|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-26-11 | | Ulhumbrus: On 22...Be4 23 Rxe4 Nxe4 24 Nc6 Qf5 25 Bf3 Nd2 26 Qxf5 Nxe2+ 27 gxf3 exf5 28 Rxb4 Rxb4 29 Bxb4 White has two minor pieces for a Rook and a pawn, and the upper hand in the ending if he can keep Black's passed pawn back and Black's Rook out in time for his King to enter the game, as in the game Bronstein vs Botvinnik, 1944. Shirov, who is a great expert on the endgame, could have avoided this variation for this reason. |
|
| Jan-26-11 | | Eyal: <On 22...Be4 23 Rxe4 Nxe4 24 Nc6 Qf5 25 Bf3 Nd2 26 Qxf5 Nxe2[f3]+ 27 gxf3 exf5 28 Rxb4 Rxb4 29 Bxb4 White has two minor pieces for a Rook and a pawn, and the upper hand in the ending if he can keep Black's passed pawn back and Black's Rook out in time for his King to enter the game, as in the game Bronstein vs Botvinnik, 1944. Shirov, who is a great expert on the endgame, could have avoided this variation for this reason.> 26...Nxf3+?? loses, of course, to 27.Qxf3, but after 26...exf5 this endgame might arise. It looks quite balanced and doesn't really have much to do with the completely different type of position in that endgame from 1944, but even if White has some edge it's better by far than anything else Black can get by this stage of the game. I'm pretty sure that if Shirov considered 22...Be4 that's not the reason why he rejected it - he probably lost his way somewhere in the maze of threats and counter-threats which this line leads to. |
|
| Jan-26-11 | | Ulhumbrus: I meant in fact to say 26..Nxf3+ and not 26...Nxd2+ but as you indicate, Black can't play it as an intermediate move as White can answer the check and remove his Queen from attack by the same time by 27 Qxf3. The right order of moves is 22...Be4 23 Rxe4 Nxe4 24 Nc6 Qf5 25 Bf3 Nd2 26 Qxf5 exf5 27 Rxb4 Nxf3+ ( to remove White's Bishop pair) 28 gxf3 Rxb4 29 Bxb4 and Shirov may have avoided this if he considered that this ending was lost for Black with best play, found no satisfactory alternative, and thought that the only thing left for him to do was to try to decide which gamble might give Anand the best chance to go wrong. |
|
| Jan-26-11 | | onur87: that was great game, but shirov isnt this player!! |
|
Jan-26-11
 | | HeMateMe: Talk about grabbing a tempo and hanging on! |
|
| Jan-26-11 | | shintaro go: Wow, Black's position suddenly crumbles. Anand deserves to win this tournament. |
|
| Jan-26-11 | | borginburks: terrible opening preparation from shirov once again...he has to find something better than the cambridge spring's variation.he has lost 3 games as black but he insists on it |
|
| Jan-27-11 | | Eyal: Once Shirov missed the tricky 22...Be4! it's very bad for him whatever he does, but with 23...Rb7 (allowing him to defend f7) he could still keep playing on for a while. Apparently he has to lose at least a pawn in such a case after 24.Nxc4 Bxc4 25.Qxc4, e.g. 25...Ba3 26.Rxb7 Nxb7 27.Bxa3 Qxa3 28.Qxa6; or 25...Bc3 26.Rxb7 Nxb7 27.Bc7! |
|
Jan-27-11
 | | chancho: Anand owns Shirov.
The other guy who treated Shirov like roadkill is Kasparov.
Shirov's record is quite good facing Kamsky, Kramnik, Polgar, Topalov, and Gelfand. |
|
| Jan-27-11 | | Eyal: In recent years he's regularly crushed by Kramnik as well (7-1 and 4 draws since 2007). |
|
| Jan-27-11 | | DAVI DE RAFE: enakku ee kali nallavannam pudichirickku |
|
| Jan-27-11 | | anandrulez: davi ... entha peru ? Ivide malayalam arkum ariyilla ennu ariyille ? :) |
|
| Jan-28-11 | | Albertan: I had the program Hiarcs 13.2 MP (Deep Hiarcs) analyze this game for 2 hours on my quad core computer and have posted this analysis to my blog. You can play through the analysis using Chessviewer Deluxe by clicking on the following direct link: http://albertan1956.blogspot.com/20... |
|
Jan-28-11
 | | Richard Taylor: Maybe Shirov is completely demoralized.
