It's, called the Steinitz, the Smyslov, the Petrosian- Smyslov, the Smyslov-Karpov, the Karpov, and just the ...Nd7 variation depending on who is writing about it. It has been very popular among many famous players past and present in lieu of the ....Bf5 Classical Main Line. At this time the Karpov Variation is not seen as much, but remains a viable option for players of all strengths.
It's associated with Karpov the most, not because he was the first to play it but because everyone watched him struggle against 1.e4 first 1...e5, with the Zaitsev variation of the Ruy Lopez against Kasparov before settling on the Caro-Kann which is rock solid but its classical variations don't offer Black many winning chances at the highest level. (Karpov is not Kramnik - snuffing out White's advantage, taking the draw as Black and then playing for the win only with the White pieces is not how he rolls). So Karpov took the previously played ...Nd7 and started adding a bunch of aggressive alternate lines, with artificial castling or queenside castling and quicker counter-play, while the chess world watched him develop the line as it happened.
Well, for the first time in my life I found the correct move and felt great about myself. Then I heard analysis behind it and that "great" feeling quickly went away.
I remember when Kamsky won the world cup a few years ago. He played like a beast at the time. Hope you can do some of his games from that tournament. i thinks it's from 2006 or 2007.
There's a Kamsky-Karpov game that I'm pretty sure you haven't covered - it was played at the Alekhine Memorial in the early 90's and it won the award for "game most in the spirit of Alekhine"
Excellent chess videos that you conduct, agadmator! I actually saw a video of Karpov interviewed on this game: he said when he played Ke7 that Kamsky chuckled as if it were a joke and looked at Karpov; then when Karpov just sat there with a small smile, Kamsky looked down at the board, looked back up at Karpov, looked down at the board again and then started nodding as he figured out the rationale for Karpov’s strategy. It must be nice to introduce a bold innovation at a Grandmaster Tournament!
Giveaway idea: You go to the winner's house, ring their doorbell, and leave a skull with headphones for them. It can have a note that says "What's the idea here?"
#suggestion At 0:55: "Karpov goes for the Karpov variation..." I think a good series would be one on the games that had the first occurrence of variations that were later named after the player who introduced them (e.g. this Karpov variation). My guess is that the first time a new variation like that was played would have been rather startling, making those games quite notable. Thanks for all your great work!
at 9:35 the winning move for kamsky could also have been h7 and after rook h1, now kamsky could have gone for rd1 pinning the bishop.... but anyways that was a close game.... thanks for analyzing. I love your videos :)
@10:02, why not Bxd7, then no matter what black plays, Rd1? Either pinning the king and forcing an exchange, or exchanging anyway, leaving enough turns to promote the pawn?
Instead of Kc1 White could have played Bh3. When black takes the bisshop, it loses one move and then white can promote the pawn because black cannot take its own bisshop that is blocking the h-file.
Finally. Inmo Karpov was the better K to be honest. In their WC games score was 119 - 121 I think. Karpov won much more tournies. A shame he weren't gratified as much as Kasparov because his persona nor play was impulsive. Oh well.
No Garry won more super tournaments, he had 17 2820+ Tournament Performances compared to Karpov's 4. Kasparov was over 2800 from 1990 onwards, Karpov never hit 2800. Kasparov beat Karpov in 3 world championships. Kasparov was No.1 in the world for 20 years. So how can you say Karpov was the better K? Makes no sense....Karpov won 10 tournaments in a row, Kasparov won 14 in a row. Every metric favours Kasparov, except maybe total tournaments, but some of them would have been weak that Karpov won. Not so for Kasparov.
