|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-22-19 | | john barleycorn: <keypusher: ...
If prep was all that it would have done Karpov more good against Korchnoi in 1978. But there weren't many games like Karpov vs Korchnoi, 1974. Karpov's ownership of Spassky, which began early and never let up, doesn't strike me as particularly prep-dependent. ...>Karpov's ownership started in the candidates semifinal 1974 . Spassky was the yardstick for Karpov. beating Spassky convincingly would / could be seen as a measure for his readiness to play Fischer as there was nothing else there. Just my way in looking at it. The Karpov-Korchnoi battles have to be rated differently. Preparing for Korchnoi may be different from preparing for Fischer. |
 |
May-22-19
 | | keypusher: <keypusher>
<But in this game, the prepared move is 21....Rd8, weaker apparently than 21....Be3. > In other words, the Soviet team failed to find the strongest move in one sideline 21 moves in. That is a ludicrously high standard for judging pre-match preparation. Apparently the Black novelties put the Sozin Attack permanently on the skids, that's pretty good.... I figured I'd point out my own stupidity before someone decided they had to. <jbc> <ownership> These things can't be dated precisely, but Karpov vs Spassky, 1973. Karpov also almost got Spassky in the Soviet championship that year. Karpov vs Spassky, 1973. Karpov also came close to losing that game, however.... |
|
| May-22-19 | | john barleycorn: Maybe, an expert like <TheFocus> can shed some more light here or even a 3/4 expert like <MissScarlett> ... CG will handle the bill, I hope |
|
May-22-19
 | | harrylime: <<john barleycorn: Maybe, an expert like <TheFocus> can shed some more light here or even a 3/4 expert like <MissScarlett> ... CG will handle the bill, I hope>> You need more German Lager <BarleyBore> lol lol lol |
|
| May-22-19 | | john barleycorn: < keypusher: ...
<jbc> <ownership> These things can't be dated precisely, but Karpov vs Spassky, 1973. Karpov also almost got Spassky in the Soviet championship that year. Karpov vs Spassky, 1973. Karpov also came close to losing that game, however....> <Karpov also almost got Spassky> well, that is not exactly "owning". Nor is this <Karpov vs Spassky, 1973. Karpov also came close to losing that game, however...> See, there is part of our problem in communication. I said Karpov "owned" Spassky from the semifinals in 1974 on. And you reply that Karpov almost "owned" Spassky before that. See it? According to the database here Karpov and Spassky played 5 games before the 1974 semifinals. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
May-22-19
| | harrylime: bARLEY BOOOORE GOING INTO MENTAL MELTDOOOOOON on these pages ! lol lol lol lol |
|
May-22-19
| | keypusher: <jbc>
<See, there is part of our problem in communication. >You're saying ownership took place in 1974. I'm saying <it can't be precisely dated> but maybe it started in 1973. And you appear to think that infinitesimal difference of opinion is worth a long and vigorous argument. So, I cannot agree that communication is the problem, or even part of the problem. We're both communicating just fine. The problem is, you're bonkers. Especially about anything that touches, however lightly, on Bobby Fischer. |
|
May-22-19
| | harrylime: The Poster <Keypusher> is a NOTORIOUS Robert Fischer HATER on this site. This needs to be said lol lol lol |
|
May-24-19
| | harrylime: Bobby got outta jail here.
He really was on his own Up against the rest of the chess world which was the SOVIETS. They knew all his games. |
|
May-24-19
| | harrylime: Robert Fischer is the GREATEST.
Discuss |
|
May-24-19
 | | Diademas: <harrylime: Robert Fischer is the GREATEST. Discuss>
Groundbreaking and original thoughts.
Is this a conclusion you just reached after strenuous studies and comparative analysis? |
|
| May-24-19 | | john barleycorn: <harrylime: Robert Fischer is the GREATEST. Discuss>
Fischer is the Greatest. Nothing to discuss. |
|
May-24-19
| | harrylime: <Diademas: <harrylime: Robert Fischer is the GREATEST.
Discuss>
Groundbreaking and original thoughts.
Is this a conclusion you just reached after strenuous studies and comparative analysis?> You been in a COMA this last 70 years ? |
|
May-24-19
| | Diademas: : <harrylime: <Diademas: <harrylime: Robert Fischer is the GREATEST. Discuss> Groundbreaking and original thoughts.
Is this a conclusion you just reached after strenuous studies and comparative analysis?>
You been in a COMA this last 70 years ?> Well, for 19 of them I hadn't even been born.
