|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 27 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-14-07 | | KamikazeAttack: <chancho: He'll be a good antidote (to Danailov) in the Topa match though...> Kamsky's dad used to be a boxer I hear.
I can see him punching Danailov's lights out. |
 |
Dec-14-07
 | | Eyal: <Mateo: <Honza Cervenka: I would say that 28...Ng4+ 29.Nxg4 Bxg4 30.Ng1 Rxb2 would have kept the game still probably equal.> What about 30.Rc2?> <28...Ng4+ 29.Nxg4 Bxg4 30.Rc2> After 30...Rh3+ White's game becomes very passive if he tries to avoid repetition, and he might even get into trouble. E.g.: 31.Kd2 Rh2 32.Kd1 Rd8+ 33.Ke1 h5; or 31.Kf2 Rh2+ 32.Ke1 Bh3 33.Rf2 Rh1+ 34.Kd2 Bg2! attacking e4 and threatening Rd8+ Ke3 Rh3+. |
|
Dec-14-07
 | | keypusher: <To quote Lasker: a lot can happen in five moves, five moves in chess is a long time.> This was a very Lasker-like game by Kamsky, I think. 29. Ng1 was a hell of a move. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | malthrope: <keypusher: <To quote Lasker: a lot can happen in five moves, five moves in chess is a long time.>
This was a very Lasker-like game by Kamsky, I think. 29. Ng1 was a hell of a move.> Yes very much so <keypusher> including the 'dash of poison' at the end! :^) |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Jim Bartle: Piggy: "Sorry for reinventing the wheel Jim. It happens! :)" They say great minds think alike. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Bobsterman3000: Yikes!! Shouldn't Shirov show a little more concern for keeping a defensive presence on the g-file and 8th rank? Isn't this just basic, unadvanced defensive theory? Indeed, 29.Ng1 was certainly a great move by Kamsky, and it enabled that knight to move into a strong combination defensive/offensive role. Kamsky showed a great understanding of how to "economically" get the most combined value of his knights with this move. However, I've got to rank Shirov's execution as <very amateurish>. His king was stuck there behind the h7 pawn, with very little defensive help. Within 3 moves he gave away both the g-file and 8th rank, with two offside pawns being his compensation. I'm no GM, but even I know not to hand over the g-file when your king is locked into the h-file with no flight squares or escape path. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | hitman84: Great game! Full credit to Kamsky for finding the best moves in time pressure. Shirov went for the kill(with black!) no doubt, but I feel he overstretched in the end. I doubt he would lose much sleep over the loss because it was pretty clear that it was going to be a win or a loss. The good thing for Shirov is he can play his natural game in the next games and Kamsky's tenacity and defensive skills will be put to test. Kamsky's style is not like Anand's. Anand owned Shirov in the WCH final because of his attacking and defensive abilities. He is more versatile compared to Kamsky. I predict Shirov will equalize. Kamsky still looks a bit dodgy with his openings. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | sushijunkie: Can someone tell me exactly where Shirov went "wrong"? My engine says he's cooked when he plays 31...Rbc2, but I'm sure Gata's advantage starts earlier. My laptop/engine suck so I can't figure it. Carbon analysis will be welcome along with silicon. Thanks. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | KamikazeAttack: <However, I've got to rank Shirov's execution as <very amateurish>.
>
I agree. It is not the loss but the manner.
