Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:37:48 01/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 21, 1999 at 11:46:51, Jeroen Noomen wrote: > >>Perhaps I should point you to the title of this thread: "Brilliant win by >>Kasparov!!: What about 30. ... Rhe8!?" >> >>Where exactly do we start talking about Shirov, Topolov, etc? I simply pointed >>out that many of Kasparov's wins are the result of the human getting 'psyched' >>rather than by his playing a brilliant and irrefutable move. >> >>no fairness issue here at all. I believe if you look at my comments about >>prior GM games you will _always_ find that I have said that _every_ game I have >>ever gone over carefully has at least one blunder. So there was no intent to >>be 'unfair'. However, the 'brilliance' of Rxd4 is yet to be proved... > >Dear Robert, > >I have to disagree with you. The whole concept of Rxd4 - winning ir not - >will not be found by many players. Kasparov saw it and calculated it >very deeply. It also is very courageous playing this way and I think >Gary is the only one in the world at this moment capable of playing such >games. > >To me it was a delight to see this game live, because not many games >are played in this style. Kasparov deserves great credit for this. And if >you find at home that there is a hole in the combination: So what? >This is what chess is about! And didn't we all love Tal? That is the >point! It's not the fact that Rxd4 might not be winning that counts, >but the fact he played it and it became a fantastic game. > >Best regards, Jeroen No argument there. Kasparov is brave. He has sacrificed from the first game I saw him play way back when. The only discussion here was 'is Rxd4 really good or not?" For that question, I am not yet sure. Finding a stunning sac that loses is (to me) no better than simply hanging a queen and resigning...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.