|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-25-04 | | ConLaMismaMano: Ups, i missed the Queen. Anyway, like Iron Maiden pointed out, white seems to be in zugzwang. |
|
| Nov-25-04 | | Minor Piece Activity: Is it really zugzwang? Black wins no matter what I'd say. Qxc4 and Be5 are the two main threats. |
|
| Nov-25-04 | | iron maiden: It's nearly zugzwang. Nice work by Kasparov. At least Grischuk beat Bareev to stay in the same time zone as Garry. |
|
| Nov-25-04 | | flamboyant: I re-watched the game like 10 times and im still stunned. I play silician almost every time against 1.e4 ( I musts admit its a part because of Garry lol )he seems to master this opening so well. Who's gonna stop him?
Anyone know the schedule of the futur games ? is there games on tomorrow? |
|
| Nov-25-04 | | euripides: Ast the end Black threatens Be5. If the white queen moves off the h2-b8 diagonal, then Black plays Qg3+. There does not seem to be an answer to this. |
|
| Nov-26-04 | | tex: <acirce> Well Rublevsky did beat Kasparov with Bb5 Sicilian not so long ago. |
|
| Nov-26-04 | | acirce: <tex> Yes, he did. But it seems the Kasparov in Cesme was not the same Kasparov as here! :-) |
|
| Nov-26-04 | | ChessMan94: I predict Kasparov will grill Kazim in their match and will become the undisputed world champ again! |
|
| Nov-27-04 | | dryden: the undisputed WHAT?
What about Kramnik, Anand and the likes?
What about the fact that he would defeat (if he does it!) the winner - although he's a very very strong player - of a pharcical WC?
And that's the winner of the World Chess Championship that HE - Kasparov- boycotted ten years ago 'cuz it did not like it.
Then he LOST at his OWN championship to Kramnik, SO WHAT? |
|
| Nov-29-04 | | themindset: so, kasparov is better than kramnik.
he was out of form in their match, perhaps over-confident and under-prepared. but not this time around. if kramnik ducks him like a little coward, then he will be the undisputed champion in my eyes - and the eyes of many others. period. |
|
| Dec-30-04 | | azi: Kasparov is incredible! He turns EVERY move into the preperation of his opponents demise! Attacked pieces turn into violent attackers. His vision of the game seems to transcend what is actually on the board. With his will he is able to see beyond most mortal chessies. Its almost scary...when he appears on the verge of having to defend he is really just uncorking a different counterattack! Amazing Gary!! Happy 2005!! |
|
| Dec-30-04 | | RisingChamp: I wonder why everybody regards every respons expect the Open Sicilian something suboptimal which deserves punishment.Acirce as for your comment abt how anti-sicilians arent good against Sicilian experts,off the hat I can think of Landa missing a win against Kasparov in the Morra Gambit and Akopian beating Kasparov with the Bb5 Sicilian. |
|
| Dec-30-04 | | acirce: You're right, you've convinced me at last, every line in every opening is exactly as good as any other. The reason we don't see the Morra, the Grand Prix or the Wing Gambit on the highest level is purely fashion. The same goes for the Ponziani, the Polish opening and everything else. How could it be otherwise? I mean, how could a chess move be "better" or "worse" than any other move? That is unheard of. |
|
| Dec-30-04 | | RisingChamp: That is of course a straw man argument,which responds to an argument I havent made.If you see the game Landa vs Kasparov 1988,you will see that the problem with the Morra,is not that is a very poor opening,but that one can simply decline it as in Adams vs Anand.Furthermore you havent addressed my point-your comment clearly suggested that after 1 e4 c5 everything except 2 NF3 is suboptimal and deserving of punishment.Your sarcasm is really crude is it an effort to evade the real issue? |
|
| Dec-30-04 | | RisingChamp: As for the Grand Prix Attack it was seen often at the top level some time ago so-yes it is out of fashion.As I have already said the Morra gambit is suboptimal only in the declined with d5 or Nf6 variations-this is also the opinion of Joe Gallagher in his book beating the Anti-Sicilians "Despite thorough analysis I havent found any way for black to completely neutralize whites strong initiative".I didnt say all lines were equally good but can you really demonstrate that the open Sicilian is "better"than the closed Sicilian or that 3 Nc3 is better than Nd2 in the French or whatever.Of course not. I agree some lines are better than others but they are equally playable and I dont think any reply other than the open sicilian is deserving of "punishment" as you claim.I would appreciate it if you back your views with some arguments instead of exaggerated sarcasm which is not relevant to the point. |
