Kasparov vs. Karpov, Game 20 | WCC 1990 - GM Yasser Seirawan - 2015.03.05
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 03. 2015
- Grandmaster Yasser Seirawan analyzes a pivotal game in the fifth and final match between rivals Kasparov and Karpov. Despite covering the game in a book of his, Seirawan learns something new about the game as well.
Garry Kasparov vs Anatoly Karpov, Kasparov - Karpov World Championship Match (1990): C92 Ruy Lopez, closed, Flohr-Zaitsev system (Lenzerheide variation)
What a fantastic person Seirawan is! He is the living embodiment of the expression "a gentleman and a scholar".
It would be an honor to meet him some day.
I know im asking randomly but does any of you know of a way to log back into an Instagram account?
I stupidly forgot the password. I would love any tricks you can offer me.
@Ahmed Parker instablaster :)
Kasparov admitted in a documentary about that turnament that he should have taken with a rook, but he overlooked it in a heat of the moment.
What documentary? I want to watch it :)
Karpov Kasparov Lion 1990. Look towards the end
AZCaveMan480 czcams.com/video/SMe-hvCwTRo/video.html
Match* not tournament.
He said he was just overwhelmed wih the idea of taking all of Karpov's pieces.
When a GM can't answer a question from a student: "Ben, do we have a chess engine on this thing?" gold.
Time constrain I guess. I doubt that Yasser couldn't see the disadvantage of the proposed move.
yes, since the proposed moved ended beeing better
On an interview kasparov talks about this move....its available on utube
GM Seirawan's game analyses are a pleasure to listen to and learn from. Here he brings you inside the minds of Karpov and Kasparov and makes everything clear, even to 1600-rated players like myself. Plus, he really engages the audience and adds humor, and he even learns from this game himself!
Hey I'm 1200 and I saw some of the correct lines don't talk down to me 5 years ago!
@@ollie7070 Happy for you. No disrespect intended.
@@tome57a You're a gentleman.
GM Seirawan is an awesome guy, he just seems like the nicest guy in the world. :D
I love him for the same reason
Great analysis Yasser. And it is amazing the way you treat the pupils and considere their questions. I saw another GM laughed on them when the question is no deep. Thank you very much from Argentina
I can listen to GM Seirawan analysing chess games forever :D
The way he explains and also listens to the students paying attention and caring is amazing. I really liked this!
beautiful person explaining an immortal game , perfect combination , im certainly enjoying not just the game .. EVRything! his calm voice his manners in talking his way of explaining , god bless you yasser , i wish i could meet you someday :)
He doesn't make me feel like a dumb ass
Dear chess club,
I would love to request an idea for a lecture, if that is possible.
Many middlegame lectures out there are mainly focused on material: good vs bad pieces, good vs bad squares, tactics and space advantages. What I'd love to see is a lecture focused on time and tempo. For instance, in this game Karpov plays the move Kh8 in preparation for the combination that is gonna follow (12:46). I don't understand the advantage of this move order instead of moving the king later on. The same kind of time related move is Kh2 by Kasparov to be able to sacrifice the rook without being checked (31:33). Apparently, the advantage of having the threat of two continuous moves makes it worth playing such a slow king move.
Also, sacrifices are often related to getting a time advantage. The comparison of material with time is a very hard one and grandmasters seem to have a superb intuition of 'sacrificing', or you could say 'trading', pieces to get time. For instance, in this game Kasparov gives away his centerpawns in order to get an unstoppable attack going.
At my level (1700) we are not so conscious of this strategic 'making slow moves to get fast moves later' idea and we are not so precise in making a good balance between sacrificing material and getting a time advantage.
