|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 39 OF 65 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-08-10 | | TheFocus: <AnalyzeThis>< There's some money to be made. 2011 will be the 50th anniversary of this match. Hard to believe. There isn't really a good book on the Fischer vs. Reshevsky match. Some IM or GM could write something, and....> Does anyone know if Reshevsky analyzed any of the games from this match. Bobby did three in My 60 Memorable Games and Evans did all the games in Chess Review (or was it Chess Life?). |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | jerseybob: keypusher; I'll try to explain that, at least as best as I can from this vantage point: the first two losses, in 1935 and 36, occurred when Keres was 19 and 20, before he had reached his late-30's peak. His one win, in 1937, occurred when he was reaching that peak, the 3 remaining losses, in the early 1940s, occurred in Nazi-occupied Europe after Kere's homeland had been brutally occupied by the Soviets and Keres was a man without a home. Yes, he eventually became a "Soviet" player, but just to stay alive. Having the sovereignty of your country snatched away must be shattering, and I don't think he was ever really the same player or person after that. He bore it all with incredible grace though. There's no doubt in my mind that just before the outbreak of WW2 several young players, Keres, Botvinnik, Fine and possibly even Reshevsky, could have beaten Alekhine in a match. |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | Petrosianic: Mednis annotated two games in <How to Beat Bobby Fischer>. And all of them were annotated in both Chess Life and Chess Review, though I'm not sure which one featured Evan's notes. |
|
Jan-08-10
 | | chancho: <jerseybob: His one win, in 1937, occurred when he was reaching that peak> You mean this game?
Keres vs Alekhine, 1937
Alekhine blundered with 22...Qb4. Not to diminish the game, the combination is a beauty, but after this game he did not beat Alekhine again. Keres may have endured stress during those times but he was winning games, he even beat Klaus Junge,a talented player who happened to be a Nazi Officer. K Junge vs Keres, 1942 |
|
Jan-08-10
 | | keypusher: < the 3 remaining losses, in the early 1940s, occurred in Nazi-occupied Europe after Kere's homeland had been brutally occupied by the Soviets and Keres was a man without a home. > Well, this is a new twist on the old "I never beat a healthy opponent" line. You are mistaken about Estonia. It was occupied by the Soviets in 1940 but the Germans kicked them out the following year. Estonia remained behind German lines during the WWII tournaments you mention. Keres played in tournaments with Nazi sponsorship (including Salzberg) and participated in exhibitions against German soldiers. The Nazis didn't force him to, either. They didn't give a damn about chess. Just sayin. |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | Gypsy: < There's no doubt in my mind that just before the outbreak of WW2 several young players, Keres, Botvinnik, Fine and possibly even Reshevsky, could have beaten Alekhine in a match. > Yes they could have. And back in those days it was actually nearly a foregone conclusion that they would have. But, lets make no mistake, AAA had quite a bit left in the tank. If you examine his games from the war years, you will see that he had a great creative surge. I personally believe that AAA played his best chess in his 1927 match with Capa; but that it is a horse race whether AAA was more creative in 1930-32 or in 1941-43. |
|
Jan-08-10
| | chancho: In the 1930's Alekhine was dominating. (except for Capa who he was not playing) Nimzowitsch said at Bled 1931:
He's treating us all like patzers! |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | Gypsy: Somewhere I saw a quote by Keres, that it was practically impossible to defeat Capablanca; but that it was practically hopeless to play Alekhine at all. |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | Petrosianic: In 1931 that was true. Alekhine dominated everyone, except Capablanca, whom he was avoiding. He may not have done himself any favors there. If he'd played Capablanca a rematch in 30-31, he might have won and ended up with a much greater reputation. In the late 30's, though, he'd slid badly. Not into obscurity, he was still on top of the pack, but there were 4 or 5 others right up there with him. Reshevsky said that none of them could have beaten Alekhine then, but I think he was thinking of the earlier Alekhine more than the Alekhine that actually existed in 1939-40. |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | Petrosianic: Keres also had an article in either Chess Life or Review in early 1940 in which he gave his evaluation of each of the main challengers' chances against Botvinnik. I don't remember what he said, except that it was worth reading. I think it also shows up in The Best of Chess Life & Review, Volume 1. |
|
Jan-08-10
| | chancho: <Briton Ken Whyld, co-author of The Oxford Companion to Chess, is another
highly respected chess historian. His contribution to this discussion is best
expressed in his own words:>
<“Keres told me in private, when he was my guest in Nottingham, that he was not ordered to lose those games to Botvinnik, and was not playing to lose. But he had been given a broader instruction that if Botvinnik failed to become World
