This post isn't meant to start any racist or sexist flame wars. This is
a chess related question to one of the curiosities ot competitive chess
playing today. As we all know, Judit Polgar has finally beaten Gary
Kasparov (albeit only rapid game match). But the real curiosity is why
she continues to lose against Kramnik.

I personally think Judit Polgar has some kind of mental block when it
comes to playing him. Or is it because Kramnik is that much a better
player than Judit Polgar? Your thoughts on this would be greatly
appreciated.

This post isn't meant to start any racist or sexist flame wars. This is
a chess related question to one of the curiosities ot competitive chess
playing today. As we all know, Judit Polgar has finally beaten Gary
Kasparov (albeit only rapid game match). But the real curiosity is why
she continues to lose against Kramnik.

I personally think Judit Polgar has some kind of mental block when it
comes to playing him. Or is it because Kramnik is that much a better
player than Judit Polgar? Your thoughts on this would be greatly
appreciated.

Chess goggles.

Their torrid secret love affair has rendered impartiality (for the more
romantic Judit) at the chess board impossible.

I mean, come on. You've seen Kramnik. Wouldn't you give him a tumble? And
then could you focus on your Caro-Kann afterwards?

Sheesh.



"LeModernCaveman" wrote in message
...
This post isn't meant to start any racist or sexist flame wars. This is
a chess related question to one of the curiosities ot competitive chess
playing today. As we all know, Judit Polgar has finally beaten Gary
Kasparov (albeit only rapid game match). But the real curiosity is why
she continues to lose against Kramnik.

I personally think Judit Polgar has some kind of mental block when it
comes to playing him. Or is it because Kramnik is that much a better
player than Judit Polgar? Your thoughts on this would be greatly
appreciated.

Chess goggles.

Alberich wrote in message ...
This post isn't meant to start any racist or sexist flame wars. This is
a chess related question to one of the curiosities ot competitive chess
playing today. As we all know, Judit Polgar has finally beaten Gary
Kasparov (albeit only rapid game match). But the real curiosity is why
she continues to lose against Kramnik.

I personally think Judit Polgar has some kind of mental block when it
comes to playing him. Or is it because Kramnik is that much a better
player than Judit Polgar? Your thoughts on this would be greatly
appreciated.

Great post! What is her record against Kramnik? I think his style is
causing her problems.

CC

In article ,
says...
Alberich wrote in message ...
This post isn't meant to start any racist or sexist flame wars. This is
a chess related question to one of the curiosities ot competitive chess
playing today. As we all know, Judit Polgar has finally beaten Gary
Kasparov (albeit only rapid game match). But the real curiosity is why
she continues to lose against Kramnik.

I personally think Judit Polgar has some kind of mental block when it
comes to playing him. Or is it because Kramnik is that much a better
player than Judit Polgar? Your thoughts on this would be greatly
appreciated.

Great post! What is her record against Kramnik? I think his style is
causing her problems.

CC

You're right. And before GM Susan Polgar "left" this board, I actually
asked her why her sister was having so much trouble beating either
Kramnik or Kasparov (granted, she beat HIM once, but still). GM Susan
Polgar refused to be drawn into that theoretical debate. Probably
because she didn't want to say anything that might come back to haunt
her little sister in upcoming matches. But I posted threads in other
chess news forum sites explaining why Judit Polgar should abandon
playing these well known opening theoretical lines. Mostly because
Kasparov and Kramnik are so booked to the gills on the different lines
that it would be nearly impossible for Judit to gain on them. I
suggested she try using the Smith Morra Gambit. When I point blank asked
GM Susan Polgar why Judit Polgar wasn't using this line...she blinked
and refused to answer my question. But it was incredible that she agreed
with a poster who answered in her place by saying Judit Polgar wouldn't
dare play lines considered "inferior". So far, I haven't come across
anybody who can prove to me the Smith Morra Gambit isn't playable
against the Sicilian Defence. Not one. I've also found it very curious
that Judit Polgar refuses to play the Vienna Game against either Kramnik
or Kasparov even though she could have transposed to those openings when
given the chance. (GM Judit Polgar is known for transposing to the
Vienna Game. Her statistics shows her playing this line a few times).Her
opening theoretical lines prove the famous remark that Polagaeevsky made
about her...that Judit Polgar would become a positional player. My
interpretation on his remark about Judit Polgar is this: Judit Polgar
has tamed her attacking style in the hopes that gaining positional
strengths would enhance her ability to catch her stronger foes. But this
is not the case at all.

Kramnik's style is ultra solid. He's almost like Capablanca in his
ability to effortlessly defeat strong opponents with simple clear moves.
Judit Polgar's problem is that she's following right into Kramnik's game
plan every time. For example, whenever Kramnik plays 1.c4, Judit
immediately goes for 1...Nf6, aiming for either the King's Indian or a
Queen's Indian. But these lines are exactly what Kramnik knows so well.
I can't believe Judit Polgar would want to face Kramnik in these lines
he knows so well. I mean, it would make better sense if she had
confronted him with 1...e5! aiming for a complex reversed Sicilian line
in the English Game. And besides, who's to say Kramnik would be booked
to the gills playing against the English?! And whenever Judit Polgar has
the White pieces, she always plays 1.e4. My suggestion to GM Judit
Polgar would be to get inspiration from Bobby Fischer's opening choice
in Game 6 of the 1972 World Championship match with Spassky. And what
did Bobby Fischer choose for that game? 1.c4! The bottom line is GM
Judit Polgar's opponents like Kramnik know her too well. It's not that
GM Judit Polgar isn't as good as Kramnik. Heck, I think she could be the
next World Champion. But she's not going to make it by using opening
lines that her opponents (Kramnik and Kasparov) know like the back of
their hands.

Alberich writes:
I suggested she try using the Smith Morra Gambit. When I point blank
asked GM Susan Polgar why Judit Polgar wasn't using this line...she
blinked and refused to answer my question. But it was incredible
that she agreed with a poster who answered in her place by saying
Judit Polgar wouldn't dare play lines considered "inferior". So far,
I haven't come across anybody who can prove to me the Smith Morra
Gambit isn't playable against the Sicilian Defence. Not one.

Maybe that's why she's a GM and you're not. How many GM games do you
see it in?

In article , Paul Rubin
says...
Alberich writes:
I suggested she try using the Smith Morra Gambit. When I point blank
asked GM Susan Polgar why Judit Polgar wasn't using this line...she
blinked and refused to answer my question. But it was incredible
that she agreed with a poster who answered in her place by saying
Judit Polgar wouldn't dare play lines considered "inferior". So far,
I haven't come across anybody who can prove to me the Smith Morra
Gambit isn't playable against the Sicilian Defence. Not one.

Maybe that's why she's a GM and you're not. How many GM games do you
see it in?

Maybe you can explain to me why the King's Gambit is no longer seen in
competitive play. Is it because it's not playable or because it's too
dangerous to try at GM levels these days. Dangerous in the sense it
could be fatal for EITHER side to go wrong. If it's because of the
later...then I say today's GMs are cowards. They're too timid to be bold
enough to try something "new". And by "new" I mean reviving old lines
and breathing new life in them.

And besides, you didn't answer why Judit Polgar feels it's not necessary
to transpose to the Vienna Game against either Kramnik or Kasparov. And
Judit Polgar HAS used the Vienna Game in the past. Why did she abandon
this? it's not entirely clear. Has she found a refutation to the opening
theory on this line? I doubt it. More likely she probably decided to
become more like the others using positional knowledge to catch them
unawares. Polugaevsky's curse is coming to the fore here. Has been in
force for a long time since Judit Polgar has matured in the chess world.
Notice Judit Polgar's strange decision to use the Petroff Defence during
that fantastic 8 game blitz match against Vishy Anand. A very dowdy
defence to use against Anand! And Judit Polgar has NEVER used this
defence before. So why in God's name did she use this?! Anand is an
expert facing the Petroff so Judit Polgar's decision to "surprise" him
in this was a very poor choice.

Alberich writes:
Maybe you can explain to me why the King's Gambit is no longer seen in
competitive play. Is it because it's not playable or because it's too
dangerous to try at GM levels these days. Dangerous in the sense it
could be fatal for EITHER side to go wrong. If it's because of the
later...then I say today's GMs are cowards.

Why would a GM play anything as White just because it's "playable"
rather than because s/he expects to come out better from it, either
objectively or by surprising the opponent? At the GM level, after
2 ef Black has already equalized. There's no reason for White to
invite that. White starts out with an advantage and aims to keep it.

Notice Judit Polgar's strange decision to use the Petroff Defence during
that fantastic 8 game blitz match against Vishy Anand. A very dowdy
defence to use against Anand! And Judit Polgar has NEVER used this
defence before.

I didn't see that match. I know she likes to play 3 Nxf7 in the
Petroff as White, relying on her tactical chops. However, Anand is
also very strong at that and maybe she didn't want to play to his
strengths.

Krammy has the biggest wang in organized chess. As Kurt Vonnegut said, you
never know who'll get one. No wonder she's nervous; I would be too...

This post is not meant to start any racist or sexist flame wars. But don't
let that hold you back...

I personally think Judit Polgar has some kind of mental block when it
comes to playing him. Or is it because Kramnik is that much a better
player than Judit Polgar? Your thoughts on this would be greatly
appreciated.

The latter - Kramnik is that much a better player.

How often have the two played eachother anyway?

John