28 Dec 09
Chess is not war. War is much uglier than chess. In war you do not play with equal armies. Each side is not limited to a single move.
As I've said, this thread is about the kind of strategy described by Tartakower. Any attempt to make it anything else is hog wash. I'm not saying that people who want to go off on such a tangent shouldn't be allowed to do so. I'm just saying for me, I'm not going there because I do not believe it is the topic. Nor do I believe it is an accurate description of the game.
28 Dec 09
Originally posted by EladarAll right. There's no real need to bring war into this. That's a different topic.
Chess is not war. War is much uglier than chess. In war you do not play with equal armies. Each side is not limited to a single move.
As I've said, this thread is about the kind of strategy described by Tartakower. Any attempt to make it anything else is hog wash. I'm not saying that people who want to go off on such a tangent shouldn't be allowed to ...[text shortened]... o not believe it is the topic. Nor do I believe it is an accurate description of the game.
29 Dec 09
4 edits
Originally posted by joesheppei think Ice cold mentioned that a piece on c4 was practically impervious to attack, but
Funny how no one mentioned that a knight sitting on c4 attacks two pawns at once. Also, another reminder that it is impervious to black's bishop, which is dark-squared.
was not as specific to state a knight. its a really brilliant game, especially the planning
aspect due to the positional features. (the ideas are just so much more concrete than
the silman 'imbalances', or Bangievs colour complexes',)
17.Qf1 , Karpov finds the plan! White intends to strengthen the pressure on the f7-point
via the a2-g8 diagonal and the semi-open f-file. For this purpose White transfers his
Queen to the better square c4.
20.Bxd7, In order to secure the point c4 for the Queen
24. Nb1 White's plan is to move his Knight to f3, drive Black's bishop away from the
h4-square, double Rooks on the f file, and compel the move f7-f6. After that in the
opponent's camp another weak square will appear- e6. Besides the game move
creates the opportunity of c2-c3 to push the black Knight to a passive position.
25. Kh2 Not allowing the Black's Bishop to move to g3
29. Nf3 f6 The first part of the plan is executed. Now White moves on to the next
stage. His task is to intrude with his Queen on the e6-square and, combining
the threat Nxe5 and the intrusion of the Rooks via the d-file, to proceed to a decisive
attack of the opponent's King. The first part of the plan is executed.
35. Rxd8 The logical finish of White's plans! There is no satisfactory defences
against the coming Be7, therefore Black resigned.
29 Dec 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThanks RC. I was going to ask if someone could post the game.
i think Ice cold mentioned that a piece on c4 was practically impervious to attack, but
was not as specific to state a knight. its a really brilliant game, especially the planning
aspect due to the positional features. (the ideas are just so much more concrete than
the silman 'imbalances', or Bangievs colour complexes',)
[pgn]1. e4 c5 2. N ...[text shortened]... ! There is no satisfactory defences
against the coming Be7, therefore Black resigned.
I had no idea my quote from Tartakower was going to spark any controvesy. It did make for an interesting debate and exchange of ideas.
29 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Ice Coldthanks Ice man, i immensely enjoyed this Karpov, Spassky game. When ego become involved its counter productive, either on a personal level or elsewhere as is self evident from this thread. We are here to learn, and once this point actually percolates to the depths of ones mind, things are seen in perspective. Our own losses, our wins, the comments of others etc etc.
Thanks RC. I was going to ask if someone could post the game.
I had no idea my quote from Tartakower was going to spark any controvesy. It did make for an interesting debate and exchange of ideas.