|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Jul-09-09
 |
| WannaBe: Well, of course <whatthefat> is gonna pick an Aussie GM!! By the way, the picture of GM Ian Rogers is by your truly!! During the American Open, held in LA! =) |
 |
| Jul-09-09 |
| tommy boy: Rdc3; Qa6
What a moves!!! |
|
Jul-09-09
|
| WannaBe: Notice how black's light squared bishop did absolutely nothing?? |
|
Jul-09-09
 |
| whiteshark: What a joyless life  c8 had in this game... |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| ozmikey: <Kasparov to Seirawan, reported in Inside Chess: "You know this games is terrible! What is Black doing? Bishop on h7? Pawn on g6? Is this resistance? This game is a shame! How can this be brilliant?"> I remember that controversy very well, especially Seirawan's coverage of the whole thing in Inside Chess. Kasparov submitted THREE of his games for the brilliancy prize, including one positional crush which included no sacrifices at all, refused to step down from the judging committee, and then basically lectured everyone as to why to vote for his game. To contrast his behaviour with Ian's typically honourable conduct: Ian was originally supposed to be on the judging committee but withdrew in favour of Peter Parr (the Oz team captain) when it became clear that his game against Milos was a serious contender. |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| levelzx: Kasparov's causes are hard to judge. Whenever he votes for his games he might be called 'arrogant'. But his games are indeed delightful. Of course it wasn't Rogers' fault that his opponent played bad. But "it takes two to produce a beautiful game", as old proverb says. So in my opinion, Kasparov's choice to pick his game was fully justified. A quite similar situation occured in famous Kasparov vs Radjabov, 2003 game, which was selected by GM's as the best at Linares 2003. IT WAS NOT THAT GOOD though, but of course it had to be chosen, as Gazza lost a tournament game to huge underdog, which was a really rare upset. |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| ozmikey: <levelzx> The relative merits of the two games is not the point at issue, though: Kasparov's unabashed lobbying for his own game was what reflected so badly on him on this occasion. Funnily enough, the Kasparov-Radjabov game you mentioned brought Kasparov and Rogers together again, so to speak; Ian was one of the GMs who picked that game as the game of the tournament, and when an angry Kaspy confronted Rogers afterwards and asked him which game he'd voted for, Rogers admitted quite openly that he'd chosen the Radjabov game...upon which Kaspy berated him loudly and at length in full view (and hearing) of the assembled company! |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| levelzx: <ozmikey> You seem to have much more knowledge about these events than I do. Thanks for pointing out a hilarious reverse of events between Rogers and Kasparov. Now, I'm only curious if anybody knows what are those three Gazza's games he submitted to 'Best Of' contest. Right now it seems to me that Kaspy insulted the jury with this move, but I have to check his games to make any further statements. |
|
Jul-09-09
 |
| TheDestruktor: Called my attention.
