|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-13-12 | | El Trueno: This game is one of the rare games which makes me smile :)
If I played as black, it surely would be draw after white's 35th move. I think that Yanofsky also thought like that. But then Fischer didn't give up.. he moved the pieces slowly... then managed to win :)
A great patience in my opinion |
|
| Jun-09-13 | | hoodrobin: <ekw: Did Yanofsky blunder finally?> 103.Rb2 was the fatal mistake allowing BN to e3 (Karsten Mueller). |
|
| Mar-04-15 | | Howard: But is it possible that Fischer might have missed a win earlier in the game ? |
|
| Oct-09-15 | | PugnaciousPawn: What an endgame battle! Bobby was an absolute master of the endgame. It's interesting to note that many of his games were very even until the endgame, where he would slowly move in for the kill with the utmost precision. |
|
| Apr-24-19 | | SimonWebbsTiger: This game, and other long games not given as a draw before no play remained, makes me wonder if Magnus Carlsen found a certain amount of inspiration from Robert James. |
|
| Apr-24-19 | | CopyBlanca: Why even bother talking about Karpov in the same breath as Fischer. Karpov is not even one of the top ten players of all time. Fischer is never rated lower than third by anyone. |
|
Apr-24-19
 | | keypusher: <CopyBlanca: Why even bother talking about Karpov in the same breath as Fischer. Karpov is not even one of the top ten players of all time. Fischer is never rated lower than third by anyone.> Only an utter moron (you, for example) would leave Karpov out of the top ten. And why are you posting about Karpov here anyway? Did you get lost? |
|
Apr-24-19
 | | beatgiant: <keypusher>
Maybe he was responding to the previous posts on this page from 2006 that were about Karpov. I could say more, but I'm beginning to feel my age ;-) |
|
Apr-25-19
| | keypusher: <beatgiant> Ah, thanks. This post is on point, then. Karpov's record in games of at least 100 moves is (I think) +6 -2 =6, excluding rapid games. One of his losses was in 2008; the other was to Kasparov in the 1990 match. The link below includes rapid games; it's not clear in every case whether a game is rapid or not. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... Fischer's record in games of at least 100 moves is +2-0=1. http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... See also Kramnik on Karpov:
<I don't know anyone with stronger fighting qualities. When I started to play in supertournaments, I was amazed by his ability to readjust himself on the spot. Karpov would play a game, come under pressure, defend for six hours, fortifies - it's very hard to break through his defence, he brilliantly calculated the variants and so defended very stubbornly - and the position would become almost drawn. The opponent would relax for a bit, and the position would become completely equal. Any player would agree to a draw and be glad that this torture was over. But Karpov would immediately start playing for a win! He could very easily forget what happened on the board before, detach himself from position's history. Karpov wasn't prone to any kind of mood swings; it was always as though he just came, sat down and started playing. If he sees any chance, he always tries to exploit it.> V Keymer vs Carlsen, 2019 Bottom line: Karpov, like Fischer, <fought until the bitter end, frequently converting drawn positions into wins by relentless positional and psychological pressure>. |
|
Feb-13-24
 | | saffuna: Benko: "Bobby, in his determination to win every game, exhausted himself by playing one long, difficult after another. In one instance, after making an error in a game versus Yanofsky, he fought for 112 moves, refusing to let his opponent deprive him of an extra half-point." |
|
Feb-13-24
| | beatgiant: <saffuna> Did Benko say where he thought Fischer made an error? I might find a few improvements for better winning chances, for example keeping the queens on with 32...Qf6 or 32...Qh4, but nothing like a clear win. |
|
Feb-14-24
| | saffuna: Sorry, no. I wish. |
|
Feb-14-24
 | | perfidious: <CopyBlanca: Why even bother talking about Karpov in the same breath as Fischer. Karpov is not even one of the top ten players of all time....> This is, ah, interesting.