kasparov9 Theres more to Chess than metrics. And what on gods earth are you talking about? When the title was forfeited to Karpov, for 10 years he played only against the very strongest opponents in tournies and annihilated everyone and everything, dedicated to prove that he was a legitimate champion. Even after giving up the title and Kasp split from FIDE, their next matchup was linares 1994, which had the strongest average rating player at that time, Kasparov himself said that whoever won could rightfully be crowned king of tournaments and world champion. Karpov had a performance rating of 2985, the only other person to beat this is our current WC Carlsen with 3002. He dominated everyone and has the best winning percentage to date, without computers mind you. Had Karpov had his challenge (Fischer) like Kasp had Karpov, it's logical to assume he would been far stronger than he became. Many GM's speculate Karpov would of been the favourite in their bouts had there been any. But ofcourse this is speculation. Karpov was usually always outplaying Kasparov. But Kasparovs preparation was superior. This is reflected in every game they played that was adjourned. I guarantee you now that if Kasparov didn't always try for an adjournment Karpov would have won their bouts convincingly. Just look at their matches, and when they were adjourned. You will see for yourself. Karpovs had much more finesse and technique over the board but at home, Kasparov was the better learner.
Karpov would miss winning variations because of his poor preparation on adjourned games, most of which were adjourned where Kasparov was loosing his edge. Its a shame really. Karpov complained about having no adjournments but to no avail. Kasparov would always play for this because he knows here, Karpov was at a disadvantage.Over the board in classical without adjournments, Karpov has a higher win ratio. Do the research for yourself and you will see. Karpov has better technique and his style is sound always, in classical anyway. Kasparov in rapid and blitz was a beast thats for sure.
Yeah metrics don't matter it's people's opinions like yours that matter. You focus on that 1 super tournament where Karpov kicked ass and had the highest tournament performance rating ever, but Kasparov had many many more 3 times as many excellent tournament performances. Like I mentioned chessmetrics gave Kasparov 17 2820+ tournament performances compared to Karpov's 4. I mean that's a huge difference, can you at least acknowledge that instead of just ignoring it. It's a fact. Kasparov had many more dominating tournament performances compared to Karpov. Chessmetrics gives Karpov the 2nd most dominant player award, right after Kasparov as No.1. So there you have it, someone that has analysed all their performances, and not just dreamt about adjournments and the like. But hard factual data that you can't ignore. Karpov had a stellar career, but Kasparov was simply Amazing. His metrics and data back it up. Arguing that Karpov was better is just ridiculous, and you would be a fool saying that to the world's chess elite. They would undoubtedly tell you that Kasparov was better, stronger player. Don't get me wrong Karpov was awesome, but behind Kasparov. If not for Kasparov...Anatoly would have dominated the scene for a long time. I mean he lost to Nigel Short in a match, and Kasparov absolutely crushed him in that 1993 match. I agree that Karpov would have been better if he played FIscher, but it just was not his destiny.
Can you show some examples where Kasparov was loosing his edge? I'm aware of many games that were adjourned and Kasparov had a winning position like from the 1990 match. I think fate dealt Kasparov good luck, I mean if Karpov got that 6th and final win in their 1984 match, things may have turned out differently in terms of chess history but that's not the way it went. Kasparov deservedly outplayed Karpov in 1985 and became world champion and never lost a title match again to Karpov, though 1987 was close but again that showed Kasparov's greatness winning that must win game in fine Karpovian style. For the record I think Karpov would have given Fischer big problems in 1975 and could very well have beaten him. And I think Karpov was very close to Kasparov but Garry was simply a little better. And chess history showed this, not to mention ratings over long periods of time, the ratings and tournament performances don't lie.
At 6:53, why cannot white play the Be5, thus relatively pinning the rook and soon winning it? Is it a fatal mistake, or is the dark squared bishop so strong that it is not worth a rook? Or, was it missed in the analysis.
