|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-09-03 | | yorkebrazil: At first kasparov had moved 36.... Nc5, but before he hit the clock he turn back to 36.... Nf8 losing a time, he was afraid of 37. Bc6. That bad loser. |
|
May-09-03
 | | lostemperor: Not quite yorkebrazil, that would be of course too obvious and impossible since the "referee" was watching above the board. But did Kasparov release the piece or not? Kasparov: <"my conscience is clean">. Judith after the game: <"you cheat">. The videopictures who had recorded the move, showed Kasparov released the piece at least 1/25th of a second. |
|
May-10-03
 | | chessgames.com: After this game, Kasparov argued that he was not afraid of 37. Bc6, and rattled off analysis to indicate that Black is OK after that move, somehow. I'll fire up Crafty for an unbiased opinion. |
|
| May-10-03 | | crafty: 36. ... ♘c5 37. ♗c6 ♕h4 38. ♗xe8 ♘g4 39. h3 ♘f2+ 40. ♔h2  (eval 0.46; depth 14 ply; 1000M nodes) |
|
May-11-03
| | lostemperor: Yes, but he was afraid during the game:) and Kasparov wouldn't have won this game. In fact even though it was a split second, Judith saw Kasparov released the piece and she looked at the arbiter, perhaps standing, who did not move a muscle. She played on, what else. It shows we must not put too much weight on Kasparov's consience. |
|
| Jun-18-03 | | karlzen: You sure black's not OK after 36...Nc5 37.Bc6 Qh4! 38.Bxe8 Ng4 39.h3 Nf2+ 40.Kh2 and now: Qf4+! ? 41.Kg1 Nxh3+! with a draw.
Worse is 41.g3 Qxf5 42.Kg1 Nxh3+! 43.Kg2 Ng5 44.Bc6 Qh3+ 45.Kf2 Qh2+ 46.Ke3 Qxg3+ 47.Ke2 Nge6 and black is even winning. After 40.Kg1 Black simply plays Nxh3+ with a draw. White's best "try" is 39.Bxf7+ Kxf7, still a draw. E.g. 40.Qd5+ Kf8 41.Qa8+ Kf7 42.Nf3 Nf2+ 43.Kg1 Nh3+ 44.Kh1 Nf2+ or 42.Nf1 Nf2+ 43.Kg1 Nxd1 or 41.h3 Nf2+ 42.Kg1 Nxd1. After 38.g3 black is winning after either Qh5 or Qg4! Conclusion:
Black is only drawing after Nc5 while he's winning in the game. Still, nice little tactical cheat! Don't have to talk to either Polgar or Shirov among others... ;) Perhaps Kasparov didn't notice that he let go of the piece. Probably did though. He said: "I have the feeling that I did not take my hand off the
knight.".
In any case, the result is clean and fair, Polgar should've told the arbiter if she thought Kasparov cheated. Simple enough. She was in time trouble, afraid of losing minutes if the claim was wrong, still cowardly! |
|
Oct-26-03
 | | Open Defence: Hmmm in the pressure of the live game it is difficult to decide whether to complain or not. Think about it, faced with such a situation, it's only human to expect that Kasparov's mighty reputation would count for something in the referee's eyes. However, this was a moment of truth for Kasparov and he failed. "To be a Champion at Chess you also have to be a good human being" - Anatoly Karpov |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | drukenknight: >>"Hmmm in the pressure of the live game it is difficult to decide whether to complain or not." I do not necessarily agree. Isnt there a rule that the players must not distract the other player? And cant' an arbiter add time to the other players clock if such a thing has happened? I know that is possible because I used to read that arbiter's (Gurt Gjseen?) column on a regular basis in chess cafe and that is a typical solution that he would have done. SHe would have every right to complain in any other situation. The only fact that complicates the matter in this csae, is that she was in time trouble and didnt have time to complain. Or she thought she didnt. Well, that would be perfectly within the arbiter's rights to award time on that basis. After all you cannot expect to be able to violate the rules of chess and get away with simply because your opponent has little time. Agreed? If Kasparov had queened a pawn and then put another K in it's place, you wouldnt say "well I should have complained but I didnt have enuf time so we played with three Ks on the board." Makes no sense. There must always be time for a complaint, otherwise there is no pt to the other rules of chess. That is my pt. YOu cant say well he could get away with it it was time trouble. That is no excuse. I did not see the occurance, but she should have complained. If her flag fell during the complaint then she should have appealed that. To the artibter or higher authority. So "no" I dont really buy this reasoning, not in toto. |
|
Oct-26-03
| | Open Defence: Not that Judit may not have had enough time for a complaint, but in the pressure of a live game and with the reputation Kasparov has, if Judit felt that the arbiter may not uphold her claim why complain ? When a player puts an extra K on the board, its obvious, when you need cameras to tell you that Gary let go of the knight for more than 1/25th of a sec, hmmm C'mon guys think about it, its not so simple to say Judit should have complained |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | drukenknight: I did not say it was simple. I said "I do not necessarily agree" and "I dont buy the reasoning in toto." YOu make it sound that the only issue is whether Polgar HAS TO KNOW IN HER HEAD already that the arbiter will or will not uphold the claim That is not true either. If you feel there is a problem, then you have to complain. If the flag drops, then there is an issue there too. So it's not just does Polgar knew that the arbiter will bla bla bla. If the flag falls that is a separate issue. Again, I pt out the rule that the player cannot distract his opponent. Even if the arbiter upheld Garys right to move another piece, he could still award her time, if he felt that what Gary did distract her. So this also a separate issue. If you believe you have a right to complain (not necessarily that you are correct, only that you have a right) then you have to complain. Its not necessary that she knows that she is right. it is only necessary that she believes she is in good faith when she complains. She should then rely on the ref. to give her the time. |
