|Jun-15-09|| ||Bobsterman3000: No good moves, plans or even cheap tricks available for Nisipeanu. |
With such an exposed king it will cost him the bishop (or more) to stop the d-pawn... he could have squirmed a little longer but the result seems inevitable, so he resigned.
|Jun-15-09|| ||Marmot PFL: Why did they invite Nisipeanu to play all these high rated players?|
|Jun-15-09|| ||virginmind: <Marmot PFL> for the obvious reason why they invite local 2650+ players at other strong tournaments too. besides nisipeanu has beaten 2700+ gm's before (including topalov, ivanchuk, shirov, grischuk, gelfand etc)|
|Jun-15-09|| ||waustad: He was doing better until 27.) ... Rf7. Rybka liked his chances with Nh3, but after that it seemed that his attack fizzled. Watching this game on http://chessbomb.com/site/ was interesting, in part because it was the only game today with a lot of moves that the computer hated.|
|Jun-15-09|| ||Eisenheim: quirky game - esp since no queen movement until move 26|
|Jun-15-09|| ||WhiteRook48: horrible game on the black side|
|Jun-15-09|| ||I Like Fish: any improvement suggestions...|
|Jun-16-09|| ||virginmind: 26...Qxa8 was a huge waste of tempo and against the spirit of black's attack. better were:|
Gelfand Boris - Nisipeanu Liviu-Dieter, King's tourney 2009
click for larger view
Analysis by Fritz 11:
1. (0.45): 26...Nh3+ 27.Rxh3 Bxd1 28.Rxd1 Qc8 29.Rc1 Qxa8 30.Bxd6 Rf4 31.Re3 Rg4 32.Rcc3 Qa6 33.h3 Rf4 34.Be7 h4 2. (0.52): 26...Nxg2 27.Rxf8+ Bxf8 28.Qc2 Nf4 29.Rf1 Qxa8 30.Bc1 Nh3+ 31.Kg2 Qa6 32.Rd1 Bxd1 33.Qxd1 Nf4+ 34.Bxf4 exf4 35.Qxh5 Bg7
|Jun-17-09|| ||ToTheDeath: I hate to say it, I love the opening and have played it countless times, but the KID is simply not a reliable defence. White players these days know too many ways to exploit their spatial advantage and Black's kingside play usually comes a day late and a dollar short.|
I'm not in the camp that says it's losing, but as Kasparov said when asked why he gave it up it's a very difficult opening where White can make you suffer a lot if he knows what he's doing.
|Jun-17-09|| ||chillowack: <Marmot PFL: Why did they invite Nisipeanu to play all these high rated players?>
You've got it backward: these high-rated players were invited to play Nisipeanu. He is a Romanian, this is his home turf. The tournament was undboutedly organized for his benefit, to give him the experience he needs to make it to the next level in his career.|
|Jun-17-09|| ||Marmot PFL: Give me a break, he's 33 years old and isn't going anywhere.|
|Jun-18-09|| ||chillowack: <Marmot PFL: Give me a break, he's 33 years old and isn't going anywhere.>|
If you mean to say that Nisipeanu is "over the hill" and can't expect to improve anymore, then I respectfully disagree, not only with the statement itself, but also the spirit behind it.
The points being that 1) many players have made fantastic strides after age 33. Kasparov, Karpov, and Anand all made some of their greatest achievements after that age, it's by no means over-the-hill; and 2) events like this are precisely *how* Nisipeanu will continue to grow--that's why they're organized. This event will give Nisipeanu valuable world-class experience.
|Jun-18-09|| ||Marmot PFL: I am sorry if my remarks sounded mean spirited, but Kasparov, karpov and Anand were all world class players by age 20. Nisipeanu is simply a somewhat above average GM but no championship prospect. he is not over the hill but has almost certainly reached his peak.|
|Jun-18-09|| ||chillowack: I agree that Nisipeanu is not in the same league as Kasparov, Karpov, and Anand.|
And you may be right that he is at or near his peak; but he could still surprise us over the next few years, and break into the elite.
|Jun-18-09|| ||hedgeh0g: I doubt that, chillowack. He belongs to the category of strong players (Khalifman and Kasimdzhanov are good examples of this) who could win the "world" title in a FIDE knockout tournament, but can't consistently play at the same level as Anand, Carlsen, Aronian, etc.|
|Jun-19-09|| ||tamar: Nisipeanu has an even score against the participants at Bazna, even counting his two losses here.|
He is likely a bit discouraged by his bad start, but at least judging by past performance, he is not overmatched.
Nisipeanu vs Ivanchuk
|Jun-19-09|| ||ToTheDeath: <tamar> Quite impressive.|
|Jun-19-09|| ||chillowack: <hedgeh0g: I doubt that, chillowack. He belongs to the category of strong players (Khalifman and Kasimdzhanov are good examples of this) who could win the "world" title in a FIDE knockout tournament, but can't consistently play at the same level as Anand, Carlsen, Aronian, etc.>
Most likely you are right, hedgeh0g, but he could still surprise us. It's happened before.|
|Jun-20-09|| ||Mateo: 20...g4 is questionable although natural as after 21.Nb6 Black has to sacrifice some material after 21...Rb8 22.Nc4. So, 21...Nxe4 was a kind of bluff. It worked until Nisipeanu lost his way. But 22.Qc2! could win quickly.|
|Jun-22-09|| ||GreenArrow: It is a shame that a lot of people have to annotate by result and fob off black's play as 'horrible', presumably based on the fact that he lost and is 'only' 2675. 21...Nxe4! is an excellent idea with the game continuation line and also intending 22.Qc2 Qh4 or 22.Nxa8 Nf2 with highly unclear positions, but an attack for black (which is what he is striving for from the opening). Nisipeanu just hasn't been able to back up his imaginative ideas in this game (and others in the tournament) with mistake-free play in later phases of the game. 26...Qxa8 looks wrong and if he had tried ...Nxg2 or ...Nh3 instead, chances would be a lot better with an unclear position. No doubt if Nisipeanu had gone on to win in 35 moves here then this would be hailed as a brilliancy instead and not sneered at.|
|Jun-22-09|| ||Oginschile: Great point GreenArrow. I have been a Nisi fan for a while. While his rating may not have reached the "elite" (at what point does it become elite i wonder? top ten?) some of his brilliancies on the board have certainly set him apart as a player that can be a lot of fun to watch.
I always look forward to watching him play. The bigger the opponent the better, and I'm sure Nisipeanu would echo this. His play is fearless!|
|Jun-26-09|| ||pulsar: Some analysis, available on the date of the publication only: http://www.bworldonline.com/BW06260...|
|Jun-28-09|| ||Domdaniel: <horrible game on the black side>
Not at all. Nisipeanu's startling 21...Nxe4!? very nearly succeeded, and might well have won against a less experienced defender. I agree that Gelfand snuffs out the black attack pretty ruthlessly, although - as others have noted here - black may have improvements.|
I don't think that it's a killing verdict on the KID either -- just that the sort of crude but semi-brilliant attacks that work against 'ordinary' GMs generally get nowhere against the elite guys.
As a game, I think it's fascinating. And mere humans like us could learn a lot from black's play. We might learn even more from White's, if only we were good enough.
Nisipeanu rightly rejected the idea of winning back the exchange with ...Bxf3, but he presumably underestimated just how bad his position would be when white emerges with two rooks plus pawns for the queen. Yet there are some very nice attacking ideas here, and they very nearly work.
|Oct-29-10|| ||nvmea: Great game. My favorite in this variation.|