< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
|Apr-06-14|| ||Richard Taylor: Karpov wss 50 when he played this, so good on him for playing, but he was well past his peak.|
|Apr-06-14|| ||perfidious: <TheFocus: Didn't Kasparov say something along the lines of, "I know Karpov better than anyone. I know all his smells."
Must have been the Ural ravioli.>
Thought it came from Uranus.
|Apr-06-14|| ||perfidious: <Richard: Some (probably more than we think) of Kasparov's games were very simple positional wins.>|
One such virtuoso display for the uninitiated, facing a man who could play a little: Kasparov vs Petrosian, 1982.
|Apr-06-14|| ||tranquilsimplicity: <Richard Taylor> I actually intended to highlight this game as an example that Karpov is no tactical novice, but wasn't sure whom he played against even though I was right in thinking it was Topalov. The reason I wasn't sure is because Kasparov also played an incredibly combinatorial game against Topalov; "Kasparov's Immortal".|
My point is that it's not that Karpov cannot attack or see into tactical motifs, it is that in my view Karpov has a tendency for defensive, prophylactic thinking, and advancing cautiously, slowly and quietly whilst avoiding complications and combinations. He even said so, comparing himself to a python that strangles it's prey crushing it slowly but surely.
With my energetic and impatient nature, one can see why I am not a fan of this kind of style. However, as you correctly pointed out the genius of Rubinstein, I may have to discard my prejudice against ultra-positional play and accept that there is genius even in this style.
I believe it is a matter of taste even though as you suggest, it is best to appreciate all styles and learn something from each. And it is for this reason that I learnt the Closed Sicilian Fianchetto Variation from Karpov's and Smyslov's games, players I would consider 'quiet'= ultra-positional.
I try as much as possible to be objective, but ultimately it's a question of taste.#
|Jul-07-15|| ||Zhbugnoimt: Richard Taylor: you commented about Kasparov's retirement. Kasparov retired for one reason. He was kicked out of world championship matches. Every time he tried to organize a match, some excuse came up, and that was for one simple reason. Nobody wanted to sponsor a one-sided match. Maybe a rematch versus Kramnik would have been good, but the sponsors, or maybe Kramnik, didn't think that. Probably the sponsors figured that people were tired seeing Kaspy for the second straight decade. So they came up with their excuses, which they themselves new were invalid, and that made it impossible for Kaspy to play another match. Kasparov saw that he was not being allowed to win the title back, so he retired! There is no other reason for his retirement.|
|Jul-07-15|| ||Petrosianic: He was still entitled to a FIDE Championship match against Kasimdzhanov, and according to Kirsan, the guarantees were on the table. He was lying, of course, but that was the claim for months. If it was only about the match, he could at least have waited until Kirsan pulled the plug or changed the rules.|
|Aug-24-15|| ||SimplicityRichard: I never tire to replay this brilliant game. And indeed, ultimately it is a matter of taste; combinative chess is my cup of tea. My feelings and comments last year as <tranquilsimplicity> have not changed one iota. #|
|Sep-09-15|| ||offramp: Against Karpov's Caro-Kann Kasparov scored 4-0 with 3 draws.|
|Sep-09-15|| ||kevin86: Kasparov kicks Karpov again...like a dead dog.|
|Sep-09-15|| ||JohnBoy: Has the issue of why not 14...Nxh4 been resolved? The Knight at f8 seems to me, as a former CK player, to be at the center of blacks problems.|
|Sep-09-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: <offramp: Against Karpov's Caro-Kann Kasparov scored 4-0 with 3 draws.>|
Which is the reason why I pronounce the opening as "Caro-Con"; if you think you will beat Kasparov with this opening, you are conning yourself.
|Sep-09-15|| ||Howard: For those of you who are wondering what tournament this game took place in, it was actually Linares 2001---not SuperGM2001.|
In fact, it was the last time that Karpov and Kasparov met in a classical time control. Linares 2001 was a double-round robin, incidentally. The two players drew their other game in this event.
|Sep-09-15|| ||Once: To be fair, Kasparov has an impressive score in the CG database against almost any black defence to 1. e4:|
Caro Kann - 63.2% wins, 34.2% draws
Sicilian - 59.3% wins, 34.9% draws
French - 67.7% wins, 22.6% draws
1...e5 - 55.1% wins, 40.8% draws
Scandinavian - 92.3% wins (12 wins and one draw).
In fact the only defence where he seems to be struggling is 1...Nc6 where he has scored the rather underwhelming 100% losses. Admittedly, from only one game:
Kasparov vs Short, 2015
And before we get too excited about finding a weakness in his opening repertoire, this was a blitz game where he lost on time.
The truth is that choice of opening is not really going to matter all that much if you find yourself sitting opposite either of the two Ks.