It must be a devastating feeling to play so below form. |
|
Jan-28-11
| | Richard Taylor: Anand is a great player (or he has been) but he just played fairly obvious moves here to win against relatively poor play. |
|
| Jan-28-11 | | Chessinfinite: < Richard Taylor> I see you are back with your *idiotic* comments. So you are saying Anand did nothing in that game? he made obvious moves...lol You should learn to treat the World Champion with more respect, do you understand? |
|
| Jan-29-11 | | Chessinfinite: Add to above post: It is sad to see a great player such as Shirov in Bad form, He was in great form last year, but these things happen sometimes. Don't know how long will Anand himself post these results in a contest for first place, for it is getting harder for the 'old' players to stay at the top. I recall there was a time when Shirov, Anand , Kramnik and others were regular competitors for the top spot, all trying to stop the Great Kasparov, but none really could, and we see those players still competing in strong tournaments ! I am sure these players have a lot of respect for each other and i hope they continue to play as long as possible, this time under the new competition from a very strong bunch of young GMs. |
|
Jan-29-11
| | Richard Taylor: <Chessinfinite: < Richard Taylor> I see you are back with your *idiotic* comments. So you are saying Anand did nothing in that game? he made obvious moves...lol You should learn to treat the World Champion with more respect, do you understand?> You mean I should fall to the ground in infinite wonder at the almighty Anand's feet? As it happens I have book of Anand's game and I study them a lot - as I say - a great player of a certain kind. But I am not sure that this is an example of his more extraordinary games. It was rather clear what White would do. Shirov played pretty badly. No player is outside criticism. Keep your hair on old chap! Keep taking your medication and keep going to therapy and and all will be well! |
|
| Jan-29-11 | | Chessinfinite: <You mean I should fall to the ground in infinite wonder at the almighty Anand's feet?> If that is what you took from what i said, there is not much to argue.. No player is outside criticism, i agree but why criticise a player, that too a World Champion who is older than his opponent, and who won a nice game ?
What i don't agree is some self proclaimed 'expert' ( read you ) claiming to criticise a World renowned player on having played 'obvious' moves.. It may appear obvious to you, old man, thats why you are not there playing with these guys.. get what i am trying to say? it think i was right in asking you to show a bit more respect to the World Champion. btw, aren't you the one who said the same thing about a 'calculating' Anand who was beating Kramnik in their World Championship match because Kramnik was ' not calculating' enough and so Anand in some way was not really beating Kramnik ? ... Whatever man, your views are weird on this one... Good luck with your hallucinations in future... |
|
Jan-30-11
| | Richard Taylor: Idint say I was an expert. You missed the point. Someone else was waxing lyrical about how this game vs Shirov ac proved what a great player Anand was. THAT is nonsense... ...he is eminently proved to be in for example his own book of his own games which I have. And of course in many other games...but this game, no. I didn't say he did nothing but Shirov's play was dubious...and this is not to put the boot into Shirov who I think is (or can be on god day) a great player also in his own way. I am NOT criticizing Anand. I actually think he was in good position to win the match against Kasparov but lost more for psychological reasons than ability... (in certain positions, he needed to attack and possibly win, but he failed to do so: but I don't criticse that, I understand it, considering who he was up against) and indeed the great game he won provoked Kasparov to play like maniac (he was very angry and wouldn't shake hands and all that, so my respect here goes to Anand... ) and played a prepared variation...now ..the point? Clearly that if Anand had had as good a team at that time as Kasparov and as much experience etc he could well have beaten him. (Also I was expressing my feelings for Shirov coming last as I came last recently in a tournament - that is the New Zealand Championships - so there is your answer as to what my experience etc is) My feeling is that Kasparov, great player of course, learnt from his games with Karpov and Petrosian et al, Anand is not (obviously) lacking in ability, but perhaps that time in experience and the psychological 'zip' so to speak...but he has proved to be a great champion and has played some extraordinarily great games...the match versus Topalov was close but he clearly deserved the victory...and so on... He is also a really nice bloke...which counts a lot. |
