< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
|Jun-08-09|| ||SirChrislov: I'd like to add that "Eddy" (as the members at Gufeld Chess Academy called him) played Kasparov to a draw in 1980 and Kasparov himself described Gufeld's masterpiece against Bagirov 'The mona lisa of chess'. it's simply a beautiful game.|
This game against Kavalek is also spectacular and one in my top 30 of all time. not an embarassing loss, I'm sure Gufeld was proud to have been co-author of the masterpiece even though he was on the losing side. I'm sure Kieseritzky felt the same way when he lost to Anderssen, but he'll always be remembered for losing chess' immortal game.
|Jun-08-09|| ||Domdaniel: <SirChrislov> Thanks for painting a wonderful picture of a fascinating man. I never met 'Fast Eddie' Gufeld, but I've long been a fan of his writing -- brilliant games, mixed with anecdotes like a story about playing football with Fischer and chess with Pele. He mentioned this to a Russian journalist who 'corrected' the 'mistake' by switching the two sports around, to Gufeld's consternation.|
I used to wonder how an ex-Red Army guy like that coped with the collapse of the USSR and then life in America in his 60s. A former student of his used to post here regularly under the name 'GufeldStudent' - which I suppose is a sign of Gufeld's influence.
Lately, I've adopted the Mona Lisa principle myself -- Tal's ideas were much the same. What's the point in playing just to grind out results? So I avoid positional draws and make more gonzo sacs ... and my rating has dropped 200 points, but at least I sometimes play a game worth being proud of.
|Jun-08-09|| ||Domdaniel: One story behind this game is that the opening was a known trap, though not quite established theory. The line had been studied in Prague, where Kavalek saw it ... and Gufeld had also looked at the idea a couple of years earlier. In those pre-internet days, unpublished opening discoveries often spread by word of mouth.|
Then, during the actual game, Gufeld forgot that he knew the position (it still happens!) -- and quickly played 7.d5, seeing that 7...Ne7 lost at once to 8.Ne6, 'mating' the queen.
But Kavalek was ready with 7...e3! and the rest is history.
|Nov-02-09|| ||WhenHarryMetSally: black preventing the white king from moving to e3 was the sublime move for me in the end game.|
|Nov-12-10|| ||sevenseaman: This indeed is a rare game of chess. Avery apt pun too. One harks back to immortal words of Steinitz about the foot soldiers of chess.|
|Jan-03-11|| ||picard: It's amazing how useless white's pieces are at the end. If white sacs them all to stop the middle pawns then black's queenside pawns will finish the job easily!|
|Jan-26-11|| ||wordfunph: Kavalek was quoted on this game..
The spectators were divided, the winner Kavalek recalled: "Some of them thinking I was getting crazy, some of them thinking that a new genius was born. I know they were wrong either way."
|Mar-12-11|| ||SirChrislov: "Since this game I always maintain the dark squared bishop has a magic all of its own." White wrote.|
|May-31-11|| ||DanielBryant: This is certainly one of the more beautiful games of chess I've seen. That Black can sacrifice two exchanges so late in the middlegame with no immediate mate and win while retaining all his pawns still astound me.|
|Jul-05-11|| ||LIFE Master AJ: http://www.lifemasteraj.com/old_af-...|
My analysis of this game ...
|Aug-09-11|| ||DrMAL: Total dominance, white got squeezed to the edges. Great ending with the runaway e-pawn. Happy Birthday Kavalek!|
|Aug-30-11|| ||SirChrislov: "As far as I'm concerned I do readily admit: There is no life for me without the g7 bishop.|
The reason for this is perhaps a game from the 1962 Student Olympiad in which I fell victim to the g7 bishop.