Easy to overlook the simple moves. That King move is obvious to an amateur simply attacking the rook, I saw that before Antonio even stopped the video and I'm a terrible player. Good video
Bxd7. Only way to prevent queening is to not capture the bishop and go for Rh2 immediately but then Kamsky's up a whole piece. Suprised he didn't see that OR Kc1...
you could just do a video like a chess FAQ where you answer stuff like "what makes a good move a good move" or even more personal things like "this is my favorite xy" and things like that. also since kasparov is watching your videos, maybe you could ask him to play a game or two against you :D #suggestion
@2:03 i think the idea of ke7 is trapping the queen. Karpov wants to push g5 nd later e5 trapping the queen but white can play Bxg5 countering g5, hxg5 isnt possible since h6 is pinned to rook. Ke7 makes queen support rook thus paving way for g5 but white plays Ne5 making way for queen
sarthak sharma The problem is that Bxf5 is coming out as a check and will also control the h7 square. That's why it is suggested for white to play Kc1, moving out of check and also attacking the black rook.
when someone says 'my engine' what does he mean by that? an engine he uses or developed by him? how many chess engines out there and which one is the best?
After Kc1 Rd4 BxB is the simplest win. On either recapture Rd1 pins the rook and the rook pawn queens. If RxPch Kb1 KxB Rh1 and the pawn cannot be stopped.
Joseph Coombs you mean 2:56 after the Qe7 move Ng5.. seems like Bf4 prevents Nh7 to attack the defender at f6, and if white plays Bh7+ its just repetitive Kh8 Kg8 since there are no good discoveries, it would be bad for Black sure but Agadmator analyzed the better Ne5 I think
What if you push the pawn to h7? If the black bishop takes the white one you simply promote to another queen, but when the rook trys to challenge the past h pawn you go rd1 and you win a piece right? Somewhat around 10:00
Agadmator, in the position you asked to find a move, what about instead og king c1 you play bishop h3 to block any attacks from the rook or bishop and if bishop captures the pawn is getting promoted, does it work?
Karpov was probably the best chess player ever when it comes to understanding the game and pure talent. Fischer was a workaholic with no life besides working on chess. Kasparov was also a talented chess lumberjack.
At 9: 45is the bishop trade not possible? Then afterwards moving rook to h1 protect fast pawn which gives advantage of one rook?while karpov needs to capture pawn
FOR GIVEAWAY!!! select three lucky people..and you can give them 3.chess books 2.digital clocks 1.cash prize or deep blue engine will also do :D :D and of course amazon gift cards.
How can Black answer at around 11:20 -11:25 at Be4 instead of Be5 ? The bishop can't be threatened by the bishop in any way if you threaten the bishop with the then simply Rook H1 and the pawn is either promoted or you have bishop vs rook End game with +2 pawns ( If this isn't winnable then I get it but please someone help me understand)
@agadmator, Glad to hear from you! I mentioned & #suggested these two games earliar: www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1140914 www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1139890 Did you see? Btw you're doing great man!..keep it up!!
cr0mag Nops.Karpov himself mentioned in an interview that he had 40% chances and Fischer had 60% in 1975.But can't say the same about 1978.But he clearly mentioned that had he played Fischer,he would have been an even better player.
cr0mag Yeah.Would have completely changed the history of the game .But fischer was a genius on the board and an idiot on other aspects of life.Its sad that the world didnt come to know the full potential of fischer.But one can't cry over spilt milk.What has happened has happened..no one can change that
Coach I have a question it is a Karoov Saga I expect these all of this games win by Karpov? There are many games win Karpov to Kasparov. I know Kasparov is many wins than Karlpv . ❤ Y
I didn't find the move, but the move I came up with is based on the same idea. I want to lure the rook away from the d file. Passed pawns must be pushed, so I analyzed the possibilities after h7. White is threatening to queen with check forcing immediate resignation, so retreating the rook along the d file doesn't do anything to stop it. White is forced to play Rh2 to stop the immediate threat. Now, white plays h8=Q+, RxQ. White now wins with Rd1, winning a piece. I think my way is just as good and more creative than the blunt Kc1.
The reason is simple, after h7 is played, black just plays Bxf5+ and you would have to move your king and then after moving the black rook to the h file, the white rook cannot protect the h pawn, black can play Bxh7, Kc1 may not look interesting, but do you think h7 is good now after hearing this. Kc1 was to avoid the bishop fork, the fact that you did not see the fork means you completely glossed over why the king needed to be moved.
