|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-25-05 | | Jaymthetactician: If it isn't a drawn position you must mean a different position. must be, I didnt record the moves past a certain point. |
|
| Jun-01-05 | | WMD: The plan 19.Rdh2 -> Rh7 + Rxg7 was very strong for White. |
|
Dec-10-05
 | | James Demery: See what happens Bobby when you`re not a scaredy cat. I played him...why couldn`t you? - Spassky |
|
| Dec-16-05 | | Jim Bartle: I know this discussion ended months ago, and well, it's not about chess, but I just saw it and.... Oscar Robertson couldn't dribble with his left hand??? Right, and Garry Kasparov couldn't play the KID. How many people here saw him play with Cincinnati, not his final years with Milwaukee, when he had faded some? Greatest point guard of all time. And Wilt: listen, he was a great, great player, even if the conditions of the game have changed that stats are hard to compare. OK, he got 20 rebounds a game, that's about like 12 or 14 today (fewer missed shots). And in the early 60s so little contact was allowed, and yes, the centers who guarded him were so much smaller, that he just got the ball and shot, no problem. First NBA game I ever saw he scored 61 and I just thought that was average... |
|
| May-23-07 | | Raginmund: wrong site... or wrong forum... I think the spot here it's basketball not chess... down kasparov,... up magic johnson :) |
|
| Nov-26-07 | | xeroxmachine: <Laskar 2300 and Reti 2500>First of all I think you mean Lask<e>r Overall record: Emanuel Lasker beat Richard Reti 4 to 0, with 3 draws.
search "Lasker reti" |
|
| Apr-09-09 | | vonKrolock: <33.♕xg6+> It seems that instead of this last move, ♔asparov had the fantastic 33.♘d5!!, that would afford him at least a deserved draw in this game - the idea is: ♖ or ♙ take the ♘, then ♖xf8+ with a perpetual - (ps: my computer is saying that the best rejoinder for Spassky is 33...♔d7!!!, with a better endgame following the fireworks ) |
|
| Sep-04-11 | | DrMAL: Kasparov mentions in his video "My Story" regret for running low on time during this, the only game he lost during his stellar performance in this tournament (see Kasparov vs Portisch, 1983 for a great example). Indeed, on move 16 he was already significantly ahead. 16.Rd2! then 17.Ng1! 18.Nf3! was a great plan. But the follow-through 19.Rdh2! was missed (probably decisive). Spassky defended brilliantly as well. After 22...Nc6! it seemed the moment for Kasparov's attack was gone (23.Re1). 33.Nd5 should have held the ongoing draw but out of time he played 33.Qxg6+?! probably losing then his flag fell. |
|
| Feb-13-12 | | screwdriver: Another game that should've been played further. |
|
| Feb-13-12 | | Shams: <Another game that should've been played further.> As is explained right before your post, Kasparov lost on time here. |
|
Oct-27-12
 | | HeMateMe: Exciting game. The conclusion would have been interesting. |
|
| Oct-27-12 | | RookFile: Kasparov didn't manage his time here, of course. There was a lot more game to be played here. |
|
| Sep-29-13 | | grasser: The game annotated:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4wU... |
|
| Sep-21-15 | | thegoodanarchist: <Jaymthetactician: Well, today's players overall would be rated higher, I estimate Morphy would be around 2100, Staunton around 1700, Zuckertort and Steinitz around 2250, Capablanca around 2500 Saint Amant around 1400, Greco around 1400 Damiano and Poleria around 1200, and so on.> And these estimates are worthy every penny I paid for them :) |
|
Jun-23-17
