|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-08-14 | | Petrosianic: <offramp>: <So let's see. Fischer is saying that the game was <getting interesting>. That means he considers the game UNinteresting up to move 26.> I think we can assume that he meant MORE interesting. Certainly the game was interesting before that, when he dredged up the Steinitz Nh3 line. But the really interesting part would be finding out how well that line held up. Having the game decided on a blunder denies us this. No mystery about what makes the game memorable. The Nh3 line and the falling asleep mid game both make it stand out. |
|
| May-08-14 | | Petrosianic: Most people are more familiar with this game than the place Fischer got it from. It's from the Steinitz-Tchigorin cable match. A two-game correspondence match which Tchigorin won 2-0. The Black game featured another attempt at Steinitz's crazy Qf6 line in the Evans, while the White game was this one. Steinitz got away with this stuff most of the time, but this match showed Steinitz at his worst and Tchigorin at his best. Steinitz vs Chigorin, 1890 |
|
| May-08-14 | | Howard: Regarding the inquiry from TheFocus (about 7-8 postings above this one), in Game 2 of the 1987 WCC match between Kasparov and Karpov, the former indeed forgot to hit his clock after making a move, and he lost three minutes from his allotted time. But his position was lost anyway. |
|
May-14-14
 | | offramp: <Petrosianic: <offramp>: <So let's see. Fischer is saying that the game was <getting interesting>. That means he considers the game UNinteresting up to move 26.>
I think we can assume that he meant MORE interesting. Certainly the game was interesting before that, when he dredged up the Steinitz Nh3 line. But the really interesting part would be finding out how well that line held up. Having the game decided on a blunder denies us this. No mystery about what makes the game memorable. The Nh3 line and the falling asleep mid game both make it stand out.> The Nh3 line and the Steinitz connection give the game some interest. But in the notes to the game, as far as I can remember, there is no mention of Fischer hitting the sack. "At this point I did something very unusual. I went to sleep for 7 and a half hours." |
|
| May-14-14 | | Petrosianic: That's true, the book doesn't mention him falling asleep. A lot of times the book doesn't tell you exactly why a game was "Memorable", only that it was. In many case it's obvious, but not always. I've wondered for years what was so memorable about Fischer-Steinmeyer. My theory is that it wasn't really all that memorable at all, and they just wanted a miniature to include in the book. |
|
| May-14-14 | | RookFile: Fischer finds a way to get an advantage after 1. e4 e5 that does not involve the Ruy. Today's players might consider looking at some of these forgotten ideas. |
|
| May-14-14 | | SpiritedReposte: I cannot believe Fischer played this line and I've never seen it. This was the bane of my Two Knights opening and always caused me problems as white. Fischer handles it superbly with 9.Nh3 where I would always play Nf3 and black would have an attack after a later e4. Here white's scattered kingside pawns don't matter as Bobby just puts his bishop on g2. I'm going to shoot for this line now again lol. |
|
| May-14-14 | | RookFile: Fischer got it from Steinitz's games. |
|
| May-15-14 | | SpiritedReposte: Interesting...ol' Steinitz knew what was up.
I don't give the "old school" players enough credit. Besides a few Morphy games, anything before Capa/Alekhine is a blur to me. |
|
| May-15-14 | | Petrosianic: <Interesting...ol' Steinitz knew what was up.> If you saw the game (posted above) where Steinitz played this line, you know it wasn't one of his more successful experiments. I can't believe you could be a Two Knights player, and not be aware of this game, though. You might consider switching away from 4. Ng5 to something like 4. d4 to give Black more problems. Fischer said that 4. Ng5 was the only reasonable try for advantage, but that was 40 years ago, and theory has changed. Generally, it seems that when players play the Two Knights Defense at all, 4. Ng5 is the move they're most prepared for. |
|
| May-16-14 | | SpiritedReposte: Just saw that Steinitz game up there thanks for posting it <Petrosianic> I should have seen these when I was a Two Knights 4. Ng5 player. I switched to the Ruy years ago and haven't looked back since! |
|
Jun-01-17
 | | Sally Simpson: A long shot.
