Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Bent the Great

One of the most colourful personalities in the chess world ever passed away not long time ago. Bent Larsen, the giant of positional chess, one of the most honest annotators had a profound influence in my chess development. I doubt that I would have made it to the GM title without his book “50 Selected Games”. At first I wanted to annotate some of his games, but then I found this being pointless. The great man has still things to tell us, so why not learn these lessons from his own moves and words:
Visit my blog for more.

Comments


  • 4 years ago

    Ziva_David

    coolio

  • 4 years ago

    GM dbojkov

    No, he does not have a strong attack, but some threats, which Black found unpleasant.

  • 4 years ago

    Elubas

    So white just has a strong attack if he's allowed to play h5?

  • 4 years ago

    ChrisIsMeChris

    An excellent game, thank you very much for posting. I loved how white owned both of the flanks, with that obvious H pawn awesomeness, as well as the A pawn serving as such an amazing anchor for the Knight on B7 :D

  • 4 years ago

    GM dbojkov

    The fight for the center is the theat h4-h5, that did not allow Black to play d5 with comfort, as he needed to keep his knight busy on f6.

  • 4 years ago

    Elubas

    Question: how did h4 fight for the center? I see in one of the lines the pawn went to h5, but what does that really do? Just expose the black kingside a bit? I'm sure it did do what you said, but I can't see how myself.

  • 4 years ago

    Zhancraft

    Fischer won him 6:0, so not only Tal better than him. Also wouldn't forget about Kasparov.

  • 4 years ago

    GM dbojkov

    The original advance of the h pawn was in fact fight for the center, which Gliga (also great player and one of my favourite) failed to oppose.

    Once that the main danger of occupying the center by the black pieces was delayed, Bent used the a pawn to create initiative along that file. Eventually, after further inaccuracy by Black he managed to liquidate into a very favourable endgame, where his bishop was much better than the opponnet's knight.

      I hope this answers your question .

  • 4 years ago

    lo2

    Could anyone please tell me like what the main reasons why Bent Larsen won are?

    I see that he got advanced his h pawn.

    After the big exchange his pieces were better placed , and he were able to go up two pawns, with a doubled pawn though.

    And he dominated the Knight on the h file, quite a lot rendering incapable of doing anything.

  • 4 years ago

    Dimitrije_Mandic

    2nd only to Tal? How about Morphy, Alekhine, Spassky, Kasparov etc.? They weren't bad themselves! Wink

  • 4 years ago

    restinpeace

    Nice choice of game by Bent Larsen, instructive game. Thanks for sharing and for annotating some of the key moves.

  • 4 years ago

    Tricklev

    I always enjoy some great Bent Larsen games, great post.

  • 4 years ago

    AlexiShirov

    Guys ! why don`t you annotate all the moves from the beginning till the end ? .. Anyway thanks alot .

  • 4 years ago

    Pavrey

    Bent Larsen was a fantastic player and 2nd only to Tal when it came to attacking play

  • 4 years ago

    GM dbojkov

    Welcome, I always enjoy his games.

  • 4 years ago

    Lawdoginator

    Thank you for another gem from Bent Larsen. Textbook technique. 

  • 4 years ago

    millvillage

    Thank you.  Style and Class.

  • 4 years ago

    GM dbojkov

    Larsen has many of those Cool But what I love mostly in his games are the annotations.

  • 4 years ago

    zakaryah

    A beautiful game - thanks!

Back to Top

Post your reply: