|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-01-11 | | duplex: Judith looks like an high school student learning positional game from a master |
|
| Aug-03-12 | | Everett: <KingG> it was more like Judith was being scolded BY a 5-year old. |
|
Aug-03-12
 | | perfidious: Judit and her teddy at ten is a memory which still makes me chuckle: see the first kibitz here (Alex Cherniack). |
|
| Jun-24-13 | | leka: Dear Dannygjk.The humans brains improves early is the correct statement.Today there are many scientists that to get to the top in any fields like a chess a football game a snooker.You have to start training very early.These scientists thinks you need 10000 hours hard training to get to the top.It is an amazing that late starters in a chess like Tarrasch Chigorin Zukertort Akiba Rubinstein 3 of them was in the world championships match altough all of them lost.Tarrasch start to play a chess game at age 15 years old.Chigorin Zukertort Rubinstein started at age 18-19 years old.Capablanca started at age 4 years old Kasparov and Fischer at age 6years old.Capablanca Kasparov Fischer had a huge avantage because they started so early age.What could have happended if Chigorin Tarrasch Zukertot Rubinstein have started at 4-6 years old.I bet no one could have stopped them.They could win the world title.And Chigorin Zukertort played combinations like Alekhine Moprphy Kasparov.We should remember Chigorin Zukertort Rubinstein Tarrasch!!! |
|
| May-17-14 | | echever7: According to one of the Polgar sisters (I don't remember which) the way Kasparov treated Judith after this game was asking: "Did you ever heard about black squares?" Yeah, disrespectful, but very Kasparov-like |
|
| Aug-19-14 | | bennythejets: in 1975...fischer would have beat Karpov easily... |
|
| Sep-07-14 | | sandtime: Entrapment |
|
Sep-07-14
 | | MissScarlett: <WMD: More from the 1994 NIC interview with Judit: In Linares, when Kasparov addressed you in the restaurant after your loss against Karpov you felt insulted by his tone. "Yeah. Probably many people felt this. I felt that he spoke with me because I am a girl. Somebody told me this was his way of talking because he is from Baku. This is the way they talk. And I said, 'I don't care'. Suppose I had already known him for a couple of years, we had had dinner sometimes, and we were friends. Then you can allow yourself such things. But when you try to have a conversation for the first time in your life. Then you're not shouting, are you? Sort of the main point is that you're a big patzer. He said like, 'You never heard of black squares?' And he named another move and said, 'Why didn't you play this?' The next day he found out himself and came up to our room and said, 'Oh yeah, this what I said is losing immediately. The other move is better.' And I felt he didn't care about me or my game. He just cared because I lost to Karpov. I just don't understand. All chess players allow him to speak with them like..." How did you react?
"I was just shocked. First of all I lost to him the day before. Then I lose against Karpov. No chance at all. Then he comes in when I am having a friendly conversation with Gelfand, Anand and some other people. In the middle of this conversation he starts talking to me. After that I was just shocked and said to these people, 'Who is he to talk to me like I'm a five-year-old kid?' I was so shocked that I just couldn't believe it. Nobody should treat people like they don't know how to play chess. That there is such a big difference. I don't like it when they treat me differently because I am good. It happens in Hungary for example. I go to the theatre and I go to the buffet and I ask, 'Do you have mineral water?' And they say no. Then they look up, recognize me and say, 'Oh yes, of course.' I don't like that. They have mineral water or they don't. It's not good that they have it if you're a chess player or whatever. I think some chess players maybe think they are special and they need special treatment, you know."> |
|
| Dec-03-15 | | MariusDaniel: Great game by both players,great performance by Anatoly Karpov in the tournament! |
|
| May-16-19 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: Capablanca vs K Treybal, 1929 |
|
| Feb-22-21 | | MarianoFreyre: This game is amazing. I understand Kasparov angry with Polgar. |
|
| Feb-22-21 | | W Westerlund: I am not so sure that age is that important. The distinction between extremely talented people and normally gifted people is much more important. Talent is not 99% hard work. It is something that some people are born with. I recently saw some drawings of Picasso that he made when he was around six. No normal six years old can draw like that. These gifts are highly specific. There is even a book about all the idiocies that geniuses produced, their opinions about things they do not understand. When Furtwangler was interviewed by the BBC, they thought he was an idiot because he couldn’t string a sentence together, etc. One needs to work to become really good at chess. It is also true that most of us can work as much as we want, we will never become GMs. This is being negated implicitly and explicitly by an industry which tries to sell their latest two hundred DVDs. I deplore this situation. I deplore the existence of computers in chess. I am not interested in the ‘truth’ of a position. I wanted to be a coffee house player and analyse a game with some friends because we liked doing it. Competition and elo were unimportant. That culture is pretty much dead now, it is a shame. |
|
| Feb-23-21 | | Gaito: Where did Judit go wrong in this game? In fact, as many of Karpov's victims had done before and after, she did not make a noticeable blunder or a big mistake, but (in Karpov's own words), it was "the accumulation of little mistakes". Karpov was a master of the explotation of "little mistakes" being piled up by his opponents. You can see what I mean if you check the sequence of computer evaluations (SF13) after move 14: +0.61, +0.73, +0.85, +1.63, +2.19, +2.37, +3.40 (after 24.h4!), +3.50, +5.22 (after 25.Ne6!), and so on, evaluation numbers always steadily increasing, up to +7.39 (after 27.h5), +8.48, +10.26 (after 28.Rae1). Karpov's opponents knew they were being slowly strangled, but they couldn't prevent it, nor could they do anything about it.
