< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Mar-13-07|| ||Brown: <All> Well, perhap Radjavov has nothing to fear re: the Bayonet Attack in the KID, but he and Smirin are perhaps the only ones... |
Kramnik vs Smirin, 2002
This is rapid, so perhaps I'm overstating...
|Mar-14-07|| ||notyetagm: <Brown: <All> Well, perhap Radjavov has nothing to fear re: the Bayonet Attack in the KID, but he and Smirin are perhaps the only ones...
Kramnik vs Smirin, 2002
This is rapid, so perhaps I'm overstating...>
That was my point exactly. But at the time of the 2000 Kramnik-Kasparov match, the KID was under a cloud because of the Bayonet Attack. That is no longer the case.
No one talked about avoiding the Black preparation in the Bayonet Attack back in 1999 and 2000, did they? White players just played the Bayonet and scored 60+% with it.
Anyone who denies that this was a considerable factor in Kasparov's defeat clearly has no idea what he is talking about.
|Mar-16-07|| ||Brown: <Anyone who denies that this was a considerable factor in Kasparov's defeat clearly has no idea what he is talking about.>|
I agree it was a factor, but perhaps not as considerable as some others. He's lost as many as three games as black in previous matches. More striking is his inability to win any games as white.
Further, Kasparov's 2nd loss in '00 is one of the most mysterious and embarassing events of his career, playing right into a theoretically lost position straight from the opening. I see your point about the KID and Grunfeld, but the nature of his second loss IMO is the most telling indicator of his mental state, preparation, and general willingness to fight on the board.
re: the Bayonet Attack. The Petrosian System also seemed to put the KID out of commission for a little bit. Gligoric, Geller and others started to make some progress for the black side and things changed.
|Mar-16-07|| ||KamikazeAttack: The KID will soon be back in the slammer where it belongs when GMs have seen the work Radja has done. Give another 12 months.|
It will be struggling again.
Since Kasaprov never planned to use the KID in the match and he didn't prepare it, I fail to see what it had to do with his loss.
|Mar-16-07|| ||notyetagm: <KamikazeAttack: ... Since Kasaprov never planned to use the KID in the match and he didn't prepare it, I fail to see what it had to do with his loss.>|
You missed the whole point. Kasparov did -not- prepare the KID for his 2000 match although he was a lifelong KID player precisely for the reasons that I have explained above.
Had the Bayonet Attack not put the KID out of commision back then, I am almost certain that Kasparov would have tried it. The Petrosian system does not keep KID players up all night searching for solutions.
|Mar-16-07|| ||KamikazeAttack: Kasparov was not a lifelong KID player. He was more of a Grunfeld player and that's what he used and got clobbered with. To say he losr cos he couldn't use one opening is just porous.|
|Mar-16-07|| ||Brown: Kasparov's played nearly everything as black against d4. Look at his early games with Karpov. Lots of QGD Tarrasch, some semi-slavs, even a QID. He didn't break out the KID and Grunfeld until later matches. He played the Grunfeld 9 times against Karpov in '86, losing 3 and drawing 6. Kasparov played his first KIDs against Karpov in '87.|
Kramnik and Karpov have ideal skill sets against Grunfelds and KIDs, not saying they're not supceptible to getting blown up now and then.
|Mar-16-07|| ||Brown: <Game Collection: How to play against the Bayonet Attack.;|
I'm sure Garry pulled together a similar list when he was playing. The Bayonet Attack apparently didn't put the KID out of commission.
<Had the Bayonet Attack not put the KID out of commision back then, I am almost certain that Kasparov would have tried it. The Petrosian system does not keep KID players up all night searching for solutions.>
Like I said, things like this come and go. The Bayonet Attack is the Petrosian System of the '90s. It simply takes someone like Gligoric and Radjabov to defend the black side.
|Mar-16-07|| ||keypusher: <The Petrosian system does not keep KID players up all night searching for solutions.>|
In the late 1950s lots of smart chessplayers thought/feared/hoped that the Petrosian Attack had put the KID out of commission forever. See Tal's memoirs, in particular his annotations to this game (Tal vs Gligoric, 1959) or Kasparov's discussion of Petrosian's career in OMGP IV.
|Mar-16-07|| ||KamikazeAttack: Hopeful these facts should quash the KID/Bayonnet rubbish we've been lumbered with.|
|Mar-17-07|| ||notyetagm: <KamikazeAttack: Hopeful these facts should quash the KID/Bayonnet rubbish we've been lumbered with.>|
If you wish to continue to believe the nonsense that you believe, then that is fine with me. But nearly -all- of the top Black KID players (Kasparov, Shirov, Polgar) abandoned the KID in the late 90s because of the Bayonet Attack. If you do not believe me, then read what KID-specialist Joe Gallagher has to say about it in his KID books.
Why you wish to rewrite history is beyond me. If you merely wish to be stubborn, then we have found a field in which you may someday become the World Champion.
|Mar-17-07|| ||notyetagm: <Brown: Game Collection: How to play against the Bayonet Attack.;>|
No Black wins in your game collection prior to 2001, proving my point exatly. Your game collection shows exactly what Kasparov said about the Bayonet Attack is true, that White's game is too easy to play and that it is almost impossible to win with Black against it.
|Mar-17-07|| ||keypusher: <Kasparov's discussion of Petrosian's career in OMGP IV.> Oops, I mean OMGP III.|
|Mar-17-07|| ||notyetagm: <KamikazeAttack: Kasparov was not a lifelong KID player.>|
Huh? There are 159(!) Kasparov games in this database in which he plays the Black side of the KID (http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches...).
Does anything you say make sense?
|Mar-17-07|| ||notyetagm: Continuing my last post, the 159 Kasparov Black KID games span from 1975 when Kasparov was 12 until 1998, after which Kasparov just quit playing the KID entirely.|
If that is not a "lifelong" KID player, then I do not know what is.
|Mar-18-07|| ||Brown: <notyetagm> I agree with you that Kasparov felt he had better chances for an easier game on the black side of other defences besides the KID after '98, but this does not mean the KID was <out of commission> after that. Others have taken up what Kasparov put down. If anything, it shows a change in temperment and passion for certain openings. He used to play the Benoni, too, of course. He's played almost everything.|
As others have pointed out, systems come and go against the KID, but there has been no refutation.
Also, I pointed out that Kasparov played a bunch of openings in his youth, but he did not start making the KID and Grunfeld his own until the late 80's, meaning a time of 10 years. Still, I think it's silly to say that Kasparov's main black openings vs d4 were not the Indian openings, either Grunfeld or KID.
|Mar-18-07|| ||Brown: <<notyetagm> No Black wins in your game collection prior to 2001, proving my point exatly. Your game collection shows exactly what Kasparov said about the Bayonet Attack is true, that White's game is too easy to play and that it is almost impossible to win with Black against it.> |
All I can say to this is that Kasparov is not infallible, nor indefatigable, and he seems to have had no heart to research the opening as much as he used to, and not as much as Radjabov and Smirin are willing to do so now.
You put it well when you typed <...at the time of the 2000 Kramnik-Kasparov match, the KID was under a cloud because of the Bayonet Attack. <That is no longer the case.>> (last sentence is my emphasis)
|Oct-01-07|| ||notyetagm: The <BISHOP PAIR> together with a <PASSED PAWN> form a -lethal- combination. |
Want an easy way to win a game? Secure the <BISHOP PAIR>, create a <PASSED PAWN> (preferrably an <OUTSIDE PASSED PAWN>), and promote your passed pawn with the aid of your bishops.
I almost lost a game in one of my chess clubs last week to this exact same formula, without making any really obvious mistakes and maintaining material equality. My opponent simply had the <BISHOP PAIR> and a <QUEENSIDE PAWN MAJORITY> that he should have converted into an <OUTSIDE PASSED PAWN>, and that was enough to secure a winning position.
|Oct-27-07|| ||notyetagm: From <http://www.chesscafe.com/text/yaz20...;:|
Position after 53 ♗c4-d5:
click for larger view
<A complete strategic triumph. Every White piece is superior
to its counterpart. Black is forced to part with his a-pawn.
53...Nd4 54.Rxa7 Rxa7 55.Qxa7 Ne7
The desperado, 55...Nxf3+ 56.gxf3 Qxf3 57.Qxf7! Nf4
58.Qf5+ Kh8 59.Qf8+ Kh7 60.Bg8+ and checkmate in short order.
56.Bc4 h5 57.Qc5 1-0
A fantastic victory by Kasparov and one of the most complete
and beautiful crushes that I've seen. Kramnik was simply outclassed this day.>
In this game Kasparov shows you his mastery of positional play. Combine this with his unsurpassed tactical vision and you begin to understand why he was the world's #1 rated player for 20(!) years.
|Dec-18-08|| ||Trojan Horse: Kasparov is a live wire!
This game is deeply analysed by Seirawan in http://chesscafe.com/text/yaz20.pdf
|Dec-11-10|| ||notyetagm: http://www.chesscafe.com/text/yaz20...|
|Mar-26-11|| ||Everett: Kasparov pulls a Karpov on Kramnik.|
|Nov-27-15|| ||kamagong24: yes! a great positional game by both players!
this should be GOTD
|Jan-13-16|| ||Joker2048: Kasparov is great..
This is beautifull game..
|Apr-12-16|| ||perfidious: Fine technical display by Kasparov, indeed reminiscent of his great rival Karpov.|
<Brown: I agree it was a factor, but perhaps not as considerable as some others. (Kasparov) lost as many as three games as black in previous matches. More striking is his inability to win any games as white.>
Then again, in several games as White during that ill-starred title match he scarcely played beyond the opening phase, if at all.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·