17 Jan 05
2 edits
which is the higher standard :
kasparov v kramnik and other top gms playing o.t.b. at their usual timelimits.
or
the best correspondence chess players (at pre computer times, say 20 years ago)
or
are there games of an even higher standard?
did one of the best gms try correspondence against a similar opponent?
of course this also brings the additional question: what is the highest standard of any chess anywhere ever? (computers included) and can we see some games please!
17 Jan 05
2 edits
Originally posted by LordOfTheChessboard[/b]sorry i am not very satisfied with your response ... they may have been "strong players" ... but these games were timed at quite fast time limits .... and played with little time between them ... surely they are of a relatively low standard in an absolute sense.
[b]I think the 2 stronges players to ever play each other where capablance and alekhine
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.[WORD TOO LONG]/b]
perhaps they were some of the first to really obsess on an opening line ... considered over hours and days and weeks and months and years ... but i am looking for extremely high quality middle game play please.
(they are also computer free of course)
17 Jan 05
Originally posted by flexmoreActualy its a mistake to think that correspondence chess games are of a higher quality then otb. Its actualy to other way around.
sorry i am not very satisfied with your response ... they may have been "strong players" ... but these games were timed at quite fast time limits .... and played with little time between them ... surely they are of a relatively low standard in an absolute sense.
perhaps they were some of the first to really obsess on an opening line ... considered ...[text shortened]... g for extremely high quality middle game play please.
(they are also computer free of course)[/b]
Middlegame play does not get any better then this
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1011478
of course black could have played better but white played perfect.
If you want a game that is played perfectly by both sides then it will probably be a very borring game since it will be an extremly drawish game.
17 Jan 05
Originally posted by LordOfTheChessboardtruly beautiful and fascinating ... i recommend every player have a very close look ... perhaps never play another game in their life and just look at this game ...
Actualy its a mistake to think that correspondence chess games are of a higher quality then otb. Its actualy to other way around.
Middlegame play does not get any better then this
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1011478
of course black could have played better but white played perfect.
If you want a game that is played pe ...[text shortened]... th sides then it will probably be a very borring game since it will be an extremly drawish game.
... but surely if you gave the same players 2 days, instead of 2 minutes, thinking time, then the game would have been even higher standard at every step!
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
17 Jan 05
Originally posted by LordOfTheChessboardI've seen better games than that. Kasparov and Topalov both played badly in the opening and early middlegame. After Kasparov launched his attack, there were a long sequence of forced moves, so the combination wasn't as difficult as it looks.
Actualy its a mistake to think that correspondence chess games are of a higher quality then otb. Its actualy to other way around.
Middlegame play does not get any better then this
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1011478
of course black could have played better but white played perfect.
If you want a game that is played pe ...[text shortened]... th sides then it will probably be a very borring game since it will be an extremly drawish game.
I don't think a perfectly played game has to be boring. For instance, there are have been amazing tactical battles that have ended in perpetual check.
17 Jan 05
Originally posted by David TebbCould you post some of those games here 😀 That would be awesome!
I've seen better games than that. Kasparov and Topalov both played badly in the opening and early middlegame. After Kasparov launched his attack, there were a long sequence of forced moves, so the combination wasn't as difficult as it looks.
I don't think a perfectly played game has to be boring. For instance, there are have been amazing tactical battles that have ended in perpetual check.
No I a agree a perfectly played game does not have to be borring but most of them probably are.
17 Jan 05
Originally posted by LordOfTheChessboardGarry Kasparov - Veselin Topalov
Could you post some of those games here 😀 That would be awesome!
No I a agree a perfectly played game does not have to be borring but most of them probably are.
