|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-08-04 | | steven18: I would've like to seen a Tal-Fischer match. Didn't Tal have a + score against Bobby Fischer? |
|
| Jan-08-04 | | ughaibu: Steven18: Yes, Tal had a plus score against Fischer, so did Geller. |
|
| Jan-08-04 | | Benjamin Lau: They played one in like 1959 or something. Tal slaughtered Fischer 4-0. Tal has a plus score against Fischer in classical time controls. Fischer has a plus score against Tal in blitz. |
|
Jan-16-04
 | | kevin86: This one seemed to be destined to be drawn from the first move. Spassky shows no initiative in this game. Fischer seems content to abide his time. |
|
| Jan-16-04 | | tud: 9...b5 was a novelty |
|
| Aug-10-05 | | RookFile: Spassky had a chance here: 18. d5!!
18.... exd5 19. exd5 bxc3 20. Rxb6 Nd8
21. Bc4, with exploits Fischer's missing 16.... Rxa1, according to Gligoric. It doesn't win, but it
give White a try for advantage.
|
|
| Aug-10-05 | | RookFile: And by the way, this was the 9th
game of the match. |
|
| May-18-07 | | Inf: why not 14.axb5? if black takes then pawn he will lose a rook, and if he retreats the K, then white has a passed pawn. what am i missing here? |
|
| May-18-07 | | Marmot PFL: <what am i missing here?> 14...Nxd4, and this center pawn is more important than the pawn on b5. |
|
| May-18-07 | | Inf: <marmot> but Spassky lost the pawn anyways... i agree with you that the center pawn is more important, but if thats the case i would have played 16.Rxa8 Bxa8 17.Bxb5 not giving black a chance to take the center pawn... Spassky was not same as the last 2 WC with "tiger" Petrosian... what a shame. i hate when things like this happen, makes me forget about everything, study chess non-stop, become a super GM, then a WC, and then come back here and post in <cg.com> to talk it up with you guys... |
|
| Feb-29-08 | | Knight13: <16.Rxa8 Bxa8 17.Bxb5> There's gotta be something wrong with that. Or else Spassky wouldn't have just castled. |
|
| May-22-08 | | Marmot PFL: <<16.Rxa8 Bxa8 17.Bxb5> There's gotta be something wrong with that. Or else Spassky wouldn't have just castled.> Can't black just play 16...Qxa8 17.Bxb5 Na7 with attack on Bb5 and Pe4? Also if white plays 16.Bxb5 black had 16...Rxa1+ 17.Qxa1 Qb6 18.Bxc6 Bxc6 19.Nd2 Ra8 20.Qc3 Qa6 and white is in trouble. |
|
| May-22-08 | | Marmot PFL: <Spassky had a chance here: 18. d5!! 18.... exd5 19. exd5 bxc3 20. Rxb6 Nd8
21. Bc4, with exploits Fischer's missing 16.... Rxa1, according to Gligoric. It doesn't win, but it give White a try for advantage. > 16...Qb6 was inaccurate, but black could also play 16...Rc8 or b4 with a good position. Even in Gligorich's line white's edge is very slight after 21...Ra5. |
|
| May-23-08 | | Peter Nemenyi: <ughaibu: Yes, Tal had a plus score against Fischer, so did Geller.> We should stipulate that these weren't equivalent achievements. Tal never defeated Fischer after Bobby was sixteen. Geller beat him five times when RJF was nineteen to twenty-four--a much greater feat even if that wasn't Fischer's absolute prime. |
|
| May-23-08 | | Calli: <Spassky had a chance here: 18. d5!!
18.... exd5 19. exd5 bxc3 20. Rxb6 Nd8 21. Bc4, ....according to Gligoric> There is no reason Black can't play 20...Na5 in that line instead of the passive d8. Looks completely equal at that point. |
|
| May-23-08 | | KingG: <tud> <9...b5 was a novelty> Yes, and 10.Bd3 was a bit inaccurate. Better was 10.Be2! as in Yusupov vs Ribli, 1985. |
|
| May-04-09 | | WhiteRook48: well, Fischer accused Geller, Petrosian, and Keres of prearranging easy draws against one other once |
|
| Jun-24-12 | | hottyboy90: This game didn't do it for me,disappointing. |
|
| Jun-24-12 | | Petrosianic: <hottyboy90>: <This game didn't do it for me,disappointing.> I'm sure that makes it disappointing to the players, too. |
|
| Jun-24-12 | | King Death: < Peter Nemenyi: <ughaibu: Yes, Tal had a plus score against Fischer, so did Geller.>
We should stipulate that these weren't equivalent achievements. Tal never defeated Fischer after Bobby was sixteen. Geller beat him five times when RJF was nineteen to twenty-four--a much greater feat even if that wasn't Fischer's absolute prime.> In my opinion what Geller did rates higher too, it was over a period of time instead of a single event where a player was just running everybody over. That can create its own momentum. At least with CG's new feature that divides the games between classical and other types we don't have to put up with things like "Botvinnik was +2-1=5 against Capablanca" anymore when everybody knows that their first game was played in a simul. |
|
| Jun-24-12 | | Petrosianic: Even worse. Not everybody did know that. |
|
| Jun-29-12 | | hottyboy90: I wasn't aware of that feature.Where do I find it? |
|
| Sep-27-16 | | edubueno: 9 a3! or 9 Tb1! |
|
| Oct-16-16 | | ZonszeinP: Indeed, I like 9-Rb1 |
|
| Aug-01-21 | | Albion 1959: The shortest game of match in terms of time spent on the board - just over three hours. The game never really came to life. Fischer's novelty on move 9, appeared to draw the sting from any hope of a Spassky attack. Though he did miss a chance on move 18 by playing Qd2? It was a surprise that he played this, maybe he lacked the confidence to try d5!?
From the 23rd move, the position was always going to be a draw. Fischer must have been pleased to get an easy draw with the black pieces against the world champion ! |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
