| Aug-24-05 | | ChiefNX: I'm suprised that no one's kibitzed on this! Kasporov's play here is sublime, tempting Timman with the poisoned d-pawn. |
|
| Aug-24-05 | | sandyobrien: nasty fork at the end
perhaps 21.. cxd5 would have been a better choice |
|
| Aug-25-05 | | ChiefNX: I can understand why Timman played it, but in the end, he probably should have left it all together. Maybe he was frustrated. The d-pawn looked like free material and on every move, Timman had a chance to capture it but each time there was a hidden catch that lead to a win for Kasparov. |
|
| Nov-12-07 | | notyetagm: More superb tactical play from Kasparov.
White To Play: 24 ?
click for larger viewHere the Black d6-bishop must <DEFEND> the e7-square from the threat of the <ROYAL FORK> ♘f5-e7+. Since this <OBLIGATION RESTRICTS THE MOBILITY> of the <DEFENDING> Black d6-bishop to the a3-f8 diagonal, this bishop cannot also <DEFEND> the e5-square. So Kasparov (White) strikes with 24 ♖e1-e5!. Position after 24 ♖e1-e5!:
click for larger viewThe White e5-rook <SKEWERS> the Black d5-queen to the vulnerable offside Black a5-knight while being immune from capture by the <OVERWORKED> Black d6-bishop: 24 ... ♗d6x♖e5? <deflection from e7> 25 ♘f5-e7+ <royal fork> and 26 ♘e7x♕d5. Kasparov played like a god in these open positions that were dominated by piece play. Kasparov was just inhumanly strong at piece play like in this position. |
|
| Jul-28-10 | | Xeroxx: He could have played something like: 16. Bxg6 fxg6 17. d6 Bxd6 18. Rxa5 Qxa5 19. Qxd6 Wonder why he didn't. |
|
| Jun-11-11 | | Juninho: well does anyone can explain what was the plan wth 15. Re5?
I think it s a bluff, threatened Timman to retract his bishop. 15.., Bd6 looks natural.
Rybka shows objective advantage? |
|
| Jun-11-11 | | SimonWebbsTiger: @juninho
Kasparov, in his notes (Informator 60/298) awards 15. Re5 an exclam and that 15...cxd5 16. Nxd5! "  " 15...Bd6 was his suggested improvement on the game because he had stronger than 15...Bg6 16. Bg5 with 16. Bxg6 hxg6 17. d6 |
|
| Jun-11-11 | | Juninho: so that not a home analysis |
|
| Jun-11-11 | | SimonWebbsTiger: I don't think it was home prep. Jan got in the novelty at move 14 - or so it seems?! Hard to say. The position at 15 is well worth a look since there seem to be so many hidden tactics. I didn't know of this game before today. |
|
Dec-25-19
 | | Plaskett: Many times Gary told me that getting a knight to f5 - in front of the other guy´s castled king - may of itself constitute full compensation for a pawn. |
|
| Feb-17-20 | | Nezhmetdinov: Great bit of info from GM Plaskett there! |
|
Dec-17-20
 | | GrahamClayton: Nice how Timman's knight on a5 becomes the ultimate target of Kasparov's tactics. |
|
Dec-17-20
 | | perfidious: Presumably it was only at the finish that Timman noticed that the knight at a5 was now horsie de combat. |
|
| Jun-12-22 | | Brenin: A great game and a great pun, especially in view of yesterday's K v Timman GOTD and accompanying pun, which has delighted us rather too often lately. |
|
| Jun-12-22 | | Knightmare07: Perfectly timed pun, poor Timman tho. |
|
| Jun-12-22 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: The engine thinks that Black's fatal error was not to capture the pawn, but rather to refrain from capturing the f5 knight. Fine pun and GoTD even so. |
|
| Jun-12-22 | | nalinw: Yes - great game and pun .... pun on a pun! |
|
| Jun-12-22 | | goodevans: That N on a5 was a real weakness. As well as ultimately deciding the game another example of how it's poor placement hindered Black came a few moves earlier. After <15.Re5> the SF annotations give 15...Qc7 16.g4 as being equal but I'm not convinced that's best. Instead <15...Qc7 16.Rxh5 Nxh5 17.b4> attacks the trapped N. 
click for larger viewIf Black saves it with <17...Bxb4> then White has <18.Bxh7+ Kxh7 19.Ng5+ Kg6 20.Qg4> and I wouldn't want to be in Black's shoes. My guess is that this is what Garry had in mind. |
|
Jun-13-22
 | | OhioChessFan: Funny pun. |
|
Kibitzing
sac: 24.Re5