|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-20-05 | | Albertan: According to the Shredder 8 chess program, Fischer made a mistake on move 36 in this game He could have played 36...Rc5 instead and after 37.Rc3 d5 38.Rd3 Kg5 39.b4 Rc4 40.Rxd5+ Kf4 41.g3+ Kf3 he would have equality. |
|
Jun-20-05
 | | offramp: And it looks as if the pawn ending after 37.Rxc5 is drawn. |
|
| Jun-20-05 | | RookFile: Well, "The Complete Games of Bobby Fischer", by Wade and O'Connell, doesn't see it this way. I don't have time to convert from descriptive to algebraic notation, so, I'll just copy this verbatim: 36.... R-QB4 37. RXR NPXR 38. K-N3 P-Q4 39. K-B4 P-Q5 40. K-K4 K-N4 41. P-KN3 K-B3 42. P-QN4! PXP 43. KXP followed by K-B4 and KXP wins -- Larry Evans |
|
Jun-20-05
| | offramp: But in that line 38...Kg5 looks better. |
|
| Aug-05-05 | | Sergey Sorokhtin: My Great Predecessors ( Kasparov)
http://www.chesschamps.com/forum/vi...36.a4 Rd4 [36...Rc5?  Garry Kasparov = Sorokhtin 37.Rxc5 bxc5 38.Kg3 Kg5 39.h4+ ( 39...Kh5!= Sorokhtin 40.Kh3 g5! 41.g4+ Kg6 42.hxg5 (42.h5+ Kf6 43.Kg3 d5 44.Kf3 Kg7=) 42...Kxg5 43.Kg3 d5 44.Kf3 Kg6 45.Kf4 Kf6 46.b3 Kg6 47.Ke5 d4 48.Ke4 Kg5 49.b4 cxb4 50.Kxd4 Kxg4= ) 39...Kf5 40.Kf3 c4 (40...d5 41.g4+ Ke5 42.b3 Kf6 43.Kf4 Ke6 44.h5 gxh5 45.gxh5 Kf6 46.a5 Ke6 47.Kg5 d4 48.Kf4 Kf6 49.Ke4 Kg5 50.b4 cxb4 51.Kxd4 Kxh5 52.Kc4 ) 41.g4+ Ke5 42.h5 gxh5 43.gxh5 d5 44.h6 Kf6 45.Ke3 ] 37.b3 Rd3 38.Rxc7 Rxb3 39.Rxa7 d5 40.Rd7 Rd3 41.Rd6 Rd4 42.Rxb6 Rxa4 43.Kg3 [43.Rd6 d4 44.Kg3 Rb4 45.b6 d3 46.Kf3 d2 47.Ke2 Rb2= Garry Kasparov 48.h4! Sorokhtin : 48...Kh5 49.g3 Kh6 50.g4 Kg7 51.g5 Kf7 52.Rc6 d1R+ (52...Rb4 53.Kxd2 Rxh4 54.Kc3 ) 53.Kxd1 Rb4 54.Rc7+ Ke6 55.b7 Kf5 56.Rh7 ] 43...Rb4 44.Rb8 d4 45.Kf3 Rb3+ 46.Ke4 d3 47.Ke3 g5 48.Rb6+ Kg7 49.Kd2 Kf7 50.g3 Rb2+? [50...Kg7= G.K.] 51.Kxd3 Rb3+ 52.Kc4 Rxg3 53.Rh6 Kg7 54.Rc6 Rxh3 55.b6 Rh1 56.Kb5 Rb1+ 57.Ka6 Ra1+ 58.Kb7 g4 59.Kc8 Ra6 60.Kc7 1–0 |
|
| Aug-05-05 | | RookFile: The analysis of 36. a4 Rc5 37. Rxc5 bxc5 38. Kg3 Kg5 39. h4+ Kh5 intriques
me, and I will research this further. |
|
| May-05-09 | | Eyal: Position after 50.g3:
click for larger viewAccording to both Mednis (in "How to Beat Bobby Fischer") and Kasparov (in OMGP), Fischer's losing mistake was 50...Rb2+? This way, he gives up his advanced pawn on d3, and remains after move 54 with a pawn which, unlike White's, cannot be supported by the king (which is cut off from the 6th rank by the white rook). Instead, he should have just marked time with his king - e.g. 50...Kg7 51.h4 gxh4 52.gxh4 Kh7 53.h5 Kg7 54.Ke3 Kh7 55.h6 Rc3 56.Rd6 Rb3 57.b6 Kh8 58.Kd4 d2 59.Kc5 Rb2 60.Rd7 Rc2+ 61.Kb5 Rb2+ 62.Kc6 Rc2+ 63.Kb7
Rb2 64.Ka7 Ra2+ and White can't make further progress. I think that this game was the last time in which Fischer tried in the KID the idea of Bf6 with an exchange of DSBs. It didn't work well for him either in Tal vs Fischer, 1959 and Reshevsky vs Fischer, 1960 (where he managed to draw, but got an even worse position than in the present game with 12...Ne8 instead of Nd7). |
|
| May-30-09 | | WhiteRook48: Yes!! Yes!! Fischer lost!!
Oops.
9...Bf6 looks rather bad, Fischer loses his fianchettoed bishop on g7 |
|
| Jun-16-09 | | PinnedPiece: Score:126 Par:104
Had several runs where I got a string of Reshevsky's moves. Pretty standard opening, from which Fisher allowed some excellent White moves. |
|
| Jun-17-09 | | AnalyzeThis: <whiterook48: 9...Bf6 looks rather bad, Fischer loses his fianchettoed bishop on g7 > So? That's often his worst piece on the board, particularly when white gets the pawns on e4, d5, and c4, and black has his central pawns locked on dark squares. Petrosian routinely won games with white in the king's indian by trading off his minor pieces in such a way that in the endgame, he had a knight or something against that bad bishop. Fischer's losing mistake didn't come until much later. |
|
| Jun-16-10 | | elohah: 20...? This looks rather outrageous.
