|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-15-05 | | PinkPanther: I really have to believe that had Adams not played h5, the purpose of which I still can't see, that this game would be a draw, because otherwise I see no way for white to break through. |
|
| Jul-15-05 | | Kangaroo: I am curious if <30 ... Bd3> was better than <30 ... Be5>. The two response for White I have found were <31. Rb7> and <31. Nd6> - none of them leading to the clear advantage for White, unlike the continuation in the game [<30 ... Be5? 31. Nf6+> and the light-squared bishop was removed]. |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | Medusa: 26 Qxa4 was an extremely stupid move in my opinion allowing the fork of the bishop to eat the rook and finallly the rook vs the bishop and one more pawn loose. I call this a blunder,a big one. |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | TruthHurts: <I really have to believe that had Adams not played h5, the purpose of which I still can't see, that this game would be a draw, because otherwise I see no way for white to break through.> You're not seing well then. By the way Bacrot could have won earlier in the game with : 32.Rook b8!! and a win.
But it's true Adams played the endgame very badly though he never had a clear draw, Bacrot always being at least better. Bacrot just outplayed Adams in this game giving him no chance in the middle game in a sharp amazing style. His 31st first mooves are really master mooves specially 25.a4!?, 28.Bc6! and 30.h4!! wich is a master positional play, very difficult to find out in such a sharp position where player think more to put some moove while h4 is very calm and clever.Akobian said on chess fm that it was a master moove and positional while the position was dynamic. Then Bacrot played a bit less accuratly in the endgame, still playing quite well, while Adams played badly. I like this game very much where Bacrot showed really great chess, keeping the pressure on each moove before the endgame and finishing well the job. Against Topalov he missed a win earlier a tried hard in the endgame to only have a draw this time he diserves this victory entirely. |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | Medusa: Really liked this game however, and im start seeing bacrot like a 2700s |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | TruthHurts: Medusa anyway white were better a this point before this blunder... |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | TruthHurts: By the way Medusa tell us about his:
< Medusa: I think all players above 2700, atleast deserve a photo on this site!
i agree, but that is for players who have shown that they are really 2700 players, not for Bacrot, that hasnt earned his points in strong tournaments.Well, some 2700 had been in the tournaments he participates, but most of his tournaments are with 2600- 2650 players, so its very easy for him to win, the same way as Ivanchuk won Capablanca memorial, with inferior players. However im anxious to see how we will play at Corus, to prove if he really its a player of 2700, or if he has confirmed my idea that he is overrated, and has earn points in easy and weak torunaments.
>
Lol, the way he outplaed Adams here, Adams should be a patzer then ;). |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | TruthHurts: <Really liked this game however, and im start seeing bacrot like a 2700s> Everything has a beginning ;) |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | Medusa: I said that but it was a stupid comment of myself, i forget often that ratings dont mean much of how good its a player, i mean 2600 and 2700 all can play good chess, and being a 2763 like Leko doesnt mean he cant get demolished by a 2500 Both Adams and Bacrot are good players, since i wrote that message is start seeing some of his games and i see him as a good player now, i talked that being an ignorant of Bacrot. |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | TruthHurts: Medusa if you want you can see my games collection where there is nice classical games of him :). |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | Medusa: thanks, i will take a look |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | pantlko: <Medusa> here's a joke for u: if a person is wrong and admit it.he is honest
if a person think that he may be wrong and admit it- he is wise man if a person is not wrong but admit...he is HUSBAND....... |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | Medusa: LOL!! i like it |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | pantlko: <Medusa> it seems u belongs to 1st category...... |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | MUG: Brave game by Bacrot, he was willing to face Adams' Queens-Indian, who had very recently beaten both Anand (Linares) and Leko with this opening. |
|
| Jul-16-05 | | Anastasia: <PinkPants> it's obvious why Mike played ..h5. Are you a beginner? |
|
| Jul-17-05 | | TruthHurts: <pinkpanther> And also ask you this question, saying this game should have been a draw because of a moove (wich is not even the case) while it should have been a clear win earlier isn't it ridiculous? I'm sure you can answer... |
|
| Jul-17-05 | | TruthHurts: LOl and also <could he have won that endgame against a strong computer?> Yes cause before h4 Bacrot played less accurantly than he was earlier so the good question is , if Bacrot and Adams had put a computer after moove 32(I know that now you know that if he had put at moove 31 he would have been winning) , was Bacrot winning?... This answer is defenitly yes, cause Bacrot could have played better before this h4 thing. And even after that the answer is not clear. By the way if they had a computer each game, hardly we would see many wins from the human even starting from an equal position wich was not the case here actually, ask adams about it lol(remember hydra ?)... Adams in the endgame played badly, Bacrot played well, and before the endgame Bacrot played magnificent and Adams played as he could being outplayed(chessbase words) that's all. And again even if there was not all the rest I said, saying that if we enter a computer(even if again it's not clear it would have a draw) Bacrot would not had win is stupid since humans hardly beat computers, specially adams lol .Saying Bacrot dindn't play well because a computer could draw is ridiculous(even if a computer was probably not able to draw agaonst an other computer specially starting after moove 32)... |
|
| Jul-17-05 | | TruthHurts: You'll have the end of my posts about it in Dortmund's discussion <pinkpanther>, there you can see my last words about it cause I have no time to loose with obvious things and poor arguments.
Even if you're not french I'm sure you can get it lol ;)... |
|
| Jul-17-05 | | TruthHurts: Just a precision <pinkpanther>: I played the endgame on my computer and it gives a clear fast win for white, h5 is played 5 moove later with a +2.00 before that for white: 45.c4 46.Rc8 c3 47.Rc7 h5(LOL) 48.g5 Bd4 49.Rc4 c2 50.Rxc2  2.5 and a clear win is coming...
Adams was lost already.
I have a game for you find where putting the computer will save Adams from loosing this game, maybe you should put it at moove one lol. See you when you will be a men boy, as I said this are my last words, would I need some more anyway... |
|
| Jul-17-05 | | Medusa: I consider this game one of the most beatifull 3 games ot now, with one round left, even tough im a patzer that doesnt know much about chess. |
|
| Jul-17-05 | | Karpova: this game shows that it dosn't need a a machine like hydra to completely demolish adams.
adams was quite promising a few years ago but now...
great play by bacrot! |
|
| Jul-17-05 | | mymt: <Kangaroo> Ilike your idea 30. ...Bd3 maybe if 31.Rb7 Rf8 or if 31.Nd6 Re1+
<Medusa> after that stupid move ...Qxa4 27.Reb1 Bxc4 28.Bc5 Black could have played 28. ...Be5 but maybe thought for the exchange he would get a passed c pawn & a R on e file.
<Anastasia> Im a beginner or near enough ...why did Mike play 45. ...h5? |
|
| Jul-18-05 | | PinkPanther: <TruthHurts>
I can't read your posts anymore. Every time I try, and see that you have made approximately 3829 typos in each post, I have a mild stroke. |
|
| Jul-20-05 | | Medusa: Karpova: this game shows that it dosn't need a a machine like hydra to completely demolish adams. adams was quite promising a few years ago but now... great play by bacrot!
I AGREE bacrot demolished adams, even tough our friend here PinkPanther its mad cause of that. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