The first critical position was maybe the one of the following diagram:
click for larger view
Black played 12...Bxe5. The engines (SF13 and LcZero) do not quite like that move, and suggest that Black exchange bishops on a3 right away. But that was far from being a losing blunder or anything like that; it was just a "little mistake"; but later there would come more of such "little mistakes", and Karpov masterfully took advantage of them all.
However, the biggest one of all those "little mistakes" happened perhaps in the following diagram:
click for larger view
BLACK TO MOVE
Although material is balanced, Black's position is pitiful. Her pieces are lacking coordination and her bishop is terribly punished on the corner doing nothing, in addition to having weak pawns and weak squares all over. Karpov must surely have enjoyed playing this position as White, as the game really plays itself. Where should Black move he attacked rook? The engine suggests 28...Rbe8 as the lesser of evils. But let us not forget Murphy's Law: "if something can go wrong, it will go wrong". Thus Judit moved her attacked rook to b5, and that proved to be the worst square for that rook. After 28...Rb5? 29.Nb3! the evaluation of the computer goes up to +5.05. Five moves later Judit would have to resign.
A positional masterpiece by Anatoly Karpov. He had the knack of making chess look like a very easy game to play. |
|
Jan-10-22
 | | al wazir: <Gaito: Where did Judit go wrong in this game?> I'm not sure what the purpose of 28...Rb5 was, but leaving the ♖ in a cage of her own making was the immediate reason for the loss. 29...Bb7 locked the door. |
|
Jan-10-22
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Karpov at his best had a quietly amazing gift for "encouraging" his opponents to weaken their own position seemingly without threatening them. Look at 16...f6. What did White threaten at the time? Can't see anything. And a few moves later, we have the position after 20...a6. Black has four pawn islands to White's two; White has an incredible Bishop on c5; Black has an isolated a-pawn on a half-open file; the Black Bishop is just a big pawn. Et cetera! But that's Karpov for you--almost never exciting, almost always quietly amazing. |
|
| Jan-10-22 | | RookFile: Although Karpov had a plus against Polgar (as he did with almost everybody), Polgar's record was respectable against him. |
|
| Jan-10-22 | | SChesshevsky: <...Kasparov went up to Judit in his usual impetuous way: "Why did it occur to you to play 6...c4 against Karpov?" ...> Though indelicate, Kasparov was probably correct in questioning 6...c4. Generally, going for the ...c4, backward ...d5 pawn structure is not to be taken lightly. Any plus achieved is usually over shadowed by the ...d5 weakness. And Garry should know. Successfully picking at Korchnoi's similar structure in a 1991 French Exchange game. Probably should be noted that white can get a somewhat related e5, backward d4 structure. There white does get a king side bind as clear compensation. Something Carlsen has been known to favor. Though that backward pawn still needs sufficient attention. As Carlsen shown in his recent game v. Kobalia in World Rapid and Blitz. Interestingly, here Karpov seems to first pick at the ...c4...d5 weakness and then later also get an e5 binding pawn. |
|
Jan-10-22
 | | ajk68: The moves after 28...Rb5? are so ruthlessly logical on white's part. <Gaito: Where did Judit go wrong in this game?>
Rb5. Rbe8 was more accurate. |
|
Jan-10-22
 | | keypusher: 28....Rb5 was certainly a bad move, but the SF evaluation was about +1.8 on a shallow search before that. Look at Black's bishop! |
|
Jan-10-22
 | | Teyss: <KingG: (...) Kasparov went up to Judit in his usual impetuous way: "Why did it occur to you to play 6...c4 against Karpov?">
Judit should have answered: "Why did it occur to you to play 36...Nc5 against me in the previous round?" Polgar vs Kasparov, 1994 |
|
| Jan-11-22 | | RookFile: I would have bashed out 6....Bd6 instantly, but the computer tends to prefer 6....a6. |
|
Dec-15-22
 | | kingscrusher: I think the major missed opportunity for counterplay was with 21...d4 Anatoly Karpov - Judit Polgar 1-0 6.0, Linares Linares ESP 1994
click for larger viewAnalysis by Stockfish 15 - 3 threads max:
1. ⩲ (0.44): 22.c4 Ne3 23.Re1 Bf5 24.Ne4 Bxe4 25.Bxd4 Bc2 26.Rxe3 Rhd8 27.Bc5 Rd1+ 28.Kf2 Rd2+ 29.Kf1 Rg8 30.Re7+ Kg6 31.Ra3 Rgd8 32.Bf2 R8d3 33.Rxa6
White is slightly better
(Gavriel, 15.12.2022)
With this positional pawn sac, the bishop can get to d5 in some variations and black can also consider trying to double rooks on the e-file with play often sufficient to draw. |
|
Dec-15-22
 | | HeMateMe: If Polgar had swapped Queens earlier in the game could she have then played an earlier c5, opening up her cramped position? |
|
| Jun-17-23 | | N.O.F. NAJDORF: <echever7: According to one of the Polgar sisters (I don't remember which) the way Kasparov treated Judith after this game was asking: "Did you ever heard about black squares?" Yeah, disrespectful, but very Kasparov-like> Did Kasparov ever hear about white squares?
"White Key Symphony" (game of the day Mar-06-2005) Karpov vs Kasparov, 1985 |
|
Jun-17-23
| | perfidious: <Teyss: <KingG: (...) Kasparov went up to Judit in his usual impetuous way: "Why did it occur to you to play 6...c4 against Karpov?"> Judit should have answered: "Why did it occur to you to play 36...Nc5 against me in the previous round?"> rofl |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
