|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Apr-14-07
 | | keypusher: Taimanov wrote a book about the match, <Ya byl zhertvoy Fishera>, which was published in St. Petersburg in 1993. I have never seen it, but many of its analyses are reprinted in <OMGP IV> and in <Russians versus Fischer>. |
|
| Apr-15-07 | | Hesam7: It looks that Taimanov's analysis is faulty. Now beside the one I posted before if we go deeper in his line: 20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Qf3 Bb7 23.Rxf6 Nxf6 24.Nf7+ Kh7 25.Bd3+ Kg8 26.Qxb7 Qd4+ 27.Rf2 Rxa2 (instead of 27...Ng4 suggested by Taimanov) 
click for larger viewHere it seems White has nothing better than a prepetual: 28.Nxe5 Ra1 29.Bf1 Ne4 30.Qc8 Kh7 31.Qf5 Kg8. All in all it seems that best and sufficient defense to 20.Qh3 is 20...Rf6! not 20...Nf6? |
|
Apr-16-07
 | | Honza Cervenka: <Hesam7> <After: 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 f4 22.Qh4 Qe8 23.Rxc7 Nd5 24.Bh5!> Nice find. 24.Bh5 did not cross my mind. |
|
Apr-17-07
 | | Pawn and Two: <Hesam7> After 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3, Fritz 9 with an evaluation of (-.13) (17 ply), found the following line: 21...Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Kh1 Rc5 24.Bxe5 Kg8. Fritz's evaluation was now (.00) (14 ply) with either 25.Bxf6 Bxf6, or 25.Bxf6 Rxf6. What is your program's evaluation of this line? |
|
| Apr-17-07 | | Hesam7: <Pawn and Two> Your suggestion (21...Qd7) looks pretty good for Black. After: 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Kh1 [23.Rfd1? Rd5 24.Rxd5 Qxd5 25.Rxe5 Qd6 26.Qh4 Ng4 27.Bxg4 fxg4 28.Rd5 Ba6 (28...Qxd5?? 29.Qxh6+ Kg8 30.Qh7#) 29.Nf3 Qf4  ; 23.Bxe5?? Rxe5 24.Rxe5 Qd4+ 25.Qe3 Qxe3+ 26.Rxe3 hxg5 ; 23.Rxe5?? Rxe5 24.Bxe5 Qd2! ] 23...Rd5 24.Bxe5 Qd8 25.Bf3 Rxe5 26.Rxe5 Ne4! 27.Bxe4 [27.Ne6? Qd3! 28.g3 Bxe6 29.Rxe6 Ng5] 27...fxe4 28.Rxf8+ Qxf8 29.Nf7+ Kh7 30.Qe3 Qxf7 31.Qxe4+ Kg8 32.Re8+ Bf8: 
click for larger viewAnd Black certainly stands better.
An improvement might be: 23.Bxa5 Qd4+ 24.Kh1 bxa5 25.Qxf5. What is Kasparov's (or Taimannov's) take on 21...Qd7 in OMGP IV ?? To bad Fischer himself did not do any analysis on this game. |
|
| Apr-19-07 | | Hesam7: <Pawn and Two> a way to break 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 might be: 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Rxf5. |
|
Apr-19-07
| | Pawn and Two: <Hesam7> In the line 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Kh1 Rd5 24.Bxe5 Qd8 25.Bf3, you have provided analysis showing that Black has the advantage. Fritz 9 also shows that after 25.Bf3, Black has some advantage (-1.05) (17 ply), and gives the following continuation: 17...Rxe5 26.Rxe5 Ne4 27.Bxe4 fxe4 28.Rxf8+ Qxf8 29.Nf7+ Kh7. This position could lead to an interesting endgame where White would have 4 pawns versus Black's bishop and 1 pawn. Better at move 25, with about an equal position, would be 25.a4 c5 26.b3 f4 27.Bxf6 Rxf6 28.Rxf6 Bxh3 29.Nf7+ Kh7 30.Nxd8 Bxf6 31.gxh3 Rxd8. Based on our review, I think both 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Kh1 Rc5 and 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Kh1 Rd5, lead to equality. In your suggested line of 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Bxa5 Qd4+ 24.Kh1 bxa5 25.Qxf5, Fritz indicates Black has a small advantage and offers the following line: 25...hxg5 26.Qxe5 Qxe5 27.Rxe5 Re8 28.Rxe8+ Nxe8. Also, Black seems to have a small advantage after 25...Qxb2. Your latest suggestion of 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Rxf5, also appears to lead to a small advantage for Black. Fritz indicates Black has a small advantage and provides the following continuation: 23...Rxa2 24.Bxe5 Ra1+ 25.Kf2 Qxe6 26.Nxe6 Bxe6 27.g4 Bxf5 28.gxf5 Ra5. Kasparov did not make any mention of 21...Qd7 in OMGP IV, nor was 21...Qd7 mentioned in the book, "Russians versus Fischer", which included analysis by Taimanov and others. |
|
| Apr-20-07 | | Hesam7: <<Pawn and Two>: Your latest suggestion of 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Re6 Ra5 23.Rxf5, also appears to lead to a small advantage for Black. Fritz indicates Black has a small advantage and provides the following continuation: 23...Rxa2 24.Bxe5 Ra1+ 25.Kf2 Qxe6 26.Nxe6 Bxe6 27.g4 Bxf5 28.gxf5 Ra5.> Impressive. Your analysis looks sound.