Shirov's play was way short of what one would expect at a championship level which this is. It was kamikaze and bad. He deserved to lose 2 times over. |
|
Dec-14-07
| | keypusher: <malthrope> I should admit I lifted the Lasker quote from Ulhumbrus. :-) |
|
Dec-14-07
 | | Peligroso Patzer: <sushijunkie: Can someone tell me exactly where Shirov went "wrong"? *** > I believe Shirov started to head down the wrong path with the over-ambitious 22. ... Qxf6?!. He probably could have avoided serious risk with 22. ... Qg4. On the other hand, Shirov may not be feeling optimistic about his chances if the match goes to tie-break, so he probably could not resist the temptation (even with Black) to preserve perceived winning chances rather than steer the position towards a likely draw. It also probably seemed attractive to keep the Queens on the board with White's King visually the more exposed at move 22. I am sure there were other possibilities for improvement in Shirov's subsequent play, but I would nominate his choice of 22. ... Qxf6?! as the critical turning point in today's game. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Aurora: Shirov is in a pretty pickle now. |
|
Dec-14-07
| | Eyal: <sushijunkie: Can someone tell me exactly where Shirov went "wrong"?> It seems that he made a series of bad decisions starting with 22...Qxf6. Instead, 22...Qg4 23.Qxg4 Rxg4 24.Ng3 Nf7 followed by Rf4 and Rxf6, is probably safe enough for Black (maybe even with a slight edge). Later, as lines which were posted here indicate, he might have been better off with 23...Rh2+, Ng4+ on moves 28 and 29, and finally 31...Rhg2 - so as to answer to Rd8+ with Rg8. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Jim Bartle: Leaving the d-file open with no defense on the back rank also turned out badly for Shirov. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | hitman84: <sushijunkie>I don't know what the engines say, but I didn't like Shirov's idea starting with 26...Rg8+ a very tempting move. It was clear that he would again stretch Kamsky by infiltrating with his rooks. I'd say it was strategically wrong because when your opponent has central connected! passers the main aim should be to exchange pieces. As the pieces get exchanged the strength of the central passers reduce. One could argue that with many pieces left on the board Shirov's plan to counter attack seems justified, but Shirov's pieces were not well co-ordinated to cause enough trouble to the white king(Mind you, actually Shirov likes playing haphazard positions). Shirov could have simply taken the a2 pawn, and then defend to salvage a draw, but it was pretty clear he was going all out for a win. |
|
Dec-14-07
| | Peligroso Patzer: A propos my earlier comment criticizing Shirov's 22. ... Qxf6?!, and in particular my comment that:
<"It also probably seemed attractive to keep the Queens on the board with White's King visually the more exposed at move 22.">, even the move chosen did not avoid a forced Queen trade when Kamsky responded with 23. Qxe5 (clearly the best move here, so Shirov should have expected it), but Shirov was not the one forcing the Queens off in this line. That psychological hurdle may have played a part in his decision to eschew what would have been the best move, 22. ... Qg4. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Ezzy: Kamsky,Gata (2724) - Shirov,Alexei (2739) [B30]
FIDE World Cup 2007 Khanty-Mansiysk (7.2), 14.12.2007
[1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3 e5 4.Bc4 Be7 5.d3 d6 6.Nd2 Bg5<Shirov has played the white side of this position (so should be familiar with black's plans) against Roiz Shirov vs M Roiz, 2006 and preferred 7 h4> 7.Qh5 Nh6 8.h3 Nd4 9.0–0N <Svidler played 9 Bb5 + against Smirin 2002.> 9...0–0< [9...Nxc2 10.Bb5+ Kf8 11.Nb3 Bxc1 12.Raxc1 Shirov doesn't seem to like this idea of being well behind in development for a pawn.] >10.Nb3 Bxc1 11.Raxc1 Ne6 <Shirov decides to keep his center pawns as they are and fight for the f4 square. >12.Ne2< Kamsky has the same idea.> 12...Qf6 13.Nd2 Kh8 14.c3 g5 <Typical Shirov. Computers tend to favor play on the queenside with 14...b5 14...Bd7 or 14...Rb8. Shirov decides his play will be on the kingside.> 15.d4< " A flank attack should be countered with a center strike"> 15...Rg8 16.dxe5 dxe5 17.Nf3!