|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 22 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Apr-13-11
 | | LIFE Master AJ: By the way, dozens of companies would routinely send me a chess book (for free) in the hopes I might review it. Things have slowed a bit the last few years - since my wife died of cancer (2008) I find myself spending more time with my family and less time working. You are invited to do the same. |
|
| Apr-13-11 | | TheFocus: I offer you my condolences about your wife. Peace onto you. Spending time with your young ones is very important. |
|
| Apr-13-11 | | Manuel G. Vergara: Geller's Leggers!!! |
|
Apr-14-11
| | LIFE Master AJ: This game was in the book - by the late Mednis, I believe - "How To Beat Bobby Fischer." My web page lists all the books that I consulted ... usually a bibliography at th end of every page. |
|
| Apr-14-11 | | Everyone: Ahhh, <fluoride> the leaders put in the water is working. We all knew it was truly <a mind control drug> but who would have ever thought it would work so well. |
|
Apr-14-11
 | | scormus: As I often do in an idle moment I was glancing down the "recent kibitzing" column and saw Fischer-Geller. My immediate thought was this was a game I just had to see. What a game! If there is an official Game of the Decade, this could have been it. Surely any game which exposed flaws in Fischer's make up must have been vewry special. Remarkable not that Fisher "missed" 20 Qf4!! but that both he and Geller marked as winning for W later that day. I dont suppose either of their analyses at the time could have been rigorous but the fact that they picked the move and the way ahead testifies just how good they were. Even Rybka4 took a fair bit of time before it decided Qf4 was the move. <CG> Thanks for not ever making this POTD. You couldnt be that cruel. |
|
| Apr-14-11 | | fab4: @<Scormus>.. Not that remarkable when Bobby moved his queen to f4 on move 21, the next move. So he saw it and it's dynamics over the board, just thought he had time to play a3,normally a useful move,but this time missing the fatal weakness it created.. In uber sharp postiions these things can happen. I think people try to read too much into the two Geller wins in the mid 60's.. |
|
Apr-14-11
| | scormus: <fab4> Aaaaw .... you spoil my wonder. But a fair point. So perhaps they both thought "what if it was 20 Qf4 ....." Yefim "Hell, I could have lost. better take a closer look ...." Booby "Hell, I could have won. better take a closer look ..." Once you start digging, you hit paydirt. |
|
Apr-14-11
| | scormus: ... and continuing the theme, they each marked 20 Qf4 as winning. A view that was questioned for a long time after. Even with Si it was not easy, at least not till recently ... Whatever, a remarkable game between two great players. |
|
| Apr-15-11 | | bartonlaos: TRIVIA ANSWERS:
<<1. At the time of this tournament, Skopje was known as the city of ....what?<>> History repeats itself. Skopje was laid to ruins in the year 518 when it was named Skopi. And in 1963, Skopje suffered another major earthquake. Nearly 3/4 of the city was destroyed, a thousand dead and hundreds of thousands homeless. Over the next 5 years it would record a series of 640 earthquakes, not lightheartedly dubbing it, "The City of Earthquakes" Skopje's Chess tournament was called, "The Tournament of Solidarity", to commemorate the Five Year Anniversary when the world came together to give aid to the city. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1963_S... |
|
| Apr-15-11 | | bartonlaos: TRIVIA ANSWERS
<2. What nickname did the locals give to Fischer?<>> Fischer was affectionately known as "The File". This was a crude contraption of yesteryear, similar to computer memory access. Apparently devices known as 'manila folders' would keep papers filled with information from scattering and a series of these folders were kept in a drawer known as a file. Fischer was The File on Chess. |
|
| Apr-15-11 | | bartonlaos: TRIVIA ANSWERS
<3. What round did Fischer launch a protest against the tournament organizers, and what were his two demands?<>> Tournament organizers decided to give the players a chance to enjoy the summer. After 6 rounds, they moved the tournament from Skopje to a lakeside resort in Ohrid, with the intention of moving it back to Skopje for the final 6 rounds. According to Bobby, the premises in Ohrid were smaller and much more noisier than Skopje, which is why he made his <first request> that either the crowd be removed or he be allowed to play his games in a private area away from all the racket! And not only were the venues different, but the chess-sets as well. His <second request> was for their to be more differences between the King and Queen that he could easily tell them apart. The tournament officials refused, and he refused to show up for the game against Knezevic, which was tallied for defeat by contumacy. However, Knezevic thought it was not the way he wished to win a game, and rejected the point, supporting Fischer's request. The officials decided to keep more order in the hall, and the chess-sets were altered to reflect the sets used at Skopje. Fischer's 10th round was played on the next rest day. Someone remarked that Fischer could have won the game, but considering the circumstances, maybe he just didn't want to do that. See for yourself:
M Knezevic vs Fischer, 1967
------
