< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
|Jan-22-07|| ||Resignation Trap: Taking a look at Vishy's other games in this tournament, I get the feeling that Anand's "heart just wasn't in it". Does anybody here agree?|
|Jan-22-07|| ||suenteus po 147: <Resignation Trap> That's the only reasonable explanation I could come to.|
|Jan-22-07|| ||micartouse: I was fascinated by the video of Topalov's post-mortem discussion of the game. He is constantly finding sacrificial variations with unclear dynamic compensation, and he dreams up fantasy positions. Also, he has full sight of the board. How fearsome!|
|Jan-22-07|| ||russep: can someone please tell me how this wins for white|
|Jan-23-07|| ||hitman84: <russep>Let me try :)|
Black's position is very passive, it cannot be improved unless white allows it.
Black has two R's that need open files
to operate. Black's pawns are all blocked here and its difficult for black to create an open file.
Lets think in terms of pawn structure..
click for larger view
Remember, white has gained control over c5 and e5 and B on c3 is guarding both d4 and b4.
Black may capture ba4 here but then that does not create an open file, the "a" pawn falls as well.
Now another try is to play g5 to control the f4 outpost but white can play h5,
If black continues with f4 then white plays g4.
If black plays g4 then white plays Nf4 defending the h5 pawn and attacking the e6 pawn.
The bottom line is black cannot improve his position and has to defend the entire game. White has ample time to improve his position.
I wonder how Karpov or Petrosian would play this from the black side.
|Jan-23-07|| ||ahmadov: Viswanathan Anand beat Veselin Topalov 20 to 13, with 37 draws, according to this database.|
|Jan-23-07|| ||Fisheremon: <syracrophy: Hmmm, I must imagine that Black lost on time.|
Or am I wrong?> That might be the only explanation. I provide an almost forced way to equality:
35...bxa4 36. Qc4 Qd6 37. Qa6 Rb8 38. Qxa4 Re7 39. h5 Rb5
40. Nc5 (40. Rxb5 cxb5 41. Qxb5 Rc7 42. Nc5 Qd5 43. Qb8 Re7
44. Qf8 Rc7 45. Qe8 Qa2+ 46. Ke3 Qd5 47. Bd2 Rc6 48. Qg6+
Kg8 49. Ke2 Kf8 =) 40... Rb8 41. Qa6 Rxb4 42. Nxe6
(42. Bxb4 Qxd4+ 43. Re3 Qxb4 44. Nxe6 Rd7 45. Re2 Rd2
46. Qxc6 Rxe2+ 47. Kxe2 Qg4+ 48. Kf2 Qxh5 49. Nf4 Qf7
50. Qa6 g5 51. Ne6 Kg6 52. Nd4+ Qf6 53. Qxa7 h5 54. Qc5 h4
55. gxh4 gxh4 =) 42... Rb8 43. d5 Rbe8 44. Kg2 Kg8
45. Kh3 Qb8 46. Rxf5 (46. Qxc6 Rc8 ) 46... Qc8 47. Qxc8
Rxc8 48. Nc5 cxd5 49. Rxd5 Kf7 50. Kh4 Rc6
|Jan-23-07|| ||ikipemiko: <ahmadov> Topalov is +1 against Vishi in classical games - no need to post this twice.|
|Jan-23-07|| ||ahmadov: <ikipemiko: <ahmadov> Topalov is +1 against Vishi in classical games - no need to post this twice.> This does not necessarily mean that Topalov is better than Anand, in the light of statistics I provided previously.|
|Jan-23-07|| ||ahmadov: Also, where did you get this information from?|
|Jan-23-07|| ||ikipemiko: I didn't say Topalov is better.
There was an article before MTel 2006 in which was shown that they were even in classical games before the tournament and you know that after that they met 3 times - 2 wins for Topalov and 1 win for Anand.
