On Mar 26, 8:50 am, "Chess One" wrote:

**people who disagree should tell Boris Spassky their fascinating
opinions.
It certainly served him against 2500-2600 players, which is probably
no
inhibition to anyone reading in this newsgroup.

A crucial correction: Boris Spassky was
*not* limited in his success with the King's
Gambit to 2500-2600 players; in fact, his
most famous wins include one against
Bobby Fischer; in sum, GM Spassky
seems to have had no particular limit
whatever here.

I am sorry, but any singular instance does not comprise any 'whatever'
statement.

Who said it was a singular instance?

To take your question literarally, you did.


It is really hard for me to try and explain
simple logic to a simpleton, but here goes:

My providing one example in no way
indicates that *only* one such example
exists! In fact, I leave it to those lucky
fellows who own super-duper-chess-base
to determine what's what here, as I am
at a huge disadvantage, having only the
internet, where people upload games at
random.


For those who are not lost in a fog of
ignorance, several such wins can quite
easily be located in a matter on minutes.
For instance, in addition to beating BF,
GM Spassky also nailed GM Bronstein
and GM Karpov with his King's Gambit.

Once!


Well, how many times have *you* beaten
those guys on the White side of the KG?
Zero-- that's how many. Look, in half the
games GM Spassky didn't even get White,
and there were a lot of draws.


The game with GM Bronstein reminded
me of the one with GM Fischer,

Which was in 1960! [Mar del Plata] where Fischer seemed to err in a
Kieseritzky with 11. ... c5?


Okay, my computer was unconcerned by
this purported error, seeing Black as on top
all the way through until a single blunder at
the end. That's not to say it preferred ...c5,
but it simply considered White to be a pawn
down nonetheless.


in that
GM Spassky seemed to not be bothered
a bit by his "material shortage"; he just
played to win, which to his mind involved
direct attacks on the enemy King.

Yes - his other trademark was B x N on f6, and he made a living out of that
too.


Hmm. So, I could maybe become a great
player by simply switching to B-g5 and Bxf6! ?
(With my luck they would all reply to B-g5 with
....Ng8!! and go on to trap my Bishop....)


Spassky's trainers told him it wouldn't work at the top level.

This /could/ explain why the wins I
found were not from his peak years, but
from those both before and afterward.

But then, that was in a database of
"uploaded" games which is undoubtedly
far from comprehensive.

And it
doesn't, otherwise we would see a KG at 2700 level, and we do not.

GM Karpov *was* at that level when he
lost to GM Spassky.

I think it is rejected because, after all,
Black has good winning chances too, and
nobody can understand what the heck is
really going on -- except Rybka and Fritz.


The closest *win* I found was against
GM Karpov, in 1982.

Spassky -Xie Jun, Monaco 1994 [Kieseritzky]
Spassky-Seirawan, Monpellier 1985, 1-0


I was referring to wins by Spassky as
White, in the King's Gambit, which exceeded
your set limit of 2500-2600. In other words, I
wanted to find B. Spassky-- G. Kasparov, 1-0,
in 16 moves from GM Kasparov's 2800 era; all I
found were two really big names, sans ratings,
and they were GM Karpov and GM Bronstein--
both world champion types. Offhand, I just
happen to know that in 1982, GM Karpov was
the world champ and he had a rating well
*above* your stated limit. True, BS probably
did not mind if AK knew a way to draw-- that's
a draw against the reigning world champ, for
him!


A better idea would be for someone with a
comprehensive games database to figure out
Boris Spassky's performance-rating as White
in the King's Gambit, let's say, decade by
decade since he ultimately morphed into a
mere 2500+ player.


I did not check to
see the list of GM Spassky's losses as
White in the King's Gambit. Let's see...
World Champion Karpov was rated what
back then? 2700ish? Oh-- did I mention
that he was the world champion? LOL!

Let you not get overexcited about half a dozen games in a carear


I generally carry only one: a chess game
(or set), in a zip-up nylon bag which also
protects my roll-up vinyl chess board. I
am not into backgammon or checkers--
you can have 'em. ;D


- since
indeed if Spassky HAD felt that it was a viable opening at 2600-2700 level,
he surely would have utilised it much more.


Another interesting idea would be to see
how this opening has done overall-- all
results by all strong players. My guess is
that Black gets a lot of wins due to things
like neither player understanding what's
going on tactically (like Fritz does), and of
course, the extra gambit pawn.

When you consider that other openings
are "safer", there is a strong incentive to
chuck those openings in which Black can
score not only draws, but lots of wins as
well. In addition, the onus of justifying the
missing pawn is on White; this bothers
some people more than others.


This returns to the first point I made, and what you cite are 'surprise'
exceptions to the rule. Your list actually supports what I am saying, since
if there are half a dozen wins with the KG at tops levels, is that still as
much as 1% of Spassky's repetoire?


I have no idea. As I say, someone with a
comprehensive-style database could find
the answer. I usually resort to something
like www.chessgames.com, where people
upload their favorite games, seemingly at
random. For instance, while there might
be 100 games by Emory Tate, you will not
find *even one* by such talents as Larry
Parr, help bot, Phil Innes, nomorechess,
Rob Mitchell, or the inimitable VeniVidiVici.


But this is to escape help-not's own point, which was to challenge the d6
pawn and d4 being the only way.

My computer examined the famous
game GM Spassky vs. GM Fischer
from 1960, and rejected our man's
commentary from MSMG, saying:

"Black was just losing the whole time!
A pawn down, some interesting
complications, but nothing *I* couldn't
handle easily. Black tossed it away
by a single tactical blunder, and White
mopped up neatly." -- Fritz

You should make it clearer in the first place if it is help-bot or Fritz who
is offering opinions.

I think it is common knowledge that Fritz
is incapable of posting here without help.
By the same token, help bot is incapable
of comprehending what the heck is going
on in a King's Gambit without help from
Fritz. You're just a chronic complainer,
you are!


-- help bot