'I really can't say why I didn't make the move' - Fischer vs Petrosian Game 1 | Candidates 1971
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 жов 2019
- Grandmaster Daniel King examines a game between Fischer and Petrosian from the Candidates 1971. Support on Patreon: ► / powerplaychess
►Support via PayPal ($): www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
►Support via PayPal (€): www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
►Support via PayPal (£): www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
✔ SUBSCRIBE: bit.ly/powerplaysubscription
👕 MERCH:
teespring.com/stores/power-pl...
www.redbubble.com/people/Dani...
📺 BOBBY FISCHER: bit.ly/rjbobbyfischer
📺 BOBBY FISCHER BLITZ bit.ly/fischerblitz
📺 CARLSEN: bit.ly/wcmagnuscarlsen
📺 WOMEN CHESS: bit.ly/womenchess
📺 ALPHAZERO: bit.ly/alphazerostockfish
📺 CHESS CLASSICS bit.ly/chessclassics
📺 TOP 10 2018: bit.ly/TOP10GAMES2018
📺 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 2018: bit.ly/worldchess2018
📺 FABIANO CARUANA: bit.ly/fabcaruana
📺 SPASSKY bit.ly/borisspassky
📺 TAL bit.ly/mikhailtal
📺 KORCHNOI bit.ly/viktorkorchnoi
📺 CHESS CLASSICS bit.ly/chessclassics
📺 BRILLIANCY: bit.ly/brilliancychess
📺 TOP10 2017: bit.ly/top10chess2017
🎥 NEW: bit.ly/newchessvideos
💿 Power Play DVDs: bit.ly/chessbasedvds
►Facebook: bit.ly/danielkingfacebook
►Twitter: / danielkingchess
#powerplaychess #bobbyfischer - Спорт
If you like my videos do *subscribe* bit.ly/powerplaysubscription and do checkout the *supporting* *options* through Patreon: bit.ly/patreondanielking or through *PayPal* (links in the description)
The way you tell the anecdotes brings the game to life
This is such a gorgeous piece of analysis, both from the historical and pure chess-wise point of view. Thanks so much for these videos Daniel
Energetic analysis and commentary, as usual, brings life into this game. Many thanks GM King
Amazing Historical Job. This video is a masterpiece itself, as much as the game. Congrats, Daniel.
I really enjoyed all the anecdotal information. It makes the game so interesting to understand the context of the times in which it was played.
Ah, how did we miss you, Danny!! Fantastic analysis as always!!
Nice to have you back mr.King!
Stunning game. Fischer's journey really is the stuff of chess legend.
Thank you, more Fischer, life is great. Love your background stories.
Welcome back, GM King! Thank you for all your great work and especially for this Fischer series; the way you cover the historical context of these matches, and the way you analyse the games themselves, are extremely valuable to players like myself who want to study the classics to help us improve.
Thank you Dan, great analysis
It's such a pleasure to have you guide us through these games!
And I love your down-to-earth way of dealing with 16.-Rg2 .
And best of it all.. you will cover all the games of this amazing match!
Already looking forward to games five and eight.. :)
Such drama and emotions in the way you narrate the anecdotes. Almost brought back the power cut scenario again. The true gift of "Story Telling". Thank you, Danny!
Amazing chess history from almost 50 years ago .. Thanks Daniel King for the analysis and re-telling of history!
Wonderful analysis! The historical information you provide enriches the game very much. Thank you!
Iron Tigran: "I move for no man!"
After the match, "It's just a flesh wound!"
Thanks for the intriguing analysis. I tried to study these games back when they happened. I didn't understand most of it.
Thanks GM. The stories behind the games are as interesting as the moves.
Sweet. More story telling please.
I missed you :) Glad to see you back. Great work as ever.
Glad your back
Great Video Grandmaster! 😃👍
this is one of the most interesting gamesive ever scene. of all the Lc0, stockfish, magnus, karpov, fischer games...this i just very interestng and elegeant. I tend to value preparation highly, even thoughI love agression and attacking in chess like Tal and other greats.
Incredible, Re4!!!
Great analysis! Fischer was a chess genius its just a shame he was such a head case.
Excellent excellent comentry by superman
Thank you sir. It's nice to see you again. Sir did you recommend opening suggestion against d4 in power play chess.
The lone star with the US flag colors correctly defined Fischer's career. He represented the US but he was doing it alone, the analyses, the preparation, everything he did alone vs the Soviet chess empire.