According to opening explorer, the caro is not that much better or worse than the other choices against 1. e4. White wins fewer games against the caro (36.2%) than he does against the French (39.3%) or 1... e5 (38.8%).
|Sep-09-15|| ||thegoodanarchist: Through the not so scientific method of trying to remember their games that I have looked at, it seems that Karpov did best by playing the Spanish against Kasparov when Gary opened with 1.e4.|
I don't recall Karpov using the Sicilian much.
|Sep-09-15|| ||Everett: Karpov really had a tough time with Black vs Kasparov in general. By the time the '86 match rolled around, Karpov's Nimzo vs d4 was taking a hit, and soon after that his Zaitsev Ruy was starting to get roughed up. |
IMHO, it was only when Kasparov played 1.c4 when Karpov could fight on equal terms. Even so, in 1987, Karpov went +2 -3 (including the famous Game 24) vs the English/Reti.
Kasparov was just a beast with White, but I found him most convincing when he went in for e4 and d4, not c4.
|Sep-09-15|| ||The Kings Domain: Good game, impressive victory by Kasparov, the way he controlled the game from the start with his trademark aggression barely gave Karpov breathing space and helped him seal the deal.|
|Jul-23-17|| ||plang: Played at Linares 2001 a 6 players double round robin won by Kasparov at +5 a full 3 points against the other 5 players who tied for 2nd at -1. This was the first time that Kasparov played 3 e5. 4 Nc3 is a particularly sharp line that Kasparov never repeated; he apparently thought it was a good choice against Karpov. 8..Nec6 is the most popular move; here Karpov varied with the rarely used 8..Nd7. 10..h5?! led to problems for Black; better was 10..d4 11 h5..dxc 12 Qxd8+..Kad8 13 hxg..N7xg6 14 b4..Nxf4 15 Bxf4..Nc6 16 Bxc6+..bc 17 Be5 with equality. In a 2000 Shirov-Karpov blindfold game (reached via a different move order) 13 Nxd5 had been played; 13 Bg5 was new. |
<Oginschile: 23... Nd7 24. Rh5 Rxh5 25. Qxh5 Bf6 26. Bd6+ is a possible line. There is some work left to do, but there is no doubting Kaspy wins this position against even the strongest computers.>
After 26..Ne7 27 Nd5 Black is completely lost.
Kasparov avoided the trap 26 Qc4..Nd8 27 Rxc5?..Rxh5!.
|Jul-23-17|| ||Muttley101: The discussion here is an excellent example of why www.chessgames.com is such an excellent website. Thanks to all who contributed so many interesting and well-argued points, and did so with good grace.|
|Aug-17-18|| ||OrangeTulip: Nice to see Van der Wiel becoming a bit immortal having an attacked named after him.
Check also the VdWiel attack in the Two Knights (Nice DVD by L’Ami on the 2 knights)|
|Oct-12-18|| ||paavoh: @JohnBoy: <Has the issue of why not 14...Nxh4 been resolved?> |
14...Nxh4 15. Bxh4 Bxh4 16. Bxd5 Kf8 17. Bxc6 bxc6 18. Rd1 seems to leave Black in a bad way for the endgame?
|Dec-11-19|| ||Clement Fraud: <paavoh> <14...Nxh4 15. Bxh4 Bxh4 16. Bxd5 Kf8 17. Bxc6 bxc6 18. Rd1 seems to leave Black in a bad way for the endgame?>|
Many thanks for your analysis. I find myself wondering if (in keeping with your suggested variation) that 16... Bf6 might have offered black better chances!? After 16... Bf6, black is threatening the ruination of white's queenside pawn majority (with ... Bxc3+)?
I believe that the Caro Kann is an aggressive opening: uncompromising, and yet positionally sound!?
|Dec-11-19|| ||Carrots and Pizza: Back in the good old days, when it seemed Kasparov would be champion forever. Karpov and Kasparov were in a class by themselves for many years. Great champions.|
|Dec-12-19|| ||keypusher: < Carrots and Pizza: Back in the good old days, when it seemed Kasparov would be champion forever. >|
He'd lost his title the year before.
|Dec-12-19|| ||paavoh: @Clement Fraud: <After 16... Bf6, black is threatening the ruination of white's queenside pawn majority (with ... Bxc3+)?> Thanks for that suggestion. It seems, after looking at the position for a while, that 17.O-O-O!? might be the antidote. 17.-Bxc3? is stymied by 18.Bxc6+ while taking the Queen out of harm's way by 17.-Qc7 is followed by 18.Ne4. Anyway, it is a complex position.|
|Dec-12-19|| ||Clement Fraud: <paavoh> <It seems, after looking at the position for a while, that 17.O-O-O!? might be the antidote.>|
You're absolutely right - I completely overlooked the possibility of 17.O-O-O (threatening Bxc6+ winning black's Queen). So Karpov was correct to reject 14... Nxh4, and a whole new approach from black is needed for the position.
I bet Kasparov was sorry he didn't try this line (against Karpov's Caro Kann) at Linares in 94!
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·