chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Yasser Seirawan vs Boris Spassky
Banker's (1990) (rapid), rd 2
Polish Defense: General (A40)  ·  0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 13 more Seirawan/Spassky games
sac: 56...Rxf3 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If you find a mistake in the database, use the correction form. There is a link at the bottom that reads "Spot an error? Please suggest your correction..." Avoid posting corrections in the kibitzing area.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
Jul-31-05  BobbyBishop: Nice going Boris! I've experimented with the Polish before and got some good games. After going over this game again, I'm going to work on it again as I'm fond of offbeat lines.
Oct-10-06
Premium Chessgames Member
  Joshka: I thought this was the St. George?...if not what's the difference?
Jan-24-09  sfm: Am I right that notation should be
54.Ng3??,Kg6??
55.g4??,Rf3+!
as Black could have played the neat little combi already at the 54th move, and that White had better option in both move 54 and 55?
Jan-24-09
Premium Chessgames Member
  Phony Benoni: <sfm> Here's the position after 53...hxg5:


click for larger view

First, this position is probably won for Black given normal play. For that reason, I would say White can't make a "??" move, which in my mind implies a changing of the game's result for the worse. I might give <54.Nf3> a "?", or maybe even "?!" because there's a little trap involved.

<54...Kg6> definitely should not receive "??". Not only does it keep the position a win, it probably makes the win a bit simpler. If Black executes his combination immediately with 54...Rb3+ 55.Ke2 Rxf3 56.Kxf3 Nd3 57.Rxc2 Ne1+ 58.Kg4 Nxc2 59.Kxg5, then White has two connected passed pawns. It probably wouldn't save the game, but it would introduce an unnecessary element of complexity and randomness which Black doesn't need to risk.

<54...Kg6> also induces <55.g4> in an attempt to keep the Black king out. That might be worth "?" since the win becomes easier, but no more. After all, it's probably a "nothing helps" situation in any case.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: RAPID. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Chess Duels by Seirawan
by rookbr
positional chess as foundation for tactics
from Chess strategy by obrit
B1 POLISH DEFENCE 2E4.
by BusterMc5
G23 in Chess Duels: My Games w/World Champs by Yasser Seirawan
from HighwAy 40-41 Goes Past Fredthebear's Park by fredthebear
Game 23
from Chess Duels (Seirawan) by Qindarka
G23 in Chess Duels: My Games w/World Champs by Yasser Seirawan
from 1990s Blatant Lies, Scandals & Coverups of 1990s by fredthebear
G23 in Chess Duels: My Games w/World Champs by Yasser Seirawan
from St. George, Polish Dogs & Hedgehogs Follow FTB by FrankTheTank
positional chess as foundation for tactics
from Chess strategy by isfsam
Game 2
from Winning with the Polish Defense (1. d4 b5!) by greed and death
positional chess as foundation for tactics
from Chess strategy by Del ToRo
+1 -2 =2 vs. Seirawan (USA, 1990) - unordered
from Match Spassky! by amadeus
positional chess as foundation for tactics
from Chess strategy by Jaredfchess
Chess Duels by Seirawan
by hms123
+1 -2 =2 vs. Seirawan (USA, 1990) - unordered
from Match Spassky! by docjan

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC