top of page

Obrolin Aja Group

Public·8 members

Download _VERIFIED_ Korchnoi Move Pdf

A cantankerous fighter on and off the chessboard, Korchnoi had been a star Soviet player for two decades before he defected from the Soviet Union in Amsterdam in 1976, a move that had been brewing for some time.

Download Korchnoi move pdf


During overnight analysis I came to the tentative conclusion that, thanks to an improbable, one piece counter-attack over the past dozen moves, White probably had enough counterplay to draw. Korchnoi, however, was sure he was winning.

In chess, a blunder is a critically bad move or other poor decision, severely worsening the player's position by allowing a loss of material, checkmate, or anything similar. It is usually caused by some tactical oversight, whether it be from time trouble, overconfidence or carelessness. Although blunders are most common in beginner games, all human players make them, even at the world championship level. Creating opportunities for the opponent to blunder is an important skill in over-the-board chess.[1]

What qualifies as a "blunder" rather than a normal mistake is somewhat subjective. A weak move from a novice player might be explained by the player's lack of skill, while the same move from a master might be called a blunder. In chess annotation, blunders are typically marked with a double question mark, "??", after the move.[2]

Especially among amateur and novice players, blunders often occur because of a faulty thought process where players do not consider the opponent's forcing moves. In particular, checks, captures, and threats need to be considered at each move. Neglecting these possibilities leaves a player vulnerable to simple tactical errors.[3]

One technique formerly recommended to avoid blunders was to write down the planned move on the score sheet, then take one last look before making it.[4][5] This practice was not uncommon even at the grandmaster level.[6] However, in 2005 the International Chess Federation (FIDE) banned it, instead requiring that the move be made before being written down.[7][8] The US Chess Federation also implemented this rule, effective as of January 1, 2007 (a change to rule 15A),[9] although it is not universally enforced.

This game between Ernst Gruenfeld and Alexander Alekhine is from Karlsbad tournament in 1923, round 2. In position on the diagram, White is to make his 30th move. Gruenfeld played 30.f3?? which immediately loses to 30...Rxd4 because 31.exd4 is impossible: after 31...Bxd4+ 32.Kf1 Nf4 33.Qxe4 Qc4+ 35.Ke1 Nxg2+ 36.Kd2 Be3+ and White will at least lose his queen. The game ended shortly afterwards following some further blunders by Gruenfeld: 31.fxe4 Nxf4 32.exf4 Qc4 33.Qxc4?? Rxd1+ 34.Qf1?? Bd4+ and he resigned due to the unavoidable back-rank mate 35.Kh1 Rxf1#.[11]

In this position, Black offered a draw. White asked Black to make a move first. According to the rules of chess (see draw by agreement), Black must make a move in response to this request, and the draw offer cannot be retracted. Black played 28...Qxb2+!, which wins on the spot (29.Kxb2 Rb3+ 30.Ka1 Ra8+ 31.Ba6 Rxa6#). White was so stunned he forgot he could still accept the draw offer, and resigned.

This example, from a game played in Linares in 2002, is one of the very rare circumstances where a grandmaster makes the worst move possible, the only one allowing checkmate on the next move. In this queen endgame, White has some advantage after 69.fxg6+ fxg6 70.Kf4 due to Black's weak pawn on c6. Beliavsky playing White played 69.Kf4??, however, overlooking the response 69...Qb8#. According to Johannessen, it took a few moments for both players to realize that it was checkmate, and Beliavsky was a good sport over this mishap.[21]

However Kramnik's next move, 34...Qe3?? (a move awarded "???" originally by ChessBase on a story covering Kramnik's blunder, and even "??????" by Susan Polgar), came as a big surprise and was described as possibly the "blunder of the century" and perhaps the "biggest blunder ever" by Susan Polgar, as Kramnik overlooked a mate in one.[23] Deep Fritz immediately ended the game with 35.Qh7, checkmate. Seirawan later called Kramnik's move "a tragedy".

From ChessBase: "Kramnik played the move 34...Qe3 calmly, stood up, picked up his cup and was about to leave the stage to go to his rest room. At least one audio commentator also noticed nothing, while Fritz operator Mathias Feist kept glancing from the board to the screen and back, hardly able to believe that he had input the correct move. Fritz was displaying mate in one, and when Mathias executed it on the board, Kramnik briefly grasped his forehead, took a seat to sign the score sheet and left for the press conference."[24] During it, he stated that he had planned the supposedly winning move 34...Qe3 already when playing 29...Qa7, and had rechecked the line after each subsequent move. After an exchange of queens, Black would win easily with his distant pawn; after 35.Qxb4 Qe2 or 35.Ng6+ Kh7 36.Nf8+ Kg8 Black also wins eventually.

