|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-26-14 | | tranquilsimplicity: <Spirited Riposte> No! Counterplay for Black was permanently inhibited. Dang..Karpov was good. Indeed my friend, indeed.# |
|
| Nov-06-14 | | copablanco: It's the same overall strategy used by Fischer playing white against Oscar Panno : Close the centre, control, and secure the queen side, attack the king flank. Done deal as white stands "reptilian like" better in these types of closed positions.
Instructive, however is Karpov's gaining control of the open "a" file. |
|
| Nov-06-14 | | MarkFinan: This is why I could never really get into Karpov's games. Over 40 moves and still 30 pieces on the board! Maybe it's because it's beyond my level of comprehension, which it kinda is, but mainly because I find positional chess too boring. Thank god for Tal, Fischer and Kasparov... and all those late nineteenth century/ early twentieth century players. |
|
| Dec-21-14 | | JosepCmd: Karpov's signature! |
|
| Jan-25-15 | | Poisonpawns: Absolutely Incredible. |
|
May-01-16
 | | Dionysius1: Karpov's 24 Ba7 is so cheeky - so he can double his rooks in peace - is so cheeky I laughed out loud when I saw it! |
|
May-01-16
| | Dionysius1: And then he just leaves it there blocking Black's rook for the rest of the game. In effect, he's winning a rook for a bishop. What a mind! |
|
| May-01-16 | | AlicesKnight: Compare Burn-Forgacs, Ostend, 1906 - the paralysis of Black's bishops, among other things, compares with this Karpov genius strangulation. |
|
May-01-16
| | Dionysius1: Yes, that's lovely, but almost showy in comparison. And I suspect it's more that in the Burn game 7. Ne4 is a bad move (though who would have known?) Dion |
|
| Feb-01-17 | | maelith: 27.Ba7 is a stroke of a chess genius. |
|
| Feb-01-17 | | ChessHigherCat: Public opinion appears somewhat divided:
<FlintEastwood: That game is the embodiment of Karpovian style! Pure torture, Karpov is a sadist.>
<offramp: About as funny as a burning orphanage.>
<thegoodanarchist: All I can say about Karpov's play here is "Nice".>
"Nice" isn't a word that comes to my mind. More like "reptilian" (boa constrictor in this case) but you have to admit he's precise as hell, and before the age of computer prep. He must be one of the most naturally gifted players of all time. |
|
Feb-01-17
 | | offramp: <ChessHigherCat: Public opinion appears somewhat divided:
...<thegoodanarchist: All I can say about Karpov's play here is "Nice".> "Nice" isn't a word that comes to my mind.> I think he said "Nice" because that is the description at the top of the page, just above a8. |
|
| Feb-01-17 | | ChessHigherCat: Aha, my fault, it was played in Nice. It seemed kind of out of character for thegoodanarchist. Maybe Karpov had been sunning himself on those horrible pebbles on the beach for 6 hours before deciding to pass on his suffering to Unzicker. |
|
| Mar-28-17 | | thegoodanarchist: < ChessHigherCat: Aha, my fault, it was played in Nice. It seemed kind of out of character for thegoodanarchist.> Haha, yes indeed! <Offramp> cracked the code |
|
| Apr-29-17 | | bkpov: Inch by inch progression. That's what chess is about. After taste is much heady than the flashy ones |
|
Jan-13-19
 | | woldsmandriffield: After the game, Unzicker commented that "One is permitted to lose to Karpov with Black". He made two bad positional mistakes though. Firstly, 22..c4? 23 Bb1 Qd8? allowed Karpov to get in 24 Ba7! and for the rest of the game Black had zero prospects of counterplay on the Q-side. Secondly, 31..g5? allowed Karpov to kill him on the K-side light squares and removed even the ghost of a chance of counterplay in the centre. Its a famous game and there is great harmony to Karpov's disposition of his forces but he won because Unzicker made these unforced errors. |
|
| Jan-13-19 | | SChesshevsky: Does look like Karpov got some help from his opponent in this one. Appears black didn't initiate even one exchange to try to do improve his position. Wonder what a win percentage would be against a side that isn't allowed to capture first? |
|
| Jan-24-21 | | thegoodanarchist: < offramp: Definitely an overrated game but that is not Karpov's fault. If you play through it once you will not want to play through it a second time.> As someone once quipped, <"When you play Karpov, nothing happens. And then you lose."> |
|
| Jan-24-21 | | carpovius: <maelith: 27. Ba7 is a stroke of a chess genius> Yes. It is. |
|
Nov-08-22
 | | HeMateMe: my balls hurt just playing through this one! Positively Petronsianesque. |
|
Dec-10-23
 | | GrahamClayton: <skakmiv> If 44...Qf7 then 45. Ng4 perhaps? <skakmiv>,
44... Qf7 45. Ng4 Ne8 46. Bb6 followed by Ra7. |
|
| Oct-12-24 | | generror: Wow... another Karpov gem. Unzicker doesn't really do anything wrong here (his biggest mistake is playing right into a closed Spanish against Karpov with Black), it feels like even Stocfish would have been strangled to death by Karpov. I'm sure Fischer saw this game, knew he had no chance and chickened out. (Just to troll all those obnoxious Fischer fanboys out there XP) |
|
| May-18-25 | | Canadian chesser: As a famous grandmaster we can assume Unzicker analyzed the final position and saw losing was inevitable and so resigned instead of making move 44. But to many of us chess novices and amateurs it looks at first as if this is a case of resigning too early? From a quick search for commentary on the Internet what emerges is that Black can resign here because a loss of one or more pawns is inevitable. It would be great if someone could provide a complete analysis showing this. Key ideas mentioned in the annotations are: white rook to a5 to capture the black b-pawn (combined with white bishop to b6 to attack the knight defender of that pawn); after the exchanging of one of the two rooks, the other white rook goes to a7; and of course white knight to g4 where it joins the attack on the f6 pawn especially. Still, couldn't Black just manage to survive without material loss using his knights to add defence to the pawns, while exchanging as many of the pieces as possible to try to relieve the obvious "bind" problem he is in? |
|
May-18-25
 | | beatgiant: <Canadian chesser> It does not look too early to resign to me. I don't see a way to avoid losing at least a couple of pawns in the near future. White threatens 45. Qxg7#.
If Black trades off with 44...Qxg6 45. fxg6, White will soon follow with Nf5 and the two knights and g-pawn will go after Black's bishop. If Black retreats with 44...Bh8 45. Qxh6+ Ke7 46. Ng4 and the kingside pawns fall. If Black defends with 45...Qf7, there's the line as <GrahamClayton> posted above, 44...Qf7 45. Ng4 Ne8 46. Bb6 and White breaks through via the a-file winning material soon. |
|
May-18-25
 | | WannaBe: Someone already ran a computer analysis, and it's +7 and change. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
