< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
|Mar-14-10|| ||newzild: Where do Fischer's notes come from?|
|May-04-10|| ||FinnPatzer: There is no option to "accepting" this Q for B sacrifice, as it's a simple mate in 2 if you don't. It's also not hard to see at move 18 that the very LEAST White can get from the sac. is a draw by perpetual check. In fact Black's game is lost after 17 moves (maybe earlier). We can only assume that Petrosian was needlessly worried about possibly throwing away a clearly won game through an ill-judged sacrificial attack.|
|May-07-10|| ||maxi: Problems in chess usually are defined by a first move, which snaps a trap or situation from which the Black King doesn't have a escape. (It is considered bad form if it is a check.) Thus by "problem move" Fischer meant the position resembled that of a chess problem, with Petrosian's move being a typical solution.|
|Jul-01-10|| ||fischer2009: 7.......0-0 is a serious positional mistake by black;pachman should have played d6 and then only castlih not allowing petrosian's 8.e5;after e5 black is both 2 cramped and now if he challenges the centre the game opens up to the better developed white's likingthe c8 bishop is not developed and the rooks are far away from being connected|
|Aug-16-10|| ||sevenseaman: Beautiful Bishop move! Petrosian can take you for a ride.|
|Oct-29-10|| ||Akavall: 19. Qxf6! is nice of course, but I really like 21. Bg7!!; it is a "quite" move that ends the game.|
|Nov-12-10|| ||Tigranny: Tigran always plays brilliant unexpected moves like the queen sacrifice and Bg7!!.|
|Nov-12-10|| ||Petrosianic: I don't kow about that. 1. Nf3 was fairly expectable.|
|Nov-14-10|| ||Tigranny: I don't mean Nf3 Petrosianic. I just meant moves to finish off the game.|
|Nov-27-10|| ||Xeroxx: Why did It Bled?|
|Feb-14-11|| ||kingscrusher: I have video annotated the key moment of this game:
|Mar-31-11|| ||Domdaniel: < Why did It Bled?>
'Sblood. Zounds. Because of the punk, sure. There's a fine old English word, raw-head-and-bloody-bones, which covers such haemophiliac leakages.
See also "bleeders", "bleeding out", "let it bleed", "what bloody man is that?", usw.|
Is *obviously* a "problemist's move", ie, one comparable to those found in composed problems. A puzzle (which may be taken from a real game) and a problem are different things.
If you're looking for Petrosianical tactics, check out the two games (one vs Spassky) where he temporarily sacs a Queen on h8.
|Apr-30-11|| ||kia0708: lovely comment from Fischr: <Now Petrosian is preparing for a very beautiful finish.>|
|May-02-11|| ||alligator: I just revisited this game as I plan to show it in my chess classes. Looking through the comments made me realize how Petrosian is still a mystery. |
Petrosian was excellent at calculating tactics, often winning world-class blitz tournaments. There is a whole book showcasing his tactical brilliance. If anyone is interested I will try to find the book info.
When playing other world class GM's Petrosian preferred safety first, since he hated losing and rarely did. One of his 'mentors' was Nimzovich, but Petrosian took "prophylaxis" to a new level. In many of his games it appears (to the uninitiated) that nothing is happening, because his plans are so subtle. Petrosian would often eliminate all counterplay before initiating an attack.
Fischer had great respect for Petrosian. Remember that Petrosian was the only player able to stop Fischer's amazing winning streak in the candidates cycle leading up to the 1972 world chamionship. Study Petrosian's games (ex in Clarke's book) and your chess understanding will reach a whole new level.
|May-02-11|| ||say it with a smile: Sadly none of the players (Petrosian, Fischer, Pachman, ..) are no longer with us. 60's was the golden age of chess.|
|May-02-11|| ||Everett: Every decade is the golden age of chess. It's all good!|
|Jul-30-11|| ||Mkhitar: Its interesting, as far as I know, Tal never had a chance to perform his stunning attacks on Petrosians King. The reason is not just because Petrosian was his friend:) And for Fisher also, ofcourse, Petrosian was more difficult opponent... Great respect to all these,indeed, GROSSMasyers!|
|Jul-31-11|| ||bronkenstein: <AFAIK Tal never had a chance to perform his stunning attacks on Petrosians King> check Tal vs Petrosian, 1974 .|
|Jul-31-11|| ||Mkhitar: O it was perfect, I haven't seen that game:)thanks bronkenstein.|
|Jan-07-12|| ||Penguincw: I would say 19.? would be a good maybe Thursday/Friday puzzle. |
click for larger view
|Apr-25-12|| ||Llawdogg: A very beautiful finish.|
|Apr-25-12|| ||LoveThatJoker: <Llawdogg> Most definitely agreed!|
|Aug-06-12|| ||backrank: I find it even more surprising than the spectacular finish how a player like Pachman could get into a positionally hopeless game only after a couple of moves, in a 'quiet' opening line! And it's not easy to spot Pachman's key error after which his game went downhill. 11 ... Nd4, however, looks kinda suspicious to me. 11 ... b6 seems more natural, although I would still prefer playing this position with the white pieces.|
|Aug-20-12|| ||LoveThatJoker: Guess-the-Move Final Score:
Petrosian vs Pachman, 1961.
YOU ARE PLAYING THE ROLE OF PETROSIAN.
Your score: 41 (par = 32)
|May-06-13|| ||pradeep1143: such games to me are more like symphonies which you enjoy listening or playing again and again|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·