< Nice move by Kamsky. It stops black's intended 17...Nf4 because of the counterplay against the 'e5' pawn. >17...Rg6 <Threatening to trap the queen with 18...Ng7 [17...Nf4 18.Nxf4 gxf4 19.Nxe5 (19.Qxe5? Qxe5 20.Nxe5 Bxh3 21.Kh2 Bxg2 22.Rg1 Bxe4 23.Bxf7 Rxg1 24.Rxg1 And black has no problems) 19...Qg7 20.g3 fxg3 21.f4 And white looks good.] >18.h4< Dynamic play by Kamsky!>18...Qg7< Good choice by Shirov, threatening 19...Nf4 [18...gxh4 19.Nxe5 Rg7 20.Rcd1 h3 21.g3 h2+ 22.Kh1!] >19.Bxe6 <[19.Bd5 Nf4 20.Nxf4 gxf4 21.Nxe5 Rxg2+ 22.Kh1 Bh3 Threatening mate in 2 - 23...Rh2+ 24 Kxh2 Qg2 Mate. 23.Qf3 Qxe5 24.Qxh3 f3 Threatening 25...Ng4 winning. 25.Rg1 Qf4 Winning. Black's got Rag8 or Ng4 and the pressure is too much to survive. ] >19...Bxe6 20.hxg5 f6 <Threatens 21...Bg4!> 21.gxf6< [21.gxh6 Rxh6 The queen is trapped.]> 21...Rxg2+ 22.Kh1 Qxf6?!< Big decision from Shirov. Kamsky was very short on time and Shirov decides to keep the position complicated to keep Kamsky under pressure. [22...Qg4 23.Qxg4 Rxg4 Is the safe option.] >23.Qxe5< [23.Nxe5?? Rg5] >23...Qxe5 <[23...Rh2+ 24.Qxh2 Qxf3+ Favors black.]>24.Nxe5 Rg5 25.f4 Rh5+ 26.Kg1 Rg8+ 27.Kf2 Rh2+ 28.Ke3 Rgg2 <[28...Ng4+ 29.Nxg4 Bxg4 30.Ng1 Rxb2 Is possibly better.]> 29.Ng1 Rxb2 30.f5 Bxa2 31.Rcd1 Rbc2?< Possibly 31...Nf7 would have more resistance. 32 Rd8+ had to be stopped.> 32.Rd8+ Ng8 33.Ngf3 Rxc3+ 34.Kf4 Rh6 35.Rg1 Rf6 36.Ng5 h6 37.Ngf7+ 1–0What a fantastic game to grace the ‘Final.’ Shirov played a great part in making this a great game. His idea’s were deep and exciting, and he would of beat a lot of good players with his enterprising play. BUT he met a Gata Kamsky in illustrious form! This was such an exciting game. Kamsky was just brilliant today. When in time pressure he dug deep and found some excellent moves. This was no walkover, Kamsky had to be at his best and more to win this. A great effort to play for a win with black, even when he had simplifying options. A great player is Shirov, but Kamsky was even greater today!! |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Ezzy: <CRWynn:> Good post! Just ignore the trolls. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Jim Bartle: It gets kind of comical sometimes. Everybody complains and complains about so many players not taking chances, playing "safety first," the sterility of many games. Fine. Then somebody does take a chance, safety be damned, it doesn't work out, and all of a sudden, he's too reckless, not "solid." Can't have it both ways. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | whiskeyrebel: Nice game. To both combatants, BRAVO. |
|
Dec-14-07
 | | Joshka: <JimBartle> Yes I agree, this is the way folks here seem to be, no matter what types of moves get played.....they can always argue the other way....as Fischer said "You gotta know when to duck, and when to punch".....or something like that...just about all games that end in a win...is caused by the losing player punching and ducking at the wrong times. |
|
| Dec-14-07 | | Jim Bartle: "What a fantastic game to grace the ‘Final.’ Shirov played a great part in making this a great game. His idea’s were deep and exciting, and he would of beat a lot of good players with his enterprising play. BUT he met a Gata Kamsky in illustrious form!" Very well said.
From the little I've read, the strange-looking 18. h4 was the key defensive move. |
|
Dec-14-07
 | | Ulhumbrus: I shall borrow keypusher's praise of the move 29 Ng1!! by giving it two exclamation marks. It answers Black's double attack on the Ne2 not by defending the target a second time, but by moving the target. It prepares to improve the position of the N by taking it towards f3, and threatens to make its contribution towards a decisive attack by the manoeuvre Ng1-f3-g5-f7. Now 29...Ng4+! 30 Nxg4 Bxg4 prevents White from getting the Ng1 into play, and this may save Black. How is White going to make further progress? On 31 Nf3 Rh3 32 f5 Rgg3 overpowers the N. On 31 f5 h5 32 Kf4 Rf2 once more wins the N. |
|
Dec-14-07
 | | Softpaw: Under time pressure Kamsky played with extraordinary precision. I watched with admiration as he found Rybka's preferred moves, one after another-- or when he went with something else, Rybka evaluated the move as equal or better than her own first choice. Shirov, unfortunately, made a few errors under time pressure, and Kamsky got a winning position. Then Shirov disintegrated rapidly. Great game. |
|
Dec-14-07
| | Joshka: Can't black draw with 28...Ng4+?? |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 27 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