|
Oct-26-03
| | Open Defence: I disagree, if it was me in Polgar's place, the doubt whether my claim would be upheld would have made me think twice about complaining. That's the pressure of high level chess when you have to think fast. No doubt there is a right to complain, however the doubt whether the claim would be upheld is sufficient to deter a claim. Whether or not Polgar felt that the claim would not be upheld only she would know, but I still maintain, when you have to make a quick decision, the slightest doubt affects you. That's life, that's chess, play on!! |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | drukenknight: she should have knocked the board over. |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | ughaibu: or urinated on the floor and gone to sleep in a field. |
|
Oct-26-03
| | Open Defence: hahahahahahahahahahahaha, hey tell me guys .. do we girls have an advantage of distracting you during a game ? |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | ughaibu: Open Defence: Be careful, next thing you know someone'll be accusing you of offensive sexist posts. |
|
Oct-26-03
| | Open Defence: hehehehhe well this was still a very interesting chess game, I do hope Judit becomes champion some day. It is unfortunate that FIDE is in chaos, I think if the old system was in place Judit might well have had a chance, lets analyse more of Judits play here, where do you think the critical error was made in this game ? |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | Diggitydawg: Hmmm, it's hard to come up with an effective plan against black after 39...Ng4. But 40.Rf1 looked weak to me because it allowed the advance of the e-pawn; preventing Nf2 is probably less important than allowing the advance of the e-pawn. So maybe 40.Kg1 Nf2 41.Ra1. |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | drukenknight: Look at move 42, the pawn fork doesnt quite work because the two rooks are still there. But 42...Nf2+ would probably be fine to pull defenders off the back rank. Or 42...Rxb2 because of the pin on the Queen. Then BxQ RxQ BxR and the fork would work. Probably Rxb2 would be equality and Nf2+ would be more unbalanced. |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | Diggitydawg: Hmmm, now that I've looked at the final position again, it occurs to me that 46.Qe7 is a bad move. She could have played 46.Qd4 which attacks the N and prevents 46...Qc4!, after which: a)47.Kg1 e2 48.Re1 Qd4+ 49. Kh1 Qf4 50.g3 Qf1+ 51.RxQ e2xR=Q# b)47.Ra1 Qf4 48.Qh4 Nf2+, losing the white Q.
So she could have played 46...Qd4 but that passed pawn worries me. So maybe instead of 44.Rd8, 44.Re1 would be better. |
|
| Oct-26-03 | | drukenknight: I think you are on the right track dawg, but forget about move 44. Your move: 46 Qd4 looks pretty good. 46 h3 might also hold, tricky but maybe. |
|
| Oct-27-03 | | Benjamin Lau: <lost emperor>
I am very surprised that you don't have the game where Polgar dealt a humiliating loss to Kasparov in your "The Polgar Sisters" collection. Don't you remember? The game where Kasparov decides to try out the Ruy Lopez Berlin Defense, which Kramnik used so successfully against him in the Braingames 2000 match? Judit Polgar vs Kasparov, 2002 |
|
Oct-27-03
| | Open Defence: Yeah Lau I saw that game, nice one and it goes very well into that collection, I wish I could get the Java working on this puter so that I could check out the variations after 46Qd4 |
|
Oct-27-03
| | Open Defence: Java working !!! :-D hmmmm how would white respond to 46..e2 after 46Qd4 ? if QxN then exf1Q#, if Re1 then Qxf5 (probably a stronger move available ... haven't looked) but e2 seems to settle matters does it ? |
|
| Oct-27-03 | | drukenknight: No it wont settle things, it seems the R will find a home on a1 in certain variations, and the Q should help the R in maintaining hold on queening square. |
|
Oct-27-03
| | lostemperor: <Benjamin> I did considered it. But I am waiting for Judith to beat Kasparov again! Inspiring her even. As a chessprofessional she might have heard from someone, there is a collection about her and her sisters here at chessgames.com. And not publishing her most satisfiying win (even including this loss) might inspire her beating Kasparov again even more beautiful! Here from an inteview after winning the Essent tournament: Question: <Men's Worldtitle. Yes or no?>
Judith: <"Yes at least I hope so. I do think it's possible"> <Open defence: do we girls have an advantage of distracting you during a game > I dunno how do you look like babe;-). Seriously? There are few women I've played and often they get distracted by my irrestible beauty hehe, (from a distance I even look like Kasparov). I am regulary distracted during tournaments by women but unfortunately they are mostly no chessplayers. Can I ask you if you get distracted by beautiful man on or off the board or do you look at other qualities in men? Here something Judith has to say about this in her interview. Question: <To dominate or intimidate?>
Judith: <To dominate. When I have to defend I also intimidate. How? Well at the board anything happens >. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 42...Qe4