Thanks TheChessGuy.|
|Mar-21-11|| ||shalgo: <"average GM" ,,,,Nigel was ranked number 4 in the world for a while. Hardly average.>|
I agree, and he was actually even better than that: he reached number three in the world in the July 1988 rating list (behind Kasparov and Karpov) and remained number three throughout 1989. His rating slipped in 1990, but by January 1992 he was back to number 4. I suppose you could argue that by the time of the match in 1993, Short was already past his peak.
Incidentally, it shows the impressive longevity of some of today's top players when you look at the names at the top of the rating lists back then. For example, in July 1993, the top ten included Anand, Kramnik, Ivanchuk, Shirov, Topalov, and Gelfand.
|Mar-21-11|| ||zev22407: Short had a winning position in 2 games but failed to produce the win, he also refused to a a few draws .|
|Aug-06-11|| ||ToTheDeath: 32.g4!? was a very good move from a competitive standpoint, seizing the initiative in Short's time trouble. 36.Re7! wins for White.|
|Dec-16-12|| ||leka: Kasparov offered a draw in this game.Short said no for draw.Kasparov missed a win many times a final mistake was 36.bishop g7???? my 32mgz computer moves 36.rook e7!!!!! after 7 minutes tought.Kasparov played badly against Short in 1993.Also Kasparov should had lost to Anand WC match.Kasparov played against deep blue computer so badly.1.d3??? and played black 1.e4 c6 2.d4 d6???? kasparov played knight h7??? against deep blue|
|Mar-21-13|| ||humeanbeing: Short more than deserved his shot. Dominic Lawson's book The Inner Game is a superb account of his encounter with Gazza. I think it was game 16 that was one square away from being a masterpiece by Short. Will check...|
|Mar-21-13|| ||IndigoViolet: Short's almost-masterpieces were games 8 and 10.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·