Paul Keres vs Samuel Reshevsky (1953) Draw Your Own Conclusion

Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players ·

Kibitzing

Paul Keres vs Samuel Reshevsky
"Draw Your Own Conclusion" (game of the day Jun-27-2014)
Zuerich Candidates (1953), Zuerich SUI, rd 11, Sep-16
Nimzo-Indian Defense: Huebner Variation (E41) · 1/2-1/2

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	18 more Keres/Reshevsky games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: Some people don't like to know the result of the game in advance. This can be done by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page, then checking "Don't show game results".

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE. [CLICK HERE]

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 · Later Kibitzing>
Apr-15-12		plang: By delaying the development of the White King Knight the opening transposed into the Samisch variation after 7 bxc. Standard is 7..Nc6; 7..b6?! is rarely played and dubious. This game was played in the 11th round. Earlier in the 5th round Reshevsky had played this line against Euwe and won after 8 Ne2; Kers played the stronger 8 e4. Botvinnik felt that 16 exf would have been the best move. Marin provided a sample line: 16 exf..Qe5+ 17 Kf1..Qxf6 18 Qg4+..Kh7 19 Rad1..Qf5 20 Qxf5..exf 21 Rd6..Na6 22 Rd7..Nb8 23 Rc7..Na6 24 Rb7 and Black is helpless. A better defense would have been 21..Qxd6 22 Rxd6..Nxd6 blunting White's attack. Keres had good compensation for the exchange and had he played 27 g4 he would have retained the initiative; instead after Keres's 27 f4? Black was better though both players had little time and the game simplified to a draw.

Aug-25-13		svetonius: There are some inaccuracies in Bronstein's analysis. The most striking one is possibly in the position after White's 38th move. Bronstein correctly points out that 38.-Rf6! is much better than Reshevsky's 38.-Qc4+. He then goes on to say that White probably survives after 39. Rd8 Rxe6 40. Rxe8+ Rxe8 41. Qd5+. This is, I assume, because Black can't keep his extra rook without White giving perpetual check. However, the chess engine Houdini gives an easy win: instead of 39.-Rxe6 Black simply plays 39.-Qb1+ 40. Ka5 Rxe6. Now the f5 pawn is protected, so the Black king can protect the rook by Kf8 or Kf7. The game is easily won by Black.

Mar-16-14		LIFE Master AJ: A great chess game ... Soltis says it might be one of the best draws of the whole of the 20th Century.

Mar-16-14		LIFE Master AJ: Hamppe vs Meitner, 1872.

Mar-16-14		DrGridlock: Komodo finds that 15 exf6 is crushing, while 15 Bxf6 is merely winning: click for larger view 1. (2.55): 15.exf6 hxg5 16.hxg5 Qe5+ 17.Re3 Qf5 18.Qh5 Qg6 19.Qh2 Nd7 20.Rh3 gxf6 21.Rd1 fxg5 22.Rxd7 Qf6 23.Rf3 Qg6 24.Qe5 g4 25.Rfd3 Rab8 26.Ne2 b5 27.cxb5 Rxb5 28.Rd1 Qg7 29.Qe3 Qh8 30.c4 Ra5 2. ± (1.15): 15.Bxf6 gxf6 16.exf6 Qe5+ 17.Kf1 Qxf6 18.Qg4+ Kh7 19.Rad1 Qf5 20.Qxf5+ exf5 21.Rd6 Na6 22.Ne2 Nc7 23.Nf4 Rae8 24.Rd7 Ne6 25.Nd5 Kg7 26.Re1 a6 27.Re5 b5 28.Rxf5 bxc4 29.g3 Rd8 30.Re7 Rb8 Once White chooses to merely defeat (Bxf6) rather than crush (exf6) his opponent, he needs to be more precise in his continuations. Move 16 (Qg4 instead of exf6) wastes about .4 of his 1.1 advantage: click for larger view 1. ± (1.08): 16.exf6 Qe5+ 17.Kf1 Qxf6 18.Qg4+ Kh7 19.Rad1 Qf5 20.Qxf5+ exf5 21.Rd6 Na6 22.Ne2 Nc7 23.Nf4 Rae8 24.Rd7 Ne6 25.Nd5 Kg7 26.Re1 a6 27.Re5 Nc7 28.Rxf5 Nxd5 29.cxd5 Re4 30.Rf3 Rxh4 2. ± (0.89): 16.Rd6 Qb7 17.Qg4+ Kh7 18.exf6 Rg8 19.Qe2 Qxg2 20.0-0-0 Qg6 21.Nf3 Na6 22.Ne5 Qxf6 23.Qe4+ Qf5 24.Qxf5+ exf5 25.Rf6 Rae8 26.Rxf7+ Rg7 27.Rdd7 Rxf7 28.Rxf7+ Kg8 29.Rxf5 Re7 30.Kd2 Kg7 31.Ke3 Nc7 3. ² (0.68): 16.Qg4+ Kh8 17.exf6 Rg8 18.Qh5 Rg6 19.Qf3 Nc6 20.0-0-0 Rag8 21.Rd7 Qc8 22.h5 Rg5 23.Qe4 Ne5 24.Rxa7 Rf5 25.Nf3 Nxf3 26.gxf3 Qf8 27.Kb2 Rxf6 28.Rb7 Qg7 29.Rdd7 Rf5 30.f4 Qf8 31.Rxb6 At move 17 Qf3 (again instead of exf6) leaks some more of his advantage: click for larger view 1. ± (0.82): 17.exf6 Rg8 18.Qh5 Rg6 19.Qf3 Nc6 20.0-0-0 Rag8 21.Rd7 Qc8 22.h5 Rxg2 23.Qf4 Qf8 24.Nh3 R2g4 25.Qc7 Qc8 26.Rxf7 Qxc7 27.Rxc7 Ne5 28.f4 Nxc4 29.Rdd7 Rf8 30.Rh7+ Kg8 31.Rxh6 Nxa3 32.Ng5 Rg1+ 2. ± (0.81): 17.0-0-0 Qxe5 18.Re3 Qf5 19.Qxf5 exf5 20.Rd6 Na6 21.Rxf6 Kg7 22.Rxf5 Rae8 23.Rg3+ Kh7 24.Nf3 f6 25.Nh2 Nc7 26.Ng4 Re1+ 27.Kc2 Kg6 28.Ne3+ Kh7 29.Nd5 Ne8 30.Re3 Rxe3 31.fxe3 Nd6 32.Rxf6 Rxf6 3. ² (0.27): 17.Qf3 Nd7 18.Rd6 Kg8 19.Qg3+ Kh8 20.Nf3 fxe5 21.Nxe5 Nxe5 22.Qxe5+ Kh7 23.Rxe6 Qxe5+ 24.Rxe5 Rae8 25.Re2 Rxe2+ 26.Kxe2 Re8+ 27.Kf3 Rd8 28.Re1 Kg6 29.g4 Rd2 30.h5+ Kf6 31.Re2 Rxe2 32.Kxe2 Kg5 In short summary, at moves 15, 16 and 17 Keres had three opportunities to play exf6. He should have taken one of those.

