|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-01-09 | | Maynard5: In response to Knight_13. 35. Nd3 is virtually forced in this position. Black is menacing 35. ... Bh3+ 36. Kg1 Bg4, with the dual threat of 37. ... Bf3 and 37. ... Rfh6, setting up a mating net in either instance. 35. Nd3 makes it possible to answer ... Bg4 with Ne5, controlling the critical f3 and g4 squares. |
|
| Mar-13-09 | | sillybilly47: In the long endgame Petrosian's Bishop is stronger than Spassky's Knight. At this level of play that is enough to save the game. |
|
| Mar-14-09 | | larsenfan: Anyone interested on this game can take a look at Crouch's book "How to defence in chess" where it is deeply analized. A great book indeed. |
|
| Mar-14-09 | | whiteshark: http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/How... |
|
| Mar-14-09 | | Nietzowitsch: Great defensive skills by Petrosian |
|
| Dec-08-09 | | sillybilly47: Just went over the game with the Golombek-Clarke commentary. This game is even more amazing with their notes. |
|
| Dec-08-09 | | sillybilly47: The Bishops are a great defensive resource,Petrosian uses them to hold the position. |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | AnalyzeThis: Only a great defensive player like Petrosian holds this, everybody else loses. |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | ughaibu: How about a great defensive player like Maroczy? Was he one of those you had in mind? |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | AnalyzeThis: Actually, I was thinking of Petrosian. |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | ughaibu: What do you mean by "like" then? Like himself??
Anyway, do you think that Alekhine and Bogolubow used to chant "Maroczy, Maroczy, your Sicilian bind is poxy"? |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | AnalyzeThis: Well, Capa was another great defensive player, he's the other one who comes to mind who could held a passive position like this. I have no idea what Alekhine was saying when he was slapping Maroczy around. |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | ughaibu: Wasn't Maroczy a respected amateur boxer? Slapping around was probably well beyond Alekhine's ambitions. |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | AnalyzeThis: That must be why Alekhine put 6 wins up the board against him. And Maroczy.... well, at least he showed up to play. Geza Maroczy - the man with losing records against Steinitz, Laskser, Capablanca, and Alekhine. Chessmetrics studies this carefully and concludes was world #1. |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | ughaibu: As for what Alekhine said, and what Maroczy replied, see this game: Alekhine vs Maroczy, 1924 |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | King Death: <AnalyzeThis: That must be why Alekhine put 6 wins up the board against him.> Nobody else could have beaten Capablanca 6 times and there was one pundit who predicted that Alekhine wouldn't even win a game. He hadn't before Buenos Aires, just like Fischer never beat Spassky before 1972. < And Maroczy.... well, at least he showed up to play.
Geza Maroczy - the man with losing records against Steinitz, Laskser, Capablanca, and Alekhine. Chessmetrics studies this carefully and concludes was world #1.> Yes, he was ranked number one by that system at that time (1906). In 1906, Steinitz was dead, Lasker hadn't played in 2 years (which hurts him in the Sonas system), Capablanca was unknown outside of Cuba and Alekhine had played a few postal games at the tender age of 14. |
|
Nov-26-11
 | | Penguincw: Endgame Statistics
♔♖♗♙ vs. ♔♖♘
The superior side (white) wins 25.8% of the time.
A draw (as in this game) occurs 72.9% of the time.
The inferior side (black) wins 1.3% of the time.
In fact, here are the only two games where the inferior side gave their opponent the zero. Averbakh vs Ragozin, 1948
J Dominguez vs M A Munoz, 2001 |
|
| Nov-26-11 | | ughaibu: According to Suenteus Po 147's collection, the Ragozin game was drawn. But!!! it was a species of Maroczy bind. |
|
| Dec-05-11 | | AnalyzeThis: <Yes, he was ranked number one by that system at that time (1906).> Of course! His was the triumph of activity over actual playing strength. The chessmetrics system rewards activity, even though in 1906 Lasker was head and shoulders above Maroczy. |
|
| Dec-05-11 | | King Death: < AnalyzeThis: ..in 1906 Lasker was head and shoulders above Maroczy.> Not to mention everybody else. Maroczy was a tough player then, but (just like Bogoljubov and Nimzovich) nobody ever confused him with being a serious threat to Lasker's throne. |
|
| Dec-05-11 | | Petrosianic: I doubt many people know much about Maroczy, except that he had a bind. He is, however, the top-rated player in every chessmetrics rating list from October 1904 through March 1907, so the onus of proof is on those who claim he wasn't a serious contender. "Bogo wasn't a serious contender, therefore Maroczy wasn't either" isn't really a serious contender in the Best Argument Championship. |
|
| Dec-05-11 | | AnalyzeThis: It must have been Maroczy's minus score against Pillsbury that made chessmetrics conclude Maroczy was stronger. |
|
| Apr-09-15 | | A.T PhoneHome: I like how these 1966 draws between Spassky and Petrosian were played out until there was nothing creative to do. |
|
| Sep-26-16 | | Aunt Jemima: After 25 Nd5, Black's position looks horrible. It looks like the kind of game I find myself in before I eventually lose to my much better opponent. |
|
Feb-02-19
 | | woldsmandriffield: 17..e6 restricts the options for the light squared Bishop. Spassky's decision to exchange with 20 Bxd5 gave the Bc8 back some scope but in return he could use the open c-file and target the Pd5. This pawn is duly won on move 25 as otherwise Petrosian must allow a fatal Rook penetration to c8. Spassky made a natural capture on move 32 but it was a mistake for White to open the h-file as this gave Petrosian counter-play. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
