Just played over number 3.
Stayed and read some of the comments.
Waitzkin was 10 or 11 when the game was played, Frumkin is an
American life Master graded over 2200 at the time of the game.
This was Waitzkin's first win over a master, He saw the Queen sac
then went and got his dad to to see him playing the combination.
(cannot vouch if that bit is true ot not).
There will be quite few playiers on here who have never beaten a Master OTB.
I have.
The First Time
Believe me when you realise the win is in your hands you panic like a rat.
One part of me was hoping he would pull a trick out of the bag and
convince me it was all an illusion.
When I then saw the winning combination ( a basic two move trick)
I looked and looked and looked.
Eventually, I picked up the Bishop and removed it from the board
then moved my Queen to square it was on. Just like a school kid does.
He resigned.
Others will tell you the first Master an important hurdle.
The Second Time
A piece of cake. Rook sac, Queen check and mate.
This wee lad went off and got his father....now that is cool.
If Morphy or Capablanca or Fischer had played this game at that age
then we would be sick of seeing it.
You must consider the occassion and the finish does have a touch of class.
Cheers Cheat. I'll have to look at a few others now.
Here is the Waitzkin game.
I think you all are missing my point. Waitzkin wouldn't even make my top 20 list of who I think are the GREATEST chess players. But I am responding to my favorite chess players, players whom I admire for whatever reasons.
Regarding game #3 Even at 11 he defeated Frumkin who was rated somethinglike 2200 at the time..MASTER status. To regard this game as ANYTHING other than BRILLIANT, is to show complete disrespect, disregard, disgraceful, dispicable, dishonest, disreputable and a whole bunch of other dis- words type of behavior.
Please people, think before you speak. More often than not, you expose yourselves for the rank amateurs that you are. You're in the hole pretty deep, STOP DIGGIN'.
Originally posted by greenpawn34-Updated-
Topalov 1
Capablanca 3
Tal 4
Alekhine 2
Waitzkin 1
Annand 1
Fischer 4
Kasparov 6
Tarrasch 1
Karpov 5
Kramnik 1
Bronstein 1
In my personal "fan" top 5. I would certainly add GM Friso Nijboer. I really like his style of play. But he does not belong in this list.
Originally posted by chesskid001hmmm, #186 was G Kacheishvili vs Waitzkin which ended in a draw when looked the last time. I even double checked it was #186. but now it's #180? I guess there's some randomness in the chessgames game list.
No, actually 186 is a win for Waitzkin, and I believe it was one of his annotated games in chessmaster
now #186 is M Zlotnikov vs Waitzkin, is that the right game?
this one:
Originally posted by greenpawn34I can't find 2200+ ratings for him neither on fide nor uscf, and nowhere is there a mention of a title of any kind. he's just a lifetime member of uscf as far as I can see. he was 2100+ uscf in 1991 though, so 2200 uscf rating in 1987 seems possible. but as I understand, that's really not that strong on uscf scale? only around 2000-2100 fide, which would make him a good club player. in other words, an amateur.
Just played over number 3.
Stayed and read some of the comments.
Waitzkin was 10 or 11 when the game was played, Frumkin is an
American life Master graded over 2200 at the time of the game.
[/pgn]
be that as it may, there's really no excuse for getting mated like that, unless he was extremely low on time. and I mean bullet low. any 1500 here would've killed him in that position.
"any 1500 here would've killed him in that position."
Give the lad some credit.
Perhaps some of the 1500 players on here would not have
got to that position in the first place.
Especially not aged 10.
My other details I took from comments made in the forum after
the game so I cannot vouch for the grades.
OK it's not the game of the century but consider the age and occassion.
Originally posted by greenpawn34well you're right about getting into that position of course.
"any 1500 here would've killed him in that position."
Give the lad some credit.
Perhaps some of the 1500 players on here would not have
got to that position in the first place.
Especially not aged 10.
My other details I took from comments made in the forum after
the game so I cannot vouch for the grades.
OK it's not the game of the century but consider the age and occassion.
still, I can't see how being young makes it any different. chess is chess, and that particular example of chess wasn't anything spectacular. I've played better games, and I bet waitzkin had been training (with a famous coach no less) for much longer than I have.
and now that I think about it, him having been a young kid and me 30+ is actually an advantage for him.
not saying that I was anything special, because I'm not. but neither was that game. it was a nice one, but it was just another game. no game that doesn't surpass any of our amateur games here by a large margin can possibly be relevant to the topic, right? I can't believe we're even talking about legendary chess masters and that in the same thread.
Originally posted by wormwoodYes, that was the game. If you watch his lecture on chessmaster about it, I found it pretty instructive
hmmm, #186 was G Kacheishvili vs Waitzkin which ended in a draw when looked the last time. I even double checked it was #186. but now it's #180? I guess there's some randomness in the chessgames game list.
now #186 is M Zlotnikov vs Waitzkin, is that the right game?
this one:
[pgn]
[Event "Open"]
[Site "New York"]
[Date "1998.??.??"]
[Round "?" ...[text shortened]... 4 44. Rf1 Ng5 45. Rh1 h5 46. h4 Ne4 47. Rf1 Qg4 48. Re1 Nxf2 0-1[/pgn]
Originally posted by greenpawn34The first time I beat a master was, in a most likely drawn position, he dropped a Bishop! The previous time, I had draw him in a winning endgame (Rook Knight and 3 Pawn vs Rook Bishop and one pawn) because the idea of even drawing a master had me star struck that when he offered the draw I immediately accepted without wondering why he was offering the draw or looking at the position 🙂
Just played over number 3.
Stayed and read some of the comments.
Waitzkin was 10 or 11 when the game was played, Frumkin is an
American life Master graded over 2200 at the time of the game.
This was Waitzkin's first win over a master, He saw the Queen sac
then went and got his dad to to see him playing the combination.
(cannot vouch if that ...[text shortened]... 26. Qxg7+ Kxg7 27. Bf6+ Kg6 28. Rg3+ Kh6 29. Bg7+ Kh5 30. Rg5+ Kh4 31. Nf3[/pgn]
Originally posted by wormwoodI admit seeing Waitzkin's name was a surprise and thought it
well you're right about getting into that position of course.
still, I can't see how being young makes it any different. chess is chess, and that particular example of chess wasn't anything spectacular. I've played better games, and I bet waitzkin had been training (with a famous coach no less) for much longer than I have.
and now that I think about ...[text shortened]... 't believe we're even talking about legendary chess masters and that in the same thread.
was another Cheat wind-up.
Seems like the lad had a future in the game - pity.
Always had a soft spot for Queen sacs and he obviously saw it
before saccing the Rook. Still quite a feat for a youngster.
I suppose at that age you are quite fearless.
Originally posted by chesskid001An IM I know (better not say his name).
The first time I beat a master was, in a most likely drawn position, he dropped a Bishop! The previous time, I had draw him in a winning endgame (Rook Knight and 3 Pawn vs Rook Bishop and one pawn) because the idea of even drawing a master had me star struck that when he offered the draw I immediately accepted without wondering why he was offering the draw or looking at the position 🙂
I asked him how he rarely loses to a lower graded player even
when he is having a bad day.
"Simple, I can see I'm lost before they can, I offer a draw and
they shake my hand off."
So the next time one of these guys offers you a draw.....😉