In ‘Combinations and Traps in the Opening.’ by Boris Vainstein published in Russian in 1960 Vainstein shows and discusses the 9.Nh3 idea. We know Fischer devoured everything in Russian he could get. It is possible that Vainstein fed Fischer's inquisitive mind to investigate it and he flicked it out 3 years later. http://www.redhotpawn.com/chess-blo... Yes it is a long shot. But give it time and soon it will be firmly established amongst all the other Fischer myths. |
|
| Jun-01-17 | | Granny O Doul: The "falling asleep" game between these two was not this one, but a King's Indian, ultimately decided by a ...Nh2 sac followed by a Q+B invasion. In "The Champions: The Secret Motives in Games and Sports" the author, Peter Fuller, quotes the "Bisguier slumped and his chest collapsed" line and makes the comment "Not very different from 'I killed and castrated Bisguier.'" |
|
Jun-01-17
 | | keypusher: <Granny O Doul> According to Bisguier, it was the Two Knights Game in the New York Open where he had to wake Fischer up. See kibitzing here: Bisguier vs Fischer, 1963 Of course that doesn't jibe with the Leopoldi story -- presumably Leopoldi wasn't at the NY tournament. Maybe Bisguier is misremembering, or there was some other all-night chess session at the New York tournament. |
|
| Jun-01-17 | | Petrosianic: <offramp>: So out of all Fischer's games what made this uninteresting game <memorable>? Probably the fact that he semi-rehabilitated a forgotten 19th century line from a player he admired. I say semi-rehabilitated because Black seems slightly better all the way through the game up to the blunder, and Fischer never repeated the line. Generally the rule with Fischer is that he might play an opening once as a surprise weapon, but if he played it twice it meant he believed in its soundness. |
|
Jun-01-17
| | Sally Simpson: Hi Granny and K.P.
I went with Bisguier on this saying Fischer fell asleep during the game that ended up as Game No.45 in M60MG, this one. |
|
| Jun-02-17 | | Granny O Doul: I think I was remembering Soltis, who in turn I suppose was following Leopoldi. I fell asleep during both, so that's no help. And almost everyone is dead now. |
|
| Sep-13-17 | | RookFile: So I guess Bisguier got surprised, but worked hard and played perfectly into the middlegame, until he blundered a piece. The game doesn't sound as exciting when you look at it this way. |
|
| Sep-13-17 | | RandomVisitor: After 26.Be4 black can try 26...Re8
click for larger viewStockfish_17090912_x64_modern: <18.75 hours computer time, 8 cores, TB6> <-0.38/60 26...Re8 27.Bf3 Rxb2> 28.Rae1 Rxe1 29.Rxe1 Rf2 30.Qd5 Kh7 31.Be5 Qe6 32.Qxe6 fxe6 33.Bc6 Rxa2 34.Bd7 Rf2 35.Bxe6 g6 36.Bd5 h5 37.c4 Bd8 38.Ra1 Kh6 39.Rxa7 Rf1+ 40.Kg2 Ne3+ 41.Kh3 Nxd5 42.cxd5 Rf3+ 43.Kg2 Rxd3 44.d6 h4 45.h3 Rd5 46.Bg7+ Kg5 47.Rf7 Rd2+ 48.Kf1 Kh5 49.Rd7 Ba5 50.Bf8 Rd5 51.Rh7+ Kg5 52.Ra7 Bd8 53.Be7+ Bxe7 54.dxe7 Re5 55.Rc7 Kf6 56.Kf2 g5 57.Kf3 Rxe7 58.Rc6+ Kf5 59.Rxc5+ Kg6 60.Kg4 Re4+ 61.Kf3 Rd4 62.Rc6+ Kh5 63.Kg2 Rd2+ 64.Kh1 |