|
| Dec-30-04 | | acirce: Rogozenko says the same in <Anti-Sicilians. A Guide for Black> about the Morra, <I have failed to find a clear way of accepting the pawn sacrifice and then completely neutralizing White's initiative>. It of course does not mean in any way that it is better than other anti-Sicilians, but anyway he recommends transposing to the 2.c3 Sicilian with 3..Nf6 which he calls equal. His assessment of the Morra is accordingly = since Black can transpose into a line that is =. I can't "demonstrate" that the Open Sicilian is better than anything else. You think that's what I'm saying? I'm speaking theoretical verdicts. Not even a 2900 player could "demonstrate" that superiority independently of all the research that has been made by experts over the decades and centuries. If I suffered from hubris I would be glad to be as "openminded" as you but I don't. As for "punish" I did not mean it as in trying to get an advantage straight away but in trying to neutralize or minimize White's which is easier against for example such a timid line as in this game than against the best lines. I agree that "punish" may create other associations and that it may well backfire if Black tries too hard to make White pay for his impudence. |
|
| Dec-30-04 | | RisingChamp: Thanx for the last post which is more characteristically level headed as well as explanatory.Now that you clarify what you meant by punish I dont think there is really a disagreement-I already said the Morra was suboptimal(it can be declined)but I do think its perfectly playable at any level-as is the c3 sicilian though I will concede it is not as thematic or principled or even as good as the main variations,it is just a matter of your taste.You should keep in mind that the evaluations of openings change all the time-not so long ago,the GrandPrixAttack was highly fashionable and was played a lot at the GM level.Now you say it is a poor opening-just for clarification I would like to know would your opinion change if it were to become fashionable again? |
|
| Jul-22-05 | | alexandrovm: Very nice game! At the end 38. ...Rh8 seems very strong. On this game <In Timofeev vs Kasparov the latter, more than twice the age of the former, made it amply clear early in the game that he was going for the full point with his Sicilian defence. It was a very convincing victory,...> more at http://www.chessbase.com/eventartic... |
|
| Jul-29-05 | | acirce: It is indeed a nice game. Lame opening by White though. 10..Nd7! is an impressive move which Dokhoian (Kasparov's second) comments like this in New In Chess 2005/1: <A critical moment in the game. Kasparov thought for a very long time over this move. Black needs to decide on a plan for deploying his pieces (all the natural developing moves have already been made) and, as it seems to me, he succeeds in looking into the future with this multi-purpose tenth move: the knight is switched to the queenside, from where (in the event of d3-d4) it eyes the c4 square. The importance of the g7 bishop is also increased, as it now keeps control of the key d4 square.> 11.Be3 <In the event of 11.d4 a4 12.Bc2 Nb6 13.d5 Na5 Black is excellently prepared for play in the centre and on the queenside.> 13..e5 <The resulting position is more typical of the Ruy Lopez, with Black having made strong progress: he has fianchettoed his king's bishop without loss of time and seized space on the queenside. His chances in the forthcoming play are already preferable.> Later on, after having outplayed White convincingly, he slips a bit and gives him a chance to reenter the game: 27..Qxc4?! <27..Bc6! was possible, keeping the passed a4 pawn alive. At the very last moment Garry inclined towards the move in the game and greatly regretted this (especially when he saw the best defence 30.Rc1!)> 30.c4? <Played in time-trouble. It is very difficult for White to defend: it is not even a question of the potential loss of his c3 pawn. Black intends to create his main threats against the white king. The best defence was 30.Rc1! Rd8 (here the following line does not work: 30..e4 31.Rd1 Qe2 32.Rd2 ef3 33.Re2 fe2 34.Qe4) 31.Qc2! (bad is 31.Qh4 e4 32.Ng5 e3) and White has every chance of saving the game.> After this the win is pretty straightforward although the play is a little bit marred by time-trouble mistakes from both sides, I'll leave that out. |
|
| Aug-08-06 | | gambitfan: A superb game ! Is this the famous Bowlder attack ??? |
|
| Aug-09-06 | | gambitfan: I played several games two days ago in a cafe with a new partner... I had Black and he played : 1.e4 c5 2. c4 ?!...
If I remember well, I mainly answered 2... d6 but after the games I had a doubt... Wasn't it better to answer 2... e6 ?