I would greatly appreciate a lecture about this topic or if you direct me to some content explaining these strategic concepts. Regards,
Sierk
(ps: others interested please vote up this comment to make sure our friends from Saint Louis can read this)
+sierkkanis
I even respond to you so that they do. I would really love to see such a lecture too. Great idea :)
Every chess player goes through three phases of chess development, or evolution, or awareness if you will. The MATERIAL phase which is all about who has more stuff (pieces, then later pawns, then later piece imbalances) than his opponent and who can 'eat' more stuff. Then the SPATIAL phase which is about square control (from trapped pieces to mating nets to piece activity to color complexes to pawn play, to the idea of space advantage itself, etc). Then comes the TIME phase, relating to the idea of the INITIATIVE in stuff like tempo moves to zwischenzugs to race attacks on opposite flanks to opposite-colored bishops in the middlegame, even to zugzwang. You see, chess is a turn-based game where you don't say "pass". So, situations on the chessboard where you try to get the illusion of having your opponent say "pass" will make you seem to have several turns at your disposal/advantage. Except for zugzwang.
I think you already understand the idea of TIME, judging by your comments on some of the moves made by Kasparov in this game. Just trust yourself that you know it. You only just need to train it (by exposure to games such as this one) and attempt to emulate such style of play in your own games when (note, I said "when", a TIME-related word) the position suggests it.
Lovely idea! Hope the listwn to you!
@@LePredator1 such a nice explanation, thank you.
He's the Bob Ross of chess
well put :D
You see those captured pieces? Theyre birds now, yeah lets make them birds
But he's a much better chess player than Bob Ross was a painter
They both are in love with the canvases on which they paint worlds and battles.
@@carlneptune1718 you take that back. I never heard Ross profess how great he was, didn't he just try to make painting accessible to all?
GM Yasser Seirawan is a like a meditation guru turned chess teacher: calming,engaging and interesting - coming from Kenya, I'm extremely grateful to have access to these awesome lectures
I love GM Seirawan! Such a humble and kind player/trainer. I wish I was a kid and get chess lessons from him :)
Am 2100 now after 3 years...this video together with mato jelic changed me
Nice, now go for 2200!
@@TheRomanianWolf 2300 + feel this is my max though. Plus I am not a teenager anymore lol
No such thing as max, keep pushing!
Wow, what an encouraging teacher! His warmth is felt through the video. Absolutely fantastic!
Today I was looking for this game, thanks.
Without his commentary I'd have no idea why the players made the moves they did. Thank you!
Really entertaining as usual. Thank you
Thumbs up for Yasser! Thanks for all the videos.
That was a great lecture Yasser. You do so much for Chess and the community and your books are tailored to just about any level as well. To me, you are Royalty sir.
Great game and it was analyzed very well,really entertaining.thank you.
Thanks for the lecture! Great insights.
What a fantastic person Seirawan is! He is the living embodiment of the expression "a gentleman and a scholar".
Someone said that before; but some things just bear repeating! What a fine human being he is!
I came here just for the Yasser comments.. Love that guy! I wonder if he knows what the world thinks of him
the greatest comentator ever...all time.....
The guy who who said why not Rxg6 obviously knew this game before hand and seen the documentary on this match on CZcams, where they go over this move, and Kasparov said himself " its unforgivable, here I should've took with the rook". The guy tried to make himself look good! Right away he blurts out why not Rxg6, interrupting yasser!
I'm pretty sure Rxg6 was discussed prior to the documentary.
Of course Kasparov's attack is unparalleled, but what an amazing defender karpov was.
such a fantastic game and thanks to Yasser for guiding us move by move on the thought processes of great chess minds.
kasparov i think didn't take with Rook because of pressure perhaps? i think kasparov did mention that sheer amount of games was mentally taxing on the both of them.
Awesome guy Yasser Seirawan is.I had the pleasure of meeting and had a little conversation with him at the Hoogovens schaaktoernooi (Wijk aan Zee) in the 1991.He signed my first copy of Inside Chess he was Chief Editor of at the time.A true gentleman!