Champion, it must not be the fault of Keres.”> http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skitt... |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | TheFocus: <chanco> Thanks for that link. A good article by Taylor Kingston. |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | Petrosianic: Keres' article is actually in Chess Review 1941, page 51. His high points: Moral priority to challenge Alekhine belongs to Capablanca and Euwe, as ex-champions. The super-class that Alekhine represented in the early 30's no longer existed. AVRO and the 1939 Euwe-Keres match were arranged partly to help Euwe make a new challenge, but in neither event did Euwe justify the hopes placed in him. Fine beat Alekhine twice at AVRO, but this was largely due to reckless play by Alekhine. Fine is inferior to Alekhine as regards both resourcefuless and in grasping the hidden depths of a position, but surpasses him in endurange, nerves, and opening knowledge. But a Fine-Alekhine match is unlikely, due to Fine's position as #2 American player. Reshevsky is as original as Alekhine and great at time pressure and the endgame. Openings are his weakness, as is a feeling of superiority left over from his child prodigy days. As attacking players, a match between them would be good. Botvinnik is more sure and calm than Reshevsky. He excells in theoretical knowledge, positional play and defense. Botvinnik would have the best chances against Alekhine (Remember, this was written in 1940). Capablanca named Keres and Botvinnik as the best challengers after himself. Flohr is no less stable than Botvinnik, and excels at positional play. Good at both the opening and endgame, his weakness lies in trying to solve in a positional way problems that call for other solutions. Keres considers himself primarily combinational, but positional when he needs to be. Believes he shares a defect with Alekhine in disliking waiting play and passive defense. In addition to the 7 at AVRO, he considers Bondarevsky, Lilienthal and Smyslov to be worth watching too. Anyway, the full article is well worth reading. Keres says it better. He mentions that after he won Semmering-Baden in 1937, the tournament committee sent a challenge to Alekhine on his behalf, which was, thankfully ignored, as he feels he would have gotten creamed then. The most notable thing about the article is that he makes absolutely no claim to having priority in challenging due to his having won the AVRO tournament. |
|
| Jan-08-10 | | jerseybob: keypusher: I stand corrected on which tyrant had his jackboots on Keres' throat at that perticular moment in time when he lost those three early-40s games to Alekhine: it was the Gauleiters, not the Komissars. But my opinion as to Keres' state of mind doesn't change. As a displaced person in wartime Europe, life must've been hellish. As to not being forced to play chess by the Nazis, well, if chess is all you can do, then you play chess. It's not like he could hop a plane to NYC. And by the way, how do you know the Nazis "didn't give a damn about chess"? In fact, the Nazis often organized "civilized-looking" things like cultural events in their prison camps - and Fortress Europa was one big prison - to put on a good face for the outside world. |
|
Jan-09-10
| | chancho: <Petrosianic> The Keres comment about Sammy's feelings of superiority being a weakness, reminded me of this game: S Webb vs Reshevsky, 1973
The late Simon Webb wrote about this game in his book: Chess for Tigers. He said throughout this game that he was being subjected to smoke warfare and aggro by Reshevsky, and that he was worse throughout the game and realized that he was losing. At move 30, he spotted a tactic that could only work if Sammy played his Queen to d7. He thought that if he quickly played his move, Sammy would become suspicious and find the trap, so he took a few minutes deliberating on his move, all the while shaking his head, sighing, and trying to give the impression that it was all rather hopeless. He then hesitantly reached for his Rook, and moved it to f3 as if he was not sure it was the right place for the piece.
Sammy looked at Webb, and smiled, smugly moving his Queen to d7.
(The move Webb was hoping for.)
Webb suddenly played 30...Nc5, banging the Knight on the square for psychological effect. Sammy sat bolt upright, looked at the position, and realized what had just happened to him.
He played his move, and then offered a draw, which Webb quickly rejected... since he did not have to play the role of the victim any longer. |
|
| Jan-09-10 | | AnalyzeThis: Was Reshevsky still smoking as late as 1973? How did the guy live to be so old - it's pretty unbelievable that he didn't get lung cancer or something. |
|
| Jan-09-10 | | parisattack: <AnalyzeThis: Was Reshevsky still smoking as late as 1973? How did the guy live to be so old - it's pretty unbelievable that he didn't get lung cancer or something.> Its all in the genes, I think. Or, at least most of it. Diet and lifestyle minor components as far as I can tell if you have the right stuff gene-wise. I had an uncle who smoked two packs of Lucky Strikes a day from 14 on and lived to be 89. Not something I would try, howsomeever - I smoked for maybe two years in my 30s, gave it up as stinky-dirty habit. |
|
| Jan-09-10 | | Red October: smoking can easily kill me, im very allergic to something in the fumes.. |
|
Jan-09-10
 | | gezafan: A couple of interesting things about the Webb-Rehevsky game. Reshevsky offered a draw while using the exchange. He may have been successful with this tactic before, relying in on his reputation. Reshevsky put up a stiff resistance. A lesser player than Webb may not have won. Seeing the way Reshevsky defended his postion is a lesson in itself. |
|
Jan-09-10
| | chancho: <gezafan> I think you meant losing the exchange.
Sorry for my nitpicking. |
|
| Jan-09-10 | | jerseybob: Smoke and chess will always go together in my mind. Whenever I smell a cigar - not that often these days!- I think of the Franklin-Mercantile CC in Philly, the first big time club I ever belonged to. As often as not your opponent would be some kind of smoker, but it was something you just tolerated. Today, different story. |
|
| Jan-09-10 | | AnalyzeThis: It's incredible that Reshevsky gave up chess for 10 years, then came back and just started winning. |
|
| Jan-09-10 | | jerseybob: What time period are you referring to? If you mean from 1922-32, that's not exactly so. |
|
Jan-09-10
| | chancho: Sammy played in the First National Chess Federation Congress of Kalamazoo in 1927. He then took a 4 year lay off to dedicate himself to school studies. He returned to play in tournaments in 1931. |
|
| Jan-09-10 | | jerseybob: He also payed in a tourney in Detroit 1924, 3 games from which are in this database. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 39 OF 65 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