1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 6. f3 b5 7. Nge2 Nbd7 8. Bh6 Bxh6 9. Qxh6 Bb7 10. a3 e5 11. O-O-O Qe7 12. Kb1 a6 13. Nc1 O-O-O 14. Nb3 exd4 15. Rxd4 c5 16. Rdd1 Nb6 17. g3 Kb8 18. Na5 Ba8 19. Bh3 d5 20. Qf4+ Ka7 21. Rhe1 d4 22. Nd5 Nbxd5 23. exd5 Qd6 24. Rxd4 cxd4 25. Re7+ Kb6 26. Qxd4+ Kxa5 27. b4+ Ka4 28. Qc3 Qxd5 29. Ra7 Bb7 30. Rxb7 Qc4 31. Qxf6 Kxa3 32. Qxa6+ Kxb4 33. c3+ Kxc3 34. Qa1+ Kd2 35. Qb2+ Kd1 36. Bf1 Rd2 37. Rd7 Rxd7 38. Bxc4 bxc4 39. Qxh8 Rd3 40. Qa8 c3 41. Qa4+ Ke1 42. f4 f5
17 Jan 05
Originally posted by lazycubanhere's another nice miniature:
Errors in chess seem to come in degrees, from the blunder to the forgivable temptation. I would not rule out a miniature as a best game, as in de Legal's only surviving game, in which the queen sac was well-disguised.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1251892
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1274802
18 Jan 05
Originally posted by Grayeyesofsorrowlol thats the same game I posted / linked 😀
Garry Kasparov - Veselin Topalov
1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Be3 Bg7 5. Qd2 c6 6. f3 b5 7. Nge2 Nbd7 8. Bh6 Bxh6 9. Qxh6 Bb7 10. a3 e5 11. O-O-O Qe7 12. Kb1 a6 13. Nc1 O-O-O 14. Nb3 exd4 15. Rxd4 c5 16. Rdd1 Nb6 17. g3 Kb8 18. Na5 Ba8 19. Bh3 d5 20. Qf4+ Ka7 21. Rhe1 d4 22. Nd5 Nbxd5 23. exd5 Qd6 24. Rxd4 cxd4 25. Re7+ Kb6 26. Qxd4+ Kxa5 ...[text shortened]... 2+ Kd1 36. Bf1 Rd2 37. Rd7 Rxd7 38. Bxc4 bxc4 39. Qxh8 Rd3 40. Qa8 c3 41. Qa4+ Ke1 42. f4 f5
18 Jan 05
1 edit
Originally posted by David Tebbwhere are the better games?
I've seen better games than that. Kasparov and Topalov both played badly in the opening and early middlegame. After Kasparov launched his attack, there were a long sequence of forced moves, so the combination wasn't as difficult as it ...[text shortened]... amazing tactical battles that have ended in perpetual check.
how can we reliably find them?
what style produces very high standard results?
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
18 Jan 05
Originally posted by flexmoreIf I come across any really good quality games, I'll post them. Probably the best places to look are in 'best games' collections, annotated games in publications like New In Chess, and the games which get the most votes in Informator. I'm sure I've seen better games by Kasparov.
where are the better games?
how can we reliably find them?
what style produces very high standard results?
Surely there are great games played in all sorts of styles, and a positional player like Karpov will have produced as many masterpieces as Tal, the tactician.
18 Jan 05
Originally posted by flexmoreSure but its not like the world champion of cc play games of a higher quality then kasparov.
... but surely if you gave the same players 2 days, instead of 2 minutes, thinking time, then the game would have been even higher standard at every step!
You would probably get the best games if you took the worlds 2 strongest players kasparov and Annand or kramnik and have them play a cc game together.
18 Jan 05
Originally posted by David TebbThe thing that bothers me a bit about Kasparov is he tends to make unecessary sacrefices in won games just to show off, usually in games were his first sacrefice was enough to win, even mate, but no, he takes the hard route, another sacrefice, instead of the simple non sacreficial mate. This kinda "move" is perfectly legal, but seems a tad unsporting. I know he did it a lot in his matches against his rival Karpov. This kinda playing is enough to make chess teachers rip out their hair, because then their kids tend to immulate Gary's playing style of unecessary sacrefices, yet in their case, of course, the result is quite different after doing this.
If I come across any really good quality games, I'll post them. Probably the best places to look are in 'best games' collections, annotated games in publications like New In Chess, and the games which get the most votes in Informator. I'm sure I've seen better games by Kasparov.
Surely there are great games played in all sorts of styles, and a positional player like Karpov will have produced as many masterpieces as Tal, the tactician.