+Evert Blad Do you ever wonder if Yasser would have been world champ if he hadn't spent so much time on Inside Chess? (Because I do)
There is a video on youtube were Kasparov talks about how he should have taken with the rook and force mate, he was very mad at himself that he did not, still incredible game and you have to respect Karpov were he calculates these huge Kasparov sacrifices and knows that it is losing
It's on youtube under the name: Karpov vs Kasparov Lion 1990. It's couple of hours long. The part in question is towards the end.
His voice is MAGICAL!
can i make a suggestion pls.
this great guy seirawan uses the board a lot and you put half of video chess thing so we cant see the board at all can you pls make the chess board smaller ot record video on bettrer angle so we can see what he shows. thanks.
The problem here is Yasser shows the moves by his hand (for the participants of his cours). We would have a pain seeing what Yasser is showing. So those pieces had to be highlighted on the chess board we see (to understand what Yasser showed to his pupils). If you'll understand what I wanted to say ... ;)
Great video
Yasser is an amazing commentator and person. Always inspiring! Why is it that if there is a Kasparov vs Karpov game analyzed, it is almost always the games that Kasparov won? Where are the games Karpov won against Kasparov? I know the style of Kasparov is more aggressive and fun to watch, but I am sure the games he lost against Karpov would be as instructive for us - the amateurs of chess.
Actually per comment below, I was going to commend GM Seirawan for using the computer to make points more often in recent videos than some of his earlier videos. I can tell he is making greater efforts despite that pesky tab menu coming up at the wrong times. Thanks for all your great work. Keep the videos coming!
Yes and no Yasser - in their 5 WC matches Gary was only +2, but if you add other tournament games at classical time controls Gary had a healthy plus score
Yes but in head to head competition is what really matters.
35:00 Garry said after the game the Bxg6 was an "unforgivable mistake". Nevertheless, Bxg6 was winning easily, that´s why Garry didn´t even bother looking for a better move.
Citriano Torres Right. But remember: If you see a good move, search for a better one ;-)
sebastiaan kruis That´s a very good piece of advice.
Citriano Torres I think Paul Morphy said that, a great chess player by the way...
sebastiaan kruis Tal said that
(anther great chess player)
As a newb learning chess decisions like sacrificing the dark squared bishop on b2 when there isn't a clear win in sight amazes me. I believe this is where aspects of the game that are impossible to develop quickly are relevant: intuition and experience...having that feeling that the position must be crushing. Even if that example isn't a good one I believe the general point stands and I'm reminded of that topalov game where Gary sacrificed his rooks long before a forced win was in sight. I would be way too scared to do something like that...hopefully one day.
THANKS!!!
Awww ...What a nice guy Yasser Seirawan is
Incredible game, incredible lecture. I love chess.
you are a really awesome teacher yasser seirawan
Whoever thinks Grandmasters are humourless nerds with no personality or human warmth should be directed here, to stand corrected.
That's only Bobby Fisher.
Regarding the situation at 35:00, Kasparov actually already did the entire analysis of the end of the game back in 1990 in this video: watch?v=SMe-hvCwTRo
Here he admits that not taking with the rook was an unforgivable mistake, because he said it would be an automatic mate by removing the rook again, but he joked that he could take more of Karpov's pieces by taking with the bishop. So yes, he did indeed - although maybe accidentally - want to torture Karpov. Hahaha!
But I think he never calculated that specific line of moves at all, because it's not true that it would be an automatic win after moving the rook back to where he seems to suggest in the video, g3. Specifically, I think he completely forgot to calculate that Karpov would have a queen on b1 in the next move. If Kasparov simply pulled his rook back afterwards, or moved anywhere else, Karpov might have clawed his way out by taking the bishop with his newly granted queen and/or subsequently move his knights around, like to f4, to block the bishop's possible check from b1. He wouldn't be able to win, but he might have thwarted the original attack, prolonging the game. :)
Ironically, Kasparov's unforgivable mistake was probably not a mistake. I wouldn't be surprised if taking with the bishop was the strongest move. What say the computers?
