Nigel Short vs Garry Kasparov (1993)

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

Kibitzing

Nigel Short vs Garry Kasparov
Exhibition Game (thematic) (1993) (exhibition), London ENG, rd 3, Oct-??
King's Gambit: Accepted. Bishop's Gambit Bryan Countergambit (C33) · 1-0

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Given 103 times; par: 15 [what's this?]

explore this opening	find similar games	91 more Short/Kasparov games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: To access more information about the players (more games, favorite openings, statistics, sometimes a biography and photograph), click their highlighted names at the top of this page.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE. [CLICK HERE]

< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 5 · Later Kibitzing>
Aug-26-04		clocked: I think the irony here is that Kasparov had provided the evaluation for this line to MCO. Can anyone confirm this?

Aug-26-04		ray keene: this was an exhibition game from a set after the match where the openings were predetermined. this one came out of the hat for kasparov as black but he cd just as easily have been white. it was not rated of course.

Sep-06-04		refutor: i don't believe that 4. ...b5 is that bad. i use it in blitz successfully and haven't had the opportunity to use it OTB but i'd definitely have to think about it if i ever got 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf 3.Bc4 over the board

Jul-05-05		coolchess: The king gambit lines are so boring,that when short played kasparov king gambit kasparov play lazy, bored and without interest. Kasparov demolish short for WC, so he lost because monotony. laziness and a desire to sleep playing so stupid and boring lines.

Jul-05-05		aw1988: Are you possibly being serious? No, this was a thematic game played with Kieseritzky's terrible move 4...b5?.

Oct-19-05		BobbyBishop: I recently found R Keene's book on the K vs S 1993 match to my great pleasure. I forgot what an exciting match it was. Poor Nigel..he was just the victim of a spell of bad luck. He had so many promising positions throughout but that damn Kaspy kept escaping! GK also said it was a much more taxing match than those against Karpov so I don't know what the hell coolchess is talking about.

Oct-19-05		OhioChessFan: What was supposed to be the point of b5? I understand things were different 150 years ago, but still. And could anyone evaluate 5..c6?

Nov-07-05		seeminor: by all accounts, Kaparov was less than impressed with this Gambit and stomped off in a huff after he lost

Nov-07-05		IMlday: Great game! :-)

Nov-07-05		refutor: <point of b5> get the white bishop onto a different diagonal, open up the b-file for use by black's pieces, allow black to fianchetto

Dec-14-05		MorphyMatt: The only reason Kasparov played 4... b5?! is that this was a "theme game" in which the audience got to pick the opening. It was not Garry's choice.

Feb-19-06		McCool: That was a fast loss by Kasparov.

Feb-24-06		McCool: Nigel Short got lucky.

Jul-09-06		who: Game of the day "Short and Sweet"

Jul-27-06		jackmandoo: Can somebody please tell me what "thematic" means? I have no idea.

Jul-27-06		tamar: "Thematic" means you do have an idea.

Jul-27-06		jackmandoo: seriously what does (thematic) mean? It says at the top, "Game (thematic) 1993" Can someone go into a little bit more detail? Im sure lots of people dont know.

Jul-27-06		babakova: In this particular instance the opening was chosen beforehand.

Aug-08-06		prinsallan: Ray Keene has mentioned earlier what "Thematic" means. It means that the opening was determined before the game started...

Aug-08-06		Honza Cervenka: <The king gambit lines are so boring,that when short played kasparov king gambit kasparov play lazy, bored and without interest.> I disagree with the first part of this sentence but the second is undoubtedly true. 10...gxh4?? is so clueless and counter-intuitive move in this position that I tend to think that Kasparov simply sabotaged the game deliberately. If I remember it well, he was quite angry before the game that he was forced to play this opening. After natural 10...g4 black looks okay and the position is definitely not boring but pretty complex.

Aug-08-06		KingG: It was stupid of the organizers to add the move 4...b5?. The game should have started with the moves 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4, and that's it. What could have been a very interesting game turned out to be a joke because of the horrible opening.

Aug-08-06		Honza Cervenka: <It was stupid of the organizers to add the move 4...b5?> Why stupid? Well, this counter-gambit is not the best option of black in this opening but it is still playable continuation for black. In fact, Kasparov could get fine game from the opening if he would not have committed that atrocious and suicidal mistake in move 10.

Aug-08-06		KingG: Yes, but it was 4...b5 that annoyed him so much in the first place, and obviously he just wanted to end the game as soon as possible after that. Had he been left to chose his own defence, he may have taken the game more seriously, and it could have been more interesting.

Aug-08-06		DrawMachine: b5 is played here to accelerate black's development and distract white's bishop from the dangerous c4 square. Liken it to a reverse Evans manouvre. No tstrictly sound, but entertaining.

Aug-08-06		Honza Cervenka: <Yes, but it was 4...b5 that annoyed him> Yes, 4...b5 was the main source of Kasparov's discontent and that spoiled all the fun here. Maybe organizers should have found any more cooperative player than Kasparov for this little thematic experiment.

Jump to page # (enter # from 1 to 5)
search thread:
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 5 · Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: EXHIBITION. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.