|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Aug-04-06 |
| chessworm: This game resembles the famous game between Lasker vs Lasker where Edward Lasker cannot force a win with Rook n Pawn against Emanuel lasker's lone knight... The Rook cannot leave the rank without exposing the pawn to capture and king cannot rescue as other king does not let him to come there.. While black will move his bishop just one square up and down....
Well played by Spassky |
 |
Aug-04-06
 |
| Peligroso Patzer: <centrumspits: Surely this is a win for Black, not?
Put the rook on f5, let the black king walk behind the rook to defend the pawn and then advances the pawn or am I missing something? >
White can play 74. Bb4 ... 75. Bc5 ... and 76. Kxb5 ..., after which it is a drawn Rook versus Bishop ending. |
|
Aug-04-06
 |
| kevin86: Black gives up a knight and proceeds to save the game! Was the "sac" sound? I will take a long row of chess computers to decide. |
|
Aug-04-06
 |
| Phony Benoni: I think the question is not whether the knight sac was sound, but whether Black had a more promising alternative. |
|
Aug-04-06
 |
| al wazir: <Ger7ry>: Thanks. This game had a lot of virtual tactics, combinations that the players must have been thinking about but which were never played. It makes me wonder how much I understand of any GM game. |
|
| Aug-04-06 |
| danielkhan: Ofcourse the sac was usound
|
|
| Aug-06-06 |
| Ger7ry: al wazir, don't be so quick to thank me, when I don't know what I'm talking about. In the line I gave, 30. Qh6 wouldn't be mate. I have a feeling that with his Queen and Rook chasing Black's unprotected King White has a mate somewhere, but I can't claim I actually see my way clear to one. |
|
Aug-06-06
|
| al wazir: <Ger7ry>: There is a mate: 26...f3 27. Rh8+ Bxh8 28. Rxh8+ Kf7/Kg7 29. Qd7+ Kxg6 30. Rh6+ Kxg5 31. Qg7#. The point of the move 26...Re6, as you showed, is that it blocks the white  's access to d7.If after 28...Kg7 29. Qd7+ black plays 29...Qf7, white wins the with 30. Rh7+, with mate to follow immediately. Don't be so quick to deprecate your own brilliance. |
|
| Aug-06-06 |
| Ger7ry: al wazir, I like your continuation, but 31. Qg7 isn't actually mate, is it, since the Black pawn's no longer occupying the flight square f4. Still, White answers 31. ... Kf4 with 32. Rh4 mate, if I'm not seeing things. |
|
Aug-06-06
|
| al wazir: <Ger7ry>: You're right, the  moved to f3. But the black  is really dead: 26...f3 27. Rh8+ Bxh8 28. Rxh8+ Kf7/Kg7 29. Qd7+ Kxg6 30. Rh6+ Kxg5 31. Qg7+ Kf4 32. Rh4#.Now that we've settled that, I am feeling very humble. After multiple mistaken attempts over a couple of days we've managed to work out what both Averbakh and Spassky must have seen OTB with the clock running. |
|
Aug-06-06
 |
| RandomVisitor: When analyzed with Rybka, this game resulted in a phenominal 30 moves that did not agree with what was played by the players. In no grandmaster game have I had such a disagreement. Perhaps the players were intoxicated (?) |
|
Aug-07-06
|
| RandomVisitor: 52...Rd3 53.Ke4 c4 54.Bd4 Rb1 55.Nf2 Rxh1 56.Nxh1 a5 57.Nf2 Rg3 58.Nd1 a4 59.Ne3  (-2.49) Depth: 32 was Black's best winning shot.White missed 27.Rh8+ Bxh8 28.Rxh8+ Kg7 29.Rxb8 f3 30.Nf4 exf4 (all others lead to mate in at least 10) 31.Qxf3 and White is winning. |
|
Aug-07-06
|
| al wazir: <RandomVisitor>: Unbelievable! I missed the pin of the  on d4 that this line creates. I've never seen a game with so many tactical resources. |
|
| Feb-03-07 |
| bob000: "I have played 16...Nc6 because I did not see any other practical resources because my position was so passive. I was very surprised that Yuri Averbakh was thinking about 1 hour (!!) (55 min.)" To be fair to Averbakh, if a top player just put a knight en prise in a way that could only be intentional I'd be a bit paranoid too. Though, if he only remained calm and played solid moves the game would be his. |
|
| Jun-09-08 |
| Salaskan: I think white would have won easily after 18. h6, which wins yet another minor piece. |
|
| Jul-19-08 |
| ravel5184: Too bad Black didn't play 14 ... Bh8 :) |
|
| Feb-20-09 |
| ewan14: 16 ... Nc6
Incredible |
|
| Mar-01-09 |
| WhiteRook48: I can never imagine what Spassky was thinking when he played 16...Nc6 |
|
| Mar-09-09 |
| WhiteRook48: next question: why not 42...Bh6?? :p |
|
Mar-27-09
 |
| shakespeare: Mark Taimanov: "I would rather resign the game than to make such a move..." |
|
| Mar-27-09 |
| ewan14: My theory - If white captures the knight on c6 he might find it difficult to castle on either side and Boris could push his pawns down the centre. When did Taimanov say that ? |
|
| Apr-16-09 |
| WhiteRook48: yeah, like play 69...Rd6+ 70 exd6 |
|
| Apr-25-09 |
| WhiteRook48: Taimanov: "I would rather resign the game than play such a move" |
|
May-05-09
 |
| ToTheDeath: And that's why Taimanov was not world champion. Mental toughness and tenacity in lost positions is a characteristic of great players. |
|
May-23-09
|
| Phony Benoni: The tournament situation adds some interest to Taimanov's remark. This game is from the playoff for first place between Taimanov, Averbakh and Spassky. In the main tournament, Spassky and Averbakh had led most of the way. In fact, they were 1.5 points ahead of Taimanov with three rounds to play, but he won out and caught them. The first part of the double-round playoff saw Taimanov draw Averbakh (Taimanov vs Averbakh, 1956) and defeat Spassky (Spassky vs Taimanov, 1956). Had Averbakh won this game, he and Taimanov would have been tied going into their second game, where Averbakh had White. As it turned out, Taimanov kept his half-point lead, drew Averbakh (Averbakh vs Taimanov, 1956), then beat Spassky again (Averbakh vs Taimanov, 1956) to clinch the title. Regardless of his personal assessment of <16...Nc6>, Taimanov must have been quite pleased that Spassky did not resign! |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
icon.