In the variation that follows the rook capturing the knight on h6, the knight capturing on d6 is indeed a winning move - however the somewhat spectacular rook e7 that is highlighted, simply doesn't work as after bishop takes the rook, cutting the connection of the queen to the pawn, and then rook takes g7 - the black rook is under no obligation to take, and the simple bishop f6 - re-establishing connection, forces the rook to trade itself for the queen resulting in white sacrificing both rooks and a minor for the queen, and if anything is probably worse. Instead the engine suggested move is to simply take immediately on g7 with a winning attack. Interesting that both players apparently misjudged that line.
Classical games: Garry Kasparov beat Anatoly Karpov 28 to 21, with 121 draws.
Including rapid/exhibition games: Garry Kasparov beat Anatoly Karpov 39 to 25, with 129 draws.
Only rapid/exhibition games: Garry Kasparov beat Anatoly Karpov 11 to 4, with 8 draws
Kasparov him self gives like 10 different ways to mate, most likely everyone has already seen his video about it.
For me this is Gary's best game ever, even better than the one against Topalov. It was an amazing attack, it was decisive I'm a world championship match, and with all respect to Topalov Karpov was a much better player.
What is the name of your (Sir Seirawan's) book? I really like the analyses!
Winning chess brilliances but he was a full series of winning chess books
Hello there, I've got a question: in the position of 10:00, why doesn't black take the e4 pawn? Then the d5 pawn will fall soon too. I would probably have played that as black. But the masters will know better for sure! Are the attacking chances of white too big in that position?
True, white's center would fall but I don't think it's relevant. All of Kasparov's pieces are active. I mean most of them are on here at squares pointing at the kingside and white would start the attack really soon. White's loss in the center wouldn't be relevant, he'll be wrecking black
Fantastic game !!
Best game of the year was miserly, I would give it the GAME OF THE CENTURY.
I don't know what the game of the 20th century is, but Kasparov has played a few games better than this. His 1999 game from Wijk aan Zee against Topalov and 1985 16th match game against Karpov come to mind.
This in my mind is nowhere near the game of the century by Bobby Fischer (Donald Byrne - Robert J. Fischer (13 years old!), New York 1956)! :P
@@MusikPiratCH Indeed Fischer's game was breathtaking. There are many players with similar shows. My favorite i Alekhine, with more than one immortals.
@@naimulhaq9626 Well, every chess lover will have his or her personal favorite. That's pretty normal, I guess.
@@MusikPiratCH Sure. Magnus the magnificent is called a mixture of Fischer and Karpov (who had the potential to defeat Fischer)
Yasser is just a class act
The guy who said "why not take with the rook?" at the end of the game saw kasparov analysis and already knew in fact he asked it even before seirawan made the bishop move... Such a squalid thing when people make questions just to seem smarter than they are..
Yasser at 13:49 and I'm reminded, there were once a Wizard from Riga
Kasparov actually pointed out that take the queen with the rook was better than with the bishop, and yes Garry just wanted to have some fun.
Talk about a game with complexities!
Seriously, why do people always show Kasparov's wins over Karpov and not vice versa?
They had extremely close matches and yet everyone seems eager to make it seem like Kasparov destroyed the guy.
I would say that it is because of the way Kasparov played, when he won the games were much more entertaining, such as this one. While the games Karpov won weren't as wild.
37.Rxg6 is actually stronger!
Analysis by Houdini 4 Pro x64:
1. +- (#10): 37...b1Q 38.Bxb1 Nf4 39.Rg3+ Nbd3 40.Bxd3+ Nxd3 41.Re4!! Nf4 42.Rxf4 Bg7 43.Rfg4 Kg8 44.Rxg7+ Kf8 45.Nxd6 Ra7 46.Rxa7 a5 47.Rf7#
"Yeah, mate in 10 when I knew for sure Bxg6+ would secure me my title without much hassle"... Kasparov, thinking out loud.
LePredator1 Also a very good chance he was in time trouble by move 37 and just went with a easy line that he knew would win.