|
| Sep-14-17 | | Olavi: <Petrosianic: Fischer never repeated the line. Generally the rule with Fischer is that he might play an opening once as a surprise weapon, but if he played it twice it meant he believed in its soundness.> He did repeat it against Radojcic in the same tournament in a later round. |
|
| Sep-15-17 | | RandomVisitor: After 7...bxc6 Stockfish thinks highly of the 8.Be2 h6 9.Nh3 line: 
click for larger viewStockfish_17091212_x64_modern - AMD FX-8370 8-core 4.21 GHz TB6: +0.08/60 8.Bd3 Nd5 9.Nf3 Bd6 10.Nc3 Nf4 11.0-0 Nxd3 12.cxd3 0-0 13.Re1 c5 14.Nxe5 Bb7 15.b3 Re8 16.Nc4 Rxe1+ 17.Qxe1 Nxc4 18.bxc4 Qh4 19.g3 Qg4 20.Nd5 Bxd5 21.cxd5 Qd4 22.Ba3 Qxd3 23.Qe3 Qxd5 24.Rc1 Qxa2 25.d4 a5 26.dxc5 Bf8 27.Kg2 Rc8 28.Qf3 g6 29.h3 Rb8 30.Rc3 Qe6 31.Re3 Qc4 32.Qe4 Qxe4+ 33.Rxe4 Kg7 34.Ra4 Rb5 35.Rc4 Rb8 36.Bc1 Kf6 37.c6 Rc8 38.Bf4 a4 39.Rxa4 Rxc6 40.g4 Kg7 41.Kf3 Kf6 42.Ke4 Ke6 43.Be3 Bc5 <+0.08/50 8.Be2 h6 9.Nh3> Nb7 10.0-0 Bc5 11.d3 0-0 12.Kh1 Bxh3 13.gxh3 Nd6 14.Nc3 Bd4 15.Bf3 Nf5 16.Qe2 Rb8 17.Rg1 Kh8 18.Bxc6 Qc8 19.Be4 Bxc3 20.bxc3 Qxc3 21.Bd2 Qc8 22.Qf3 Nxe4 23.dxe4 Nh4 24.Qh5 Qxc2 25.Bxh6 Qxe4+ 26.f3 Qxf3+ 27.Qxf3 Nxf3 28.Bxg7+ Kh7 29.Bxf8 Nxg1 30.Bd6 Rd8 31.Bxe5 Nxh3 32.Rf1 Kg6 33.Kg2 Ng5 34.Rf6+ Kh5 35.Ra6 Rd2+ 36.Kg3 f6 37.Bf4 Rc2 38.Rxa7 Ne4+ 39.Kf3 Ng5+ 40.Bxg5 Kxg5 41.h4+ Kxh4 0.00/50 8.Qf3 cxb5 9.Qxa8 Be7 10.0-0 h6 11.Ne4 Qd7 12.Nxf6+ gxf6 13.d4 Nc6 14.d5 Nd4 15.Be3 0-0 16.Bxd4 Bb7 17.Qxa7 Ra8 18.c4 Rxa7 19.Bxa7 bxc4 20.Nc3 Bb4 21.Rfd1 Bxc3 22.bxc3 Bxd5 23.Be3 Qb7 24.f3 Qb2 25.Rac1 Be6 26.a4 Qa3 27.Bxh6 Qxa4 28.Rd8+ Kh7 29.Be3 Qa3 30.Rdd1 Qb2 31.Rf1 f5 32.Rf2 Qa3 33.f4 f6 34.h3 Kg7 35.g3 Kg6 36.Kh2 Kf7 37.Re2 Kg6 38.Rec2 Kf7 39.Re1 Qd6 40.Rd2 Qa3 41.Rc2 |
|
Dec-07-18
| | keypusher: < Olavi: <Petrosianic: Fischer never repeated the line. Generally the rule with Fischer is that he might play an opening once as a surprise weapon, but if he played it twice it meant he believed in its soundness.>
He did repeat it against Radojcic in the same tournament in a later round.> He never played 3.Bc4 in a serious game after 1963, so he didn't have many opportunities to repeat. He reverted to Nf3 in a simul game that transposed after 8....Bc5 9.d3 h6 10.Nf3. Fischer vs Bill McLaughlin, 1964 Another simul game went 8....Bc5 9.d3 0-0 10.Nc3 h6 11.Nce4. Fischer vs D Gould, 1964 |
|
Dec-07-18
| | keypusher: <He reverted to Nf3 in a simul game that transposed after 8....Bc5 9.d3 h6 10.Nf3> is a dumb thing to say, because if Black lets you get in 9.d3 why wouldn't you play 10.Nf3? |
|
| Dec-07-18 | | ChessHigherCat: I didn't wade through all the analysis but 26...Rxb2 struck me as a silly pawn grab that deserved punishment. SF says Bisguier could have retained an advantage (-0.41) with Re8. |
|
| Jun-10-19 | | Patzer Natmas: Game featured in "New in Chess - Tactics Training - Bobby Fischer" |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
