< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Oct-19-05|| ||Swindler: Nice comments from Nunn!|
|Nov-06-05|| ||who: <tpstar> Fritz thinks your line is only drawing. 27...Ra8 28.Ne7+ Kh8 29.Qxf7 Rxd3 30.Nf8 Qa2! and white needs to go for a perpetual.|
|Nov-06-05|| ||tpstar: <who> Honza gave that exact line and suggested 31. Qf5 - maybe that leads to the perpetual, but you might plug it in to make sure. Also, I wondered about 27 ... Rxd3!? 28. Qd3 Ra8 instead - maybe check that out too. =)|
|Nov-06-05|| ||who: 31.Qf5 g6 is also a draw.
32.Qf6+ Bg7 and then either knight saced at g6 leads to a draw. Anything else loses.
32.either Nxg6 also a draw. Everything else loses.
27...Rxd3 28.Qxd3 Re8 29.N5f6+ gxf6 30.Nxf6 Kf8 31.Qg3 Ke7 32.Nxe8 Kxe8 33.Qg8+ with an advantage to white.
|Nov-06-05|| ||tpstar: <who> OK thanks, but the original idea was 28 ... Ra8 to activate the Rook while avoiding the Knights. Does that change the second line's potential?|
|Nov-07-05|| ||who: o.k. sorry. I was posting right before I left for work, so I was a bit rushed. 27...Rxd3 28.Qxd3 Ra8 29.Ne7+ Kh8 30.Qd5 with white winning either the f7 or d6 pawn and black having only more troubles ahead (+2.78 Fritz).|
|Dec-15-05|| ||alexandrovm: <...I think few grandmasters would have been prepared to give up a whole exchange to cement control of d5.|
One of the main differences between a strong player and a truly great one is that the latter is able to go beyond what is generally known and accepted to discover new ideas and principles....> This is an incredible game!
|Dec-15-05|| ||AdrianP: GM Rowson discusses this game in some detail in either Chess for Zebras or 7 Deadly Chess Sins (I think probably the former).|
|Dec-15-05|| ||AdrianP: He makes the point, if I remember rightly, that when he showed the position before 17 Rxb7 to a bunch of club players, quite a few of them thought about taking on b7 but none of them saw the follow up 18 b4! emphasising the uselessness of Black's pieces and the *quality* in White's position.|
Also, the same bunch of club players allowed without passing comment Rowson to (deliberately misleadingly) comment on Shirov's 18... Bg5!? by saying "in order to prevent 19 Ne3 to c4". The point is that 19 Na3 is exactly the same manouevre, but is not so readily seen.
|Feb-02-06|| ||Jarlaxle: beautiful game.. has gotd written all over it|
|Apr-06-06|| ||InspiredByMorphy: I dont believe that 17.Rxb7 was sound. If black can mobilize its knight and keep the queen in the center for defense, it seems unlikely white can achieve a positional advantage. For example, 22. ...Ra7 23.Nc3 Qd7 (creating an outlet for the knight) 24.Nb6 Qc6 25.Ncd5 Qc1 and although the knights are well posted, they dont threaten anything. Furthermore, the exchange of queens is imminent. Or 22. ...Ra7 23.O-O Qd7 and white does not appear to have not achieved positional compensation. 22. ...Ra7 23.O-O Qd7 24.Ncb6 Qe6 25.Bc4 but theres still no threat as black answers with 25. ...Nd8 . White took a gamble and won.|
|Apr-06-06|| ||tpstar: <InspiredByMorphy> Nice to see you again! =)|
Just to remind you about two newer options, first the ability to put FEN diagrams into your posts (if you want):
click for larger view
The second is the chessforum section Recent Chessforum Activity where you can open your own page for your own personal use (if you want).