Before the match USSR-Czechoslovakia, a friendly football game took place in which Kavalek took a beating. This man swore he would get his revenge in the chess match, by beating me!" --E. Gufeld, My life in chess: The search for La Gioconda
|Aug-30-11|| ||SirChrislov: And what revenge!|
|Oct-28-11|| ||Crazychess1: Such a great final position. . .|
|Nov-29-11|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: I like too much 27. Rxc5 !!|
|Dec-27-11|| ||King Death: More than once in this game White must have thought he was consolidating
until his opponent came up with imaginative idea after another. The move 6.Ng5 isn't one I remember seeing before. If I remember right White usually plays 6.Bc6 dc 7.Ne5 or Nfd2.|
|Jan-21-12|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: You know something? Black has all his pawns in the final position !!|
|Mar-18-12|| ||edyedzer: Half century ago !!|
|Sep-14-12|| ||Six66timesGenius: Nice Game!!|
|Sep-14-12|| ||hugogomes: The sac is Rxd2 not Nf6. After Nf6 black gets 3 pawns for the knight, which is not a sacrifice.|
|Dec-03-12|| ||vinidivici: 23...Rxd2 is very plausible move. Very imaginative thought by Kavalek but nothin near marvel or what, it just a very good move. White down a knight, right, but f2 pawn is defended by rook and bishop. And the f2 pawn is now same as strong as a rook soon would be defended by e-pawn, after 23.Ke2, the white knight is a threat bcoz it could move to c4. But only from now, Kavalek considered his pawn as a rook that had to be protected by bishop.
23...Rxd2 and now black f2 pawn strong as hell, b6 bishop could be preserved relentlessly. Say, if white 25.c4 (instead Bf8) then 25...Bd4|
26...Rg4, again Kavalek foresaw the 27.Bc5, and again, to protect the bishop.
So maybe 27...Rxc5 looks very miraculous for some of readers. But again we got the benefits of whatever our predecessors have done/said. They say the connected passed pawns at 6th pawn same strong as rook and we got a pawn chain even better it touches the 7th rank (stronger than rook). After 27...Rxc5 28.bxc5 Bxc5, square e3 defended by bishop and soon the black pawn would go there and thats why white done 31.Rd4 to prevent white dominated the e3 pawn.
But its too late, after 32...Kf4, e3 square dominated by black, and remember connected passed pawns at the 6th rank same as strong as a rook. Beside that white has 3 more pawns compared black 5 pawns. It loss for white.
Of course a GM like Kavalek foresaw those possibilities when 23...Rxd2. But it could be explained by logics and that shows he knows the theory and applied it in the game. He considered f2 pawn as his weapon same as a rook; he didnt mind sacrificed another rook for a bishop (27...Rxc5) because he considered his 7th rank pawn as a rook; he knew to protect his "rook", he had to protect the bishop; and finally at the end of the game, he had more pawns than his opponent, moreover his opponents rook weaker than his "rook" because it touched the 7th rank.
So it really how the way you see your pieces, one of my ex-teachers (2400+ FIDE) always emphasized that kind of thought. So when theres a theory, theres a reason behind that, better we believe those and apply it in the game. Some players failed to be a GM (i know some users though), they just achieved "a weak master" or they changed the profession because they very stubborn to learn it and even they devoured the theories but they underestimated most of them.
|Dec-03-12|| ||perfidious: <vinidivici: 23...Rxd2 is very plausible move. Very imaginative thought by Kavalek but nothin near marvel or what, it just a very good move....>|
Most of us have lower standards for appealing ideas and moves, I suppose.....
<....we got the benefits of whatever our predecessors have done/said....>
Learning in chess, same as many other things in life, may be described the same way.
<....So when theres a theory, theres a reason behind that, better we believe those and apply it in the game. Some players failed to be a GM (i know some users though), they just achieved "a weak master" or they changed the profession because they very stubborn to learn it and even they devoured the theories but they underestimated most of them.>
Is the point of this incoherent mishmash to denigrate those players who have forsaken chess in favour of other things?
The storm flag goes up when I see terms such as 'weak master' or 'weak grandmaster'. Most often these utterings emanate from players who haven't a prayer of getting near such a level themselves, whatever the reason.
My guess is that this player's teacher would never use the phrase 'weak GM'.
This was a marvellous concept by the young Kavalek and anyone would be proud to play such a game, including a weak player such as myself.
|Dec-03-12|| ||vinidivici: <My guess is that this player's teacher would never use the phrase 'weak GM'.>|
I bet he is. He got the big ego, but most of the GMs i know have that kind of manner. For him theres no word such a "weak". Once you are a GM, you are no weak anymore.
I just want to show that if you apply the theory right in the place, you could achieve something incredible like this game. Well, its kind of helping you guys.
|Dec-03-12|| ||vinidivici: <'weak master'>
you see the quotation marks of that word, it purely a satire. i didnt trigger those words. lol...i remember a user considered him/herself as a "weak master".
|Feb-08-13|| ||FSR: It's cool that Kavalek kept all eight of his pawns for the entire game.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·