Let's have a look at COE ( Opening Explorer )... 2...e6 seems to be the best answer according to Opening Explorer : 65 games with following probabilities : 23.1% (White winning), 16.9% draw, 60% Black winning... The problem is that after 3. c3 c6 ... (most common moves), if White play 4. d3 ... (second most common move after 4.f3 ..., then Black seems to have no more suitable answer : the paradox is that White seem to win ! Opening Explorer Due to the low number of games, these statistics have of course no great value... and COE (Opening Explorer) is of no great help for 2...e6 If we look now at 2... d6 COE gives good roads to Black winning games... With only 7 games, 2...d6 looks ridiculous compared with 2... e6 (65 games) but winning probabilities (28.6%/14.3%/57.1%) are good for Black - as unsignificant as they might be for such a low number of games -... Opening Explorer If White play then 3.♘f3, we obtain 301 games (transposition of moves) and good winning prospects for Black. With other White third moves, it is OK for Black too... Looking at the games given in the data base for these 2...d6 positions, I discovered A Timofeev vs Kasparov, 2004, 2004 and decided to study it. In conclusion : I was right to play 2...d6 instead of 2...e6 two days ago in that cafe ! |
|
| Oct-25-08 | | notyetagm: <acirce: It is indeed a nice game. Lame opening by White though. 10..Nd7! is an impressive move which Dokhoian (Kasparov's second) comments like this in New In Chess 2005/1:
<A critical moment in the game. Kasparov thought for a very long time over this move. Black needs to decide on a plan for deploying his pieces (all the natural developing moves have already been made) and, as it seems to me, he succeeds in looking into the future with this multi-purpose tenth move: the knight is switched to the queenside, from where (in the event of d3-d4) it eyes the c4 square. The importance of the g7 bishop is also increased, as it now keeps control of the key d4 square.> 11.Be3 <In the event of 11.d4 a4 12.Bc2 Nb6 13.d5 Na5 Black is excellently prepared for play in the centre and on the queenside.> 13..e5 <The resulting position is more typical of the Ruy Lopez, with Black having made strong progress: he has fianchettoed his king's bishop without loss of time and seized space on the queenside. His chances in the forthcoming play are already preferable.> Later on, after having outplayed White convincingly, he slips a bit and gives him a chance to reenter the game: 27..Qxc4?! <27..Bc6! was possible, keeping the passed a4 pawn alive. At the very last moment Garry inclined towards the move in the game and greatly regretted this (especially when he saw the best defence 30.Rc1!)> 30.c4? <Played in time-trouble. It is very difficult for White to defend: it is not even a question of the potential loss of his c3 pawn. Black intends to create his main threats against the white king. The best defence was 30.Rc1! Rd8 (here the following line does not work: 30..e4 31.Rd1 Qe2 32.Rd2 ef3 33.Re2 fe2 34.Qe4) 31.Qc2! (bad is 31.Qh4 e4 32.Ng5 e3) and White has every chance of saving the game.> After this the win is pretty straightforward although the play is a little bit marred by time-trouble mistakes from both sides, I'll leave that out.> Excellent commentary.
|
|
| Aug-28-11 | | ReaperX: Been studying on the Sicilian. Just played a game with someone who also put down 3.Bc4 Lets just say I didn't do too well. Studying up on all the lines in the Sicilian |
|
| Aug-02-19 | | Patzer Natmas: Game featured in "New in Chess - Tactics Training - Garry Kasparov " Solve for black on move 43... |
|
Sep-20-23
 | | plang: White's setup bears some resemblence to the slower variations of the Ruy Lopez or the Giuoco Piano. 9..Bg4 had been played in the draw Yudasin-Greenfeld 2000 Israel Championship at Ramat Aviv; 9..a5 was new. Dokhoian after 13..e5:
"The resulting position is more typical of the Ruy Lopez with Black having made strong progress: he has fianchettoed his king's bishop without loss of time and seized space on the queenside. His chances in the upcoming play are already preferable." White's 23 a4 succeeded in activating his king bishop but at the expense of giving Black a powerful pawn on a4. 27..Bc6 28 Bd5..Ra8 would have been a better solution maintaining the strong outside passed pawn. White missed the best defense when playing 30 c4?; instead 30 Rc1..Rd8 31 Qc2..e4 32 Qxd3..Rxd3 33 Nd4 would have given White good chances to hold. The point was 32 Re1?..exf wins for Black as well as 32 Ne1..Bd4! 33 Rxd4..e3! and wins. White's last chance was 34 Ng4!..h5 35 c5!..Qb2 36 Ne3..Qc3 37 Nc2 and White would have had good chances to draw. 36 Re1 would have held out longer. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
