|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 336 OF 963 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Mar-31-08
 | | Domdaniel: Is Fischer's 60 Memorable Games really that good? I've never owned a copy, though I've glanced at it occasionally and have probably played through most of the games at one time or another. But when I was younger *everybody* had a copy. I wanted to be different - the recurring motif/ familiar failing - so I got Nimzo's books instead. I know the quality of Bobby's play. I just find it hard to believe he'd have much of interest to say, apart from games, variations and perhaps accidental insights into Bobbyness. Can anyone persuade me otherwise? |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Red October: well with Fischer for example you might get the famous "which shows the inferiority of White's first move" (1.d4) type comments some times, and also "I may be forced to admit the Winawer is sound but I doubt it! It is anti-positional and weakens the K side" (I believe this is from his game with Tal perhaps) which frightened me as a young girl coz I liked both 1.d4 and the French Winawer lol but entertaining |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Red October: <This will be very unpopular with Fischer fans, but I've never quite understood the hype surrounding this book. Yes, Fischer was a great player, but this book is extremely far from being the best chess book ever. If it were at all possible to present this book to a chessplayer who had no knowledge of Fishcer's identity, I doubt that they would be that impressed with it. There has been so much hero worship of this guy, that one review on a web site claimed that there were no analytical mistakes in this book! > a review from Amazon .. so yeah maybe its not that great... does it have mistakes in the analysis ? I am not strong enough to know unless someone points it out.... but in Fischer's choice of variations you do get an idea of how he thinks, direct, clear, rational, probably more of a logician than Botvinnik perhaps... |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | achieve: WOW! I must admit to feeling like the kid in the candystore-- first taking time to gobble up the finest chocolates, to then move in for a closer look at the various flavours... <Eyal> Your account of the two Giants' (thinking) processes is fabulous -- Botwinnik refusing deep calculation + risks (of course, one must be extremely talented and trained to even assume being capable of covering ALL the (objective) bases against <Tal>)... <Dom> How the heck have you found the energy after this excruciating, tiresome weekend? <Deffi> <chime in> You are one of the brightest around here at CG if you put your mind to it and are confident -- like Jess said-- a role model (for me too) That said I have to take some time to catch up (DOH) - and attend to the issues brought up... I saw f4 in the DIAGRAM line because I used my old strategy to look for any possible out/relieve of tension for the Black LSB and the weakness of Black squares with a Damen-tausch, obviously I was able to deploy that approach because I was not psychologically involved in that game/line and was fresh and analytic... |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Red October: <20.Bxd6 Nd3> I thought 21.Rcd1 might be the way to go for White but maybe not it requires careful analysis, but this position is quite rich, I would definitely consider 12.Nf5 OTB |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Red October: thanks <achieve>
as Prince sez, a Model needs to be a Role Model...
Go ahead Chelsea! |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: <Deffi> I agree that 17.Nd5 is best, but I'm not clear why the rook goes to c1. And in your line, after 17.Nd5 Be6 18.Rac1 Nxb2 19.Be7, black doesn't have to play ...Be5. One option is 19...Nd3 hitting the rook, though that probably doesn't get anywhere. How about 19...Rfe8 when 20.Nc7 is bad after 20...Rxe7 21.Nxa8 and the knight gets trapped on a8. In fact ...Nd3 *can* be inserted in the sequence as well. White should be better all right, but I think attempts to win material don't quite work. Plus, in real life, the psychology would now favour Black, having found the ...f4! line. While white has gone from a promising kingside attack to a possible slight edge in a queenless middlegame ... |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | achieve: HEH
Chelsea?
Ahh...
hehe
Well I go with the Prince line! |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: <Niels> -- <<Dom> How the heck have you found the energy after this excruciating, tiresome weekend?> Different kind of energy. |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | achieve: Save it for the girl I used to say -- hmm.. I like your approach here... |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: I'll stick with Elvis (Costello, of course).
"I don't want to go to Chelsea
Even though I've seen the movie" |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Red October: <How about 19...Rfe8 when 20.Nc7 is bad after 20...Rxe7 21.Nxa8 and the knight gets trapped on a8. In fact ...Nd3 *can* be inserted in the sequence as well.> 20.Bxd6 Nd3 21.Rcd1 there seems more than meets the eye here, I seem to like White the more I play this :) |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: <Red> Heh, Deffi ... you've almost got me engaged in a game of chess with you, despite my earlier protests. Deviousness, thy name is Woman. Doesn't it say that in the Bible or somewhere of that ilk? What happens after 17.Nd5 if black omits ...Be6 and plays ...Nxb2 at once? White can play 18.Rb1, of course. Or 20.Be7 when 20...Be2!? seems to put all four rooks in some kind of danger. <Niels> You saw the whole idea with ...gxf5, ...f4, and ...Bg4 just looking at the FEN? I'm impressed beyond words. |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | achieve: Well, f4 *had* to be played in that position I thought... My quick chess insight is very limited, but given a few minutes I start humming --- of course there was one Diagram that was clear-- maybe a lucky shot? I even experimented with ...f6 Qh4 for a while but lacked the time to post... Anyhoo I dont find complex middlegame tactics usually. |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Red October: <What happens after 17.Nd5 if black omits ...Be6 and plays ...Nxb2 at once? White can play 18.Rb1, of course. Or 20.Be7 when 20...Be2!? seems to put all four rooks in some kind of danger.