 | | offramp: <Jaymthetactician: Well, today's players overall would be rated higher, I estimate Morphy would be around 2100, Staunton around 1700, Zuckertort and Steinitz around 2250, Capablanca around 2500 Saint Amant around 1400, Greco around 1400 Damiano and Poleria around 1200, and so on.> I can easily see that. It is not about imagining THEM coming forward into the future, but if WE went back into the past. What Elo would one need to beat Staunton - ... I have got to say that it would be very low. A guy of modern-day Elo 2000 would probably take Staunton to the cleaners. |
|
| Jun-23-17 | | ChessHigherCat: < offramp: <Jaymthetactician: Well, today's players overall would be rated higher, I estimate Morphy would be around 2100, Staunton around 1700, Zuckertort and Steinitz around 2250, Capablanca around 2500 Saint Amant around 1400, Greco around 1400 Damiano and Poleria around 1200, and so on.> I can easily see that. It is not about imagining THEM coming forward into the future, but if WE went back into the past. What Elo would one need to beat Staunton - ... I have got to say that it would be very low. A guy of modern-day Elo 2000 would probably take Staunton to the cleaners.> It all depends on the underlying assumptions of the comparison. If you're interested in who has the greatest "chess mind" (not meaning the one who is the most square and sees everything in black and white :-), then the old greats who travel forward into our time should be allowed a period to catch up on theory. Otherwise, a modern, unimaginative player with relatively weak powers of calculation but immense theoretical knowledge, with a modern Elo of 2000 or so, might beat those guys easily if they traveled back in time, as you say, especially if they adapted their strategy by setting a lot of traps that were unknown at the time. |
|
Jun-23-17
 | | tamar: <Dec 4 04 Jaymthegenius: Now you have to know that Philidor or Greco wouldnt even win a tournament nowadays. I personally believe I could defeat Philidor, Greco, or Morphy easy as white with 1.Nf4 or 1.b3 (my favorite) Or as black with 1.e4,Nc6 or 1.e4,g6 or even 1.e4,b6. Because they had no knowledge of hypermodern strategy, and I would easily win... > Ny personal favorite post of the Jaymthe* franchise. |
|
| Jun-24-17 | | Retireborn: 1.Nf4 would certainly come as an unpleasant surprise to Morphy, I shouldn't wonder. |
|
| Feb-11-18 | | CopyBlanca: You guys are dreaming. Morphy,Greco,Philidor all these guys would take you to the cleaners. Lets just discuss Morphy for a bit. He was able to play multiple blindfold games at once. None of you dreamers could even begin to play a single blindfold game.
When I played tournament chess there was a player in the city that memorized openings up to 15 moves etc. It did not help him at all as soon as the game left his memorized game he soon lost as he was now forced to make his own moves. |
|
Feb-11-18
 | | keypusher: <None of you dreamers could even begin to play a single blindfold game. > Don't be absurd, I've played games blindfold and I'm terrible. Keeping track of 32 pieces max on 64 squares is not that hard. Playing well, with or without a blindfold...that's another thing. |
|
Feb-11-18
 | | saffuna: I can sort of do it if I have a blank board in front of me. Without that, forget it. |
|
| Nov-04-18 | | Inocencio: This is a masterpiece! |
|
| Jan-11-19 | | whiteshark: <WMD: The plan 19.Rdh2 -- Rh7 + Rxg7 was very strong for White. < DrMAL:... But the follow-through 19.Rdh2! was missed (probably decisive). >> Indeed, you are both right, at the core!
