|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-29-09 | | ewan14: Boris did beat Bent Larsen spectacularly in one game but overall Larsen drew with Spassky and beat L. Stein This showed how powerful Larsen was at this time ! |
|
| Oct-29-09 | | Petrosianic: True, although Spassky's loss to Larsen was an UGLY turkey. (shudder) I won't even link to it, it would give you nightmares. And one day after that brilliant 17 move win that gets reprinted so often. |
|
| Oct-29-09 | | AnalyzeThis: Just in time for Thanksgiving? |
|
| Jan-14-10 | | Garech: Beautiful middlegame piece coordination from Fischer. |
|
| Jan-14-10 | | Peter Nemenyi: <Yeah, Fischer himself demonstrated brilliantly several times the superiority of bishop over knight in endgames (Fischer vs Taimanov, 1971, for example, is textbook), but this game shows that he knew how to play it the other way around as well.> Fischer also ground out a win with knight versus bishop to complete his clean sweep in the 1963-4 US Championship: Saidy vs Fischer, 1964. In this game too he was Black in an English. |
|
| Jan-14-10 | | AnalyzeThis: In Fischer's 1992 match with Spassky, he took the knights more than at any point in his career. |
|
Feb-11-11
 | | HeMateMe: I could look at Fischer's games all day. By move 23, he has completed the long process of winning white's isolated c pawn, without allowing any counterplay. Very instructive how BF avoids exchanges, and with piece play further surrounds the weak pawn. That, and some fancy endgame moves win. |
|
| Jul-01-12 | | Howard: The book Fischer: His Approach to
Chess (by Agur) gives some interesting analysis to a position that took place around the 20th move in this game.Suffice to add that no one could believe at the time that anybody--even Fischer--could beat Petrosian twice in a row ! Petrosian rarely lost a game back in those days. That someone could beat him in two consecutive games was unbelievable. |
|
| Jul-01-12 | | RookFile: That was certainly the impression of Petrosian at his peak strength. |
|
| Jul-01-12 | | Lt.Surena: RookFile:Certainly there is no excuse for losing twice in a row to Bobby. But by 1970 Petrosian had won the World Championship twice in a row. Something that Bobby would never phantom in his life time. Capablanca, Tal, Euwe, Spassky, Smyslov were not good enough to win back to back championships either. So don't feel bad. Later on Bobby retired to a cheap motel in Pasadena while Petrosian went on to play three times as many games and and take on all new comers. *Read Kasparov's impression of Tigran !! Now, why didn't Bobby play Kasparov in 1992 instead of Boris? Answer: Bobby was a coward. |
|
Jul-02-12
 | | keypusher: <Suffice to add that no one could believe at the time that anybody--even Fischer--could beat Petrosian twice in a row !> Spassky had done it in the world championship match the year before. |
|
Jul-02-12
 | | harrylime: <Lt.Surena> You've got the greatest chess player of all time nailed. lol Petrosian's games and Petrosian's charisma have carried chess. End of. |
|
Jul-02-12
 | | kingfu: Another good Fischer-Petrosian game is 175 on the Fischer page. It starts out as a nice quit Caro-Kann, then there are 4! Queens on the board. Then it ends up being a draw. Great stuff. |
|
| May-07-15 | | 4tmac: 55. Bc4 Nc5 56. f5 Ke7 57. fxg6 hxg6 58. g4 Kf6 59. Kd2 Nxe4+ 60.
