...in the World Championship match, I'm going to throw my mouse through my monitor.
What ever happened to matches with more than one opening in them?
You'd think even cautious players could try a Caro-Kann with Black.
I guess it's asking too much for the old days with King's Indian's, Grunfelds, Sicilians, Benoni's, etc. - positions that were actually unbalanced enough where both players were at risk.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem ...in the World Championship match, I'm going to throw my mouse through my monitor.
What ever happened to matches with more than one opening in them?
You'd think even cautious players could try a Caro-Kann with Black.
I guess it's asking too much for the old days with King's Indian's, Grunfelds, Sicilians, Benoni's, etc. - positions that were actually unbalanced enough where both players were at risk.
World Championship Match Kasparov vs Anand, 1995 New York City.
First 8 games were draws.
Followed by 3 decisive games.
Maybe once the deadlock is broken they'll both have to go for it.
Game:
1.Sicilian, Scheveningen
2.Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation
3.Sicilian, Scheveningen
4.English
5 Sicilian, Scheveningen
6. Ruy Lopez, Open
7.Sicilian, Scheveningen
8. Scotch Game
All draws
I think there is now a realisation that at the top level there is no advantage with the white pieces. At amateur level though all openings are sound and quite playable and we should be glad that we don't have to play these type of things. Perhaps Fischer random really is the solution.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie I think there is now a realisation that at the top level there is no advantage with the white pieces. At amateur level though all openings are sound and quite playable and we should be glad that we don't have to play these type of things. Perhaps Fischer random really is the solution.
Still, there are traps and such in the middle game so the upper ranks like Magnus and so forth, the real game starts at what, 20 moves in or so. Still lots of play from then on which still keeps it interesting for everyone. Us duffers included.
Would be pretty epic for someone to play the orangutan opening or b4 at the top level of play and win on a regular basis, unfortunately I think it would only really be successful against 2200 and under.
On the other side if someone did venture forth with 1.b4 or 1.g4.
remembering of course that there is a lot of money at stake,
there are those who would say they are insulting the other player.
In amongst the praise and astonishment at Miles beating Karpov
with his 1...a6 there were grumbles that one should not play moves
like that against v a world champion, it shows no respect..
On the other side if someone did venture forth with 1.b4 or 1.g4.
remembering of course that there is a lot of money at stake,
there are those who would say they are insulting the other player.
In amongst the praise and astonishment at Miles beating Karpov
with his 1...a6 there were grumbles that one should not play moves
like that against v a world champion, it shows no respect..
I thought being world champ meant you had to be prepared for all 20 of whites possible opening moves 16 pawn and 4 knight. They don't separate the world championship into who is best e4 player or d4 player or the best e5 d5 defense.
Originally posted by Deputy Daddy I thought being world champ meant you had to be prepared for all 20 of whites possible opening moves 16 pawn and 4 knight. They don't separate the world championship into who is best e4 player or d4 player or the best e5 d5 defense.
The closer you get to the top of human chess players, the less the number of variations they will throw at an opponent because most of them have been proven to be weaker and more prone to errors. So they are not too prone to throw in a kings gambit or Scandinavian or Dutch. They already know how to decimate those kind of openings. I think Bobby Fischer did a KG against Spassky in 72 and maybe they did that sort of thing in the 19th century when it was who had the mostest attack moves, the hell with subtility but now with computer analysis and the upper ranks with stupendous memories they all know the 19th century stuff down pat and so they wouldn't use it except for a surprise to rattle the opponent trying to figure if they had worked up an improvement.
" I think Bobby Fischer did a KG against Spassky in 72"
I wish he did but no, it was Spassky who played the Kings Gambit v Fischer
at Mar Del Plata in 1960.
Do not over estimated the memory and knowledge of the current top players.
They prepare for individual opponents and the openings tend to stay within a certain group, .
Yet is it not too uncommon to see an excuse for a losing that the player forgot his preparation.
Theory has dulled all the wild openings, though at club level they will always
be played with a fair amount of success. At the top the players will have stored
the theoretical antidotes a long time ago. We would all like to see an Evans or a
Goring played and I often wonder why the so called weaker player does venture
down this path as White as a lot of the gambits have been ground down to lifeless positions.
Speaking of King('s) Gambit.
Spassky vs. Fischer KG game from 1960 was commented by Vladimir Vukovic in old issue of Chess Messenger.
Fischer played well and had advantage after the openign.
Moves 10. ...c5! and 12....Nc6 were specially praised by Vukovic-
26th ...Rf8 was decisive mistake.
If he played 26...b6 he could have had 17...Bf6 on 27. Re5.
Fischer was so hurt after the defeat that he wrote an article "3...d6 is refutation of King Gambit".
Dr. Petar Trifunovic took it for granted and in his Openings book there is"3...d6! Becker's Defense"
But Fischer knew he wasn't right. The article is the same as article from 1963 in which he analyzses his games from minor open tournament and where he states at his opponents were usually lost after 9 or 10 moves.
If I see ONE more Spanish...
19 Nov '16 18:17
Back to Top