Carlsen waited for Aronian to make his move, and Aronian eventually played the otherwise solid 27...Bc3??, allowing White back into the game. Aronian had seen 27...R8xf4, but playing quickly to avoid time trouble, he thought that White could strike back with 28.gxf4 Nxf4 29.Ra8+ since both 29...Kf7 and 29...Kh7 lose to the knight fork 30.Ng5+. He had missed, however, that the retreat 29...Bf8! ends White's brief counterattack and leaves White defenseless against the mate threat.[27]

The sixth game of the World Chess Championship 2014 in Sochi between Magnus Carlsen and Viswanathan Anand also featured a double blunder. Carlsen adopted the space-gaining Maróczy Bind setup against the Kan Variation of the Sicilian Defence, and accepted a set of isolated doubled pawns in return for active play. After an early queen exchange he soon developed a commanding position and appeared to have excellent winning chances. On his 26th move Carlsen played 26.Kd2??, immediately realizing after making the move that 26...Nxe5! (with a discovered attack on the g4-rook) 27.Rxg8 Nxc4+ (zwischenzug) 28.Kd3 Nb2+ 29.Ke2 Rxg8 leads to Black picking up two extra pawns and gaining excellent winning chances. Anand, not expecting the blunder, replied with 26...a4?? in less than a minute. He, too, saw the missed tactic immediately after making his move. Carlsen made no further mistakes and converted his advantage into a win.[28]

In this pawn ending (from a game in 2020), White is a pawn down, and to hold the draw, he either needs to preserve his last pawn, or (if Black decides to play ...Ke6 followed by ...f5) bring the king close enough to the e-file and stop the king from reaching any key squares. The correct move to draw is 69.Kd2!, when 69...Kc5 70.Kc3 prevents all king's entries onto the fourth rank, while 69...Ke6 70.Ke3 f5 71.exf5+ Kxf5 72.Kf3 prevents the king from advancing any further and reaching a key square. Instead, White blundered by giving up the opposition after 69.Kc3?? when after 69...Kc5 White resigned, as he loses his last pawn: 70.Kb3 Kd4 or 70.Kd3 Kb4 71.Ke3 Kc4 72.Kf3 Kd4 73.Kg3 Kxe4. Thus, the position after 69.Kc3?? Kc5 is reciprocal zugzwang: if Black were to move, it would be a draw, while if White to move, Black wins.

During the ninth game between Ian Nepomniachtchi and Magnus Carlsen in the World Chess Championship 2021, the game was equal until Nepomniachtchi played 27.c5??. This move handed the advantage to Carlsen since after 27...c6, the White bishop on b7 is trapped and the knight on b3 cannot move to c5 to defend it. The game followed with 28.f3 Nh6 29.Re4 Ra7 30.Rb4 Rb8 31.a4 Raxb7, leaving Carlsen a bishop up. Nepomniachtchi resigned eight moves later.

With the tide turning towards an eventual Soviet war victory over the Nazi invaders, Bronstein was able to once again play some competitive chess. His first top-standard Soviet event was the 1944 USSR Championship, where he won his individual game against eventual winner (and soon-to-be world champion) Mikhail Botvinnik. Bronstein moved to Moscow as the war wound up. Then seen as a promising but essentially unproven young player, one of dozens in the deep Soviet vanguard, he raised his playing level dramatically to place third in the 1945 USSR Championship. This result earned him a place on the Soviet team; he won both his games played on board ten, helping the Soviet team achieve victory in the famous 1945 USA vs. USSR radio chess match. He then competed successfully in several team matches, and gradually proved he belonged in the Soviet chess elite. Bronstein tied for first place in the Soviet Championships of both 1948 and 1949.

Botvinnik wrote that Bronstein's failure was caused by a tendency to underestimate endgame technique, and a lack of ability in simple positions.[4] Botvinnik won four virtually level endgames after the adjournments, and his fifth win came in an endgame that Bronstein resigned at move 40. These adjourned games made up four of Botvinnik's five match wins; Botvinnik had no more than a minimal advantage in these games when they were adjourned at move 40.

David Bronstein wrote many chess books and articles, and had a regular chess column in the Soviet newspaper Izvestia for many years. He was perhaps most highly regarded for his famous authorship of Zurich International Chess Tournament 1953 (English translation 1979). This book was an enormous seller in the USSR, going through many reprints, and is regarded among the very best chess books ever written.[7] More recently, he co-authored the autobiographical The Sorcerer's Apprentice (1995), with his friend Tom Fürstenberg. Both have become landmarks in chess publishing history; Bronstein sought to amplify the ideas behind the players' moves rather than burdening the reader with pages of analysis of moves that never made it onto the scoresheet. Bronstein's romantic vision of chess was shown with his very successful adoption of the rarely seen King's Gambit in top-level competition. His pioneering theoretical and practical work (along with Boleslavsky and Efim Geller) in transforming the King's Indian Defence from a distrusted, obscure variation into a popular major system should be remembered, and is evidenced in his key contribution to the 1999 book Bronstein on the King's Indian. Bronstein played an exceptionally wide variety of openings during his long career, on a scale comparable with anyone else who ever reached the top level. 041b061a72

  • Group Page: Groups_SingleGroup
    bottom of page