Another try for White: 20. Qh3 Nf6 21. Bc3 Qd7 22. Bf3 Qe7 23. a3 Ng4 24. Bxg4 Qxg5 25. Be2: 
click for larger view White does not seem to have much but his pieces are well coordinated. Anyway 21... Qd7 looks like a very strong defensive move and certainly it is an improvement over 21... f4, it is surprising that so many strong players missed it. |
|
Apr-24-07
| | Pawn and Two: <Hesam7> After 20.Qh3 Nf6 21.Bc3 Qd7 22.Bf3 Qe7 23.a3 Ng4 24.Bxg4 Qxg5 25.Be2, I agree that Black is ok. Fritz 9 finds the position after 25.Be2, to be slightly in Black's favor, (-.57) (17 ply), 25...Ra7 26.Rd1 Kh7 27.Bd3 e4 28.Bxg7 Qxg7 29.Bc4 Rf6 30.Bd5 Ra5. |
|
| Jun-22-07 | | Petrosianic: This game was the turning point of the match. Had Taimanov found the win, the match would likely have been tied after 3 games. Then, when this game was adjourned in a losing position, the Russians offered a package deal. Resign this game in exchange for agreeing to a draw in the still adjourned Game 2. Though he had no advantage in Game 2, Fischer turned the deal down, since he was obviously going to win this game no matter what. Upset by the recent turn of events, Taimanov found a way to blow Game 2 (which was no small feat), and the rout was on. |
|
| Feb-25-08 | | notyetagm: Black to play: 30 ... ?
click for larger viewHere White has just played the -amazing- blunder 30 ♖e6-e8?, making a <LOOSE> piece (White e8-rook) -and- <LINING UP> his White e8-rook diagonally with his White a4-queen. So the White e8-rook suffers both from a <LACK OF PROTECTION> (one attacker, one defender) as well as being a <MISPLACED PIECE> (lined up with White a4-queen). Fischer (Black) struck hard with 30 ... ♗e4-c6!.
Position after 30 ... ♗e4-c6!
click for larger viewI would consider 30 ... ♗e4-c6! to be <INTERFERENCE>, since it <BLOCKS> the <LINE OF LIFE-GIVING FORCE> from the White a4-queen to the <LOOSE> White e8-rook while also threatening the White a4-queen herself. But you can consider this a <BISHOP FORK> as well if you like. |
|
| Feb-29-08 | | extremepleasure2: I doubt that 11...b6 is the best response to 11.Qb3. Why not 11...Kh8 instead? If 12 Ng5 then simply c6 and black is OK. 11...b6 made the things more complicated for black. He had to struggle against many pins in the game. What is the point of 11.Qb3? |
|
| Nov-07-08 | | veerar: <extremepleasure2: I doubt that 11...b6 is the best response to 11.Qb3. Why not 11...Kh8 instead? If 12 Ng5 then simply c6 and black is OK. 11...b6 made the things more complicated for black. He had to struggle against many pins in the game. What is the point of 11.Qb3?>
The first one,was,recommended by Tahl! |
|
| Jun-06-09 | | nimh: Overnight analysis
1: Mark Taimanov - Robert James Fischer, ct(1/4) Wankuwer 1971
click for larger viewAnalysis by Rybka 3 Human 32-bit:
= (-0.25) Depth: 15 00:03:57 12321kN
20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Rxf6 Bxh3 23.Nf7+ Kh7[] 24.Nxd8 Bxf6[] 25.Nc6 Be6
= (-0.23) Depth: 16 00:07:05 22788kN
20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Rxf6[] Bxh3 23.Nf7+ Kh7[] 24.Nxd8 Bxf6[] 25.Nc6
 (-0.34) Depth: 17 00:19:38 67223kN
20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Rxf6 Bxh3 23.Nf7+ Kh7[] 24.Nxd8 Bxf6[] 25.Nc6 Be6
(-0.34) Depth: 18 00:39:57 141mN
20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Rxf6[] Bxh3 23.Nf7+ Kh7[] 24.Nxd8 Bxf6[] 25.Nc6
(-0.29) Depth: 19 01:21:25 296mN
20.Qh3
= (-0.09 !) Depth: 20 02:30:27 523mN
20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Qh5 Bb7 23.Re6[] Qd7 24.Rxf6 Nxf6 25.Nf7+ Kh7
= (0.00) Depth: 20 04:25:01 911mN
20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Qh5 Bb7 23.Re6[] Qd7 24.Rxf6 Nxf6 25.Nf7+ Kh7
= (0.00) Depth: 21 05:45:16 1207mN
20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Qh5 Bb7 23.Re6[] Qd7 24.Rxf6 Nxf6 25.Nf7+ Kh7
= (0.00) Depth: 22 08:47:49 1829mN |
|
| Mar-22-10 | | birthtimes: 9. Bd2 had only been played 3 times previous to this match, with White winning all 3 times, one in 1965, and two in 1968. |
|
Nov-24-10
 | | ketchuplover: 19.Rxc7 looks interesting imo. |