click for larger view
Black to move
1) +4.11 (27 ply) 19...Nxd4 20.Nxd4 Qf6 21.Ncb5 c5 22.Nc6 Rxb5 23.Rf2 Qxf2 24.Qxf2 Bxb2+ 25.Kc2 Bg7 26.e5 a4 27.Rh3 a3 28.Rxa3 Rb7 29.Ra6 Bf8 30.a4 Rc8 31.Na5 Rd7 32.Qd2 Re7 33.Qf4 Rd7 34.Qh4 Rdc7 35.Bxc4 dxc4 36.Kc3 Bg7 37.Nxc4 Kf8 2) +4.84 (27 ply) 19...Qf6 20.e5 Qf5 21.Rf2 Ne7 22.Ng5 Qg4 23.Be2 Nf5 24.Rxf5 Qxf5 25.Rf1 Qxf1+ 26.Bxf1 c5 27.dxc5 Re7 28.Qf4 Bh6 29.Kc2 Reb7 30.Na4 Rc7 31.Qh4 Kg7 32.Nf3 Be3 33.Bg2 Kg8 34.Ng5 Kg7 35.Nh7 Bxc5 36.Nxc5 Rxc5 3) +5.97 (26 ply) 19...f6 20.Rh7 Qe7 21.Qg1 Qf7 22.exd5 Ne7 23.Bxc4 Nxd5 24.Nxd5 exd5 25.Bd3 f5 26.Qh2 Qd7 27.Kb1 Kf8 28.Ng5 Qd6 29.Rxg7 Rxb2+ 30.Qxb2 Kxg7 31.Qd2 Qb4+ 32.Qxb4 axb4 33.Rc1 Re7 34.Rxc7 Kf6 35.Nh7+ Kf7 36.Rc6 Re3 37.Ng5+ Kg7 38.Bb5 Kh6 39.Nf7+ Kh5 40.Ne5 Re1+ 41.Kc2 6.0 minute analysis by Stockfish 9 v010218 |
|
| Jan-11-19 | | whiteshark: <WMD: The plan 19.Rdh2 -- Rh7 + Rxg7 was very strong for White. < DrMAL:... But the follow-through 19.Rdh2! was missed (probably decisive). >> Indeed, you are both right, at the core!
click for larger view
Black to move
1) +4.11 (27 ply) 19...Nxd4 20.Nxd4 Qf6 21.Ncb5 c5 22.Nc6 Rxb5 23.Rf2 Qxf2 24.Qxf2 Bxb2+ 25.Kc2 Bg7 26.e5 a4 27.Rh3 a3 28.Rxa3 Rb7 29.Ra6 Bf8 30.a4 Rc8 31.Na5 Rd7 32.Qd2 Re7 33.Qf4 Rd7 34.Qh4 Rdc7 35.Bxc4 dxc4 36.Kc3 Bg7 37.Nxc4 Kf8 2) +4.84 (27 ply) 19...Qf6 20.e5 Qf5 21.Rf2 Ne7 22.Ng5 Qg4 23.Be2 Nf5 24.Rxf5 Qxf5 25.Rf1 Qxf1+ 26.Bxf1 c5 27.dxc5 Re7 28.Qf4 Bh6 29.Kc2 Reb7 30.Na4 Rc7 31.Qh4 Kg7 32.Nf3 Be3 33.Bg2 Kg8 34.Ng5 Kg7 35.Nh7 Bxc5 36.Nxc5 Rxc5 3) +5.97 (26 ply) 19...f6 20.Rh7 Qe7 21.Qg1 Qf7 22.exd5 Ne7 23.Bxc4 Nxd5 24.Nxd5 exd5 25.Bd3 f5 26.Qh2 Qd7 27.Kb1 Kf8 28.Ng5 Qd6 29.Rxg7 Rxb2+ 30.Qxb2 Kxg7 31.Qd2 Qb4+ 32.Qxb4 axb4 33.Rc1 Re7 34.Rxc7 Kf6 35.Nh7+ Kf7 36.Rc6 Re3 37.Ng5+ Kg7 38.Bb5 Kh6 39.Nf7+ Kh5 40.Ne5 Re1+ 41.Kc2 6.0 minute analysis by Stockfish 9 v010218 |
|
| Nov-13-20 | | fisayo123: Meltdown by Garry. This must have hurt as he was on a murderous 6.5/7 going into this game. . Despite being the vastly superior player at this point, he still didn't know how to play against his childhood idol. Much better position, he easily outplays Spassky throughout the game but in the critical moment , he loses his composure. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 11...Bxg4