|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 19 OF 19 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
| Jun-15-09 |
| xrt999: <returnoftheking: < xrt999: In his lifetime, Geller played 890 games as black and only lost 90 of these games.
He won 264 and drew 536. >
He had a 60 percent score with black??>
These numbers may not be 100% accurate; I extracted these statistics from the CM database, which only contains about 1,700 Geller games, and physically counted each section by hand. It was quite tedious, but I was really on a mission to get the info, and couldnt figure out how to get the database to give me the statistics. I was able to get to the actual point of all of Geller's games as black, and could then arrange them by win-loss-draw. After a while of laboring over how to then get the numbers, I remember saying to myself "just freakin count the things". Sometimes we rely on technology too much, and forget that we can always "old school" it. cheers |
 |
| Jun-15-09 |
| WhiteRook48: my that's impressive |
|
| Jul-24-09 |
| M.D. Wilson: Botvinnik thought Geller was the best player in the world in the mid to late 1960s. I think Spassky was better, but only just. Spassky matched up well against Geller, but Geller matched up well against virtually everyone else. |
|
Aug-07-09
 |
| percyblakeney: <Botvinnik thought Geller was the best player in the world in the mid to late 1960s> If Botvinnik really ranked Geller ahead of Spassky during that period his judgment could have been better... I mean, they played two Candidates matches then and Spassky won both with a big margin (+3), apart from also winning the World Championship. |
|
| Aug-08-09 |
| M.D. Wilson: Botvinnik was, with all respect, wrong on a number of occassions. He was completely off the mark with the 10 year old Karpov. Spassky matched up very well against Geller, but Geller could beat anyone in any individual game or games; perhaps Botvinnik should have said "Geller is the most dangerous player in the world". In my opinion, Anand is better than Ivanchuk, but when in form, Ivanchuk is very dangerous indeed, and can beat anyone. Lasker was also renowned, even in his latter years, for being "dangerous". An interesting quality. |
|
Sep-29-09
 |
| kamalakanta: <percyblakeney: <Botvinnik thought Geller was the best player in the world in the mid to late 1960s> <If Botvinnik really ranked Geller ahead of Spassky during that period his judgment could have been better... I mean, they played two Candidates matches then and Spassky won both with a big margin (+3), apart from also winning the World Championship.> It is funny how sometimes it is a matter of players matching up correctly. Also, Spassky had a brilliant trainer, Bondarevsky, who helped him find Geller's weakness: Geller felt uncomfortable when his king was under attack. Spassky, on the other hand, did not match well with Karpov. |
|
| Sep-29-09 |
| WhiteRook48: ... a record he shares only with Botvinnik, Petrosian, and Korchnoi
what about Paul Keres? |
|
Sep-29-09
 |
| Benzol: <WhiteRook48> You're right that Keres should get a mention. See the earlier post of <LittleWing: Dear chessgames.com!
According to the database, Paul Keres is the recorder, who scored against 9 world champions:
1. Capablanca
2. Alekhine
3. Euwe
4. Botvinnik
5. Smyslov
6. Tal
7. Petrosian
8. Spassky
9. Fischer>
Checking in "Warriors Of The Mind" I find that Keres has a slight plus against Smyslov (+9, =23, -8); dead even with Petrosian (+3, =25, -3); a plus score with Euwe (+11, =9, -7); a negative score with Spassky (+3, =18, -5); a plus against Tal (+8, 15, -5); negative with Botvinnik (+3, =9, -8); negative with Alyekhin (+1, =8, -5); dead even with Fischer and a slight plus with Capablanca (+1, =5, -0). BTW he played Karpov twice as well with both games bein drawn. |
|
Sep-29-09
 |
| JaneEyre: <dead even with Fischer> A miscount, I think. Fischer was 4-3 with Keres. |
|
Sep-30-09
|
| Benzol: <JaneEyre> It looks like you're right. According to Keene & Divinsky the score was (+3, =4, -3) in ten games. However, Wade & O'Connell have the following :
1.Zurich 1959 Fischer
2.Bled 1961 draw
3.Bled/Zagreb/Belgrade Candidates 1959 two wins each
4.Curacao Candidates 1962 One win each and two draws This gives Fischer (+4, =3, -3) against Keres.
