|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-05-03 | | freshscenario: I meant the anand-kamsky game from the same tournament....plus huebner-kasparov... kasparov lost whilst trying to come up with a combination...maybe we couls do better. Very rich position |
|
| Nov-22-03 | | PinkPanther: Honestly, I don't know if I've ever seen a player of Anand's level lose so many miniatures. I can recall at least about 5. |
|
| Nov-22-03 | | FeArMySkiLLz: Its a pitty |
|
| Nov-22-03 | | derbyc: This is my first time, I try to link games. So the relevant Anand-Kamsky match is Anand vs Kamsky, 1992 and the Huebner-Kasparov is Huebner vs Kasparov, 1992 |
|
| Sep-27-05 | | lopium: Bing. |
|
| Dec-05-05 | | alexandrovm: nice finish here also, Anand's shortest lose against a top GM |
|
| Dec-15-06 | | ghaiethe: I think that Anand saw the pseudo sadic move of Kasparov:"I give u an other chance" Anand:"No f5 and I resign" |
|
| Jan-13-07 | | russep: why didn't Anand just move his knight when Kasparov played Qe1? |
|
| May-22-07 | | silencerius: It's called chess blindness, happens to everyone, even super GMs. |
|
| Oct-03-07 | | patzerboy: And now Anand is the new world champion. |
|
| Nov-01-07 | | hnishy: This is Anand's second shortest loss in a serious game. |
|
| Nov-01-07 | | Riverbeast: Whoops!
Well it's not as bad as Kramnik hanging mate in one to the computer. |
|
| Nov-01-07 | | anandrulez: Actually Anand Kasparov head to head says mroe about his psychology than his strength . I mean he never had the thing going when he played Kaspy . I remember Lin 97 , he could have simplified the position but he just went for a win as white and got tossed by Kaspy's sicilian . Kaspy is one player Anand couldny play well . Ivanchuk is another player in that list and maybe Topalov and Kramnik Aronian are his major opponents now .
ANyways from chess blindness to world championship its a long way :-) and more way to go !!
Go Anand !! |
|
| Jun-23-08 | | notyetagm: 
click for larger view
click for larger view
click for larger viewHoly criminy!
I solved this exact same problem the other day over on the <Chess Tactics Server> (http://chess.emerald.net) not knowing it was from this famous Anand loss to Kasparov. |
|
| Jun-23-08 | | hitman84: <notyetagm>You got the link wrong its emrald :) http://chess.emrald.net/ |
|
| Jun-23-08 | | notyetagm: <hitman84: <notyetagm>You got the link wrong its emrald :) http://chess.emrald.net/>;
Oh, so -THAT'S- why I can never get to the site unless I use my bookmark. :-) |
|
| Jun-23-08 | | Udit Narayan: hey, that's a great site. i joined today! |
|
| Jun-23-08 | | notyetagm: <Udit Narayan: hey, that's a great site. i joined today!> Can you compare it to http://www.chesstempo.com or the new tactical training feature in the latest version of the Chessbase playchess server at http://www.playchess.com? |
|
| Jan-21-09 | | WhiteRook48: why 16...f5?? |
|
| Apr-30-09 | | WhiteRook48: 17...exd5, hoping that white has no defense against this attack, still loses to 18 Be2 |
|
| Nov-18-10 | | Tigranny: How could Anand overlook his threatened knight? |
|
| Jan-28-11 | | KingG: In his chessbase DVD Anand says that he thinks this loss was a key reason for his subsequent terrible score against Kasparov, since up until then he had been doing well against him and even had a slight plus score at this point. I don't know if this made as much difference as Anand says, but it's interesting how in his mind one simple blunder can become so significant. In his own DVD, Korchnoi says that one of his early games with Tal might have had a big influence over their personal score. |
|
| Feb-23-11 | | fab4: <WhiteRook48: why 16...f5??> f5 is quite logical if, as Anand undoubtedly thought, White could'nt capture the knight on d5... Unfortunately 16.Qe1 vacated the e2 square for the bishop. Anand's record against Gazza is abysmal. I had no idea. |
|
| Jul-04-11 | | Rook e2: Why are there so few grandmasters who just say, I have a terrible score against him because he is just better than me. |
|
| Sep-10-20 | | fisayo123: I'm kind of confused as to why this is labelled a rapid game when it was a classical game played in Dortmund 1992 |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
