...and the Greatest Endgame Player EVER is > - Chess Forums - Page 2

congrandolor

Jun 27, 2018

0

#21

SmyslovFan wrote:

Wow, that's really tough.

Every match-play World Champion excelled at the endgame, including Tal. Most World Champions were the best endgame player of their generation.

Today's best players don't have the advantage of adjournments, and yet they usually play at a higher level than even the best pre-computer endgame players (that would be Karpov, Andersson, Speelman, and maybe Kasparov).

By that standard, Carlsen is probably the best endgame player of all time. But I really enjoy the endgames of Andersson, Smyslov, Botvinnik, and Karpov.

Computers help players a lot in openings, but are useless in endgames, endgames principles are the same today than 100 years ago, so I don´t think current GMs are better than former (look Caruana missing a win with R+B vs R vs Svidler in Candidates 2016, or the horrible Queen endgames Hou Yifan lost vs Carlsen and Giri).

Justs99171

Jun 27, 2018

0

#22

mecuelgalapieza wrote:

SmyslovFan wrote:

Wow, that's really tough.

Every match-play World Champion excelled at the endgame, including Tal. Most World Champions were the best endgame player of their generation.

Today's best players don't have the advantage of adjournments, and yet they usually play at a higher level than even the best pre-computer endgame players (that would be Karpov, Andersson, Speelman, and maybe Kasparov).

By that standard, Carlsen is probably the best endgame player of all time. But I really enjoy the endgames of Andersson, Smyslov, Botvinnik, and Karpov.

Computers help players a lot in openings, but are useless in endgames, endgames principles are the same today than 100 years ago, so I don´t think current GMs are better than former (look Caruana missing a win with R+B vs R vs Svidler in Candidates 2016, or the horrible Queen endgames Hou Yifan lost vs Carlsen and Giri).

You Obviously don't know what table bases are. You obviously don't know that adjournments were abolished due to computers and that was before computers could even play at GM level. You obviously haven't been over many historical games, because those guys botched endgames too, and more of them. You can't simply go over the best endgames of the best players from 100 years ago and compare them to the worst endgames from players that are not the best today; and then conclude that past players played endgames as well or better. That is ridiculous.

A couple years ago I downloaded a massive pgn database from chessgames.com, which was all games that resulted in a king + rook + pawn vs king + rook. I never made it through all the games, but the quality of early chess games was astoundingly horrible.

It's an absolute certainty that past greats have unjustifiably been mythologized.

The best endgame player ever is Magnus Carlsen. This is 100% due to modern resources.

Now I don't know if he deserves credit for being the greatest endgame player ever because for me, best (absolutely strongest) and "greatest" are not the same. An example: Rubinstein contributed to the progress of rook endgames where as Magnus Carlsen benefits from previous contributions of theoreticians and computers.

Leave it to us amateurs to obsess over superlatives instead of having a genuine curiosity for the science of chess.

SmyslovFan

Jun 27, 2018

0

#23

I have an IM friend who broke 2500 FIDE. He didn't get the norms necessary to become a GM because he was busy getting an advanced degree and a good paying job. But he knows his chess.

He once told me that almost every GM under the age of 25 has studied the games of Smyslov and Botvinnik and are at least their equal in the endgame!

Yes, today's best endgame players are standing on the shoulders of giants, including ones made of silicon. But they are indeed seeing farther than players from the past. And again, don't judge today's players by the time trouble blunders they make when you don't judge the players of the past by the same standard. Players from before ~1995 had the benefit of adjournments.

Preggo_Basashi

Jun 27, 2018

0

#24

SmyslovFan wrote:

Wow, that's really tough.

Every match-play World Champion excelled at the endgame, including Tal. Most World Champions were the best endgame player of their generation.

Today's best players don't have the advantage of adjournments, and yet they usually play at a higher level than even the best pre-computer endgame players (that would be Karpov, Andersson, Speelman, and maybe Kasparov).

By that standard, Carlsen is probably the best endgame player of all time. But I really enjoy the endgames of Andersson, Smyslov, Botvinnik, and Karpov.

