|Jul-25-05|| ||madlydeeply: Thaks for showing me how to break into a locked up pawn position Mr. Spassky.|
|Sep-30-05|| ||alexandrovm: This game of Spassky is really great!|
|Jan-02-07|| ||Towershield: One of my favorite games.|
|Jan-02-07|| ||russep: Nice endgame|
|Oct-28-08|| ||savagerules: This looked like a Spassky simul game instead of a candidates match game. Byrne had to feel discouraged by this game.|
|Oct-28-08|| ||AnalyzeThis: I think it's a strategic masterpiece.|
|Oct-29-08|| ||Jim Bartle: Have to agree with AT this time.|
|Oct-29-08|| ||Nietzowitsch: If you havent a clue whats going on you shouldnt call it <a strategic masterpiece>.|
|Oct-29-08|| ||Riverbeast: Why Byrne would willingly trade all the pieces, and enter a bishop ending with all his pawns fixed on the same color as his bishop, is beyond me. |
Isn't this the first principle every child is taught (NOT to do) in endgames?
I don't think this is a strategic masterpiece, because Spassky's winning plan was obvious...Byrne just sleepwalked into a dead lost endgame.
But every game Byrne played in this candidates match was weak - and not just weak chess, but weak hearted...He basically just lay down and let Spassky walk all over him...Then resigned the match before it was even over!
|Oct-29-08|| ||AnalyzeThis: The bad bishop ending is death when you're up against a knight, but a lot of times, you can hold it anyway when it's bishop vs. bishop if you can keep the opponent's king out. Spassky here was able to use his far advanced queenside pawns for tactical reasons, and that was the deciding factor.|
|Oct-30-08|| ||Chessdreamer: Robert Byrne: "I wanted to play 26 ...g5 and I don't know why I didn't."|
|Jan-21-09|| ||Peter Nemenyi: <Then resigned the match before it was even over!>|
This is simply wrong. Three wins were required to win the match and Spassky recorded three, in six games played. Byrne lost badly but he didn't run away.
|Jun-17-09|| ||Mateo: Interesting Bishop ending.
24. a4! <With the idea Bd2, a5-a6 and Ba5.> Be7 25. Ke2 Kf7 26. Bd2 f5 27. exf5 gxf5 28. Kd3 Bf6 29. f3 h5 30. a5 Ke8 31. a6! <threatens Ba5.> Kd7 32. g3 <32.Ba5 Kc7!.> Kc7 33. h3 Kd7 34. Ba5 <threatens Bxb6.> Kc8 <34...bxa5?? 35.b6!, White wins.> 35. Be1 Kd7 36. Bf2 Ke8 37. Be1 Kf7? <A mistake.> 38. Bb4 Be7 <38...Ke7 39.Ba5! bxa5 40.b6!, White wins.> 39. f4 exf4 <39...Kf6 40.fxe5 dxe5 (40...Kxe5 41.Bd2 followed by Bf4+) 41.Bxe7+ Kxe7 42.c5! bxc5 43.b6! axb6 44.a7, White wins.> 40. gxf4 Ke8 41. Kxd4 Kd7 42. Kd3 <At first glance, it looks drawish since White cannot use his queen side majority. White will have to sac the ‘c’ pawn to make some progress.> Kc7 43. Ke3 Bf6 44. Kf3 h4 45. Ke3 Bg7 46. Kd3 Bf6 47. Bd2 Kd7 48. Be3 <Threatens Bxb6.> Kc7 49. Bf2 Kc8 50. c5! dxc5 <50...bxc5 51.Be1 followed by Ba5 and b6 wins too.> 51. d6 Kd7 52. Bxc5! <threatens Bxb6.> Bd8 <52...bxc5 53.b6!.> 53. Bb4 Ke6 54. Kc4 Bf6 55. Bc5! Bd8 <55...bxc5 56.b6!.> 56. Bd4! Kxd6 57. Be5+ Ke6 58. Bb8 Kd7 59. Kd5 1-0
|Jun-17-09|| ||Riverbeast: Good annotations <Mateo>|
It is an interesting ending, and instructive....Winning themes like this in bishop endings occur relatively frequently
|Jun-17-09|| ||ajk68: Spassky creates a good-bishop bad-bishop endgame. It was clear he emerged with a superior position, but then
31. a6! seemed like such a mistake to me. I didn't see how he would ever break open the position. Then as I followed the game, it becomes clear that was a critical move.|
I've learned a lot from this game.
Initially, black's king is tied down to the corner. Black's bishop needs to return to b8 to free his king. But white's active king or bishop will capture the h-pawn before black can hand off defensive assignments.
When black is about ready to set up a workable defense, 42. c5! changes the entire position.
I'm curious to analyze whether the game was lost as early as move 22, or if there was a mistake after move 22 that sealed it.
A strategic-positional masterpiece!
|Jun-17-09|| ||DWINS: Say what you want about Byrne's play in this game, but it was a dead draw.|
<Chessdreamer> is correct. Byrne wanted to play 26...g5 drawing, but for whatever reason changed his mind. Bobby Fischer pointed out that 26...Bd8 draws also.
|Jun-17-09|| ||WhiteRook48: this was the most unlikely matchup I would have thought of|
|Jun-17-09|| ||DWINS: Why <WhiteRook48>? Byrne was a solid top 15 player at the time and was playing some excellent chess.|
Nobody expected him to beat Spassky, but as Boris said, "Byrne is not here by accident".
|Jun-17-09|| ||HeMateMe: I thought Byrne traded off the pieces because he was getting the mobile pawn center, his pawn were linked up for a drive, but Spassky's extra pawn was a backward pawn. We've all lost games with white in this kind of position.|
Tradiing pawns on the queenside gives Spassky the initiative, so Byrne avoided the pawn exchanges. But by allowing the deep pawn chain, Byrne had to constantly watch for a sacrifice to create a passed pawn. So he lost one of his nice center pawns, as a result of this. It does seem like a position a grandmaster would not allow.
In an interview, Spassky said he became world champion because "I was very strong in the middle game." I can believe it.
|Jun-17-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: Very strong, yes. And a universal style, meaning he could outplay anybody in any type of game. That was Spassky when he was at his best.|
|Dec-30-09|| ||M.D. Wilson: Yes, Spassky considered himself the best middlegame player in the world for some time before and during his Title bouts with Petrosian.|