|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 223 OF 376 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jul-18-06
 | | chancho: <JustAFish> I was sure I read 75 moves somewhere, so I took a look at the Oxford Chess Companion and it says there are six basic endgames where the number of moves is extended to 75. |
 |
| Jul-20-06 | | JustAFish: < I was sure I read 75 moves somewhere, so I took a look at the Oxford Chess Companion and it says there are six basic endgames where the number of moves is extended to 75.> Interesting. I wasn't aware of ths.
What year was your Oxford Chess Companion published? I'm reading through the FIDE laws of chess right now and cannot find any citation of this exception: http://www.fide.com/official/handbo...
Historical notes online seem to suggest that, at one point, the number of moves was extended to 100 for certain endgames, but that this exception was removed at a later time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifty_...
If this exception is still around in certain quarters (such as certain National chess federations), does anyone know how it works in practice? Does one call an arbiter to decide whether the position is one of those that requires more than 50 moves to finsh off, or do the players invoke it themselves? I had heard that certain endgames, given perfect play and defense, take more than 50 moves to win- such as two bishops vs. Knight- in which case I would assume, given the laws of chess, the game is simply a draw when 50 moves is reach and, colloquially, boo-hoo to the player with more material. In the case of bishop+knight vs. lone king This seems weird to me in any case, since that combination of pieces should should, theoretically, take 35 moves or less with perfect play. It seems curious to me that the "exception" would be granted to this particular combination of pieces, allowing the player with more material a 15 move "buffer" of mistakes to make. |
|
Jul-20-06
| | chancho: <JustAFish> My copy of the <The Oxford Companion To Chess>, was copyrighted in 1992. Here's something on the fifty move law. (page 134) <fifty - move law
If both players have made 50 moves without capturing a man or moving a pawn, a player whose turn it is to move may claim a draw except for six basic endgames for which the number of moves is extended to 75: these are Q vs B+B. Q vs N+N. B+B vs N. N+N vs P. Q+P one square from promoting vs Q. and R+B vs R. This law was enacted by FIDE in 1988 and superseded a mercifully short- lived 100 move law.
The first three of the six exceptions rarely occur in play. The last three occur more often, but the great majority of positions are either drawn or can be won in fewer than 50 moves. R+B vs R occurs most frequently and wins in more than 50 moves are few, while many positions are drawn at the start. Not surprisingly, many players object to the imposition of a 75 move defensive task.> |
|
| Jul-20-06 | | JustAFish: Well, this is good to know. Perhaps I should carry a xerox of this rule around with me in my wallet in case one of the qualifiying situations ever arise. :-) |
|
| Aug-07-06 | | Resignation Trap: <ray keene> I am looking forward to your new book <<Petrosian Against The Elite>>. In particular I am eagerly awaiting your explanation on how Petrosian dealt with his "difficult" opponents, such as Lajos Portisch or Ratmir Kholmov . |
|
Aug-07-06
 | | technical draw: <Resignation Trap> This is how Petrosian dealt with Lajos Portisch. Portisch vs Petrosian, 1982 |
|
| Aug-09-06 | | positionalgenius: Hey Raymond Keene I just read your book on the 1990 WCC match between Kasparov and Karpov and it was very good.Where can I find your Kramnik-Leko book? |
|
Aug-09-06
 | | ray keene: <positional genius> thanks for yr kind comments on my kasparov v karpov 1990 book--the kramnik v leko book is available from amazon or the direct hardinge simpole link on this site -see top of this page-or via www.hardingesimpole.co.uk where most of my in print books can also be found |
|
Aug-10-06
| | ray keene: <resignation trap> i hope you like the petrosian book -it shd be out soon-i dont recall giving any of petrosians games v kholmov but we do have a number v portisch |
|
| Aug-14-06 | | AdrianP: The 4th Staunton Memorial - starting today - has received remarkably little publicity. A much stronger line-up than usual - including Adams, Sokolov, Timman and our very own Lawrence Day. Details here: http://www.howardstaunton.com/hsmt2... |
|
| Aug-14-06 | | Captain Scarlet: A decent line-up for the Staunton Memorial but no live coverage, unfortunately. |
|
| Aug-14-06 | | weary willy: <ray keene: there are indeed some people who make a speciality of learning how to mate with bishop and knight> I though I had a recollection of you playing just such an ending at Blackpool British Championship 1971 ... (against "Reid"???) but I think I might be confusing it with your gane against Eric Holt |
|
| Aug-15-06 | | whatthefat: <ray keene>
