|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-23-04 | | aragorn69: Fascinating analysis by Kasparov on a drawing line that leads to a picturesque stalemate on http://www.chesscafe.com/misha/rsf2... Seven <First I missed clear win with 41.Ke4! instead of 41.Nf7? After that Black missed his chance: 43...Bd5! This leads to a true chess study; I couldn’t believe my eyes when I found it at the board.Q: Did you indeed find it at the board? Not in the post-mortem analysis? GK: Post-mortem?!? I told Dreev about 43...Bd5 immediately after the game was over. Look: 44.Nd7+ Kd6 45.Nf6 Kc5 46.Ne4+ (or 46.Bg4 c3! 47.bxc3 bxc3 48.Nxd5 cxd5 49.Kd3 d4 50.Bd1 Kd5 51.Bc2 Kc5 52.Bb3 Kb4 53.Bd1 Kc5=) 46...Bxe4 47.Kxe4 b3 48.Ke3 Kb4 49.Kd2 c3+! 50.bxc3+ Kxa4 51.Kc1 Ka3 52.Kb1 a4 53.Bd3 c5 54.Bc4 b2 55.Bf7 (55.Kc2 b1Q+!) 55...c4 56.Bxc4 stalemate. Incredible!> Worth watching !! It seems that the GK is very competent at <Kasparov bashing> himself... :-))) |
|
| Nov-23-04 | | arielbekarov: <alexandrovm> It is great of you to apologize, but it was really not needed !! I was just wondering how I could be so misinterpreted. So, I was thinking : "It's really difficult to communicate without seeing each other's faces. The expression in our eyes, on our mouth and holding of our body make it so much easier." The naked words have an enormous impact, and therefore can it be a more correct discussion, because we are not influenced of beautiful eyes, a nice sounding and convincing voice, and name it all what can distract us. The words are there alone, but it makes it also more difficult. I don't have a computer of my own, so I am reading this now 1.45 p.m. (French local time). I was checking "doubtless" several times in order not to use a word that means the opposite to my intention.
They were just closing, where I am writing, but while walking to my room, I was thinking more and more that this must be the reason.
"Doubtless" can easily be misread as "doubtful". The eyes register one thing, but the brain transforms it to something else.
Never mind, if it is one's mother tongue or not. The same procedure may happen, but less in one's native language.
I have several funny stories about this, but don't worry, not now. This is also interesting to observe while playing chess. One has a plan and sees a real good move according to it. The plan itself makes you partly blind, but as we all know, everything possible has to be taking into consideration. And we are checking and checking before the move. And here we go !
But, something went wrong ??
The move was not so good after all. The idea is still good, but the move destroid it all. That's why, I think that sometimes obvious "blunders" can tell that the player is a talented and imaginative one, but has to improve the checking of all possible dangers. Chess is a good school ! So, once again, thank you for your answers and greatness to admit a misunderstanding and I will certainly take your words seriously about how to present what I think is right or not.
We have different opinions, Thank G-D,
and I am not supposed to sound like the one who possesses the overall correct answer how it should be.
That would be awful !
Anyhow the chance/risk is less than microscopic.
All the best !
Ariel |
|
| Nov-23-04 | | arthurv: on move 52 why the bishop did not eat the knight? Maybe this way the game could end remise? Am I right? |
|
| Nov-23-04 | | Lawrence: <arthurv>, <Junior 8> shows that 52.....Bxd3+ would have given White an advantage of +4.02 whereas 52.....Ba4 gives White an adv. of "only" 2.12--at the moment. (7 min. search) |
|
| Nov-23-04 | | azedex: Thanks for your posting Aragorn69
If kasparov saw that OTB, well oh my god, love or hate him (and what chess player could possibly hate him!?)He is scarily amazing!
Also ariel nice posts. (je te remercie.) |
|
| Nov-23-04 | | azedex: Btw. How do I get those red highlights in my posts. Sorry this is all new to me. |
|
Nov-23-04
 | | Willem Wallekers: <red highlights>
Hold Shift, press "," before and "." after the test you want to highlight. |
|
| Nov-23-04 | | arthurv: So what we have seen here, is not merely a Kasparov plays a great game,
but takes full advantage out of the little mistake from the opponent,as it happened more often this tournement.