Holy crap.

If only there were move people like you in the forums.

A post full of various statements, and not 1 of them is total bullshit.

Wow, I'm stunned.

SmyslovFan

Jun 27, 2018

0

#25

SeniorPatzer wrote:

Rubinstein, Capa, Smyslov, Karpov, Ulf Andersson, Carlsen

I love Rubinstein's endgames too! I actually prefer his endgames to those of Capa. I forget who said it, (Tarrasch, maybe) Rubinstein is an endgame of a game started long ago by God.

SmyslovFan

Jun 27, 2018

0

#26

Thanks for the kind words, @Preggo_Basashi!

Preggo_Basashi

Jun 27, 2018

0

#27

SmyslovFan wrote:

Thanks for the kind words, @Preggo_Basashi!

SpiritoftheVictory

Jun 27, 2018

0

#28

SmyslovFan wrote:

I have an IM friend who broke 2500 FIDE. He didn't get the norms necessary to become a GM because he was busy getting an advanced degree and a good paying job. But he knows his chess.

He once told me that almost every GM under the age of 25 has studied the games of Smyslov and Botvinnik and are at least their equal in the endgame!

Yes, today's best endgame players are standing on the shoulders of giants, including ones made of silicon. But they are indeed seeing farther than players from the past. And again, don't judge today's players by the time trouble blunders they make when you don't judge the players of the past by the same standard. Players from before ~1995 had the benefit of adjournments.

A well thought-out post per your usual standard. Thank you for your input.

Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Jun 28, 2018

0

#29

ilovesmetuna wrote:

and its hard to believe karpovs didn't have the goolies to play 29 Nf5, even granted that tactics tended to give him the heebeejeebees.

....maybe he was plonked ?

Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Jun 28, 2018

0

#30


19. a4Andersson starts by fixing black's queenside structure. This move gives the bishop on b2 some freedom of movement, as we will see later in the game.

 Bg4Black, in turn, finishes his development and eyes the e2 pawn

 20. Kf1

 Rd7A good square for the rook. From d7 it protects both b7 and d4

 21. Rb4

 Ra7 ?!Not the best square for the second rook

 ..h5fixing white's kingside pawns was interesting instead

 22. Ra1This move is more in Andersson's style, preparing a5 and eventually a6 and winning the black pawns

 Bxc6 !?was an interesting try
bxc6
Rb8+
Bf8
Ba3
Rxa4
Bxf8
h5
f3
1. Bc5+
2. Kh7
3. R8b4
4. Ra2
5. R4b2
6. Ra4
..Bh3+
Kf2
Kh7
Bc5with good chances for white

 22...Ra5

 23. h3

 Be6

 24. h4White calmly improves his position

 Bg4

 25. Bc1

 h6

 26. Bd2

 Re5 ?!A slight inaccuracy that allows white to improve his g2 bishop to f3 and stop worrying about the pressure on e2

 27. f3

 Bf5

 28. f4

 Re8

 29. Bf3Although we have started from a completely equal position, ten moves later white's position looks definitely preferable.

 Rde7

 30. Rab1

 Bc8

 31. Be1White find an even better square for his dark squared bishop - f2

 h5

 32. Bf2

 Rd8Slowly, black is forced to get passive and defend his weaknesses

 33. a5

 Rc7Protecting c6

 34. Kg2

 Rcd7

 35. Rc4

 Re7

 36. Rb2Note how white doesn't hurry with pushing a6; he has a long term advantage and he is not interested in changing the character of the position without first making sure that his pieces occupy the best squares. There is also a pshychological factor to it; he knows that black's position is uncomfortable and nobody likes to stay passive and suffer for a long time