No need to write who is better in rapid chess so that's why the total score is : Anand beat Topa 20 to 13 .
|Jan-23-07|| ||ahmadov: Being good at rapid chess DOES matter for a professional chess player, as much as being good at Fisherandom and blindfold chess.|
|Jan-23-07|| ||Lt. Col. Majid: Isn’t it interesting how a failure has suddenly become a victor and success?|
Topalov lost the biggest challenge of his career but now he is known as
World Champion of “Fighting Chess”
World Champion of “Unbalanced Positions”
Talk about moving the goal post.
Question is, will the Elista wound ever heal? LMAOOO.
|Jan-23-07|| ||ahmadov: <Question is, will the Elista wound ever heal? LMAOOO.> No, it will not...|
|Jan-23-07|| ||Lt. Col. Majid: <No, it will not...>|
Dosen't look like it.
While Danailov, Topalov and his unhinged fans are still suffering from effects of the defeat, Kramnik has moved on.
Winning is surely a peaceful phenomenon.
|Jan-23-07|| ||Ulhumbrus: Anand said in his lecture/press conference that his resignation had definitely not been premature. He said that the e6 pawn had been going to collapse after which Black would have had a hopeless game. He said that he had made 5 blunders, one of which had been to play ...Qd5 instead of playing for ...Rd5, when White would have stood better, but Black would not have had to resign.|
|Jan-23-07|| ||Fisheremon: <Ulhumbrus: Anand said in his lecture/press conference that his resignation had definitely not been premature. He said that the e6 pawn had been going to collapse after which Black would have had a hopeless game. He said that he had made 5 blunders, one of which had been to play ...Qd5 instead of playing for ...Rd5, when White would have stood better, but Black would not have had to resign.> I wonder if he (a super-GM) could see my clear analysis.|
|Jan-24-07|| ||Lt. Col. Majid: <Ulhumbrus: Anand said in his lecture/press conference that his resignation had definitely not been premature. He said that the e6 pawn had been going to collapse after which Black would have had a hopeless game. He said that he had made 5 blunders, one of which had been to play ...Qd5 instead of playing for ...Rd5, when White would have stood better, but Black would not have had to resign.>|
5 frigging blunders?? Anand what's the matter?
|Jan-25-07|| ||Brown: <everyone> Petrosian, master of the exchange sac for attack and defence, probably beats everyone in "unbalanced" positions.|
Fischers' classic Game 13 vs Spassky must be considered one of the best in this category.
Spassky vs Fischer, 1972
Shirov is known for this sort of thing, on the winning and losing side of unbalanced positions. After all, he plays the Botvinnik Semi-Slav from both sides.
And here's one of Larsen's
P H Nielsen vs Larsen, 1997
Oh, and Fischer against Larsen here
Fischer vs Larsen, 1971
All the greats play unbalanced positions well, but the very best GM's (Karpov, Fischer, Kasparov, Petrosian 58-63 and Smyslov 51-56,) chose when to unbalance the positions to their benefit.
Tal, like Shirov, often did it whimsically, not the same way the best ever have. I would put Topalov in the same general category as these two. Great, great players, all three. Lasker and Bronstein belong here as well.
|Feb-13-07|| ||patzer2: The official Corus 2007 Report of this game is at http://www.coruschess.com/report.ph....|
|Feb-15-07|| ||RandomVisitor: Final position:
click for larger view
1. (0.70): 35...bxa4 36.Qc4 Qb6 37.h5 Rcd8 38.Rc5 Rd6 39.Nf4 Re7 40.Qa2 Qa6 41.Re5 Qb6 42.Kg2
2. (0.79): 35...Qe7 36.a5 Qxc5 37.dxc5 Kg8 38.Re1 a6 39.h5 Kf8 40.Ne5 Red8 41.Re3
|Feb-15-07|| ||rndbyboneng: topolov is a cheater|
|Feb-15-07|| ||Fisheremon: <rndbyboneng: topolov is a cheater> I think Anand admitted an unfair play (see my analysis, and RamdomVisitor's too).|
|Feb-16-07|| ||alicefujimori: <rndbyboneng: topolov is a cheater>..and you're just another brainless accuser.|
|Jan-22-19|| ||John Abraham: stunning exchange sacrifice from Topalov|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·