Daniel Hernandez Vazquez i think you ment to say h7 and actually after bxb on f5 it's a check followed by rook to h2 preventing king from caturing the rook and stopping the promotion
"Karpov goes for the Karpov variation". Wow, I wasn't expecting that.
Stockfish says that it is Steinitz variation and not Karpov's.
Reminds me of a Denis Leary joke. Poor Lou Gehrig, he died of Lou Gehrig’s disease how do ya not see that coming.
@@yvurrekpaulin255 No. Smislov variation
It's, called the Steinitz, the Smyslov, the Petrosian- Smyslov, the Smyslov-Karpov, the Karpov, and just the ...Nd7 variation depending on who is writing about it. It has been very popular among many famous players past and present in lieu of the ....Bf5 Classical Main Line.
At this time the Karpov Variation is not seen as much, but remains a viable option for players of all strengths.
It's associated with Karpov the most, not because he was the first to play it but because everyone watched him struggle against 1.e4 first 1...e5, with the Zaitsev variation of the Ruy Lopez against Kasparov before settling on the Caro-Kann which is rock solid but its classical variations don't offer Black many winning chances at the highest level. (Karpov is not Kramnik - snuffing out White's advantage, taking the draw as Black and then playing for the win only with the White pieces is not how he rolls).
So Karpov took the previously played ...Nd7 and started adding a bunch of aggressive alternate lines, with artificial castling or queenside castling and quicker counter-play, while the chess world watched him develop the line as it happened.
"Little argument with FIDE..." Love your understatements. :3
Well, for the first time in my life I found the correct move and felt great about myself. Then I heard analysis behind it and that "great" feeling quickly went away.
hahah me too
😂😂😂
I remember when Kamsky won the world cup a few years ago. He played like a beast at the time. Hope you can do some of his games from that tournament. i thinks it's from 2006 or 2007.
Lets hope not because Kamsky is a walking zombie.
There's a Kamsky-Karpov game that I'm pretty sure you haven't covered - it was played at the Alekhine Memorial in the early 90's and it won the award for "game most in the spirit of Alekhine"
Excellent chess videos that you conduct, agadmator! I actually saw a video of Karpov interviewed on this game: he said when he played Ke7 that Kamsky chuckled as if it were a joke and looked at Karpov; then when Karpov just sat there with a small smile, Kamsky looked down at the board, looked back up at Karpov, looked down at the board again and then started nodding as he figured out the rationale for Karpov’s strategy. It must be nice to introduce a bold innovation at a Grandmaster Tournament!
Giveaway idea: You go to the winner's house, ring their doorbell, and leave a skull with headphones for them. It can have a note that says "What's the idea here?"
Good one! Hahaha
Outstanding idea, Geller was always a brilliant theoritician. Great choice of game.
Thanks for the 2 videos today whenever I get the notification saying you uploaded a new one, it makes my day Bro! Keep up the good work
Perhaps Agad could review the 1969 Junior World Chess Championship won by Karpov. Karpov dazzled the world with his talent!
#suggestion
At 0:55:
"Karpov goes for the Karpov variation..."
I think a good series would be one on the games that had the first occurrence of variations that were later named after the player who introduced them (e.g. this Karpov variation). My guess is that the first time a new variation like that was played would have been rather startling, making those games quite notable.
Thanks for all your great work!
at 9:35 the winning move for kamsky could also have been h7 and after rook h1, now kamsky could have gone for rd1 pinning the bishop.... but anyways that was a close game.... thanks for analyzing. I love your videos :)
I thought the same about h7, but I think it isn't working. After Rxh7 the bishop is defended a second time and the past pawn is gone.
No cuz the bishop will capture the bishop on f5 with check and pick up the pawn
Thanks for the tal game the other day. Love your daily videos
An almost flawless game by Karpov! Great video! Must say I didnt see Ke7!
