| Jul-05-08 | | zev22407: Long castle as an attacking move! |
 |
| Jul-05-08 | | zev22407: A crazy game |
|
| Jul-05-08 | | Dr. J: 1) What if 32 Re2?
2) What if 39 Rxf2? (Then if ... b1/Q or ...c1/Q, then 40 R2f1) |
|
Jul-05-08
 | | Gilmoy: <Dr. J: 32.Re2> isn't legal -- the rook is pinned. <39.Rxf2> Bxf2 suffices: 40.f8=Q Bxd1 <White gained only 3 points, has no checks, and can't stop both pawns>, or 40.Rd<any> (b1,c1)=Q+, or 40.Rf1 Bc5. A pair of queens beats queen-high! |
|
| Jul-05-08 | | Jedithious: I liked 15. p-c4, creating a pawn chain. The turning point of the game was probably blacks castling queenside. |
|
| Jul-05-08 | | wouldpusher: 20. b3?! and 21. c4? weren't really very pleasant tries. |
|
| Jul-05-08 | | Manic: <Gilmoy> 39.Rxf2 Bxf2 40.f8=Q Bxd1 41.Qc8+ and 42.Qxc2. Instead, I think 39.Rxf2 c1=Q 40.Rff1 b1=Q and now 41.Rxc1 Qe4+ mates so 41.f8=Q Bxf8 42.Rxc1 Qe4+ 43.Kg1 and now 43...Bc4+ or 43...Bxg7 should win. I also think <Dr. J> meant 33.Re2. If so, then 33...Qxe4+ 34.Rxe4 Rd2+ and 35...c3 should win. |
|
| Jul-05-08 | | backyard pawn: Grand Larseny |
|
Jul-05-08
 | | Once: <woodpusher> Totally agree. White sacs two pawns (and allows black two connected past monsters) just to be able to push d5 - which black promptly ignores. Poor judgement on white's part. The closed sicilian is normally played by white as a kingside attack, so black sometimes switches his king to the queenside. I can understand why white stopped his kingside attack in this game. Back is going to castle queenside so a kingside attack is more of a liability to white than a threat to black. But white's queenside and centre play needed more preparation than this. |
|
Jul-07-08
 | | kevin86: Two connectors prove to be better than rook and bishop-even when standing alone. |
|
Jul-14-08
 | | patzer2: Black castles long with 22...0-0-0! and sacrifices a Knight, because, as <Kevin86> suggests, his two connected passers give him more than adequate compensation for the piece. Also, the fact that he gets four pawns for the knight and a completely demolished White pawn structure makes the decision easy. Larsen could also have played 22...Na5  and won in less dramatic fashion (with the two passers still providing the decisive edge). However, he was probably looking at 22...Na5 23. d6 with his powerful dark squared Bishop being locked away for a while, and so decided to give up the Knight instead. The powerful posting of the Bishop on a3 in the final position, supporting the pawn promotion on c1 seems to fully justify this decision. |
|
May-20-09
 | | notyetagm: Wow, a *beautiful* game by Larsen: great tactical play and the strategic themes <BISHOP VERSUS KNIGHT> and <CONNECTED PASSERS>. |
|
sac: 22...O-O-O