| Oct-12-04 | | radu stancu: Errr... It was white who played 30.Kf2, and it helped him win. While protecting his a-pawn might have worked too I like the fact that Rublevsky disregarded it and went for the central pawns with the king and also kept his rook very active. |
|
| Oct-12-04 | | patzer2: <radu stancu> Thanks! I did a terrible job on those posts in evaluating 30. Kf2!? and deleted them. Looks like 30. Kf2!? was not a bad plan afterall and is worthy of study. |
|
| Oct-12-04 | | tex: Rublevsky is probably world's biggest expert on Bb5 sicilian. I wonder why Gary allowed it. There was like no chance he will get to the Najdorf :) |
|
| Oct-12-04 | | patzer2: The position after 35. h4! is a good illustration of the weakenesss of the doubled pawn in the ending. If after 35. h4! the Black pawn on were on say h3, then Black could play 35...Ke7 to deflect the Rook. However, with the doubled pawn weakness created at move 29. for Black, he is forced to give up a pawn and a dangerous endgame initiative to White. |
|
| Oct-12-04 | | patzer2: I believe 24...Rf6!? would have held OK with counter chances for Kasparov.
Black may also be able to hold after the interesting idea 37...Kd7!? 38. Rg6 Ra1! recommended by Fritz 8 (the difference being that White now does not have the strong 40. Re6+ as in the game). <Clocked> Thanks for the catch! I meant to type 24...Rf6!? |
|
| Oct-12-04 | | patzer2: Kasparov's 6...c4!? is a rare try in this opening but did succeed previously in V Malakhov vs Movsesian, 2002 and held for a draw in Zhong Zhang vs Khalifman, 2001. The mainline is 6...b5 as in Black's wins in Adams vs Shirov, 2002 and Grischuk vs Kasparov, 2002. |
|
| Oct-12-04 | | acirce: Yermolinsky posts this suggestion on Mig Greengard's chessninja.com site: <Ra1 (instead of Ra5??) Rxd5 Re1+ Kf4 (Kf2 Rd1 or Kd4 Re2) e3! de3 Rc1, and draws. Any comments?> That would be 34..Ra1, and I would seem to agree. |
|
Oct-12-04
 | | jaime gallegos: another game ( seven with normal time, 11 if you add 2 against chessprogramms and 2 in rapid match )that Kasparov lost on the last 24 months!
remember : Huzman vs Kasparov, 2003 and
Kasparov vs Radjabov, 2003
and this game because of the huge ELO difference ! |
|
| Oct-12-04 | | patzer2: <acirce> The suggestion 34...Ra1 looks good for a draw to me, with better chances than 37...Kd7!? However, it is still complicated for both sides after 34...Ra1 35. Rxd5 Rxe1+ 36. Kf2 Rd1 37. Rd4 Kf6 38. Ke2 Rg1 39. g3 Rg2+ 40. Ke3  . Yet with that elusive "best play," Black (at least at Kasparov's level of play) should draw. The immediate 34...Ra1 does avoid the (not-so-obvious) loss of tempo associated with 34...Ra5 |
|
| Oct-15-04 | | alexandrovm: <jaime gallegos>, amigo peruano. Tienes algun nick en chessbase.
Espero tu respuesta |
|
| Jun-30-05 | | refutor: i'm just glad the chess tourist got a chance to beat kasparov ;) you could almost hear shirov scream when this game and this game Huzman vs Kasparov, 2003 happened :) |
|
| Aug-22-05 | | who: Another example of Ray Keene's point that Kasparov doesn't do so well against Sicilian's where 3.d4 isn't played. |
|
| Aug-22-05 | | RookFile: Just goes to show you, that Fischer could still win games against Kasparov
by avoiding the 3.d4 systems.
Fischer vs Spassky, 1992 |
|
| Jan-16-06 | | The17thPawn: <Patzer2> - Black lost in the Adams vs Shirov, 2002. In fact it looks like Adams is about to deliver an instructive mate when Shirov resigns. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | ToTheDeath: <Another example of Ray Keene's point that Kasparov doesn't do so well against Sicilian's where 3.d4 isn't played.> I suppose that's a relative statement. Against the Closed Sicilian B23 the database shows Kasparov scoring 5 wins, 6 draws and no losses. Against the Canal-Sokolsky Attack B51 Kasparov has scored 5 wins, 2 draws, and only 1 loss (Ivanchuk). Against the Alapin B22 we see 6 wins, 5 draws and only 2 losses, one in 1976 as a 13 year old boy and the other against Deep Blue. Not a bad record at all.