Sort of Karpov style in the old days. |
|
| Nov-23-04 | | alexandrovm: Ariel, I read your text carefully this time and came to the conclusion that you have an artistic soul, and I admire that in a person. Art in music, in chess, in politics, in philosophy, etc. Thanks for your words. If you have time sometime, drop me a line at "alexandrovm1@yahoo.com".
best wishes
Alexandro |
|
| Nov-24-04 | | drukenknight: what's going on here? You cant leave him with the N. He will eat you alive. Looks like a bad endgame. |
|
| Nov-25-04 | | BadTemper: No wonder GK is undefeated. Terrible endgame play by Dreev. |
|
| Dec-08-04 | | zorro: In his interview on chessbase.com Kasparov says Dreev came up with a powerful novelty but failed to follow his idea, connected to q-side castling (according to Garry), whereupon White would have been on the struggling side. Since, as it seems, 15...Nd7 is the novelty, what is the follow up Kasparov is referring to, 18...0-0-0 instead of 18...Nxe5? |
|
| Dec-16-04 | | LIFE Master AJ: <zorro>
Good info.
<everyone>
Great game ... when it is finished, this will be my "Game Of The Month," for December, 2004. |
|
| Dec-17-04 | | zorro: <LMAJ> In fact, that was a question more than an info. |
|
| Dec-17-04 | | karlzen: <zorro>, if I remember correctly, 18...0-0-0 was Kasparov's preference. I don't know the merit of the move though. |
|
| Dec-20-04 | | LIFE Master AJ: My analysis indicates that 18...0-0-0; is probably bettter than the game ... but after Qe1!, White retains a fairly significant edge. ("+/") |
|
| Mar-01-05 | | ionnn: Today in the Karpov tournament Dreev played the same line in his game vs Bacrot. He improved his play by 18 ... 0-0-0!?. Bacrot replied by 19 Qe2, but after 19 ... c5! Dreev had a promising position. Bacrot managed to escape and the game was draw. |
|
| May-26-05 | | woodenbishop: Only Kasparov could pull this win off (especially against 6 pawns to his own 3). |
|
| May-26-05 | | johnshadows: the rumor is that Dreev was drunk. |
|
| May-26-05 | | woodenbishop: <johnshadows> No man who is intoxicated can come out in the end game with 6 pawns against the likes of Kasparov having only 3. |
|
| Jul-22-05 | | alexandrovm: Kasparov indeed likes complications. This game is a prove of it. And Dreev novelty surely is very interesting |
|
| Jul-21-06 | | Hesam7: Is the ending after 27. Bxd1:
click for larger viewreally lost for Black? Or Kasparov simply outplayed Dreev in a difficult ending? Also it is interesting that Kasparov did not go for the following line: 31. Bxe6+ Kxe6 32. Nc5+ Ke5 33. Nxb7 Kd5 34. Kd2
click for larger view |
|
| Sep-13-07 | | watchthehit: wow amazing how he won that even though he was in a worse position and less pieces amazin |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | myschkin: A key match of the day was, without a doubt, Kasparov-Dreev. Dreev led the tournament together with Grischuk, but playing Black against Kasparov did not promise an easy life. And indeed, Garry restored his once-habitual confidence, quickly executing opening moves and quickly obtaining a threatening position. Dreev reacted with principled rook sacrifice, Kasparov had to return piece to avoid mate, and the players reached highly complicated position. White had extra exchange, but Black’s pieces were pointed at White King’s residence, and everything could explode not in his favor. It seems Dreev rushed with his 18...Nxe5, allowing Kasparov to simplify the position and transpose into an endgame evaluated as “probably a winning” by Jakovenko. Despite Black having formal material compensation for a piece, White had good winning chances. The only factor favored Black was that White had to be very careful not to allow exchanging all his remaining pawns (both of them, to be precise).
Kasparov slipped with his time control move, allowing Dreev a miraculous save, which Alexey didn’t see. To find it one had to wholeheartedly believe in Black’s defensive resources... or to be Kasparov! Garry said he saw that problem-like continuation leading to stalemate, and he showed it to his opponent after the game.
(http://www.chessbase.com/eventartic...) |
|
Aug-31-23
 | | plang: Kasparov certainly wouldn't have been surprised by the opening as the Moscow Variation is a specialty of Dreevs. 12 0-0 is the main line; here Kasparov chose the rare sideline 12 f3. Earlier in the year at the World Championship tournament at Tripoli Kobalia had played 12..Nxe5?! against Beliavsky and the game had ended in a draw; Dreev and his second Filipenko had prepared 13..hxg with following exchange sacrifice 15..Nd7!for that tournament but didn't get to use it until this game. It was voted the second best opening innivation in Informant 92. Unfortunately, Dreev forgot the main line from his analysis when he played 18..Nxe5? which led to an inferior endgame; with 18..0-0-0 19 Qe2..c5! Black would have had strong counterplay. 43..c3? was ultimately the losing move in this very tricky endgame; 43..Bd5 would have been less committal. Black resigned due to 59..Kc7 60 Kb3..Kb7 61 Ka4..Ka6 62 Nb3 (62 Nxc6?..b3 draws). |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