Sarcasm not your strength? |
|
| May-24-19 | | john barleycorn: <Diademas: : ...
Sarcasm not your strength?>
not in the last 19 years. |
|
May-24-19
| | harrylime: <Diademas: : <harrylime: <Diademas: <harrylime: Robert Fischer is the GREATEST. Discuss> Groundbreaking and original thoughts. Is this a conclusion you just reached after strenuous studies and comparative analysis?> You been in a COMA this last 70 years ?>
Well, for 19 of them I hadn't even been born.
Sarcasm not your strength?>
Actually itz my GREATEST STRENGTH .
You ok ? lol lol |
|
May-25-19
 | | Keyser Soze: <The problem is, you're bonkers. Especially about anything that touches, however lightly, on Bobby Fischer.> LOL. Also Kasparov, Short, Abdel Irada, Susan Polgar, etcetc |
|
| May-25-19 | | john barleycorn: <Keyser Soze: ...
LOL. Also Kasparov, Short, Abdel Irada, Susan Polgar, etcetc> However, take note you won't make it there. your miserable condition is not worth it. |
|
May-25-19
| | Keyser Soze: Busted.
Course, your criminal friend already rent his life for it! Useless on this one broda..Hows him btw? Happy? LOL Say hi to that old failipina, old man |
|
| May-25-19 | | john barleycorn: <keyser soze> as I said, you are not worth it. Get your attention from <tpstar> et al. |
|
| Sep-08-19 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: <It is known that Spassky is not a big worker or hard worker in chess. He is quite lazy, so he didn’t work too much on chess. This was the main reason he was defeated by Fischer. If you recall the games, it was game number four when Spassky with black showed a fantastic novelty which was prepared by him and his team. I know this novelty. But, what happened is Spassky didn’t make the effort to memorize it, because it was winning by force. Geller told me when they started to repeat this before the game, Spassky, after three or four moves into the novelty, said, “Oh, this is not so important, because I will find it [the moves] over the board.” So, he didn’t remember the moves and he didn’t win the game, which was already won at home. This was extremely important because Spassky won the first game, a strange game. Better not to say that Spassky won the game, but that Fischer lost the game. Then, Fischer didn’t appear for the second game, and Fischer won the third game, so if Spassky had won game number four with black, he most probably would have won the match.> I was going to mention that interview, which I saw a while ago but can't find online any more. It's frustrating that Karpov doesn't go into any detail about the winning variation. He also claimed that Spassky missed a win in game 13, again without elaborating. According to Gligoric, the idea of playing ... Rd8 before ... Rh8 was given by Olafsson in his match bulletin, but I seem to remember that the idea was not his. |
|
| Sep-08-19 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: 'I found ways that Spassky could get a winning position in the opening of the Alekhine Defence. Fischer played the Alekhine Defence and Spassky missed a very big advantage.' https://www.stabroeknews.com/2015/f... |
|
Sep-08-19
 | | gezafan: <ToTheDeath: Karpov:
<It is known that Spassky is not a big worker or hard worker in chess. He is quite lazy, so he didn’t work too much on chess. This was the main reason he was defeated by Fischer. If you recall the games, it was game number four when Spassky with black showed a fantastic novelty which was prepared by him and his team. I know this novelty. But, what happened is Spassky didn’t make the effort to memorize it, because it was winning by force.Geller told me when they started to repeat this before the game, Spassky, after three or four moves into the novelty, said, “Oh, this is not so important, because I will find it [the moves] over the board.” So, he didn’t remember the moves and he didn’t win the game, which was already won at home. This was extremely important because Spassky won the first game, a strange game. Better not to say that Spassky won the game, but that Fischer lost the game. Then, Fischer didn’t appear for the second game, and Fischer won the third game, so if Spassky had won game number four with black, he most probably would have won the match.> > Karpov's claim that Spassky probably would have won the match if he had won game four is just another backhanded way to demean Fischer. If Spassky had won game four the score would have been
12 to 9 with Fischer needing but a draw in the last three games to win the match. Fischer still would have won the match. |
|
| Sep-09-19 | | RookFile: From what I've seen Karpov has actually been pretty complimentary towards Fischer. I think Karpov does have some contempt for Spassky, especially the latter's work ethic. |
|
Sep-09-19
| | harrylime: <<RookFile: From what I've seen Karpov has actually been pretty complimentary towards Fischer. I think Karpov does have some contempt for Spassky, especially the latter's work ethic.>> A primed motivated Spassky against a Karpov without his Soviet RED CARPET backing ??? I'm going Boris.
EVERYDAY OF THE WEEK. |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 