In the old romantic days the attitude was, "The prettiest", following that era the attitude was, "The fastest", and the current era the attitude is, "The surest".
Instead of Qxh6 near 34:00 the computer found checkmate in 6 with Nf7 followed by Qxf7 Qxh6 Bh7 Rxa8 Nf6 Rxf8 Qxf8 Qxf8 Bg8 and Qxf6 checkmate
I could listen to this guy talking chess all day.
What software is that?
At 34:12, what would be the variation if black king moves to g8?
I believe white would have played knight to e6 and then there's a lot of variations from there but black would've been mated in everyone of them.
PaperMan713 i was seeing king G8, Ne6 check, king f7, Qxf7 mate. But I can't (or am too lazy) to look further with queen or bishop blocking the rook after ne6
If he blocks the rook after ne6 with queen or bishop he is just delaying the inevitable, because if he blocks with the bishop then rook takes bishop/check, if he blocks with the queen same thing and then the game is over.
And if he doesn't block the rook on g3, it's kg8, then, ne6, kf7, queen takes bishop on f8 and checkmate because the king will be blocking his own queen, and he cant move his king to g6 nor e6 (taking the knight) because of the two rooks on g3 and e8.
What is with 34.Nf7+ Qxf7 35.Qxh6+ Bh7 36.Rxa8+ Nf6 37.Rxf8+ Ng8 38.Rgxg8+ Qxg8 39.Qxh7# mate?
It's a line a computer would quickly suggest. Qxh6+ is easier for a human to see.
Indeed! All these comments arguing about Rxg6 vs. Bxg6+, when this would have been the shortest victory. In that line, 34... Kh7 35. Qxf6 Nxf6 36.Bxf5# is also nice.
Garry said that he just wanted to get all of Karpov's pieces off the board, there's no other reason, like he didn't want to finish him too soon.
Kasparov said himself "It's unforgivable, here I should've taken with the rook." 'Unforgivable' may be a strong term but the discovery (check-)mate threat after Rxg6 would, indeed, have been much better.
Engines really are unforgiving, though. I fed this one to Leela, and she suggests White doesn't even play 34. Qxh6+, but rather just 34. Rxa8. You'd think White's attack loses momentum that way, but the funny thing is, that Black gets mated, after all, but this time on h8! Like 34. ... Bxb1, 35. Nf7+! Kh7, and now simply 36. Rxf8, and whatever Blacks plays, it's mate; like 36. ... Qg6, 37. Qxh6+! Qxh6 38. Rh8+ checkmate.
Why didnt black capture at e4 at 2:20?
*****
He played against it in his match against Kortchnoi; it was used heavily by his opponent in the 1978 Baguio match as far as I can recall.
well done
Yasser is the Bob Ross of chess lecturers. *in the softest voice* "thunder and storm clouds..."
30:58 what if after Kh2, black plays h5, preparing Bf7?
This guy sounds like my Math teacher! Oooohhhhh
I think Gary later said in an interview that he should have taken with the rook, with a forced mate, but he just wanted to take all of Karpov's pieces
That's a fact he said that.
Kasparov himself talks about how he should have taken with the rook at the end of this game
@27:28 what is wrong with the idea of NxG7?
at 27:27 why didn't white go knight to g7?
Cool game.
is it recent?
two years before I was born, so...yes?
People seriously underrate Karpov, but Karpov in his prime was easily a match for Kasparov in his prime.
Epic
actually d4 is playable immediately instead of h3 followed by Be3 see Fischer my memorable games for analysis.
playable for Fisher...
FIVE CROWNS!
He changed his move against Judit Polgár in 1994 after momentarily letting go of a piece. Kasparov went on to win the game. The tournament officials had video records proving that his hand left the piece, but refused to release the evidence. A factor counting against Polgár was that she waited a whole day before complaining, and such claims must be made during the game. The videotape revealed that Kasparov did let go of the piece for one quarter of a second.