> my initial idea was 18.Nf6+ but that is complicated and needs careful scrutiny |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: <Niels> Once you actually reach the position after 12.Nf5 gxf5 13.Qxh5 then, I grant you, 13...f4 soon becomes clear as the only move. But many people would look at the threatening queen on h5, and assume that it would automatically give white a huge attack -- not seeing that ...f4 and ...Bg4 actually forces a queen exchange. So they would decline the knight 'offer' and play a different 12th move; as my opponent did. Even though - as I said earlier to Eyal - the knight is fantastically strong on f5, I think many players would avoid taking it. |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | achieve: PS. <Dom> If you have Nf5 fxg5 as a given, it starts more or less from there... |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Red October: <Deviousness, thy name is Woman. Doesn't it say that in the Bible or somewhere of that ilk?> dont blame us it was the snake... and The Apple.. oops that's me |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | achieve: <Dom> Of course -- I was sailing on your first few move suggestions when I looked at it... Then came in Eyal's post and I did not bother posting... I wanted to check first and wasn't sure at all!! That's why I was fooling around with ...f6 -- with advantage for White a bit... maybe... |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: Hey, folks ... if an early ...Nh5 ever becomes fashionable in the Fianchetto KID, we'll all be *way* ahead of the game. Just remember all this stuff ... |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | achieve: Course, I've got it locked and loaded by now, no kidding! ... |
|
| Mar-31-08 | | Eyal: <Red October: <What happens after 17.Nd5 if black omits ...Be6 and plays ...Nxb2 at once? White can play 18.Rb1, of course. Or 20.Be7 when 20...Be2!? seems to put all four rooks in some kind of danger.> my initial idea was 18.Nf6+ but that is complicated and needs careful scrutiny> For what it's worth, Fritz's recommendation as best play for both sides is indeed 17.Nd5 Nxb2 18.Nf6+ and now 18...Bxf6 19.Bxf6 Nd3, which is evaluated as near equality. Gaining back the pawn immediately, at any rate, doesn't seem to give White much after 20.Be7 Rfe8 21.Bxd6 Rad8 22.e5 Nxe5 23.Bxc5 b6. |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: Before we leave that KID mishmash, a recap and one more bizarre variation. It started with White playing 12.Nf5 (which I originally thought was simply strong, as did my opponent who declined to take it) to reach this position: 
click for larger viewThen we (Eyal, Niels, somebody called Fritz) discovered an amazing way for Black to take the knight and force a queen exchange: 12.Nf5 gxf5
13.Qxh5 f4!
14.Bxf4 Bg4!
15.Qg5 Qxg5
16.Bxg5 Nxc4
Despite apparent simplification, this turns out to be an incredibly complex position. Deffi provided some new ideas - white has 17.Nd5 followed with moves like Be7; but black has counterplay, eg ...Be2 and ...Nd3. This is where we are now:
click for larger viewAnd my new line (expect errors) is:
17.Nd5 Nxb2
18.Nf6+ Bxf6
19.Bxf6 Nd3
20.f3 Be6
21.Rfd1 Nb4 [...c4 is worse]
22.Rxd6 Bxa2
Fritz evaluates this as better for Black, but ...
23.Rxa2!? Nxa2
24.Rd5 h6 [to avoid mate]
25.Rh5 Kh7
26.Bh3
Which reaches this:
click for larger viewAmazingly, White seems to be winning. Apart from the kingside mate threats, there's also the idea of Rxc5 followed by trapping the loose knight on a2. Meanwhile, black may have to play ...Rg8 and ...Rg6, returning the exchange, to avoid mate. As far as I can see, White can cash in all this compensation before black can free his knight or get his extra pawns moving. BTW, 26...Kg6 is not possible. White has a forced mate:
27.e5! Kxh5 [nothing else is better]
28.Bf5 Rg8
29.g4+ Rxg4
30.fxg4#
Which would have made a satisfying game. Heh.
It's not the last word, of course, but much of the line is effectively forced ... a pseudo-sac on move 12, and a (winning?) attack, an exchange down, by move 26. I think. Any comments? |
|
Mar-31-08
 | | jessicafischerqueen: <Dom, Deffi, Eyal, and Niels> Heh Thanks to all of you!!
Usually when I wake up I check in to read the posts from my best friends (that is you people, God help you). Then I go to the execrable <Yahoo news> until I wake up. Imagine my pleasant surprise to see such an interesting and long discussion between all four of you, featuring more of <Dom's> game scores and ideas OTB. Very, very interesting and entertaining.
That <Dvorjak> certainly seems to hit the nail on the head-- <Eyal> has quoted him liberally as well on many, many Game pages. As well- <Dom>-- Tal's <My life and Games> is the book I read on the plane over here-- I keep going back to it as well. You'll see in my profile that I actually "tell" people to buy the book. It's so easy to use since there is a great <games collection> here that follows the major games covered in the book. It's my favorite chess book.
<Dom> heh I started talking about the <French> on the <Battle of the Brains II> page and all I got in replyu was the terse <I don't expect 1....e6>. Heh that's the whole point, though I just let it slide. NOBODY EXPECTS <2...e6>! I think many, many people placate themselves with the notion that "Oh well I don't have to worry about that because no one plays the French anymore." Coincidentally, in the last three weeks I've been investigating the French more than at any other time in my life and I have to say I'm gaining a real appreciation for it. It is very, very, subtle and mysterious.
Like the <Sasquatch>, only real. All of yours,
Mrs. Zatopithique |
|
Mar-31-08
| | Domdaniel: Hey, Jess. We worked some real collective chess magic here earlier. I thought I'd played a nice, if fairly obvious, move on move 12 of a King's Indian. My opponent quickly caved in. But Fritz didn't like it, and Eyal, Niels and Deffi helped explain why - then got onto proving I was still winning anyhow. My own last word is in the previous post, reaching a mate on move 30. It really is intriguing stuff, thanks to everyone. All this and Talspawn too ... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 336 OF 963 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