Nunn seems to think more highly about this game than you do. :) Perhaps Kasparov was just ahead of his time here, since some recent Sveshnikov games feature an exchange sacrifice by White leading to the superior endgame.
|Apr-08-06|| ||InspiredByMorphy: <tpstar> Thanks. Good to be back.|
|Sep-27-06|| ||aazqua: What a tremendous game. Kasparov seems to have a piece en prise for most of the game. Gives you a sense of how dominant he was for such a long time.|
|Mar-28-07|| ||whatthefat: This is a very imaginative game from Kasparov. Interestingly, Fritz 8 finds 17.Rxb7 with no difficulty at all, considering it the best move by just 11 ply.|
|Apr-06-07|| ||Fisheremon: Black missed 22...Ra2!?|
|Apr-06-07|| ||Atking: As every body praised Kasparov's play <Fisheremon> almost laconicaly notes <Black missed 22...Ra2!?> which I'm quite agree.|
|Dec-09-07|| ||scholes: Nice comments from Nunn!|
|Jan-18-08|| ||littlefermat: I was reading about this game today in Nunn's "Understanding Chess Move by Move." Kasparov's 17.Rxb7 was a great move and very instructive as well.|
A similar game, where white strangles black with well-placed knights at d5 and b6 can be found here:
Karpov vs Nunn, 1982
|Jul-06-10|| ||Fanques Fair: What does White do if Black plays 32- ..., Ne6! ?
If 33-Nf6+,gxf6 , 34-Qxh6,Ke7, 35- Bd5?!,Nd4 !
And if 33- Qh8+, Nf8, 34- Nf6+, gxf6, 35-Qxh6,Ke7, 36-Qh7-Ne6 and the bishop at c4 is attacked...
|Apr-01-11|| ||BobCrisp: <Very daring>, <very imaginative>, say the posters. Yes, and <very well-prepared>. The chances that <Kasparov> found <17.Rxb7> OTB are zero. This is not, of course, to say that the novelty was anything close to winning but the psychological effect alone would be enormous.|
<Garik> later pointed out that 27.Bb5! (instead of Nd7) is very strong
|Apr-03-11|| ||qqdos: 3 books on the Sveshnikov praise this game and I agree with Bob Crisp (and Nunn!) that 17.Rxb7 was a fantastic and amazing sacrifice but chiefly psychological. The 3 authors are Dorian Rogozenko; John Cox and Yuri Yakovich. The latter comments (p.94) that Shirov's "16....Nc5?! allowed Kasparov to create a masterpiece". I would like to suggest that like Fischer-v-Geller, 1967 it may be a flawed, make that slightly flawed, masterpiece (but a wonderful game all the same) because of Kasparov's failure to find 27.Bb5! His 27.Nd7?? should have allowed Shirov to equalise with 27....Ra8. Instead Shirov blundered in turn with 27...Nd8?? and allowed GK to pounce. Final point GK was helped by Shirov's 25....Rd2? a rather feeble attempt to harry Kasparov's Queen which did not cause her a moment's concern! Black needed to move his Queen (25....Qe8) away from White's threatened fork on d7, which Kasparov couldn't resist on move 27.|
|Mar-23-12|| ||tivrfoa: heyyy. why this was not gotd already? are you waiting his birthday?? xD|
|Nov-24-12|| ||Llawdogg: 17 Rxb7!!|
|Nov-24-12|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: Will not come as a surprise that this game was voted best game in Informator 62 with 74/90 points. |
GK's notes appeared in 61/178.
Looking back at the older comments, <Honza Cervenka> mentions 27...Ra8! but not Kasparov's intended follow up: 28. N7b6 which Garry analyses to a small advantage for white after his typically involved lines. 27. Bb5! was stronger as noted by Kasparov et al whilst 27...Nd8? was the losing move from Shirov.
With regard to the exchange sac itself (17. Rb7!!). Apart from the lovely quote of Nunn, I would urge reading the section "the Positional Exchange Scarifice" in <Petrosian's Legacy>, a posthumous book published by Editions Erebouni 1990, which collected lectures given by the Iron Tiger.
Petrosian remarks that the hardest thing about an exchange sac is the psychological aspect. You have to tear away that chain which binds you to the material values we learnt as beginners and look at the actual forces and positional factors.
btw, I never realised until I saw Garry talking about his career and from the introduction to the Legacy book just how much he revered Petrosian.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·