There are many instructive ideas in this game. To castle or not to castle - that is the question among many in this Gordian knot of a game.
the pre-bong cloud
I found it! I'm really learning a lot from your videos, thank you for the good work!
Holy crap he blew it! I didn’t see that coming. He just blew a win.
Downvote Agadmator ? Why....those 4 people need help...I'm happy to be here daily and can't wait for the next one. TY
Karpov goes for the Karpov Variation... What a surprise
Please, more videos with Karpov:)
@10:02, why not Bxd7, then no matter what black plays, Rd1? Either pinning the king and forcing an exchange, or exchanging anyway, leaving enough turns to promote the pawn?
fantastic
Instead of Kc1 White could have played Bh3. When black takes the bisshop, it loses one move and then white can promote the pawn because black cannot take its own bisshop that is blocking the h-file.
Karpov has to be the greatest chess player ever. He was a monster back then and still at age 70 beats solid players.
btw, instead of that KC1 move - pawn to A7 was a good option. The only way to stop the pawn is RH2, which is countered by RD1
Сомнительный Собеседник if p to a7 then bishop captures bishop with check and then takes the pawn
Ke7 a great move from the opening for black and Kc1 wins the game for white, all hail the king
Finally. Inmo Karpov was the better K to be honest. In their WC games score was 119 - 121 I think. Karpov won much more tournies. A shame he weren't gratified as much as Kasparov because his persona nor play was impulsive. Oh well.
No Garry won more super tournaments, he had 17 2820+ Tournament Performances compared to Karpov's 4.
Kasparov was over 2800 from 1990 onwards, Karpov never hit 2800. Kasparov beat Karpov in 3 world championships. Kasparov was No.1 in the world for 20 years.
So how can you say Karpov was the better K? Makes no sense....Karpov won 10 tournaments in a row, Kasparov won 14 in a row. Every metric favours Kasparov, except maybe total tournaments, but some of them would have been weak that Karpov won. Not so for Kasparov.
kasparov9 Theres more to Chess than metrics.
And what on gods earth are you talking about? When the title was forfeited to Karpov, for 10 years he played only against the very strongest opponents in tournies and annihilated everyone and everything, dedicated to prove that he was a legitimate champion. Even after giving up the title and Kasp split from FIDE, their next matchup was linares 1994, which had the strongest average rating player at that time, Kasparov himself said that whoever won could rightfully be crowned king of tournaments and world champion. Karpov had a performance rating of 2985, the only other person to beat this is our current WC Carlsen with 3002. He dominated everyone and has the best winning percentage to date, without computers mind you.
Had Karpov had his challenge (Fischer) like Kasp had Karpov, it's logical to assume he would been far stronger than he became. Many GM's speculate Karpov would of been the favourite in their bouts had there been any. But ofcourse this is speculation. Karpov was usually always outplaying Kasparov. But Kasparovs preparation was superior. This is reflected in every game they played that was adjourned. I guarantee you now that if Kasparov didn't always try for an adjournment Karpov would have won their bouts convincingly. Just look at their matches, and when they were adjourned. You will see for yourself. Karpovs had much more finesse and technique over the board but at home, Kasparov was the better learner.
Karpov would miss winning variations because of his poor preparation on adjourned games, most of which were adjourned where Kasparov was loosing his edge. Its a shame really. Karpov complained about having no adjournments but to no avail. Kasparov would always play for this because he knows here, Karpov was at a disadvantage.Over the board in classical without adjournments, Karpov has a higher win ratio. Do the research for yourself and you will see. Karpov has better technique and his style is sound always, in classical anyway. Kasparov in rapid and blitz was a beast thats for sure.
Yeah metrics don't matter it's people's opinions like yours that matter. You focus on that 1 super tournament where Karpov kicked ass and had the highest tournament performance rating ever, but Kasparov had many many more 3 times as many excellent tournament performances. Like I mentioned chessmetrics gave Kasparov 17 2820+ tournament performances compared to Karpov's 4.