It appears that only against this line of the Rossolimo 2...Nc6 3.Bb5 does he slip a bit, with 2 wins, 2 draws and 3 losses. |
|
| Jul-25-09 | | The Rocket: "just goes to show you, that Fischer could still win games against Kasparov by avoiding the 3.d4 systems. " how in the world does this game show that fischer could beat kasparov? Because kasparov loses a game to a 2650 guy whos an expert in the line, you draw the conclusion that because fischer beats a 2600 spassky in 1992 (whos probably in the 1992 shape gonna get hammered by rublevsky) with non d4- systems that he would beat kasparov!?. a very very strange conclusion... |
|
| Oct-07-09 | | WhiteRook48: you can't compare Fischer and Kasparov |
|
| Apr-22-17 | | Finnishplayer: Rublevsky played wonderfully well in this game IMHO. Am I right? |
|
Jul-20-19
 | | g15713: Black to move. Last: 43.Re5
click for larger view43...g6 is a clear-cut draw according to FinalGen and it is also much easier to defend than the following tightrope that Black faced after the game continuation... White to move after 43...g6
click for larger viewStockfish analysis:
1) +0.08 (47 ply) 44.Kc5 Rg1 45.Rd5+ Kc7 46.Kb4 Kc6 47.Ra5 Kd7 48.Rc5 Kd6 49.Rb5 Kc6 50.c4 Rb1+ 51.Kc3 Rg1 52.Ra5 Kb6 53.Rd5 Kc6 54.Kb4 Rg2 55.Rc5+ Kd6 56.Rb5 Kd7 57.Ra5 Kc7 58.Kb3 Rg1 59.Re5 Kd6 60.Rb5 Kc6 61.Kc2 Rg3 62.Ra5 Rg2+ 63.Kb3 Rg1 64.Kb2 Rg3 65.Re5 Rg4 66.Kc3 Rg2 67.Kd4 Rg4+ 68.Kd3 Rg3+ 69.Ke4 Rg4+ 70.Kf3 2) +0.08 (46 ply) 44.Kd5 Rg4 45.Kc5 Rg1 46.Rd5+ Kc7 47.Kb4 Kc6 48.Ra5 Kd7 49.Rc5 Kd6 50.Rb5 Kc6 51.c4 Rb1+ 52.Kc3 Rg1 53.Ra5 Kb6 54.Rd5 Kc6 55.Kb4 Rg2 56.Rc5+ Kd6 57.Rb5 Kd7 58.Ra5 Kc7 59.Kb3 Rg1 60.Re5 Kd6 61.Rb5 Kc6 62.Kc2 Kd7 63.Kd3 Rg3+ 64.Kd4 Rg4+ 65.Kc3 Rg3+ 66.Kb2 Rg2+ 67.Kb3 Rg4 68.Ra5 Kc7 Game continuation went instead:
43...Kd6 44.Ra5
Black to move. Last: 44.Ra5
Karsten Muller and Yakov Konoval in their illustrious 2016 chess book, Understanding Rook Endgames, analyzed this rook ending on pages 167-168. <"The defense can be so difficult that even Kasparov failed to hold in the following case"> Diagram 4.7.37 - Muller 
click for larger view44...Rg4+ 45.Kb3 Rg1 46.Kb4 Rb1+ 47.Kc4 Ke6! 48.Ra6+ Kf5 49.g6 Rg1 50.Kb5 Ke5 51.c4 Rb1+! 52.Kc6 Black to move. Last: 52.Kc6
click for larger viewBlack now played 52...Rg1? Muller quotes:
<"This allows White's king to cross over to the kingside."> 52...Rc1! draws, for example, Muller gives the following <Houdini magic> drawing line: 53.Kc5 Rg1! 54.Rd6 Rg4! 55.Rd5+ Kf6! 56.Kb5 Ke6! 57.Rc5 Rg1! 58.Rc6+ Ke5! 59.Kb6 Rb1+! 60.Kc7 Kf5 61.Rd6 Rc1! 62.Rd5+ Ke6 63.Rc5 Rc2 64.Rc6+ Ke5! 65.Kd7 Kf5! 66.Ke7 Kg5! 67.Kf7 Kh6! 68.c5 Rxc5!! 69.Rxc5 stalemate. 
click for larger viewAfter the game continuation of 52...Rg1? White won as follows:
53. Kd7 Rd1+ 54. Ke7 Rb1 55. Ra5+ Kd4 56. Kf8 Rb7 57. Rf5 1-0 |
|
| Aug-05-19 | | Howard: Was not aware that this was the ONLY time that Rublevsky played the greatest player of all time. |
|
| Feb-06-22 | | jbuczyna: Howard: Was not aware that this was the ONLY time that Rublevsky played the greatest player of all time. It's not--he has played Carlsen twice...and beaten him twice! |
|
Aug-25-23
 | | plang: 15 Rfe1 had been played in Vaulin-Moroz Pardubice 1992 (game not included in this database); 15 Rab1 was new. The line with 6..c4!? is double-edged but in this game led to a better endgame for White due to Black's extended pawn formation. 22..Bf5! was a clever attempt to activate his pieces (23 Nxd5..Be4!); perhaps 23 Re1 would have been a better response than Rublevsky's 23 Nxf5?!. 24..Raf8?! led to a poor rook ending for Black; Rublevsky suggested 24..Rf6 25 Rxf6..gxf 26 g3 with some edge for White. White gave up his a-pawn with 30 Kf2! in order to activate his king and rook. 45..Ke6 46 c4..g6 47 Kb4 was suggested as a tougher defense though White would still have had excellent winning chances. That neither Rublevsky or Hansen (in Secrets of Chess Endgame Strategy) mention Muller's 52..Rc1! is just further evidence of how tricky rook endgames can be. |
|
Aug-25-23
 | | perfidious: <plang.....That neither Rublevsky or Hansen (in Secrets of Chess Endgame Strategy) mention Muller's 52..Rc1! is just further evidence of how tricky rook endgames can be.> Not to mention why one must work hard away from the board nowadays on all phases, with no adjournments. |
|
Kibitzing
Annotations by 