One question I've often wondered about, is which of Tal's own games did he like the most? I've never found a good source for this information. It would be interesting to know whether his view changed on this as well, since he had some real gems later on too. Perhaps you might know?And out of interest, what (handful of) Tal's games do you consider his best? |
|
Aug-16-06
| | ray keene: staunton memorial 4 is the strongest all play all in london for twenty years-there has been a good preview in the daily telegraph, two weekend features in the times and a preview in the current spectator. the staunton website is up and running and chessgames itself already has both of the played rounds up, some games with notes by eric schiller.our problem with live games reportage is that eric schiller who wd have been arbiter and IT guru suffered a stroke and cd not come-already short staffed , our webmistress tinni nan was then hospitalised over the weekend-she is now back home but it slowed us down. however from now on i expect that the games will appear each day here on chessgames , tho not in real time. |
|
Aug-16-06
| | ray keene: <weary willy> my game v holt blackpool brit ch 1971 was just a very long game-not b and n v king--keene v sanz alicante 1975 was another long win in the ending 2 b v n. finally keene de castro lugano ol 1968 might have reached the ending of b and n v king but i failed to win blacks last rook for my passed pawn. |
|
| Aug-16-06 | | positionalgenius: GO ADAMS |
|
Aug-16-06
| | ray keene: <what the fat> smyslov v tal ussr internal team comp 1964 where tal played the tremendous ---qe2!! sac'ing his queen was i believe his favourite game-i wd certainly include this in his top ten in addition to reach a top ten i wd include the following in no particular order tal v hecht varna 1962
tal v panno interzonal 1958
gurgenidze v tal ussr 1956-not sure of date-its a modern benoni keres v tal cands 1959-a defensive masterpiece
tal v fischer cands 1959-kid where white doubles rooks on the 8th
tal v smyslov cands 1959 a d3 caro kann
botvinnik v tal game 6 i think 1960 wcc kid where tal sacs with nf4!!? portisch v tal interzonal 1964 is a fabulous draw-tho perhaps not one of tals very best games so i will add two more wins
spassky v tal montreal 1969
tal v larsen final match game 1965
i wd be interested to hear of any thoughts on my list |
|
| Aug-16-06 | | whatthefat: <ray keene>
Thanks for that - especially the info regarding the smyslov game.I'd largely agree with your list. Some other games I really like are:
Tal-Simagin, 1956;
Tal-Botvinnik, 1960 game 1;
Tal-Hjartson, 1987;
Tal-Keller, 1959;
Spassky-Tal, 1973. |
|
Aug-16-06
 | | KingG: Some of my favourite Tal games are the totally crazy ones with pieces en prise all over the board, such as Tal vs Tolush, 1956 or Tal vs Koblents, 1957. There may be mistakes in these kind of games, but in such complex positions, it's not surprising. Even computers would make some inaccuracies. |
|
Aug-16-06
 | | Domdaniel: <ray Keene> I'm very much looking forwarded to that Petrosian book. I recall an earlier collection - not by you, but taken from a Russian source - was top-heavy with games from the 1940s and early 50s, mostly easy wins against obscure Armenians etc.
Anyway, I trust the new book will take after your classic on Nimzowitsch. I got the algebraic version recently, having 'lost' the original - and I also tracked down Bjorn Neilsen's Danish Nimzo book from the 1940s. |
|
| Aug-16-06 | | Nikita Smirnov: I am now reading his book "How to win with the Nimzo-Indian"
It is really a great book I strongly recommend this book.I did even remmember a game there:
Gherghiou-Stein,Mar del Plata 1965 |
|
Aug-16-06
| | Domdaniel: <ray keene> Speaking of long games, I can recall a couple from the 1970s where you won or drew delicate endings with the help of adjournment analysis - including,I think, one of the key games leading to the GM title. Do you think this would be possible with current time controls and no adjournments? I remember, years ago, Tim Harding complaining vociferously about the old rate of play: even that was too fast for him. He still beat me.
More seriously, there seems to be a generation of players who regard endings as a subset of blitz. |
|
| Aug-19-06 | | Nikita Smirnov: I like him as annonator. |
|
Aug-21-06
 | | jamesmaskell: <ray> What do you think the Government should do in order to improve Britains prospects in Chess? I ask because ConservativeHome is currently undergoing a project where its trying to come up with 100 policies which the website can propose to Cameron as possible policies (he needs to get some at some point in the next 4 years...). Perhaps support of chess amongst other mind sports could be one of them? Anything specific you can think of? |
|
Aug-22-06
| | ray keene: <what the fat> yes your tal additions are all worthy selections--tho i sense that the ---qe2 q sac game v smyslov is still the best of the bunch! |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 223 OF 376 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
