"help bot" wrote in message
...
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!

It illustrates that you argued from a single instance. And your subsequent
writing is now supplemented by Taylor Kingston's dozen references, which
include KGs played immediately before and after the W Ch match with Fischer,
both drawn, and the last 5 outings of the KG, all drawn.

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.

And therefore your comments are random too. But you still make strong
statements about them, without knowing if they are typical or otherwise.

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.

I mentioned this anecdote since it returns the subject to chess [and indeed
to our recently rehersed discussion if 1700 players can analyse as well as
GMs grin] and it provokes the issue if black's 11th move is actually
playable. It is interesting that your computer evaluation seems to think so.

That's not to say it preferred ...c5,
but it simply considered White to be a pawn
down nonetheless.

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....)

BxN has to do with your willingness to invest in a King hunt.


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.

As above, perhaps some people can understand what's going on - Spassky
could! Which is why he didn't play the KG very much after he got good, since
it was too predictable and offered insufficient winning chances with white.

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.

Or perhaps that is your answer right there! Boris is a good guy, and
expanded his own repetoire far beyond the KG, and indeed, included The Rest
of Life too - otherwise he would have wound up as mad as Fischer. So I think
the real answer of his performance does not rest in chess.

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 hope you know to roll it with the checkered side outward? That stops the
curl and means the rooks in the corners don't skateboard on a and h files
all on their own. [Messages from the Masters, vol twa.]

- 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.

The KG has made a comeback - see the Johansson title I mentioned previously,
thanks in part to efforts by the Brits, Spielman and Nunn. Basically if
Basman can open with a steady diet of Grobs and Borgs and gain his IM-ship,
then certainly the KG is very playable at master level. Probably the Modern
Defence
1 e4 e5
2 f4 ef
3 Nf3 d5
[modern def, looks like a poorer var of the Scandinavian already - and is
very sharp and dangerous for both sides]
4 ed Nf6 [then, why not ...]

5 Bc4 !?

then as black do you like 5. Bd6 or Nd5

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.

As above - here is black playing to win, but by substantially increasing his
own losing chances, which, I think if you essay the White side of the KG is
what you are looking to provoke - a fight!

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.

Okay then

And I snipped the rest, since Fritz doesn't either.

Phil Innes


-- help bot