- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
Originally posted by hamworldIt looks to me suspiciously like it ought to mean "Peter's son", i.e. "Petersen" or "Peters". Those are common names in many Christian countries; I would not at all be surprised if Armenia were one of them.
So Petrosian just happens to be a common name?
Richard
Originally posted by Shallow BlueYou already knew that, didn't you? Heh. I did not know that about Petrosian's name.
It looks to me suspiciously like it ought to mean "Peter's son", i.e. "Petersen" or "Peters". Those are common names in many Christian countries; I would not at all be surprised if Armenia were one of them.
Richard
Side note: I just played the same opening again and today. I have no idea what's up with people and the Nimzowitsch defence. Trying to use the defence of Petrosian's hero vs the offence of one whose idol is Petrosian is not working for them so far haha.
Sometimes I love being a Petrosian wannabe.
Originally posted by hamworldFunny, before I knew about proper pronunciation of Russian and Armenian names I called him Petro See' Ann🙂
You already knew that, didn't you? Heh. I did not know that about Petrosian's name.
Side note: I just played the same opening again and today. I have no idea what's up with people and the Nimzowitsch defence. Trying to use the defence of Petrosian's hero vs the offence of one whose idol is Petrosian is not working for them so far haha.
Sometimes I love being a Petrosian wannabe.
- Joined
- 10 Dec 11
- Moves
- 143494
1 edit
Petrosian vs Fischer in blitz from 1970 in Yugoslavia
...
No one can emulate Petrosian. His playing style looks like drunk Rubinstein.
(Smyslov however looks like Rubinstein on prozac.)
His style is dirty - I don´t mean negative, but that he was practically oriented, with poor knowledge of openings. His strenght lied in positional feeling and general theory of pawn-structure and weak/strong fields. When he was talking about other players, he was always talking about "their sense of weak/strong fields"... Petrosian was unique exempel amongst world champions: no predecessors no followers - except you! You are making history on RHP forum on Friday the 13th -
....
Originally posted by vanderveldeThat is a scary coincidence. Maybe I will make history. 😛 Are there any books/DVDs I can get where Petrosian talks about other players?
Petrosian vs Fischer in blitz from 1970 in Yugoslavia
[pgn][Event "Herceg Novi blitz"]
[Site "Herceg Novi"]
[Date "1970.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Petrosian, Tigran V"]
[Black "Fischer, Robert James"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo ""]
[BlackElo ""]
[ECO "E70"]
1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 g6 3.d4 d6 4.e4 Bg7 5.Bd3 c5 6.d5 O-O 7.Nge2 e6 8.Bg5 h6 9.Bd2 Nbd7
...[text shortened]... xcept you! You are making history on RHP forum on Friday the 13th -
....
- Joined
- 10 Dec 11
- Moves
- 143494
3 edits
Originally posted by hamworldI'll have to search about books. I remember an article from Yugoslavian ches magazine "Chess Messenger" from 1972, in which Petrosian wrote report on tournament in San Antonio. He commented his win against Henrique Mecking and had described his unfair behavior during the game. He was so mad that he wrote: "Mecking will never ever become world champion because he simply does not understand the concept of weak fields... He gave me white fields in Palma de Mallorca in 1969 and now he gave me black fields in San Antonio..."
That is a scary coincidence. Maybe I will make history. 😛 Are there any books/DVDs I can get where Petrosian talks about other players?
And in play-off match with Poluagevsky for the USSR title 1970, his coach Suetin in his comments frequently mentioned strong fields in 2 games Petrosian won (they counted on Polugaevsky's weakness in positional play).
Mecking vs Petrosian 0-1, San Antonio 1972
Originally posted by vanderveldeHmm. This game and the one vs Mecking where Petrosian played as White vs the Modern Defence reminds me of something that has been bothering me subconsciously for a while: I just don't understand the weak square concept. Never have. The positional sacrifice concept is also hard for me to understand. I've maybe used that idea in *one* chess game of mine.
I'll have to search about books. I remember an article from Yugoslavian ches magazine "Chess Messenger" from 1972, in which Petrosian wrote report on tournament in San Antonio. He commented his win against Henrique Mecking and had described his unfair behavior during the game. He was so mad that he wrote: "Mecking will never ever became world champion be ...[text shortened]... g4 82.Ba4 h2+ 83.Kg2 Nxf2 84.Kxh2 Nd3 85.Kg2 Ke3
86.Kg3 Nc1 0-1[/pgn]
I only pretty much understand grabbing space, and relying on my positions to carry me through the tactics. Should I hire a grandmaster to pound the fundamental positional concepts in my brain?
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
Originally posted by hamworldNot really. All I know is that "-ian" is an extremely common surname suffix in Armenian; that such common suffixes often denote "son of"; that "Petro-" looks like "Peter" (duh...); and that Armenia is a Christian country. The rest was just conjecture; but, I think, reasonable conjecture.
You already knew that, didn't you? Heh. I did not know that about Petrosian's name.
Richard
Originally posted by Shallow BlueHmm. What do you think "Vartanovich" means?
Not really. All I know is that "-ian" is an extremely common surname suffix in Armenian; that such common suffixes often denote "son of"; that "Petro-" looks like "Peter" (duh...); and that Armenia is a Christian country. The rest was just conjecture; but, I think, reasonable conjecture.
Richard
Hi Hamworld.
I'm thinking this copying Petrsoian thing is at the moment a bit beyond you.
(to be perfectly frank it is beyond everyone).
I'd put it on hold for now.
You say: "I just don't understand the weak square concept." and are
even having trouble pronouncing his name. 😉
Do your heroes in stages, start of with Morphy, when you have him tucked
under you hat move onto to Tarrasch, Alekhine.....do it one step at a time
or just stick at Morphy. By then you will be a good chess player and will know
yourself where you want go and who you want to follow.
Originally posted by greenpawn34It is my understanding Paul Morphy was more than a good chess player. The European Champion was afraid to play him. I think he could have been as good as any player today with the competition.
Hi Hamworld.
I'm thinking this copying Petrsoian thing is at the moment a bit beyond you.
(to be perfectly frank it is beyond everyone).
I'd put it on hold for now.
You say: "I just don't understand the weak square concept." and are
even having trouble pronouncing his name. 😉
Do your heroes in stages, start of with Morphy, when you have him ...[text shortened]... a good chess player and will know
yourself where you want go and who you want to follow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Morphy
Originally posted by greenpawn34Exactly what games of Morphy would I study? His wins? His draws? His losses? All of them?
Hi Hamworld.
I'm thinking this copying Petrsoian thing is at the moment a bit beyond you.
(to be perfectly frank it is beyond everyone).
I'd put it on hold for now.
You say: "I just don't understand the weak square concept." and are
even having trouble pronouncing his name. 😉
Do your heroes in stages, start of with Morphy, when you have him ...[text shortened]... a good chess player and will know
yourself where you want go and who you want to follow.