|
Jan-30-11
| | Richard Taylor: "btw, aren't you the one who said the same thing about a 'calculating' Anand who was beating Kramnik in their World Championship match because Kramnik was ' not calculating' enough and so Anand in some way was not really beating Kramnik ?" Again you misunderstand. My comments were completely tongue in cheek at the time. Directed at people's futile arguments about who is the better player and so on...mostly the arguments are pointless. So I was using some satire...I pretended I thought Anand was an idiot savant...lol! Also I was defending Kramnik as far more than a "Drawnik" as <Travis Bickle> was calling him... I respect Anand not as he is World Chess Champion but how he behaves as one ..and for that I respect Anand but in this game you are missing the point...as I pointed out this game is NOT proof of Anand's abilities so much as it shows Shirov's poor form. And Shirov is clearly getting older and so on... Of course Anand had to play well to win... But my respect goes to Anand (as player ...BUT he is not beyond criticism as you keep wanting to imply) as he is decent man as well as great player...not because of one game...now I have less respect for (example) Fischer or even Kasparov as I feel the latter for example was / is too arrogant. The former was a (rather unlikable) mad man, and (Tacitly, Kasparov: "I am the greatest" ..blah! Say it if you are Ali but not a short arsed Kasparov... Great ability, yes. But gets my respect?...No.)... " ... Whatever man, your views are weird on this one..." Probably I am a bit weird...what's wrong with weird? Are you normal? Do I look normal? "Good luck with your hallucinations in future..."
Fair enough. But I am able to rise above petty national or "idolizing" mud-slinging prejudices and "starry eyes" and to keep an objective view of these matters. Keep calm and rethink your views. Clearly all this is keeping you nervous, tormented, sleepless, and is probably spoiling your love life if not you chess... |
|
| Jan-31-11 | | Chessinfinite: Oh so now you had been joking all along and *I* did not see the meaning of your posts? .. Good, that clears it up.. next time please do mention that somewhere, for those of us who are not so gifted in the *joking* department ..... <No player is outside criticism. Keep your hair on old chap!> Agreed, so you are saying that it is ok to criticise Anand which i presume you did and that is why you feel the need to bring up this point. <I am NOT criticizing Anand.> Make up your mind, what exactly are you telling about Anand here? <I actually think he was in good position to win the match against Kasparov but lost more for psychological reasons than ability.> Ok , i will consider this your opinion, i think Kasparov was a much bettter and stronger player than Vishy and i also do not think Anand ever had any real chance of beating him in that match you mentioned. Psychological or not, it is all part of the game is it not? And the fact that you find the need to mention your respect for Anand in every other line is out of the way too IMO. You may have bought his book, that does not necessarily mean a thing concerning showing respect elsewhere IMO... Actually you may be surprised, but I too respect Anand a lot, so much that i feel statements made out of line concerning him need to be pointed out or *corrected if possible*. But that does not make me a Nationalist.. btw, I do think that Kasparov was perfectly justified in his attitude and behaviour and what you termed as arrogance, i see it as something nice at times and good for the game. Infact Anand would do well by having some of that attitude, but he is as he is, a *gentleman* so to speak, as i know from where he comes, to be a gentleman is the highest form of honor one can get. So that is all fine regarding the way Anand is... < starry eyes, mud slinging, love life ? > Again, whatever man, should i be asking you to show a bit of politeness to me too now? |
|
| Jan-31-11 | | Robed.Bishop: Somebody needs a drink... |
|
| Feb-01-11 | | pankajdaga: chill the f*** out... |
|
| Mar-04-11 | | checkmateyourmove: i love how he prefers to build his tempo in the game instead of pawn grabbing. Beautiful |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 7 OF 7 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
