Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing User Profile

Member since Apr-24-05 · Last seen Sep-06-21
Location: Espoo, Finland.

Interests besides chess: philosophy, psychology, science in general, art (drawing especially), (military)history, THE truth (whatever that is).

In short: I'm interested in everything, but prioritizing the least trivial. (Chess is not trivial, nor is art. It's only a matter of how you perceive them.)


My top-3 favorite players: Morphy and Capablanca, followed closely by Fischer.

For me, choosing favorites is more about the originality and efficiency of that player's style, rather than raw strength. Of course, these qualities correlate with success, but should explain my choice of players, especially of Morphy. Like Fischer, I appreciate "the light touch" over "the heavy".

---- ADDED 2012-01-14:

Lately I've also gained a great appreciation for the mind of Emanuel Lasker, though I wouldn't call his style "light". I currently believe Lasker's "maximum strength" (the maximum depth and accuracy of his judgment and plans), was actually greater than Capablanca's. But Capablanca's style was better overall because of it's greater freedom from oversights and faster pace of play, which seem more important than the maximum strength a player can reach. This is because as the saying goes, 1 bad move can be sufficient to not only neutralizing the advantages gained from 40 perfect moves, but even to losing the game!

In summary: in a must-Win-situation I'd pick Lasker, but in a must-Not-Lose-situation I'd pick Capablanca.

For this same reason I suspect Morphy could've defeated Steinitz in a match: Steinitz's new theories enabled him to perhaps squish more accuracy out of non-open positions (whenever he wasn't too busy trying to prove his point with some very eccentric moves), but Morphy's relative lack of oversights coupled with his more balanced positional style would've probably won the match, though most likely only after a slow start, as was typical of Morphy.

   krippp has kibitzed 83 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Nov-27-17 Nyback vs Carlsen, 2008 (replies)
krippp: I played the ending, found this pretty problem-like mate, white to play and mate: [DIAGRAM] The correct answer is... ...<58.Qd7!> and mates in 5. Taking the Bishop with <58.Qxh6+> is only mate in 10, the black King escaping via e7 and d6, the Pawns having to be gobbled,
   Nov-27-17 NN vs Philidor, 1749 (replies)
krippp: The principle of development expressed after move <10.O-O> !!? "Again, it being necessary to observe, as a general rule, that, as it is often dangerous to attack the adversary too soon, here likewise you must be reminded not to be too hasty in your attack, until your pawns are ...
   May-16-17 Capablanca vs C Piccardt, 1920
krippp: <krippp> has a video titled "Magnus Carlsen Reviews His Game vs Aronian", where he admits he doesn't remember the game anymore. So that removes Carlsen from 2). My sources were exaggerating (probably some Internet newspaper). Also puts Fischer's "perfect game memory"
   May-08-17 Capablanca vs Kostic, 1919 (replies)
krippp: <Ulhumbrus> [DIAGRAM] Then comes <16..fxg3+ 17.hxg3 Bxf3 18.gxf3 Qh3> [DIAGRAM] ...and with material now equal, black having the initiative against white's king, white seems to have only 2 options for not losing immediately on material: <19.gxh4 Rxf3+ 20.Ke2 Qg2+ ...
   May-08-17 Showalter vs Marshall, 1909 (replies)
krippp: <offramp> Well you leave away the immediate, critical tactical variation <26..Bxa3 27.Bxg7 Kxg7 28.bxa3>, as played in the game, which leaves white with 1v2 pawns on the Q-side, an advantage more easily used for pawn promotion than white's 3v2 on the K-side. Black is ...
   Sep-29-15 Isle of Man Masters (2014)
krippp: Earlier it seemed I couldn't post there. Now I can. Whe-hee.
   Sep-28-15 Robert James Fischer (replies)
krippp: Does anyone know a free-to-post chess forum? I have an idea about Internet bet-chess, and would like to post it some place where people read it. I have more info at PokerStars IoM Masters (2014)
   Nov-03-14 Kasparov vs Karpov, 1987 (replies)
krippp: <talisman> <16..Ndc4> clears d6, allowing <17..Qe7>, escaping the bishop's diagonal, and a good square for black's queen. Otherwise <15..Qc5> made less sense, he may as well have played <15..Qh5> immediately. Even without Kasparov's <16.Be3>, at c5
   Nov-03-14 J Juhnke vs Karpov, 1969 (replies)
krippp: It's a good game from 18-year-old Karpov, but his opponent is not very strong, repeatedly ignoring good development: <9.Nf5?!> moves the same piece twice for little compensation. <9.Re1> or <9.Bf4> were more logical. <16.Bb2?> again moves a piece twice, and ...
   Nov-03-14 Kasparov vs V Rao, 1989
krippp: This opening is so funny. Kasparov's simul opponent plays <9..e3!?>, a move Karpov used to defeat him in their 1987 match ( Kasparov vs Karpov, 1987 ), and where Kasparov found the best reply <10.d3!> over the board. This is of course the move Rao would have been ...
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

You are not logged in to
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC