Well in chess mentor Silman says that rook a to d1 was a tad inaccurate and knight d5 was more precise(because he has to move the rook back later). In the book russians vs fischer they gave a later rook from d to a1 a !, and even bronstein was so impressed with this move that he asked him how to come up with it. In the book they also give analysis of Kasparov in some games, so i wonder if Silman was correct, if was why would they give Fischers move a !, and also why wouldnt anyone else not have pointed it out, and why would bronstein be impressed by moving the rook back, if he just was correcting an inaccuracy before.
The game was played in Mar del Plate tournament in 1960, i want to know was silman right, was rook from a to d1 a tad inaccurate and knight to d5 was better?
Check the other thread you made on the subject yesterday.
Well in chess mentor Silman says that rook a to d1 was a tad inaccurate and knight d5 was more precise(because he has to move the rook back later). In the book russians vs fischer they gave a later rook from d to a1 a !, and even bronstein was so impressed with this move that he asked him how to come up with it. In the book they also give analysis of Kasparov in some games, so i wonder if Silman was correct, if was why would they give Fischers move a !, and also why wouldnt anyone else not have pointed it out, and why would bronstein be impressed by moving the rook back, if he just was correcting an inaccuracy before.
The game was played in Mar del Plate tournament in 1960, i want to know was silman right, was rook from a to d1 a tad inaccurate and knight to d5 was better?