< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|May-23-14|| ||Legend: In the book "Paul Keres, Photographs and Games" (1995), which collects all OTB games Keres ever played, this game is a Draw.|
|May-23-14|| ||WCC Editing Project: Thanks <Legend> for further information!|
Personally I doubt <Tal> would misremember this game, since according to both him and his games collector <Hilary Thomas>, it was this win that helped put <Daugava> into first place, and thus the Final Round: http://www.olimpbase.org/1964sc/196...
But in fact, Daugava finished 2d and Kalev 3d, meaning that Daugava went on to the final round and Kalev didn't.
Finally, <Thomas> even gives the "Adjudicated analysis line" that the judges used to demonstrate that white had what amounted to a forced win.
<Thomas> doesn't say who the Adjudicators were, or why the game had to be adjudicated, but he does give the "Adjudicated line."
These Club/Republic team championships were normally so tightly scheduled that there was no breaks from start to finish of the events. One round a day, no day or days available to play adjournments.
That's probably why the game was adjudicated- no time left in the day to finish, no extra day to play out an adjournment- it might be a reason why <Keres> may have accepted the Adjudication instead of complained about it, although <Thomas> doesn't say anything about that.
|May-23-14|| ||whiteshark: Source 3
CD <Mikhail Tal - 8th World Champion>* by Alexander Khalifman et al
gives also <1-0>
* 'The most complete collection of Tal's games ever compiled....' http://www.chessdirect.co.uk/acatal...
|May-23-14|| ||whiteshark: Here are some lines starting from the final position, as given by Houdini 4, depth = 28 ply:|
1) 42...Lg7 43.Tc1 Tb8 44.Df1 Kh7 45.Sc6 Ta8 46.Sa7 Tb8 47.Sxb5 Dxb5 48.Dxb5 Txb5 49.Txc7 Txb4 50.Txf7 Kg8 51.Td7 Lf8 52.Kf3 Tb2 53.Ta7 Tc2 54.Tb7 Ta2 55.Lc1 Tc2 56.Lg5 Ta2 57.Le3 Lg7 58.Tc7 Lf8 59.Tc6 Ta3 60.Tc7 Tb3 61.Ke2 Tb4 62.Kd3 Ta4 63.Ld2 Td4+ 64.Ke3 Ta4 65.Kf3 Ta3+ 66.Ke2 Ta2 67.Kd3 Ta3+ [+1.64]
2) 42...Tf8 43.Tc1 Tb8 44.Sc6 Te8 45.Sa7 Tb8 46.Df3 Kg7 47.Tc6 Da4 48.Sxb5 Dxb5 49.Txc7 Tf8 50.Tc6 Ld8 51.Txd6 Dxb4 52.Tc6 Te8 53.Lc5 Db5 54.De3 Db1 55.Ld6 Dd1 56.Df3 Dxf3+ 57.Kxf3 f6 58.Lc5 Kf7 59.Td6 g5 60.hxg5 fxg5 61.Th6 [+2.38]
3) 42...Kh7 43.Tc1 Tb8 44.Sc6 Te8 45.Sa7 Tb8 46.Df3 Kg7 47.Tc6 Da4 48.Sxb5 Dxb5 49.Txc7 Tf8 50.Tc6 Ld8 51.Txd6 Dxb4 52.Tc6 Te8 53.Lc5 Db5 54.De3 Db1 55.Ld6 Dd1 56.Df3 Dxf3+ 57.Kxf3 f6 58.Lc5 Kf7 59.Td6 g5 60.hxg5 fxg5 61.Th6 [+2.38]
4) 42...Tc8 43.Df1 Te8 44.Sc6 Db7 45.Ta5 Sd4 46.Ta7 Db6 47.Dd1 Kh7 48.Da4 Tc8 49.Da5 Kg7 50.Lxd4 exd4 51.Kf3 Kf8 52.Dxb6 cxb6 53.Ke2 Lg7 54.Kd3 f5 55.exf5 gxf5 56.Td7 Ta8 57.Sxd4 Ta3+ 58.Kc4 Lxd4 59.Kxd4 Tf3 60.Txd6 Txf2 61.Txb6 Ke7 62.Ke5 Te2+ 63.Kxf5 Td2 64.Ke5 Te2+ 65.Kd4 Td2+ 66.Kc5 Tc2+ 67.Kb5 Tc3 68.Tg6 Kd7 69.Kb6 Td3 70.d6 Tc3 71.b5 Tb3 72.Kc5 Tc3+ [+2.80]
|May-23-14|| ||WCC Editing Project: Thanks <whiteshark>, that will be valuable additional supporting data if the correction slip I sent is refused.|
I think the preponderance of data suggests the score should be <1-0>.
As mentioned in my previous post, it was the fact that <Hilary Thomas> actually supplied the "Adjudication line," supposedly demonstrating a winning or won game for white, that convinced me that <Tal> is remembering this game result accurately.
Here is Adjudication line reported by <Thomas>:
42...Kh7 43.Qf1 Kg7 44.Nc6 Qb7 45.Ra5 Nd4 46.Qa6 Qxa6 47.Rxa6 Nxc6 48.dc Rb8 49.Ra7 Rxb4 50.Rxc7 Rxe4 51.Rc8 Rc4 52.c7 Rc6 53.Ba7 d5 54.Bb8 <1-0>
|May-23-14|| ||WCC Editing Project: |
I should make it crystal clear that this line was not composed by <Thomas>- he is reporting the actual line given by the actual adjudicators used to justify awarding <Tal> the point in this game.
|May-26-14|| ||WCC Editing Project: |
Two more pieces of evidence that <Tal> won this game:
Rusbase download: http://al20102007.narod.ru/team_ch/...
[Event "Ch URS (team) (1/2 final)"]
[Site "Tallinn (Estonia)"]
[White "Tal Mihail (LAT)"]
[Black "Keres Paul (EST)"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3
d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Nd7 10.d4 Bf6 11.a4 Bb7 12.axb5 axb5 13.Rxa8
Qxa8 14.d5 Na5 15.Bc2 Rb8 16.Na3 Ba6 17.b4 Nc4 18.Nxc4 bxc4 19.Ba4
Nb6 20.Bc6 Bb7 21.Bxb7 Qxb7 22.Be3 Ra8 23.Qe2 Qa6 24.Nd2 Na4
25.Nxc4 Nxc3 26.Qd3 Nb5 27.Na5 h6 28.Rc1 Rb8 29.Nc6 Ra8 30.Na5
Rb8 31.Qe2 Bd8 32.g3 Bf6 33.h4 Kh7 34.Kg2 Kg8 35.Qd3 Kf8 36.Qf1
Kg8 37.Qe2 Bd8 38.Qd3 Bf6 39.Qf1 h5 40.Ra1 Re8 41.Qc4 g6 42.Qe2 1-0
Olimpbase download: http://www.olimpbase.org/1964sc/196...
[Event "4th Soviet Team Cup - prel"]
[Site "Tallinn URS"]
[White "Tals, Mihails"]
[Black "Keres, Paul"]
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 d6 8.c3 O-O
9.h3 Nd7 10.d4 Bf6 11.a4 Bb7 12.axb5 axb5 13.Rxa8 Qxa8 14.d5 Na5 15.Bc2
Rb8 16.Na3 Ba6 17.b4 Nc4 18.Nxc4 bxc4 19.Ba4 Nb6 20.Bc6 Bb7 21.Bxb7 Qxb7
22.Be3 Ra8 23.Qe2 Qa6 24.Nd2 Na4 25.Nxc4 Nxc3 26.Qd3 Nb5 27.Na5 h6 28.Rc1
Rb8 29.Nc6 Ra8 30.Na5 Rb8 31.Qe2 Bd8 32.g3 Bf6 33.h4 Kh7 34.Kg2 Kg8 35.Qd3
Kf8 36.Qf1 Kg8 37.Qe2 Bd8 38.Qd3 Bf6 39.Qf1 h5 40.Ra1 Re8 41.Qc4 g6 42.Qe2
|Oct-31-14|| ||Zonszein: Tal won this game.
He speaks about it in his book Life and Games of Mikhail Tal (page 246)
It's true that Tal had negative score against Keres but it needs to be taken into consideration that he lost twice in Curaçao when he was very very ill.
And anyway by 1962 Keres was the best player in the world. Petrosian won the Candidates because they were cheating!!
|Oct-31-14|| ||Petrosianic: If we throw those two games out, he still has a losing score against Keres.|
And if we throw those two out, we should really also throw out the two Tal won in 1973 when Keres was near the end of his career, and Tal was still near his prime.
|Oct-31-14|| ||RookFile: Tal seemed to like that a4 move in the Ruy Lopez. It gives black problems to solve.|
|Oct-31-14|| ||Zonszein: He was very good indeed at making moves that created problems for his opponents!
Only Sapssky and Korchnoi were very good at sorting them out
|Oct-31-14|| ||Petrosianic: Well, Sapssky (?) only scored 52% against Tal, so he wasn't as good at sorting them as Viktor Lvovich was.|
|Oct-31-14|| ||Zonszein: True. There was a Spassky before and after 1970.
I was referring to the "before" one
|Oct-31-14|| ||Petrosianic: Yeah, I see what you mean. Looking at their record, Spassky was 0-5 against Tal after 1970, with a lot of draws.|
Actually, it looks like Spassky's last EVER win against Tal was in their Candidates Match, which is kind of mind-boggling. I had no idea.
|Oct-31-14|| ||Zonszein: Exactly!
It's really amazing.
The last time Spassky beat Tal (in oficial games at least) it was in......1965!!!!
|Oct-31-14|| ||Strelets: Between the judges' adjudication line and Tal's as-yet-unequaled chess autobiography (he held Keres in extremely high regard as a chess player and as a person, something he makes readily apparent in "Life and Games . . .") it's probably safe to call this a win for White.|
|Oct-31-14|| ||Lt.Surena: Zonszein, You are clueless.
Petrosian did not lose a single game on his way to win the World Championship match with Botvinnik. No World Champ can claim that.
He crushed Bobby in Curaçao. *Well so did a lot of other guys. Bobby was the punching bag. Bobby lost freaking 7
games. I bet you didn't know that.
Petrosian went on win the World championship again in 1966. Only the Best of the best of any sport or game can defend their title successfully. Bobby couldn't do it neither could Tal, Smyslov, Spassky, Capablanca ..
|Oct-31-14|| ||Joshka: Is Black's c7 pawn poison? Cause sure seems like Tal could have won a pawn for several different moves starting with 29. Rc7?! Black's Knight is pinned to his queen and can't recapture.|
|Oct-31-14|| ||shivasuri4: <Joshka>, 29.Rc7 loses to ...Nxc7, when the knight defends the queen.|
|Nov-01-14|| ||Zonszein: As Fischer pointed out long ago, these people (Petrosian, Keres and Geller) made draws between them in often less than 20 moves whereas he was faced to well prepared opponents etc etc..
Even Spassky once said that if he had qualified to the tournament in Curaçao then Keres would have become champion in 1963
Petrosian didn't loose. But how could he if Keres and Geller didn't even try to beat him?|
|Nov-01-14|| ||Zonszein: On pure chess level, Fischer should have been the only foreigner in Curaçao. Stein and Spassky should have been there (instead of Benko and Filip)
Perhaps Fischer would have been last!
|Dec-04-14|| ||Petrosianic: <Zonszein>: <As Fischer pointed out long ago, these people (Petrosian, Keres and Geller) made draws between them in often less than 20 moves whereas he was faced to well prepared opponents etc etc..>|
It was a fairly typical tournament, yes. The top players drew with each other and beat up on the weakies. What made this tournament remarkable is that Fischer was one of the weakies.
Of course, Fischer didn't claim it was the draws that beat him, he claimed it was Korchnoi throwing games to the others that did it. Even Fischer seems to have quietly abandoned that claim shortly after he made it. At least Korchnoi said that he and Fischer had good relations afterwards until Korchnoi dared to play for the world title.
<Petrosian didn't loose. But how could he if Keres and Geller didn't even try to beat him?>
Odd that Keres and Geller both managed to lose.
<On pure chess level, Fischer should have been the only foreigner in Curaçao. Stein and Spassky should have been there (instead of Benko and Filip)>
Stein, definitely (he actually qualified). But why Spassky, and not Smyslov? Spassky was at a rather low point in his career until 1964.
|Dec-25-14|| ||Zonszein: In his book Chess Is My Life Korchnoi claims that at the time the Russian press (whatever that meant ...)published and "antisemitic" article called "Spassky should play in Curaçao (or was it Stocholm?)
"Based on what? Don't know
(It was, it seems, an article against Stein)
Spassky had a mediocre year indeed. But remember his famous victories in the King Gambit against both Bronstein and Fischer.
And BTW, Fischer played the Interzonal in 1970 without participating in the USA championships. So, why not Spassky in 1962? LOL
|Jul-11-15|| ||jerseybob: Zonszein: In the Interzonal days, each zone(U.S.,Soviet, etc) could decide whom to send, that decision wasn't imposed from on high by FIDE. Fischer's participation in '70 was irregular, for sure, based on Benko relinquishing his seat.|
|Jul-11-15|| ||ughaibu: "by 1962 Keres was the best player in the world. Petrosian won the Candidates because they were cheating" |
Sadly, it seems to be a serious post. But if it were true that "they" were cheating, then the considerations that apply to Petrosian would apply to Keres, as he was one of "them". So, either Petrosian still was above Keres, or Keres wasn't involved in the cheating.
Botvinnik stated that Geller was the world's strongest player, no need to go into when he said it because we can assume that the reason he said it was his personal negative score against Geller. But Geller also came below Petrosian at Curacao, so Petrosian must have been cheating alone.
I suppose he could have been cheating with Fischer, after all, how else can we explain Fischer's loss to him? Not to mention their short draws and agreeing draws in positions that were pretty much won for Petrosian.
And of course he was cheating, all those draws against Spassky in 1966, not winning a string of tournaments as champion and basically being too fat and a commie.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·