< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 23 OF 23 ·
|Feb-27-05|| ||WMD: This game was a slow death for Mickey. He just cannot challenge the very top players. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||Ron: I'm wondering if there is an improvement for Black's play after White's novelty 12. Ne2. Did Adams have to wind up losing a pawn?
Perhaps instead of 15. ... f5 Adams could play 15. Rhe8 |
|Feb-27-05|| ||square dance: <Wow, everyone is opening 1.d4 against Mr. Micky and winning. Kasparov, Topalov, even Anand at WAZ. Are the P-Q4 openings a known weak spot for Adams as black?> well, if vishy breaks out 1.d4 against you that speaks volumes. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||yoozum: I was working 5 hours today and when I left for work, the game still seemed a bit drawish. You can imagine how I was bagging in anticipation. Man am I happy that Garry won this. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||Orbitkind: <WMD: This game was a slow death for Mickey. He just cannot challenge the very top players.> That's nonsensical because Adams IS one of the very top players. Adams has been part of the top ten for as long as Anand et al as far as I know. Just because he has lost a couple of games does not mean he is a lesser player. Think how close a chess game can be. Also he may not be in top form at the moment. I've only been following professional chess for about 6 months so I don't know what the players have been like previously, but Adams has made short draws as much or more than any of the other top 10 from the games I've seen. He definitely can challenge the top players though because he is one of the top players. He scores consistently well in the very most elite events and has done for many years. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||fian: <square dance> What do you mean? Anything wrong with Anand playing 1.d4? |
|Feb-27-05|| ||csmath: I don't see anything to be very excited here. This is a typical "grinding it out" game, certainly worthy win.
Adams lost because Kasparov was very determined to get the full point but also because Adams became tired and probably impatient and started pushing a-pawn when there was no reason to do that. He also walked into a bad opening losing a pawn fast after playing a forced sequence by his own choice after 14. ... 0-0-0?!, 15. ... f5 and 18. ... Nd4 |
Of course it is a worthy win but it is really hard to see this as a particularly brilliant game.
|Feb-27-05|| ||shortsight: <fian> i think <square dance> is implying the world's very top players are avoiding micky's reply to e4! and that speaks for his ability itself. anyway, micky is certainly the top players, though he has a very bad score against kaspy, anand, but he has favourable scores against leko, polgar, svidler, topalov, ivanchuk, kramnik. if this record is consider weak, then what do we expect? anand? he has as bad scores against kaspy too. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||WillC21: There is so much talk about the now "aged" Kasparov being weaker than in his younger years. I disagree; I think with computers and new methods for opening preparation the game has simply made it more compeitive and the margin Kasparov had in this respect no longer exists. I do not think his play has diminished, on average. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||csmath: <<the world's very top players are avoiding micky's reply to e4!>>|
Kasparov play d4 for a longer time than Adams plays Ruy-Lopez. Also you cannot blame Kasparov for not being excited getting into Spanish torture.
In this very game Kasparov offered Adams choice to go into 0-0 which would result with almost certainly tactical battle. Adams avoided and played 0-0-0. That gave him more peacefull game but with an inferior defence.
So I don't think Kasparov is avoiding anything. He made a choice, Adams made his own. Apparently Kasparov's choice was better.
|Feb-27-05|| ||artemis: <csmath> this game was played to near perfection by kasparov. no, there weren't any unbelievable tactics, but that is because each player stopped them from occuring. If you didnt follow it live, take your time going over the moves. Kasparov's play here is phenomenal. hes not as good as he used to be, but he is still better than the top level players today. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||csmath: I watched it live and didn't see anything phenomenal. ;-))
It is technical. Adams wasn't very precise. It is arguable whether he had a good chance for a draw or not but he certainly did not play precisely in the end and that helped Kasparov. |
The whole opening Adams run into is a bad one. When you lose a pawn like that without any compesation it is hard to stay afloat. I have a feeling that a player like Leko would be able to hold it though.
