< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·
|Jul-06-07|| ||sanyas: This game is funny, but not what I'd call World Champion standard. Especially considering Spassky's play. White looks lost after 18 moves. Tal's suggestion would have improved te game immensely.|
|Jul-06-07|| ||Petrosianic: With 20/20 hindsight, maybe. At the time where you say White looks lost, Tal thought White had the advantage.|
|Jul-07-07|| ||sanyas: <Petrosianic> Well I'm certain he's lost after 22...b5. What can he do? He has no play, and can only wait for the hammer to fall. Petrosian finished him off with style and imagination, to be sure, but I wouldn't call this a positional brilliancy so much as a case of Spassky hanging himself.|
|Jul-07-07|| ||Petrosianic: This from Tigran Petrosian: His Life and Games:
Curiously, very few of the experts in the press-room were able to guess his moves, and they gave those moves extremely contradictory evaluations... Only one of Petrosian's moves occasioned a unanimous, if stormy, reaction; this was the 17th move, whereby, in combination with other moves, he closed the queen's side. Simagin, Kotov, Holmov, and Flohr immediately condemned the move, seeing in it only a desire of the World Champion to block the position and lead the game to a draw.
Even the far-sighted Tal did not immediately divine the champion's intentions. Tal was then waiting for a phone call, and sat in a corner away from the noisy group of grandmasters.
'Who is better?' I asked him. Casting a glance at the demonstration board and noticing Petrosian's latest move he declared:
This was how firmly rooted was the conviction that the champion would evade complications at any price! Even when Petrosian, fearing for the safety of his own king, added the final defensive touches to his position, before beginning a general advance, this was taken only as a striving for the quiet life.
The illusions were soon dispelled. A few moves later Black's pieces were making inroads on the king's wing. This was the triumph of Petrosian's strategy. Then he sacrificed the exchange and set all his pawns in motion in the centre and on the king's side. This was the triumph of his tactics.
|Sep-17-07|| ||dabearsrock1010: now added to Game Collection: Sac-ing the exchange for powerful pawns|
|Dec-31-07|| ||M.D. Wilson: Brilliant game to inspire a New Year!|
|Jan-04-08|| ||M.D. Wilson: Last year this game was great. It still is.|
|Jan-04-08|| ||Whitehat1963: Funny!|
|Feb-29-08|| ||Knight13: On the move 17. Bf5 followed by Bh3 Spassky pointed out, "But my bishop looks like a pawn on h3!" so he didn't do it.|
|Jun-17-08|| ||Zonszein: very nice, but all this seems an obvious answer to the agresive play from Spassky.|
Petrosian only did what he needed to "save" the game, which eventually actually won it
|Jun-29-08|| ||apexin: a stunning game from petrosjan.|
|Jun-29-08|| ||RookFile: <Zonszein: very nice, but all this seems an obvious answer to the agresive play from Spassky.|
Petrosian only did what he needed to "save" the game, which eventually actually won it >
I couldn't disagree with you more. The first finesse was that Petrosian was slow to castle kingside. Next, we have Petrosian leaving the rook on g4, to be taken by knight or bishop, upon demand. Nobody - nobody - had as skillful of a judgement of these types of exchange sacs as Petrosian.
It was not obvious, for example, that Spassky's counter-attack, with 26. e4 would not work. It's by far the best chance for counterplay.
Consider the story above, where you have, even Mikhail Tal, at some point, saying that Spassky is better.
No, my friend, this was not at all obvious.
|Sep-14-08|| ||PinnedPiece: .|
Guess the move
|Sep-14-08|| ||PinnedPiece: it appears that after any king move (e.g. 44.Kg1 or Kxg2 or Ke2) that|
is mate in 2 or 3, or the white queen is lost.
|Sep-14-08|| ||PinnedPiece: Be fun to see this:
as a puzzle some (Tues?)day to see the analysis of what would happen if the sac is not accepted.
|Jan-01-09|| ||YoGoSuN: Is White strategically lost after 22. b5?|
|Feb-09-09|| ||YoGoSuN: nvm the bumb question|
|Feb-12-09|| ||sillybilly47: Great game by the champ. Deserves much study. Petrosian had to be precise.|
|Feb-13-09|| ||laskereshevsky: I already know this Great game....
since i was a juvenile chess-student i studied several's Petrosian's games...
He's well know like a defensive player, a little "boring"... is same way this is true, but Tigran had had a very deep positional sense, even Botvinnik admited how much was difficoult to understand his mind working's way... and when he choiced to go for sacrifice, was dangerous and creative like Tal....( unfortunatly, he didnt very often goes to...)
By my side I always considered the armenian one of the best ever player..
Fischer and Kasparov too declared in several occasions how much they admired and respected this player
|Feb-13-09|| ||laskereshevsky: Another similar game..
Bogoljubov vs M Monticelli, 1930
OK,... they are not exactly the same
when i say similar im considering the strategical plane involving: Total control of the board by ...exchange sacrifice,.. keeping close the queen wing,... control of the centre,... king side pawns storm advance,... et voila!
|Feb-13-09|| ||M.D. Wilson: This game almost sums up the match.|
|Feb-13-09|| ||chess61: One of Petrosian's best games.|
|Feb-13-09|| ||laskereshevsky: The Petrosian-Spassky 1966 world-match was one of the ever-best played.|
Botvinnik-Tal 1960 (the first)
........... this before Kasparov burst into the championship match field!
|Feb-13-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: The first Lasker vs. Steinitz match was quite good.|
|Feb-13-09|| ||laskereshevsky: <AnalyzeThis> aye, of course...
I just considered the generational-gap between the 19th and the 20th Centuryes games.|
but watching this point without any kind of limitation, would i like to add that the
were fantastic too....
But i like the refering to Lasker... after all is my first name here on CG......:)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 6 ·