It appears that Keene & Divinsky have reversed the number of Fischer wins with the draws in their data. |
|
| Sep-30-09 |
| ewan14: During the time period in question did Geller match up well against Korchnoi and Larsen ? |
|
| Sep-30-09 |
| ewan14: I think Larsen is up on Geller ! ! !
when Larsen was at his peak , 1967 - 1970 |
|
| Sep-30-09 |
| returnoftheking: <xrt99> only now seen your post, I will try to check it one of these days with megabase and the computer count. Bravo for the work btw. |
|
Sep-30-09
 |
| parisattack: A new volume in the Chess Secrets series is out now: Power Players - and includes Geller. Previous Secret volumes were Giants of Strategy and Great Attackers. |
|
| Oct-01-09 |
| TheFocus: Does anyone know if Geller ever published a book he discussed in which he would analyze all the games he played against Fischer? |
|
Oct-01-09
|
| JaneEyre: <1.Zurich 1959 Fischer
2.Bled 1961 draw
3.Bled/Zagreb/Belgrade Candidates 1959 two wins each
4.Curacao Candidates 1962 One win each and two draws >It's just a pity, of course, that Fischer played neither Keres, Tal nor Botvinnik again after 1962. |
|
Oct-01-09
|
| parisattack: <TheFocus: Does anyone know if Geller ever published a book he discussed in which he would analyze all the games he played against Fischer?> Are you thinking of Application of Chess Theory?
Not much on Geller for the outstanding player he was - Grandmaster Geller at the Chessboard, the Russian 'Black' book of his games... |
|
| Oct-01-09 |
| TheFocus: <parisattack> The review of that book says Geller analyzes 100 games, all wins. No, I think the book Geller spoke of doing would only be his games against Fischer. I will check and see if he spoke of it in Russians vs. Fischer. |
|
| Oct-01-09 |
| returnoftheking: I don't remember anything about that, it would be a very short book.. |
|
Oct-01-09
 |
| stoy: According to Bronstein's widow her husband, as he lay on his deathbed, named Geller, not himself, as the greatest player of the King's Indian defence. |
|
| Oct-01-09 |
| TheFocus: Botvinnik quote: "Before Geller, we did not understand the King's Indian." |
|
| Oct-01-09 |
| ughaibu: By my quick calculation, I make his record 69%: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
Oct-02-09
|
| parisattack: I am looking forward to seeing the Chess Secrets book with Geller. There was a website dedicated to him I saw once some years back. Can't find it now, anyone know of it? Done by a Danish or Sandinavian fellow if memory serves. |
|
Oct-04-09
|
| parisattack: I received my copy of Chess Secrets: The Giants of Power Play. Neil McDonald did a great job on the Giants of Strategy tome and appears to have done a good job here, also. The players considered: Topalov, Geller, Bronstein, Alekhine and Morphy. I am not sure on Bronstein as a Power Player - and I would have switched Alekhine to the Attacking volume and Stein to this one. I've only read the first chapter, Dynamic Elements which is something of an introduction. Some interesting topics follow - Catching the King in the Center, the Goldielocks Queen and A Battering Ram on the f-file. For the Geller fan starved for annotated games, there are 18 here. There are so many chess books coming out from the Brit publishers these past few years. I used to try and buy all of them but gave up - too many in quantity and too few of quality. But The Giants of Power Play is a keeper, IMHO. |
|
Nov-03-09
 |
| BlueMooner: I thoroughly agree with Paris. McDonald's annotation collections are consistently entertaining and his latest offering 'Chess Secrets: The Giants of Power Play' is no exception. Geller's games are great fun & I have been impressed with his aggressive but principled repertoire - some good and exciting ideas. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 19 OF 19 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