Interesting enough Ponomariov, who was following game live as well, proposed some of the moves Adams played that costed him a pawn.
|Feb-27-05|| ||PinkPanther: <square dance>
Ummm....or because Adams' isn't as strong against d4 as e4, which is more of a compliment to his abilities in the Ruy Lopez than an insult aimed towards his Nimzo/Queen's Indian.
|Feb-27-05|| ||square dance: <i think <square dance> is implying the world's very top players are avoiding micky's reply to e4!> this is incorrect. to clear any misconceptions up, i was implying that vishy almost never plays anything other that 1.e4 with white. the fact that he was prompted to do so against adams, i believe, speaks volumes. adams is clearly one of the leading experts of the ruy lopez from either side of the board, but this alone should not be enough to prompt vishy to switch to 1.d4. i dont think anand would have played 1.d4 unless he that mickey was a bit weak in his queens pawn defenses. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||Backward Development: < This is the most enjoyable endgame I have ever followed. And what's even better: I will like the outcome, whatever it is. They have both played so well, that it doesn't matter what the score is going to be.> Were you here for Leko-Kramnik Two rooks v. Queen game? That was great, topped off by dancing rook. |
|Feb-27-05|| ||Backward Development: according to this DB, Adams' record on the black side of the Ruy since 2002 is +2 -5 =28|
his record since '02 on the black side of the Nimzo is +2 -4 =5
and the QID is +5 -4 =10
|Feb-27-05|| ||csmath: Adams is an expert for QID too. Choice of NID was apparently a good choice by Kasparov. But that is what you do, you play what you think your opponent does not like. |
And once again, take a look at the game, Gazza opened the avenue for tactical confrontation and Adams declined, steering the game toward more peaceful middlegame.
Unfortunately for him that costed him a pawn and the rest is history.
If you want to play against Kasparov for a draw you need to be extremely patient and well prepared. It does not look Adams was prepared (he lost the pawn fast) and he wasn't patient enough either (look how he was pushing the a-pawn at the end of the game). Therefore the loss.
|Feb-28-05|| ||AdrianP: <Adams and 1. d4> Adams is playing very aggressively against in the opening 1. d4, and quite effectively. In Topalov-Adams, Adams - with the black pieces - came within a whisker of wiping Topalov out; or, at least, came out of the opening with a very good and active position against Kasparov. Compare also the wild game Kasparov-Adams, 2004 at the Olympiad (notwithstanding that a lot of it is theory).|
<csmath> <artemis> I agree with <artemis> on this one. Kasparov played absolutely brilliantly in today's game. There were a lot of paths to a draw (some of which were less obvious than others) Gazza adroitly avoided. What was particularly impressive was the way that Gazza used mating threats to make progress with the g-pawn. Try playing that Q and R endgame against a computer and you'll see just how difficult the win was.
|Feb-28-05|| ||euripides: After 7 Qc2, Black has to play actively. There are at least three important and very wild lines; 7...c5 (which goes back to Capablanca), 7....Nc6 and ...e5 (which goes back to Alekhine), and 7...e5 - which has been doing rather well in recent games, including a blitz game in which Kasparov as Black demolished Kramnik. So 12 Ne2 may be an important innovation. I am sure Adams works on his sharpest lines the whole time, but you can't always be prepared for your opponent's innovations. |
|Mar-01-05|| ||patzer2: Bravo Kasparov! This is the kind of near perfect opening, middle game and endgame technique knowledgeable fans should appreciate. With no huge blunder on Adam's part, Kasparov beautifully combines positional and tactical play to grind out a decisive victory. |
|Feb-06-06|| ||GlennOliver: 32... Rb5 ?!
With continuing possibilities for at least the draw ?
|Feb-17-06|| ||silvio: just like all the greats Kasparov's moves look so naturally simple and logical! but us ordinary mortals only
can admire while we are unable to imitate them in practice. A beautiful
game by Kasparov.|
|Mar-14-06|| ||alexandrovm: <patzer2: Bravo Kasparov! This is the kind of near perfect opening, middle game and endgame technique knowledgeable fans should appreciate. With no huge blunder on Adam's part, Kasparov beautifully combines positional and tactical play to grind out a decisive victory.> I agree...|
|Nov-05-09|| ||WhenHarryMetSally: someone should just beat him and put an end to this.|
|Aug-08-16|| ||Albion 1959: Incredible. Adams is a GM with an Elo rating of over 2700 and yet was not able win a single game in 23 attempts against Kasparov! Clearly GK has the Indian sign over Mickey:|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 23 OF 23 ·