|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Nov-27-04
 | | aw1988: Oh yes, this one. Some errors, but pleasing to look at. |
 |
| Dec-21-04 | | shortsight: 23. f3 Rh1+! 24. Kxh1 Qh4+ 25.Kg1 Qh2+ 26. Kf1 Qh1# whatever white's reply in 23rd move, i guess the combination will still works. |
|
| Jan-09-05 | | Saruman: <whatever white's reply in 23rd move, i guess the combination will still works.><shortsight> 24.Kxh1 was the only move. |
|
Jan-27-05
| | Granite: I agree with Tal on one point, that Karpov game is really nice and worth checking out. |
|
| Jan-27-05 | | WarehouseMan: Perhaps with incredible play Spassky could of just taken the pawn? 17. Nxd4...Qe5 18. N2f3...Qh5 19.h3...Bf4
I don't have the best Fritz or processing speed, but playing on until about move 23 I'm not getting a negative score or anything |
|
Jan-27-05
| | euripides: At move 11 the game is almost exactly symmtrical, with some central tension. Spassky simply decides to resolve the tension and is dead in ten moves. Flabbergasting. |
|
Sep-01-05
| | TigerPawns: i did some computer analysis. after 19. ...Rd5, black seems to be winning. The best reply I can find however, 20. Qa3 still looks like it gives too much attach. After 19. ...Rd5, against Tal it's 0-1. It is surprising that Spassky (tactical genius himself) played the hopeless 20. Qd2 though. |
|
Oct-17-05
 | | Bobwhoosta: Like all of Tal's opponents, Spassky was probably too busy wondering where the evaluation changed from "Equal, equal, equal" to "How am I going to get out of this???". I would assumed if you are suddenly confronted with a position you never expected and you're also losing it's tough not to go back over the game real quick. It's a temptation of mine... |
|
| Sep-06-06 | | Zorts: I think Spassky's mistake was 15.Rfd1, he should've moved 15 Rfe1. |
|
| Sep-07-06 | | kinghunt72: In my computer analysis, 15. Rfd1 is whites best move, but I don't think it really matters what the move is, because the outcome probably stays the same. |
|
| Sep-07-06 | | Zorts: Keen observation...how about some feedback on the Stahlberg vs. Keres, 1936 game. |
|
Feb-12-07
 | | keypusher: Amazingly similar to this game: Nimzowitsch vs Tarrasch, 1914 |
|
Jun-16-07
| | Wolfgang01: It's a great game by Tal. If Tals attack on Spasskys king is that easy, then whites opening plan has some flaws. 15. Rfe1 looks better to me; it avoids blacks plan starting with 15. … d4. After that move I don't see good fields for the white queen. 18. … Ne5!! followed by 20. … Rd5!! shows how easily a good plan smashes even great players like Spassky. |
|
Jun-16-07
| | Wolfgang01: 23. … Rh1+
24. … Qh4+ followed by 25. … Qh2+ and Qh1# can't be avoided. |
|
| Oct-24-07 | | Udit Narayan: Brilliant Tal as usual !!!! |
|
Oct-24-07
 | | PinnedPiece: I'm not seeing why 23. Qf4 hasn't been considered...it threatens the xg4, protects h2, f2.......? |
|
Oct-24-07
| | keypusher: <Pinned Piece> 23. Qf4 Qh4 and I don't see a defense. |
|
Oct-24-07
 | | Shams: 23.Qf4 Qh4 and say goodnight, gracie |
|
| Sep-12-08 | | pom nasayao: If 23. Qf4 then Qh4 is Tal's next move. It threatens 24. . .Qh1 mate. Nothing can stop it, not even 24. Qh2, f3, Kf1, Qxg4 or g3. |
|
Oct-25-08
| | Silverstrike: Interesting variant of The Greek Gift, whereby the attacker brings his rook rather than his queen to the h-file. |
|
Sep-20-09
 | | Garech: I have done a youtube analysis of this game using Fritz, please check out the following link if you are interested - thanks! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9ie... |
|
Oct-06-10
 | | sevenseaman: One gets the feeling Spassky has played this game like a helpless young kid. Both were former world champions but how vastly superior was Tal! |
|
| Mar-19-11 | | Llawdogg: Wow! 20 ... Bxa2+! Great bishop sacrifice to set up a spectacular mating attack. That was quick. |
|
Mar-19-11
 | | AylerKupp: I just finished looking at this game in the book "Great Attackers" (Kasparov, Tal, and Stein – yes, Stein) by Colin Crouch. He devotes 12 pages to this game. His conclusion is that Spassky could, indeed, have taken the pawn with 17.Nd4 but that Tal had many resources even then. The notes include some analysis by Kasparov. As it often happens, many of the most interesting moves occur in variations that didn't occur in the actual game. If you've never read a book by Colin Crouch you owe it to yourself to do that. Very thorough and highly readable. I highly recommend both the "Great Attackers" book and Colin Crouch's analysis. And definitely take look at <Garech>'s YouTube analysis. |
|
| Apr-09-13 | | The Rocket: Awful play by Spassky, well exploited by Tal |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
sac: 20...Bxh2+