|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-28-11 | | bronkenstein: Another possibility , Kasparov´s ego is destroyed by this devastating loss , he turns to alcohol and then commits suicide after being eliminated in the next cycle quarters By Gulko (with zero again , needless to say ) in their famous 1986. match. Gulko is OFC eliminated by Sokolov in semis , and Karpov farms the latter easily in the WC match. In few years , Kasparov is remembered only by few chess historians , and his mother. |
|
| Jun-01-11 | | M.D. Wilson: And yet another one of Botvinnik's predications was wrong. |
|
| Sep-04-11 | | Big Pawn: Karpov easily outclasses Kasparov in this game. This was just a crush. |
|
| Sep-04-11 | | Petrosianic: Thanks for telling us who won the game. I was unclear on that, and neither the scoresheet nor any of the previous coments made it clear. Who was playing White, by the way? |
|
| Sep-05-11 | | Big Pawn: < Petrosianic: Thanks for telling us who won the game. I was unclear on that, and neither the scoresheet nor any of the previous coments made it clear. Who was playing White, by the way?> Thank you for sharing this valuable information. |
|
| Sep-05-11 | | Petrosianic: It was a question, not information. So, if you don't know who was playing White, how do you know which player outclassed which? |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | Zugzwangovich: Is all this sarcasm really called for? |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | Petrosianic: Yes, and if you don't get it in 30 minutes, it's free. |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | Zugzwangovich: <Petrosianic: Thanks for telling us who won the game. I was unclear on that, and neither the scoresheet nor any of the previous comments made it clear. Who was playing White, by the way?> Sorry for sticking my two cents in. My take on this comment/question is that you were telling Big Pawn you take issue with his assessment that Karpov "easily outclassed" and "crushed" Kasparov in this game. Am I spot on or full of it? |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | M.D. Wilson: Slippery as an eel, Petrosianic, like your idol. |
|
| Sep-06-11 | | Big Pawn: <Petrosianic: I was unclear on that, and neither the scoresheet nor any of the previous coments made it clear.> <Petrosianic: It was a question, not information. > The above quote from you is "information" [sic]. Thanks - I knew you would see it my way. |
|
| Jun-25-15 | | Everett: <
Sep-04-11 Petrosianic: Thanks for telling us who won the game. I was unclear on that, and neither the scoresheet nor any of the previous coments made it clear. Who was playing White, by the way?>An eminently douche-like post, this quote above. |
|
| Jun-25-15 | | Petrosianic: No, no, your post wasn't that bad, it was merely pointless. I'll prove it to you. You tell me what the point is of posting something that anybody can see on the game's scoresheet? I'll bet you can't. People slam The Focus for posting too many quotes, but how much worse would he get it if he went around posting who the players in the game were. |
|
| Jun-25-15 | | TheFocus: <Petrosianic> <People slam The Focus for posting too many quotes, but how much worse would he get it if he went around posting who the players in the game were.> Oh great, now I can't do that.
I thought I would get another couple of thousand posts that way. |
|
| Jul-11-15 | | Everett: <n-25-15 Petrosianic: No, no, your post wasn't that bad, it was merely pointless. > Double-down doucheness. Well done |
|
| Mar-25-16 | | mhand: I think that move 37b5 lost the game.37Qf7 protecting b7 indirectly and attacking the white rook too was more better and probably extends the battle for a while. |
|
Mar-25-16
 | | plang: Kasparov gave up the Tarrasch after his two losses early in this Match but I am not sure any other top GMs had the ability to defeat this defense the way Karpov did. |
|
Mar-25-16
 | | perfidious: Matter of fact, no-one else managed to win against Kasparov's Tarrasch: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... |
|
| Mar-25-16 | | Everett: <memberMar-25-16 plang: Kasparov gave up the Tarrasch after his two losses early in this Match but I am not sure any other top GMs had the ability to defeat this defense the way Karpov did. premium
memberMar-25-16 perfidious: Matter of fact, no-one else managed to win against Kasparov's Tarrasch:> These guys were both booked up and deadly with White. Even against each other. Kasparov struggled to find a sound defense once Karpov switched to d4 (and c4 as well), and Karpov saw his Nimzo and Ruy smacked around a bit. And just like you two indicated, these guys used those same openings against everyone else and did just fine. Better than fine actually. |
|
| Mar-25-16 | | morfishine: Karpov at his prime |
|
Mar-26-16
 | | offramp: <mhand: I think that move 37b5 lost the game.37Qf7 protecting b7 indirectly and attacking the white rook too was more better and probably extends the battle for a while.> That is a very good suggestion. Welcome to the site, BTW. I am sure you'll enjoy it here, as I have! |
|
Sep-15-18
 | | HeMateMe: white's iron grip on the e file decides the game. Maybe Kasparov has weakened his position by advancing his kingside pawns--his Knight had no good outpost. His Queen never got back in the game. |
|
| Sep-30-21 | | Gaito: 
click for larger view
BLACK TO MOVE
In this position Kasparov could have recovered his pawn with 24...Qxh3 with a healthy position and a roughly equal game, but he liked to play a pawn down with some initiative as a compensation, so he played 24...f6!? instead.
This was the seventh match game and Kasparov had just lost the sixth game after an exhausting and long rook ending in which Karpov showed excellent technique. So it was understandable that Kasparov wanted to avoid simple positions and try to win a game, because he had already lost two games and won none yet. But such an approach against Karpov was bound to backfire. Toward the end of this very long and exhausting match Garry gradually understood that if he was to win a game against Karpov his only chance was to play like Karpov himself! Recently Anatoly Karpov said in an interview that in this match he gave his young rival 48 lessons for free! There might be some truth in that assertion. After this match Garry Kasparov emerged as a much stronger player. Something similar may have happened back in 1927 to Alexander Alekhine: it is possible that Capablanca gave Alekhine 34 lessons for free, and after the Buenos Aires match Alekhine was transformed into a really formidable player a whole class above all his other colleagues (except Capablanca). Of course this is only a personal opinion. I could easily be mistaken, but it is apparent that after this match Garry Kasparov made a noticeable leap in strength equivalent to about one hundred rating points, so it could be true that he learned a thing or two from Karpov. |
|
| Sep-30-21 | | Gaito: <Mar-25-16 mhand: I think that move 37...b5 lost the game. 37...Qf7 protecting b7 indirectly and attacking the white rook too was better and probably would have extended the battle for a while.> Yes. I agree with what you say, mhand. 37...b5? may have been Kasparov's losing mistake. During the eighties, making just one mistake against Karpov was usually enough to ensure a defeat, even if one played the remainder of the game to perfection. 
click for larger viewPosition after 37.Qe7. According to the engine SF14, if Black plays 37...Qf7, White has only a minimal edge (computer evaluation: +0.36).
Nevertheless, after the move actually played (37...b5??) the evaluation of the engine suddenly jumps to +5.00. |
|
| Sep-30-21 | | Gaito: Curiously, out of the 48 games played in this match, only two games were selected as "good games" in Chess Informant No.38. It is amazing that a World Championship match that lasted about four months and 48 games might have produced only two "good games", those were games number 27 and 48. As Joanthan Berry said once in a game he annotated (of another event): "This was a bad game. Not all the games of this event were that bad; there were also a few good games, but who wants to see good games?" |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
Annotations by 