Mar-17-14		LIFE Master AJ: Yes, you are correct. In fact, we should not be surprised when the computers find an improvement. In fact, we should be surprised when we find old/famous game ... and the engines CANNOT find a significant improvement!!!!!!

Mar-17-14		Olavi: Of course 15.exf6 was recommended as winning in the books by Bronstein, Ståhlberg and Euwe.

Mar-17-14		LIFE Master AJ: I might have tried 15.exf6 on general principle ... I always was an attacker ...

Mar-17-14		Dr. J: <DrGridlock> Thank you for a valuable analysis. But when you say <Komodo finds that 15 exf6 <+2.55> is crushing, while 15 Bxf6 <+1.15> is merely winning> I think you may be overstating matters somewhat: as I understand it, it takes an advantage of about 1.40 to call a position "winning", and even 2.55, while won, should mean significant resistance is still possible. (We have even seen many puzzles here that required difficult "wetware" analysis to solve, that the machines have dismissed as +5.0 or worse.)

Jun-27-14		RookFile: If you could only chose one game in chess history to describe what heroic defense looks like, this game is a great candidate.

Jun-27-14		rune ohlsson: The rescuing move is obviously 10. ---Re8 to give the King a resort.

Jun-27-14		kevin86: It looks like it is just getting exciting...and they draw!

Jun-27-14		posoo: yes kevin I agree. this is some seriously weak chess.

Jun-27-14		Domdaniel: <posoo> That post might have been made by an ironist or an idiot. And I have to say that irony does not seem to be your strong point.

Jun-27-14		playground player: Reshevsky could've changed his name to Houdini after this one.

Jun-27-14		posoo: lol dumduniel, this game looks like one of my blitz games

Jun-27-14		posoo: The mind of a maven, perfodios...the mind of a maven. I am sorry that you cannot see.

Jun-28-14		Domdaniel: <posoo> I'm not particularly sorry that you can neither think nor spell.

Feb-23-16		ZonszeinP: What a game! When you think that Reshevsky probably found all those moves at the end in extreme zeinot as often!! What a player

Mar-01-17		nopassion4jazz: is this the game that considered one of the most reproduced and analyzed game in the century? i just heard it

Mar-01-17		Howard: You probably read that on the back cover of the Zurich 1953 tournament book.

Jun-27-21		stevenashs20mworkout: My copy of Zurich by Bronstein gives the final move 41. Kc4-b5! (not 41. Kd5 as is shown above). What's the deal?

Jun-27-21		keypusher: <stevenashs20mworkout: My copy of Zurich by Bronstein gives the final move 41. Kc4-b5! (not 41. Kd5 as is shown above). What's the deal?> Najdorf's book also gives 41.Kb5. Is there another source or is this just a typo? This was a famous game from the moment it was played, so it seems unlikely that two of the participants would get the final move wrong. SF thinks 41.Kd5 is clearly the better move, incidentally.

Jun-27-21		Williebob: According to Bronstein, 41. Kb5 was the sealed move, and the draw was agreed upon unsealing. His final comment, "if they had known better, then at least one player would not have agreed to the draw without playing on," at first looked to me as though Bronstein figured White had winning chances. But then I reckoned that he was referring to the final result, with both Keres and Reshevsky in contention for the coveted 1st place.

Jun-28-21		keypusher: <Williebob: According to Bronstein, 41. Kb5 was the sealed move, and the draw was agreed upon unsealing. His final comment, "if they had known better, then at least one player would not have agreed to the draw without playing on," at first looked to me as though Bronstein figured White had winning chances. But then I reckoned that he was referring to the final result, with both Keres and Reshevsky in contention for the coveted 1st place.> I think you were closer to Bronstein's meaning the first time, although any winning chances in the final position belonged to Black. (Does anyone have the Russian-language original?) Reshevsky and Keres were certainly in contention for first when this game was played, but at the end of the tournament, they, along with Bronstein, were two full points behind Smyslov.

search thread:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 · Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.