If one were to include <fishie>, Rybka, Fritz and other software, I imagine that is so. Till that day, this comment is good for a chuckle. |
|
| Feb-14-24 | | Damenlaeuferbauer: Of course THE Anatoly Karpov belongs to the top ten, if not top five chess players of all times. Nobody won more international tournaments than him. He almost whitewashed Garry Kasparov in their first match 1984/85 and it could be, that he would have beat Bobby Fischer in their 1975 encounter, but THE AMERICAN decided not to play. After 3 years without playing one single serious tournament game, it could be, that this match would have end in a desaster for the reigning world champion. |
|
| Feb-14-24 | | Petrosianic: <square dance: this game is from 1962. what could that possibly have to do with 1975?> People are obsessive and tend to see everything in terms of their obsessions. I remember once seeing a comment in an article about Erich Elliskases. One comment thought that the most important thing about him was that he had played Fischer. I remember once hearing Melvin Belli doing a guest spot on a local radio show. People were calling and asking about all the famous cases he'd been involved with. A certain obsessive fan I knew called in, and I knew right away that she was going to ask him about that horrible Star Trek episode he was in. Sure enough... |
|
| Feb-14-24 | | Lambda: The <Fischer is never rated lower than third by anyone.> is very silly and false too. Personally, I have four world champions who all successfully and repeatedly defended their title as my settled top four. Which I don't think anyone can really call a foolish policy. |
|
| Feb-14-24 | | Petrosianic: I don't know if it's silly, but it's definitely false these days. (In the 1970's, probably not). There used to be a time when the Top 3 on pretty much every list were Capablanca, Alekhine and Fischer, in one order or another. But that was a very long time ago. Ben Finegold doesn't even put Alekhine in his Top 10 now. |
|
| Feb-14-24 | | Petrosianic: <thegoodanarchist>: <This is a demonstration of one of the reasons Fischer would have beaten Karpov in 1975 - Fischer was relentless.> It's also a demonstration of why Fischer was incapable of playing at all in 1975, and burned himself out before he was 30: Because he was too relentless. Eventually it catches up to you. |
|
Feb-14-24
| | perfidious: Karpov was no milksop in that department, but had other interests in life; by contrast, Fischer was monomaniacal about chess until Reykjavik. |
|
| Feb-15-24 | | Granny O Doul: <Karpov was no milksop in that department, but had other interests in life> True; there was also communism (though I did mention his stamp collection to a local sports reporter who gave the 'communism and chess' quote in a "tale of the tape" re Kasparov-Karpov 1990). Back in the late 90's, Ben Finegold opined that Michael Jordan was "probably" one of the top ten basketballers of all time (which of course was the same as "of the 20th century). |
|
Feb-15-24
 | | HeMateMe: In terms or <accuracy> aren't Carlsen, Fischer and Karpov in the top five, when the super 'Bots are analyzing games with their Death Star CPUs and more memory than planet Vulcan? |
|
Feb-15-24
| | beatgiant: <saffuna> Despite what Benko wrote, having fairly carefully reviewed the early part of the game, I can't actually find any point where Fischer missed a major improvement here. Meanwhile, with 19...b6, 25...Nxb3, 26...bxa5 etc. Black seems to be deliberately and systematically steering into liquidation of the queenside pawns. Of course I'm no Benko and I hate to disagree with him, but it seems to me Black was all along happy to reach the kind of endgame he got, with a pawn up and slight winning chances although it's a theoretical draw. If so, he must have been prepared for a long game. |
|
Feb-15-24
| | beatgiant: Way back in Yanofsky vs Fischer, 1962 (kibitz #16) , <hoodrobin> cited Karsten Mueller pointing to 103. Rb2 as the losing move, without showing what White should play instead for a draw. It would take me quite a bit of work to understand and verify that. But is there an easier defensive setup earlier on? For example, instead of leaving the pawn on g2 leaving the weak dark squares open for Black's knight and king to invade, what if White puts the pawn on g3 at a suitable moment, for example <66. g3>. With that, I don't see anything for Black in the short term, at least. |
|
Feb-15-24
| | beatgiant: If White tries 104. Be4 Ne3 105. g3+ <Kh3> reveals a tactical flaw with White's Rb2: the unfortunate rook position means Black is threatening a knight fork on d1.
click for larger view |
|
Aug-28-24
 | | FSR: Fischer's longest game. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
