| Nov-16-03 | | Kenkaku: So far Round 3 of Kasparov vs. X3D Fritz has followed this game exactly. Apparently no true novelty has been played yet (up to move 10). |
|
| Nov-16-03 | | Benjamin Lau: Hmmmm... Is it a bad omen that this similar game you randomly fished out was won by black? |
|
| Nov-16-03 | | Shadout Mapes: The commentators for the Kasparov - Fritz X3D match (which I'm watching right now) say Kasparov got out of book with 10.Ba3 even though it was clearly played in this game. Kasparov diverged from the game with 12.b6 closing the position to get the computer into positional territory. |
|
| Nov-16-03 | | Bears092: now Garry played 12. a6 to deviate |
|
| Nov-16-03 | | Benjamin Lau: This pawn structure looks like it's ripe for lots of positional sacs. It's not clear though whether white is cornering black, or whether black is really cornering white. I can't wait to see the 3rd game. |
|
| Nov-17-03 | | Dr Young: This is what Fritz programmers should try next. They should somehow try to simulate Keres' playing style. |
|
| Nov-17-03 | | thekleinbottle: Anyone know what the losing move here is? What's wrong with 32. Be2 (followed by Bf3 at some point)? |
|
| Nov-17-03 | | WhoKeres: I believe that in Golombek's book on the 1948 Match-Tournament he states that Reshevsky went wrong with either his 43rd or 44th move. According to Golombek, Keres blundered his e-pawn on move 15, but had drawing chances at the adjournment due to the blocked pawn structure and white's bad Bishop. Keres showed amazing analytical ability to find a win for black; Golombek said Reshevsky played right into Keres' adjournment analysis, lost the exchange and then the game. |
|
| Nov-15-10 | | soothsayer8: 16. Ndxe4!? Turns out to be a bit hasty. That weakness on e4 (and, subsequently, g3 after f3 is played) was Reshevsky's undoing in this game. |
|
Jul-29-11
 | | Sebastian88: In T. Czarnecki's Bock: "Szach i mat" 1953 is:
47. R:c6! with a draw.
47.Rxc6 bxc6 48.b7 Re8 49.Qxf5+ 1/2:1/2 |
|
Dec-08-11
 | | Honza Cervenka: <soothsayer8: 16. Ndxe4!? Turns out to be a bit hasty. That weakness on e4 (and, subsequently, g3 after f3 is played) was Reshevsky's undoing in this game.> I don't think so. 16.Ndxe4! simply wins a Pawn as 16...dxe4 17.d5 wins the piece back with advantage (17...Nf8?? 18.dxc6  ) as well as 17...dxe4 18.d5. Keres was struggling for draw for a long time and won the game only due to tactical collapse of Reshevsky. As <Sebastian88> pointed out, 47.Rxc6 was still good enough to force draw on the spot and white's play can be improved in some other places too. 56.e4?? was a big blunder leading to immediate loss of game while after 56.Bd2 black's win is not so clear, though black has a good practical chance to win with Q+R against Q+B+3P due to very bad and passive Bishop of white. |
|
Oct-01-13
 | | WCC Editing Project: Game date disambiguation:
Though other round 13 games were played on 15 April, this one was played on 19 April for the following reason: <The Reshevsky-Keres game had to be <<<postponed till April 19th,>>> as Reshevsky was ill with a sore throat and had to go to bed for a couple of days, during which time he was attended by a Russian doctor."> Harry Golombek, "The World Chess Championship 1948" (Harding Simpole 1949), p.139 |
|
| Mar-21-22 | | cehertan: A sickening loss for Reshevsky. Before blundering the exchange around move 45 he was effectively 2 pawns up with the black a pawn eventually doomed. Black has nothing and can hardly hold out in the long run. |
|
| Mar-21-22 | | SChesshevsky: <A sickening loss for Reshevsky...> I got the impression Reshevsky's greatest strength was that he was always looking for a tactical "trick" that would give him a significant advantage. It was impressive, his alertness and how many combos he found. Seems many/most of his wins were, very generally, mostly relatively quick. And even many of his longer grind-out pawn up wins were setup with a cute "trick" . Unfortunately, his instinct for always searching for that wounding tactical finesse was probably also his biggest weakness. Pretty sure it was a main reason for his famous time troubles. And when the execution wasn't appropriate, it maybe led him to some ugly losses. As possibly here. Believe Reshevsky's tendency probably came from all those wins he had as a child prodigy. Beating up on those coffee housers with I'm sure clever combinations. Can see winning that way with all the praise could easily become a playing habit. |
|
Kibitzing