 Bg4

 37. Rcb4

 Rdd7

 38. Rb6

 Rc7

 39. Rc2

 Red7

 40. Rc4Now the white pieces have reached ideal squares and he will be ready to play a5-a6

 Bxf3+

 41. Kxf3

 Rd5

 42. a6

 bxa6

 43. Rcxc6

 Rxc6

 44. Rxc6White has obtained a clear advantage and will soon win one of the weaknesses a6 or d4

 a5

 45. Rc8+

 Kh7

 46. Ke4

 Rd7

 47. Ra8

 f5+

 48. Kf3

 Bf6

 ..Rd5
Be1

 49. Rxa5

 Kg7

 50. Ra6The endgame is still not easy to win, but Andersson has no problem in working for the full point

 Kf7

 51. Be1First, he improves the bishop to the a3-f8 diagonal

 Rd5

 52. Bb4

 Rb5

 53. Bd6

 Rd5

 54. Rc6

 Rb5

 55. Bc7

 Rd5

 56. Kf2

 Rb5

 57. Bd6

 Ra5

 58. Rb6

 Rd5

 59. Bb4

 Bd8

 60. Rc6

 Rb5

 61. Rc4

 Rd5

 62. Kf3

 Bf6

 63. Ba3

 Rd7

 64. Bb2

 Rd6

 65. Rb4

 Ke6

 66. Ra4

 Kf7

 67. Ba3

 Rd5

 68. Ra7+

 Ke6

 69. Rb7Finally, he has reached the desired position. Black is in zugzwang

 Bd8

 ..Ra5
Rb6+
Kf7
Bb2
Rd5
e4

 70. Rg7

 Kf6

 71. Ra7

 Bf8with the simple idea of playing Rb7 followed by Bg7 would have immediately won the d4 pawn
Bb6
Rb7
Bd8
Bg7+
Ke6
Rb4

 71...Ra5

 ..Ke6only repeats move after
Rg7
Kf6and now again
Bf8wins

 72. Bb2 !A nice trick

 Rxa7

 ..Rd5
e4

 73. Bxd4+

 Ke6

 74. Bxa7

 Ba5

 75. Bf2

 Kd5

 76. e4+

 Kc6

 77. d4

 Kd6

 78. Ke3

 Bb4

 79. Kd3

 Ba3

 80. d5

 Bc1

 81. Ba7

 Ba3

 82. Bb8+

 Kc5

 83. d6

 Kc6

 84. e5

power_9_the_people

Jun 29, 2018

0

#31

Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Jun 29, 2018

0

#32

Justs99171 wrote:

The game against Karpov isn't an endgame. The game never really quite reached the endgame stage.

Pleez don't argue w/ me....even when I'm wrong .

Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Jun 29, 2018

0

#33

....TY Adam !!

congrandolor

Jun 29, 2018

0

#34

ok, keep thinking that average current GMs are better than immortal players, then don´t be taken aback when Hou Yifan plays horrible queen endgames against Carlsen and Giri, Aronian blunders once and again vs Dubov in the World Cup, Caruana misses a WC match due to not knowing how to win a R+B vs R endgame vs Svidler in the previous Candidates, Mamedyarov and Aronian make a festblunder in the last Candidates and so on and so on. I guess your 2500 IM friend then would beat easily all the mentioned players, wouldnt he? And timetrouble is an excuse, it existed always.

Thee_Ghostess_Lola

Jul 2, 2018

0

#35

From: WIM energia (Chess.com 09/30/11)

I am holding a book called “Grandmaster Chess Strategy” by Jurgen Kaufeld and Guido Kern published by New In Chess in 2011. The book is a collection of Ulf Andersson’s games with excellent annotations by the authors. If you have not heard of Ulf Andersson I can assure you that he is a god of endgames. Going through the games of excellent endgame players should be part of your endgames study plan. However, one can be easily drowned in the bulky volumes of books published on great endgame players. Nowadays, it is not a matter of getting the information but rather of filtering it right. So, here we have a book with 80 games of Andersson; what should we do next? The chapters are classified by particular themes or material balance which is very helpful in the selection procedure. Going in detail through all the games would be ideal but here we are interested in a situation when you have only about 3-4 hours overall to dedicate to this book.

testaaaaa

Jul 2, 2018

0

#36

rubinsteins games ended in rook endings very often he was very good at it