So, if Rxg2 not promise any tangible advantage to black, except perhaps some initiative, it means that Chebanenko analysis does not contain a refutation of the variation played by Fischer in his game with Taimanov.
Thus, one should conclude two things: a) it is totally unclear why until the end of his life Petrosian regret to not have played Rxg2 instead of Bf5; b) the content of Chebanenko's envelope could be useful only as toilet paper for "the winner of match Petrosian-Korchnoi".
Winning 20 games in a row against GM opposition. These days they celebrate getting 20 draws.
This is why when negotiating the 75 match with Karpov, Fischer refused Karpovs suggestion that there was a break in the proposed 10 win match. Fischer was afraid the Russians would give Karpov lots of novelties.
Do you have any book recommendations for the controversies surrounding the World Chess Championship 1984?
I love chess and the chess stories.
I love your videos. But your donation links are in the way of the annotations for the game.
wow babi was on fire!
Does anyone know how opening variations get there names, where they found over the board during a match by their namesakes etc? Have there been any new variations named? Bit out of touch with these things. Cheers Daniel.
They usually get their names from the person who invented it or the place it was invented and sometimes if a lot of players from a certain place are playing it. Like the London system
@@KorbyWaters Was wondering if they were first played in a match or prematch analysis, guess its a bit of both. Its just occasionally Daniel might say a given move was a novelty in this position and was wondering if any of the modern players have had variations etc named after them. Thanks for the information.
others commentators come and go , some might even have better hair, but Danny is the best
Splutter...splutter...better hair??
What about the trip to Japan? I hope England-Argentina was not the only match you saw there (it was pretty boring).
I remember this game. When it was played the Fischer Boom hadn't happened yet, and the only place I could find the score of the game gave the moves with no other comments. After Black castled queen-side I kept looking at the end of the moves, wondering if they got it wrong and it was supposed to be white resigns, not black. To win this game, and win it in the first session, too, for twentieth in-a-row, I was just blown away. The only game to me that parallels it is the Capablanca-Marshall "Marshall Gambit" game. And it's the one thing that disappoints me about Kasparov's career--there's no games like this, where he takes on a strong TN and busts it OTB. Fischer did that multiple times in his career.
Fischer didn't actually bust anything over the board in this game. He got a complicated, slightly worse position and managed to outfox Petrosian in the endgame.
Also, do you really want to hold Kasparov's excellent preparation against him??
Fischer was nowhere near his level in that regard. Watch him getting completely destroyed when he dared to repeat his poisoned pawn variation against Spassky (game 11). Things like that hardly ever happened to Kasparov.
But anyway, I actually find comparing different eras rather pointless..
@@fundhund62 not exactly. Also Kasparov's opening lines were busted sometimes. It's enough to remember the defeats against Korchnoi (1st game of candidate match) in his pet variation against queen's indian (incidentally it is the Petrosian Variation) or the defeat against Karpov with Tarrasch Variation of QGD and Sicilian Scheweningen (1st match 1985) and Grunfeld (2nd match 1986).
Kasparv became unbeatable only after the advent of chess engines and database.
Fischer was strongest than Kasparov.
@@archaeopteryx7405 You have a strage definition of busted openings. In those games (he did not lose the 2nd game 1986 and was better throughout) he was outplayed, but it had little or nothing to do with openings.
@@fundhund62 my English is bad, I know it, but I'm sure that I never wrote that Kasparov lost the 2nd game of match with Karpov in 1986. I wrote that Grunfeld Defence was busted by Karpov in some games of that match.
If you are not sure about that read a book on that match.
another top analysis, bobby would love you covering some of the quarterfinals of the world championship FRC 960 that just ended. more brilliancy less studied dry lines. ridiculous time format, I believe fide is secretly trying to kill it, but that's all we have played here for years now, and frequently watching the few commentaries i can find, i will see a move by a grandmaster and immediately say, bad move, for my vision has been stretched. it's still the thrills of the romantic era here, which is what chess is supposed to be, no? as bobby said in reference to the immense amount of study of openings necessary to even be able to play even the first creative move, "I thought we played chess because we didn't want to work. "
Baturinski also wrote the Karpov book "Chess genius Karpov" and, oh my, is this a propaganda-laden work if there ever was one. Good game analysis, though 😊😈
easy for baterinsky to say, but let him play and see what happens...lol! and he is in no position to question the great petrosian. in addition…i have never heard of the world chess champion baterinsky.
"Russians v Fischer" - when Petrosian was Armenian!
Nice video but you talk too much :)
Fuck off
You're precisely wrong, he's talking too little
trolls gonna troll i guess