These answers were drawn from reports in both Chess Life and Chess Review articles written by Miroslav Radojcic and Petar Trifunovic |
|
| Apr-15-11 | | newton296: I think white is won after Qf4 |
|
| Apr-21-11 | | qqdos: I am glad that my little plea of Apr-08-11 has sparked off such a storm (more heat than light?) but dismayed that we have not been put out of our collective misery! Perhaps that is why this game is such a memorable gem. May I commend a 2007 book by Alexander Raetsky & Maxim Chetverik on The Classical Sicilian, p.96 - where they give this comment after 20.Qf4! cxb2 21.Rh5 Nf6 22.Rh6! "would have maintained a vicious attack". I believe that is the correct assessment. They also point out that Fischer made another "slip" in the actual game after 20.a3? Qb7 21. Qf4? Better is Rh5! at least allowing Fischer to fight on or, no doubt with gritted teeth, to force a draw. |
|
| Apr-24-11 | | qqdos: P.S. If it is suggested in the sequence given above 20.Qf4! cxb2 21.Rh5 Nf6(?) 22.Rh6! that 21...Nc3+ is the better choice, then 22.Kxb2 Nxd1+ 23.Kc1 (only move creating a threat of # in 3 with 24.Bxg7+!) Qxd4 (how else can Black eliminate this threat and where else can he play his Queen to save from her from this fate?) 24.Qxd4 d5 25.c3! Rxf7 26.Bc2 and White is still comfortably on the attack. Can Black realistically hope to avoid this outcome? |
|
| May-26-11 | | dannygjk: *sigh* A position can be said to be won, even if noone has demonstrated it. In some positions the win is so difficult to demonstrate that we have to rely on our or someone else's judgement. Yes of course if there are no lines giving us virtual 'proof' of a win, then we can nitpick and say, 'You have not satisfactorily demonstrated a win from this position.'. It is for practical purposes impossible to demonstrate a win in many positions, but even average club players like myself can see that the probablilty of the opposing player surviving must be very small and so it is 'normal' to say it is a win. |
|
| Aug-18-11 | | DrMAL: Thanx <qqdos> for pointing me to this "Flawed Masterpiece" game. 9...Qa5?! was intended as an improvement over 9...a6 and in a later round Fischer encountered another "improvement" 12...Rad8 in Fischer vs Sofrevski, 1967 where he blew black away. For entertainment value I had to temporarily unblock ole AJ to see what sort of trash he posted all over this game. His link was interesting, I have never seen so much punctuation along with other BS such as "MOST opening books say the move: 15.e5!?, (Maybe - '!') is much better." Once again the self-glorified bookish patzer is full of excrement. 15.e5 does not gain any tempo advantage and, like Fischer stated in his book, 15.a3 (the proper alternative to his move along with 15.g4!) was not chosen to gain time. Fischer gave 15.f5 two exclams, he did so for a reason that any good chessplayer can easily see. 15.g4! was also an excellent and consistent move (as Fischer states in his book) perhaps even absolute best. 15.e5?! loses critical tempo and it creates an equal position. After this move, Geller continued his plan, remaining consistent. However, as <Al2009> correctly pointed out, the intermediate move 15...e5 before 15...b4 was a better alternative. However, his move to show this 16.Bf2 (instead of 16.Be3) is poor. His analysis of 15.e5?! that post is just plain wrong, and the statement, "But it is clear that Fischer didn’t evaluate at all such a possibility" is ridiculous. People who write such rubbish about any GM should be sentenced to playing checkers for a year. In the case of Fischer it deserves lifetime sentence LOL. OK, now for the "best" part by ole AJ: <A VERY long story ... made short? I could find NO forced win after 20.Qf4, despite days of analysis with engines like Fritz 12, Rybka 3 and Houdini.> This was written on the same day as his earlier post, providing a clue to its meaninglessness. In other words, ole AJ stuck it on his Fritz 12 for his usual few minutes to copy the output as he did so hilariously in Kasparov vs Topalov, 1999 but the result was not wrong enough to post and insult others in dishonestly defending LMAO. I will cover this in the next post, this one is already very long (but hopefully entertaining :). |
|
| Aug-18-11 | | DrMAL: Fischer stated that 20.Qf4! wins. However, he did not see black's best continuations so the analysis in his book is more than merely flawed it is simply wrong. Black's best to stall imminent disaster was 20.cxb2! a seemingly innocuous waiting move that further activates Q on b4. Note that with his powerfully placed bishops, white's king is still completely secure. After 21.Rh5! black has two options (the first being much stronger, that Fischer did not consider): A) 21...Nf6 22.Rh6! Rxf7 23.Bxf7 Be4 24.Bb3 d5
click for larger view From here, 25.Bxf6!! Bxc2+ 26.Bxc2 Qxf4 27.Rxh7+ Kg8 28.Rxg7+ Kh8 29.Rh7+ Kg8
click for larger viewThere are at least two ways for white to win (via 30.Rg7+ or 30.Rh8+) but 30.Bxe7 may also. I will present only the first one for brevity, 30.Rg7+ Kh8 31.Bd4! Bf6 32.Rg4! Qh6 33.Rg6! Qc1+ 34.Rxc1 bxc1Q+ 35.Kxc1 Bxd4
click for larger viewWith an endgame that is a difficult (for me, probably not for Fischer) technical win. B) 21...Nc3+ 22.Kxb2 Nxd1+ 23.Kc1 from here Fischer states, "Rf7 (forced)" a move that instantly loses as he shows (it's actually a forced mate in 12 or less). However, black could play 23...Qxd4!! a Q-sac, the much more stubborn move. After this, 24.Qxd4 d5 25.c3!