I would rather move the rook and dump the f-pawn, just to post a knight on e5, rather than do this.
Or I would rather play ...Nh4, trying to provoke g3, and just go back.
Or...But White's already better.
60...if g3, 61 Rc3! nails it. |
|
Apr-07-21
 | | An Englishman: Good Evening: Nice endgame squees by Reshevsky even if Fischer could have saved the game. Incidentally, 9...Bf6 does not appear in the DB after 1984 (and fares poorly), whilst 9...f6 appeared as recently as 2019. |
|
| Apr-07-21 | | Sim1: Title is quite a subtle pun on Fischer's "My 60 Memorable Games". Nice. I like it. |
|
| Apr-07-21 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: Now we need puns based on the book Profile of a Prodigy. |
|
| Apr-07-21 | | Cheapo by the Dozen: Or Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess. |
|
Apr-07-21
 | | AylerKupp: <Sim1> Title is quite a subtle pun on Fischer's "My 60 Memorable Games"> I don't know about the subtleness part, particularly since the title for yesterday's game was "My One Memorable Game". But, of course, these titles were suggested some time ago, and it was maybe a coincidence that we had back to back Fischer games and each of their titles had the word "Memorable" in them. Or perhaps <chessgames.com> decided that it was time for a "Memorable" week and selected these games, and their titles, on purpose. I wonder if there are any more like that? I also don't believe the rumor that Reshevsky played 59.Kc8 rather than the obvious (at least to me) 59.Kc7 which might have resulted in an immediate resignation by Fischer just so that we could have a GOTD title candidate for the words "60 Memorable". Most likely, since Reshevsky was probably in time trouble as he often was and the second time control was probably at 60 moves, Fischer just wanted to make sure that Reshevsky made the time control before he resigned. And time trouble might have been the reason why Reshevsky played 58.Kc8 instead of 59.Kc7. Maybe he was subconsciously tying to promote his king to a queen? Of course, other possible candidates for this game's title could have been "When Reshevsky Was Still Reshevsky" or "When Fischer Was Not Yet Fischer", but that would have spoiled the "Memorable" week. However, "Not One Of My Sixty Memorable Games" would have maintained the opportunity, although that is probably a candidate for the title for most of Fischer's published losses. |
|
Apr-07-21
| | AylerKupp: Ha! I just noticed that the aphorism displayed when I posted my previous comment was "No one ever won a game by resigning". Most appropriate to my theory of why 59.Kc8 (which is what I should have said) instead of 59.Kc7 and yet another coincidence. |
|
Apr-07-21
 | | keypusher: <However, "Not One Of My Sixty Memorable Games" would have maintained the opportunity, although that is probably a candidate for the title for most of Fischer's published losses.> <AK>
As I'm sure you know, three of Fischer's losses actually made the cut for 60MG: Fischer vs Tal, 1959 Spassky vs Fischer, 1960 Fischer vs Geller, 1967 |
|
Apr-07-21
| | AylerKupp: <<keypusher> As I'm sure you know, three of Fischer's losses actually made the cut for 60MG> Yes, particularly the last one against Geller, which "I" (in reality multiple engines) analyzed extensively. But I consider them all memorable for one reason or another; for example Spassky beating Fischer when opening with the King's Gambit! How can that game not be memorable since (I think) motivated Fischer to discover "A Bust to the King's Gambit" (http://brooklyn64.com/wp-content/up...)? Made even more memorable, at least to me, was his concluding line: "14...Nxd4 And Black wins... Of course White can always play differently, in which case he merely loses differently." A quote which I have paraphrased and used multiple times. Which just reinforces my point, 3 lost opportunities for their title to have been "Not One Of My 60 Memorable Games". :-) Although this is not really always true; some of a player's losses are their most memorable, as was Lasker vs W Napier, 1904 which the loser, Napier, considered to be his best game ever, even though he lost it. I certainly consider the game that I resigned because I thought I was being back rank-mated even though I had a winning position to be among my most memorable, but not in a good way. :-( |
|
Apr-07-21
 | | beatgiant: <Of course White can always play differently, in which case he merely loses differently.> Fischer cited Weaver Adams as the inspiration for that line, but I haven't been able to find the original source (probably in Adams' book _White to Play and Win_, but I don't have a copy). |
|
Apr-07-21
 | | perfidious: We also know that <AK> has a thing, come to Fischer, going back to 1966, when he simply had to have the last word in an encounter with the great man himself. |
|
Apr-07-21
 | | harrylime: Bobby is the greatest.
In ten years time I will look back at my post just now and go silly all over it xxx |
|
| Apr-07-21 | | Caissanist: Was this Reshevsky's masterpiece? I've heard a lot of praise for this game over the years. |
|
| Apr-07-21 | | Caissanist: Arnold Denker singles out 14..gxf5 for criticism: <Black's fluid pawn center will lack dynamic punch without the King's Bishop as backup muscle: the preferred move in this position is NxBP>. Since Bobby never played this line again then presumably he thought that either gxf5 or one of the moves leading up to it was wrong. |
|
| Apr-07-21 | | Olavi: It's a rather colourless game with Fischer missing a draw in the rook ending. I'm not sure whether the Reshevsky masterpiece exists, he was a tenacious slugger... maybe Reshevsky vs Capablanca, 1935 from his youth, maybe Reshevsky vs Fischer, 1965 (although that's a bit easy) or Reshevsky vs Polugaevsky, 1970 |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