Kc2 Kg7 61. Be6 Kh6 62. Bc4 Nf2 63. Be2 e4 |
|
| Aug-31-17 | | Petrosianic: <notyetagm>: <Damn, the bishop is supposed to be stronger than the knight in the ending on an open board with pawns on both sides of the board.> That's just it. White doesn't HAVE pawns on both sides of the board. Even if he did, there are a lot of other factors to consider. You can't take general rules as gospel. They apply to average situations, but not all. Say that White's f pawn were a b pawn (move white's a pawn back a couple of squares. Who's better? Well, a lot of that would depend on where Black's a pawn were fixed. On a white square, he's in trouble. On a black square, not as bad. And so on. I'm dubious of any engine analysis showing White as okay after move 20 or so. Engines simply don't look far enough ahead to know. Black's a clear pawn up and White is looking uphill, especially after 28. Bg5 gives up White's only advantage (the two Bishops). To the guy who suggested that Fischer missed 49. Rxf7+. No way. He was simply giving up a pawn to trade into a winning Minor Piece ending (and White had no choice but to do it). With the Rooks off, the position is a win. With the Minors off, it would be a draw. With both on, it may be a win, but not nearly as easy as with the Rooks off. |
|
Aug-31-17
 | | perfidious: <Sneaky....And so I am left wondering: did Fischer overlook 49. Rxf7+, or did he realize that he would win the resulting ending anyhow?> In Levy's <How Fischer Plays Chess>, this game is annotated by Petrosian himself, who notes that after 51....a3 (paraphrasing): 'It is a simple win for Black' and continues on in this vein--I believe without comment for the remainder of the game. |
|
| Aug-31-17 | | Petrosianic: <this game is annotated by Petrosian himself, who notes that after 51....a3 (paraphrasing): 'It is a simple win for Black'> He's right, it is. Because White can't break through on the Kingside with K+4 vs. K+3. It's a slight advantage, but not enough (the Bishop can't even assist). Meanwhile, there's no way of stopping Black from parking his Knight on b4 or c3 and getting in a2. That's why Fischer was happy to give up the f pawn by allowing Rxf7+. If the eval doesn't show that, then don't believe the eval. |
|
| Sep-01-17 | | Petrosianic: Probably had this been a tournament game, White would have resigned much earlier. But in team events, there's a tendency to avoid putting points for the other team on the board for as long as possible, to avoid demoralizing your team mates. |
|
| Nov-17-19 | | spingo: 
click for larger view
In this position Petrosian played the clever 49.Rxf7+. After the game he said to Fischer that he was going to play 49.Kg1. Fischer had not seen this move. Petrosian thought it might draw. 49. Kg1.
click for larger view
The most obvious move draws immediately:
49...Rxf2
50. Bh3! Rf3. <This is the only way to save both pieces>.
51. Kg2 Rf2+
52. Kg1 = <with a draw by repetition.> The other way of taking the pawn also seems to lead to a draw:
49... Nxf2
50. Bc4! Nh3+
51. Kh1 Rf2
52. Be6!
click for larger view
52...a3!
53. Bxh3 a2
click for larger view
...And here Petrosian saw that the correct move to draw was
54. Bg2! followed by 55.Kh2.
However, the best move after 49.Kg1 could be
49...h5!
click for larger view
For example,
50. Bc4 Rxf2
51. Rxa4 <and I think Black would win without too much trouble.> I wonder if Fischer would have found 49...h5! after 49.Kg1 ?
He was at the top of his form at the time and I think that if the position had actually arisen he would have found it. See <Python Strategy>, page 277. |
|
| Feb-04-22 | | jerseybob: <Lt.Surena:.... Bobby was a coward.> not feelin' the love here! Bobby was a complicated, very imperfect person, agreed, but a coward? Whatever that means. |
|
| Apr-10-23 | | Temi: How can you say a coward the one who destroy the might of the Soviet Chess Machine and shutting out the two candidates for the World Championship match. This is an impossibility but it happen. |
|
Apr-10-23
| | HeMateMe: Speak English, you savage. |
|
Apr-10-23
| | HeMateMe: Tomorrow's Girls
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mky...> |
|
Apr-10-23
| | HeMateMe: Bar Kays
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWU...> sh**t is ripe |
|
| Jul-16-23 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: 64. Kc4 Nc1 65. Kd5 Nd3 66. Kc4 Ne1 67. Kc3 Kg5 68. Kd2 Nf3+ 69. Ke3 Nd4 wins |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