click for larger view And no matter what black plays (25...Rxf7 is best), it's a fairly easy win from here. I am surprised Fischer never corrected the mistakes in his book. |
|
| Aug-18-11 | | DrMAL: IDK <Kolyas> "The Focus" managed to troll his way onto my IGNORE list too LOL (and ole AJ is of course back on it was only temporary for entertainment), cheers m8! :-) |
|
| Aug-19-11 | | DrMAL: <qqdos> Kudos to you for seeing 23...Qxd4!! in that second variation I gave, you even got the best line following it correct. Did not notice this until now, I should read your posts more often (and carefully!). And <DWINS> above even found the toughest sequence with 21...Nf6 using Houdini. He chose the second way 30.Kh8 and got that sequence best, kudos to him too. Looks like I re-invented the wheel again LOL. Well, it was instructive, cheers. |
|
| Aug-20-11 | | qqdos: <DrMAL> thanx. Have we now comprehensively re-habilitated Bobby's 20.Qf4? He clearly got it right but possibly for the wrong reasons. I would like to establish an entente cordiale reading all posts objectively and carefully! On the 15.e5! dxe5 question may I refer you to White's victory in Jovcic vs Radojcic, Yugoslavia 1969 (Chess Informator 8/376). In the 23...Qxd4!! line, after 24.Qxd4 d5 (which blocks both white-square bishops), I have another candidate for your consideration 25.Qd3 (instead of 25.c3!) aiming somewhat crudely at h7. The B(c6) cannot now stop the mate and 25...g6?? leads to 26.Qd4+ and # next move. Thus 25...h6 is the only defence; 26.Rf5 Bd7 27.Kxd1 Bxd5 (perhaps 27...Be6 is more stubborn) 28.Qxf5 Rd6 29.Bxd5 and White has Q for 2 rooks and that pesky f7-pawn still stuck in Black's throat!. Well onwards and upwards (and backwards in time) to the next beautiful game - Euwe vs Keres, Rotterdam 1940 (0-1) 36m. which I first came across in Edward Lasker's marvellous 1951 book Modern Chess Strategy. Over to you (all!) |
|
| Aug-21-11 | | DrMAL: <qqdos> Well, I hate to admit it, but ole AJ's random selection may actually be true. In the ending position I gave in option A) that Bobby never considered, I tried for several hours to see if I could find a clear win and I could not. Admittedly, my endgame abilities are not as strong as in other aspects of the game, so I am not sure if this "technical win" can be had. Yes, there were games won with 15.e5 and it has positional value but this does not make it a great move here. It's a matter of valuing tempo versus quality or material that Kasparov describes to evaluate chess. Fischer generally gave tempo (initiative) most emphasis and I have to agree with him here. After 25.Qd3! also an excellent move yes 25...h6 26.Rf5 still wins because black loses the knight. Both moves seem roughly equivalent, I chose 25.c3! instead because it used the bishop on b3 and looked more elegant (probably stronger too). Simply 25.Kxd1 also seems to win but it does not seem as strong. Bottom line: 20.Qf4 at least draws. If black plays perfectly it seems this may be the case but I am not sure. Much more likely, a small inaccuracy will allow white to win easily anyway. |
|
| Aug-22-11 | | ProjectR: <DrMAL> <The Focus managed to troll his way onto my IGNORE list too> This is no surprise at all ! He belongs with the life master,fab4,Lennonfan,and shachmatov amongst others. Just trolls,especially thefocus,how one man used so much foul and offensive language without being pushed before he jumped,is beyond me ! |
|
| Aug-22-11 | | I play the Fred: What is with the constant updates of <DrMAL>'s ignore list? Excuse me, IGNORE list?
Does who is in which ignore list matter one little bit? And do we need <post after post after post after post after post after post after post> to reference that particular ignore list? "Just put him on your ignore," some of you are saying. The problem with that is that I'd be missing out on a number of very informative posts. When <DrMAL> isn't trolling, he posts a lot of useful stuff. This is one of the reasons I'm not renewing Premium Membership. If this site had moderation, a poster like <DrMAL> would be asked to cool it on the trolling or suffer some kind of consequence. |
|
| Aug-22-11 | | fab4: < ProjectR: <DrMAL> <The Focus managed to troll his way onto my IGNORE list too>
This is no surprise at all ! He belongs with the life master,fab4,Lennonfan,and shachmatov amongst others. Just trolls,especially thefocus,how one man used so much foul and offensive language without being pushed before he jumped,is beyond me !> Laughable ! You really could'nt make it up.. Only , it's here , on this site .. An awful lot seems 'beyond' you huh <MrProject> ? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 22 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