To drone. Nice shot!!!
Osea que en ingles se pronuncia "Gerry" 00:17 y en español "Gary"
I heard that Kasparov would train for matches by playing with Karpov
rook takes queen was the best move and will lead to checkmate
I love Yasser. Don't know why, but I just do. Who I DON'T love is whoever put this video together. Yasser is getting up and pointing to things we can't even see because the graphic is blocking him. That's annoying, not just because I know he's pointing out cool stuff and I'm missing it, but because this late in the game CCSCSL still can't get it's shit together. STILL. After how many videos? C'mon, people!
They're doing it for free, so I wouldn't complain.
God. He's showing the game and explaining the moves as well as sharing some background information. What else do you want? Yasser bringing you breakfast in bed?
If you don't know which moves he's talking about (without seeing him point them out visually) you might wanna learn the coordinates. Otherwise I don't know what's the problem.
If you can hear the moves he is saying, then why would you need to see them visually??? Just enjoy the videos and don't complain... You can only complain these things only because they upload the videos...
Tharinda Nimnajith I need to see the moves because he's showing them. Not being able to see them feels cheap and wrong, and things that are wrong bother me. If you're going to go through the trouble of making a video and uploading it then take the time to do so correctly. Otherwise don't do it at all.
StormSong8 Its a free video. A courtesy... Be appreciative.
Yasser is better than any antidepressant.
I think the guy who said "...to torture him..." was right! Rxg6 is FAR SUPERIOR than Bxg6+, both are completely winning obv and Bxg6 is actually a "bad move", that's how much better Rxg6 is. I think he did take with the Bishop to just torture him psychologically too! Great game!
JohnnySkillish You waste a lot of time in chess looking for the "absolute best "move, better once a winning line is found go with that (provided the win is not too tortuous).
Jonchess Valid point Jon, and well taken. I like a more "hybrid" approach, especially in post game analysis. No doubt though...winning IS winning, but HOW you get there IS important too. Good stuff. TY!
Yeah like I was saying the guy who blurred out Rxg6 obviously seen the 1990 match documentary where Kasparov says that. Just wanted to make himself look good in front of Yasser and everyone.
Just consider the psychological state of mind Kasparov was in - akin to that of Yasser commenting the game, actually: ou just sacrificed many pieces, and now you have a chance to get them back, one after the other. It's a very human reaction to want to cash back in on the returns like that, even though Rxg6 was clearly the superior move. I guess for a moment there he didn't fully realize how good his position really was.
the guys who saw rook g8 is bobby fischer xd
At 17:33 what if white moves his knight at g5 attacking the rook and threating to fork the king and the queen ? Black wouldn`t capture with the pawn because white would be able to h5 with the queen and..probably win..
If Ng5 then black plays Rxe1+ which forces queen off diagonal by Qxe1 so the rook trade did 2 good things in one move (i.e. remove itself from any forks and forcing queen off dangerous diagonal) and now the knight is hanging and a free piece to capture.
36:06 if you take with the rook i think Kasparov didn't do it cos he was lazy and wanted to win quickly. I don't see a defence - but i'm not 2780 so how would i? - but Ke4 attacks the bishop the after Rxe4 Re8 then Rg(anything) i think he just wanted to end the game quicker by taking with the bishop with check
Well it doesn't end the game quicker, i just think Karpov didn't really care he was so far ahead
Nevermind the engine shows why Karpov's better than us
at 21:04 you once the king moves you would not take the rook, you would play Bh7+, Kh8...Bg6+, Kg8...Qh7#
alien chess!! :)
About the Rook taking at the end- Kasparov admitted that that would have been better later on.
If Rook takes on g6 then black can play knight to e7!!!!. I saw this move in 10 seconds.
This is such a cool game I'd trade every game I've ever played for this one if I was white lol
You are firgetting that when kasparov were un jail karpiv went visit him and helped kasparov
at 16:30, i had the same question :)
karpov is a pokemon