|
| Aug-17-11 | | DrMAL: The latter of two KID games by Fischer during his shutout over Taimanov in their quarter final candidates match. Both employ the "Korchnoi Attack" also used in the blitz game Korchnoi vs Fischer, 1970 where Fischer also won. 9.Bd2 was unusual, used in both games. Here, instead of 11.exf5 as before white first played 11.Qb3 (15.Qb3 in earlier game). 15.Ne6 was maybe stronger than 15.fxe5 also good for some slight advantage. But 16.Nf3 was clearly better than 16.c5 giving black a pawn for insufficient compensation. 21.Rxh6+ would have been a good exchange sac (best move), where black's best would be to give it back (e.g., 22...Qe7) for slight advantage. After a few slight inaccuracies by white, 28...Bf8?! was a mistake because of what Fischer played, and 30.Re8?! compounded it, 30...Bc6! won the Q for R+B, resulting in Q+P for R+N. |
|
| Aug-17-11 | | DrMAL: <nimh: Overnight analysis> Yes only a short while is needed to realize that a repetition is the best white can do. After 20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 white either moves the queen or plays 22.Rxf6 Bxh3 23.Nf7+ Kh7 24.Nxd8 Bxf6 25.Nc6 Be6 All queen moves are worse than this, except 22.Qh5 Bb7 23.Re6 these moves are compulsory. But now to avoid a repetition (via 23...Qd7 or 23...b5) for a "dead draw" as Kasparov put it, 23...Qf8 and the best white can do is 24.Rf2 Rxe6 25.Nxe6 Qe7 and a bunch of exchanges occur either by 26.Nxg7 or 26.Bxd5 (same either way, they transpose) in order for white to have any possible edge: 26.Nxg7 (26.Bxd5 Bxd5 27.Nxg7 Kxg7) 26...Kxd7 27.Bxd5 Bxd5 28.Bc3 Qg5 29.Bxe5 Kh7
click for larger viewFrom here white has a meaningless "edge" where the best is to delay queen swap via 30.Qe2 f3 now white is compelled to trade queens or black will have minuscule edge 31.Qd3+ Qf6 32.Qxf6+ Kxg6 33.gxf3 white has an extra pawn but it is useless because of the opposite color bishops. Note that black did not have to do this anyway, either of black's two choices above on move 23 obtain a repetition, but losing the pawn gives a computer evaluation in white's favor that is meaningless anyway, it IS a dead draw. |
|
| Aug-17-11 | | whiteshark: <Wankuwer> makes my day + none too soon |
|
| Dec-19-14 | | maseras: 20.Qh3 Rf6 21.Bc4 f4 22.Qh5 Bb7 23.Re6 Qf8 24.Rf2 b5 25.Bb3 Kg8 26.Bb4 Qxb4 27.Rxf6 hg 28.Qf7+ Kh8 29.Bxd5 Bxd5 30.Qxd5 Rxa2 31.Qd8+ Kh7 32.Rc6!
∞ |
|
| Jan-08-17 | | edmundo51: My opinion: 20. Qh3 Rf6 21. Bc4! f4! 22. Qf3! Bb7 23. B:d5 hg5 24. R:f6 Q:d5 25. Q:d5 B:d5 26. Rf5 R:a2 27. Bc3 and white  |
|
| Jan-08-17 | | edmundo51: 21....f4? is mistake. Better 21...Qd7 22. R:f6 N:f6 23. Nf7+ Kh7 24. Ng5++ and = |
|
| Mar-17-19 | | Ulhumbrus: Suppose that we assume that White tries for too much if he tries to attack both the queen side and the king side by Qb3 and Ng5. In that case suppose that White concentrates on the queen side and tries to attack only the queen side. The move 11 Qb3 obstructs the b pawn which could be used to support the advance c5. This suggests 11 b4. |
|
| Jul-20-20 | | Ulhumbrus: Taimanov's quoted remarks suggest that he played 20 Nf3 not because he believed it to be the best but because he could not calculate 20 Qh3 to a win or find a win after 20 Qh3 and then lost confidence in himself. This suggests that Taimanov made a psychological error. Perhaps Taimanov tried to calculate a position that was impossible to calculate. Perhaps Taimanov needed sometimes to play the move that he felt was the best and calculate more afterwards. |
|
| Jan-27-21 | | jerseybob: <Hesam7: (analysis omitted)..All in all it seems that best and sufficient defense to 20.Qh3 is 20...Rf6! not 20...Nf6?> In the famous Fischer photo that appears on the cover of Soltis' Bobby Fischer Rediscovered, Bobby is shown at the board after the hypothetical 20..Rf6 has been played, staring at the camera(and the skeptics) as if to say "your move". I think it's safe to say he thought he could hold the game. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 40...Qg7+