I will take a closer look at the line starting with 25.Bd7, specially possible alternatives to 25...Qc7. If I find something interesting, I will post here later. |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| ricardolopez: I think after 15..e5, B lacks a theme of counterplaying. Was it possible 15...cxd and after that e5 opening c column and b1-h7 diagonal? |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| Notagm: Great play from White, but it's difficult to understand Black's 22nd and 23rd moves, deliberately shutting in his Bishop. |
|
Jul-09-09
|
| TheDestruktor: Well, it took less time than I expected to look at the final combination. My conclusion: after 27.Nd5, black is basically lost! Why? Because:
1) Black is a piece up, but the bishop in h7 is useless; 2) The two black rooks do not help on defense;
3) White attacks with queen, knight, AND TWO ROOKS, while black defends with queen and bishop. 4) Besides, the white rooks go to attacking squares gaining tempos over the black queen. So white is technically down in material, but has an overwhelming material advantage where it matters. Black's decisive mistake was 25...Qc7. A much better move was 25...Rb8, bringing the rook to reinforce the defense of the king, and gaining a tempo by forcing white to play 26.b3 (which, in turn, would make a future Rb3 impossible). Then, after 26...Qc7 27.Bh3 Rhf8, with the intention of ...f5, there would still be a game. |
|
Jul-09-09
 |
| kevin86: Why the pun:The Wizard of Oz? I don't get it. |
|
Jul-09-09
 |
| Gregor Samsa Mendel: Ian Rogers is from Australia. He's an "Ozzie" (Aussie). (Rim shot.) |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| nevski: How can a GM confine his bishop behind his own pawns!? |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| WhiteRook48: spectacular! |
|
Jul-09-09
 |
| FSR: I agree with <Jonathan Sarfati> and others: it was ridiculous for Kasparov to sit in judgment on his own games and those of the other contenders. It's mind-boggling that the game selection committee allowed this to happen, and that Kasparov would be so ethically bereft as to participate on the committee under these circumstances. |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| YetAnotherAmateur: I have to say, 22. ... Bh7? Why not trade the very bad bishop on g6 for the very good bishop on f5? I grant you, black's not in great shape by that point, but the very least you can do on the defensive is try to blunt your opponent's attack by simplifying the board when it's to your advantage. |
|
Jul-09-09
 |
| whatthefat: <WannaBe: Well, of course <whatthefat> is gonna pick an Aussie GM!!> I admit it, I succumbed to hopeless patriotism! |
|
Jul-10-09
 |
| keypusher: <nevski: How can a GM confine his bishop behind his own pawns!?> Well, presumably he didn't think it would stay there forever! No doubt he expected to play ...Bg8 and ...f6 at some point. It's too bad, though, the sight of that locked-in bishop does detract from the game (and reminds me of this legendary encounter). Kasparov vs Sting, 2000 |
|
| Jul-10-09 |
| ozmikey: <levelzx><Now, I'm only curious if anybody knows what are those three Gazza's games he submitted to 'Best Of' contest. Right now it seems to me that Kaspy insulted the jury with this move, but I have to check his games to make any further statements.> I'm pretty sure that one of them was Kasparov vs V A Loginov, 1992. Which is, admittedly, a fine game, but I'm not sure whether you'd call it a "brilliancy". That was the point that Anand made to Kasparov in the judges' meeting. |
|
| Jul-10-09 |
| Jim Bartle: Maybe another was Kasparov vs Ivanchuk, 1992. It was #7 in the Informant's Best Games from issue 55. |
|
| Jul-10-09 |
| ozmikey: <Jim Bartle> I think you're right, that was the other one. Again, a great game but...not what most people would describe as a brilliancy. |
|
Jul-11-09
 |
| Peligroso Patzer: One could hardly call Black's resignation premature, but <in the final position, 32. ... Rc8 is interesting to analyze>. (All other moves allow White to force mate quickly.) In the position after a hypothetical 32. ... Rc8, White's only winning move is <33.Nb6+>, and then: <[A]> 33. ... Qxb6 34.Rxb6 Rc7 35.bxc3 Rhc8 36.Rxd6  (White retains a huge positional advantage, and now has also an advantage in material.) or
<[B]> 33...Kb8 34.Nxc8+ Kc7 35.Qxa7+ Kd8 36.Rxc3 Qd7 37.Qb6+ Ke8 38.Nxd6+ Kf8 39.Rc7 Qe6 40.Rxf7+ Qxf7 41.Nxf7 Kxf7 42.Qf6+ <Kg8!>< (Black "threatens" stalemate!, e.g., 43.a4?? draw>) ... but White has mate in 4 with: 43.f4! exf4 44.e5 f3 45.e6 f2 46.Qf7#. |
|
Jul-11-09
|
| Peligroso Patzer: BTW, since the stalemate idea (with 42. ... Kg8! in variation [B], above) was obviously the deep idea behind Milos's 22. ... Bh7?! and 23. ... g6!?,< ;-) > it is surprising that he resigned rather than try 32. ... Rc8 and 33. ... Kb8, etc. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
