| Jul-04-04 | | refutor: this line (up to move 17 or so) was played at the highest levels in the late 80s/early 90s Rozentalis vs Ivanchuk, 1986 , Van der Wiel vs Mikhalchishin, 1987 , Oll vs Khalifman, 1988 , Rozentalis vs Gelfand, 1988 , Kasparov vs Anand, 1991 , Timman vs Yusupov, 1992 . this was the sixth game in the candidates match and the other timman-yusupov was the second game, so i guess after this result, the "top guys" decided that it was better for white? so black plays 5. ... Nd7 now |
|
| May-01-05 | | Poisonpawns: <refutor> Thanks for the info: I was about to comment how i never saw this line before, and how interesting it was to me.In this game there seems to be alot of possibilities for both sides that could change the outlook on the variation.i.e instead of 15..f5!? why not the immediate 15..Nb3!? axb3 doubling whites pawns? If you are going to lose the piece at least leave a defect in the opponents position.Yusupov allows timman to recapture the piece without a price.Instead of 17..c6!? the move Rad8! is strong if 18.Bxb7? Rd1!+ 19.Rxd1 Bxd1 and the knight goes free |
|
| Feb-11-18 | | whiteshark: "And so, instead of increasing his lead, Yusupov allowed his opponent to even the score. [Timman vs Yusupov, 1992 ] Winning on
the next day [game 5], Artur again took the lead, and now we needed to decide whether to repeat the principled variation that was played in the second game [Timman vs Yusupov, 1992 ]. We checked our analysis for a rather long time. Having not found a refutation, we decided to take the risk. Alas, we guessed wrong. <Timman and his second,
grandmaster Piket, had found a powerful novelty that refuted the variation, making it unplayable.> 21.Bf1! [...]
26.Re1! [...]
30.Be4!, and Timman eventually converted the advantage. The score became even again. But our misfortunes did not end there. The next day, Yusupov was unable to win an absolutely winning position. And with Black, forced to play a new variation, he tried a rather dubious line in the Petroff Defense, suffered defeat, and failed to salvage the match. It seems to me that, after this failure, Yusupov gave up on having an ambitious competitive chess career. He continued to play in strong tournaments, but he now spent much of his time on the lessons he regularly gave to support his family. It became difficult for him to keep up with modern theory and maintain his competitive form at the necessary level. This was evident, when Yusupov was to play Anand in the first match of the new candidates cycle in early 1994, Artur took his wife and little children with him to Wijk aan Zee. Of course, that did not help him concentrate on the match. Anand
won with a score of 4½-2½."
-- Dvoretsky |
|
|
|
|
Kibitzing
sac: 14.Be4