I mean that's a huge difference, can you at least acknowledge that instead of just ignoring it. It's a fact.
Kasparov had many more dominating tournament performances compared to Karpov. Chessmetrics gives Karpov the 2nd most dominant player award, right after Kasparov as No.1.
So there you have it, someone that has analysed all their performances, and not just dreamt about adjournments and the like. But hard factual data that you can't ignore. Karpov had a stellar career, but Kasparov was simply Amazing. His metrics and data back it up.
Arguing that Karpov was better is just ridiculous, and you would be a fool saying that to the world's chess elite. They would undoubtedly tell you that Kasparov was better, stronger player.
Don't get me wrong Karpov was awesome, but behind Kasparov. If not for Kasparov...Anatoly would have dominated the scene for a long time.
I mean he lost to Nigel Short in a match, and Kasparov absolutely crushed him in that 1993 match.
I agree that Karpov would have been better if he played FIscher, but it just was not his destiny.
Can you show some examples where Kasparov was loosing his edge? I'm aware of many games that were adjourned and Kasparov had a winning position like from the 1990 match.
I think fate dealt Kasparov good luck, I mean if Karpov got that 6th and final win in their 1984 match, things may have turned out differently in terms of chess history but that's not the way it went. Kasparov deservedly outplayed Karpov in 1985 and became world champion and never lost a title match again to Karpov, though 1987 was close but again that showed Kasparov's greatness winning that must win game in fine Karpovian style.
For the record I think Karpov would have given Fischer big problems in 1975 and could very well have beaten him.
And I think Karpov was very close to Kasparov but Garry was simply a little better. And chess history showed this, not to mention ratings over long periods of time, the ratings and tournament performances don't lie.
thank you for doing this it made my day!! I made the suggestion btw :3
+Carlos Javier Palacios Thank you :)
agadmator's Chess Channel saludos desde Argentina!!!! ¿quizás más videos de Karpov o Spassky? :V
A recommendation. When showing games on the black side, turn the board to see them from that perspective. Very good your videos.
Karpov is really a passive player😏
9:10 Whats wrong with just pushing H7 in that position? If Bishop captures F5 you can promote, if rook moves H2 you can capture the bishop and check
Jonas Keß if h7, bishop takes bishop is check, after king moves bishop takes pawn on h7
At 6:53, why cannot white play the Be5, thus relatively pinning the rook and soon winning it? Is it a fatal mistake, or is the dark squared bishop so strong that it is not worth a rook? Or, was it missed in the analysis.
chessguy123 it is not a real pin because Black can get rid of the pinned rook with Rxd1+ and the queen can move
8:36 lolll I’m dyinggg
Well presented.
Wow I found King to c1. Wow! Wasn't sure but it looked right.
Stockfish says that it is Steinitz variation and not Karpov's.
At 9:30, would white bishop to h3 work? Just curious if I have missed something.
In the position that you offer the pausing of the video and finding the best move for white , Bh3 will do the job too I believe
Easy to overlook the simple moves. That King move is obvious to an amateur simply attacking the rook, I saw that before Antonio even stopped the video and I'm a terrible player. Good video
Caro Kann Defence. Karpov. Bong Cloud Variation
at @9:46, why not push the pawn? h7 rh2 rd1 and black loses the bishop and the a7 pawn?
bishop takes bishop with check
Could you please cover the two games played today between Nakamura and Carlsen?
Bxd7. Only way to prevent queening is to not capture the bishop and go for Rh2 immediately but then Kamsky's up a whole piece. Suprised he didn't see that OR Kc1...
you could just do a video like a chess FAQ where you answer stuff like "what makes a good move a good move" or even more personal things like "this is my favorite xy" and things like that. also since kasparov is watching your videos, maybe you could ask him to play a game or two against you :D #suggestion
@2:03 i think the idea of ke7 is trapping the queen.
Karpov wants to push g5 nd later e5 trapping the queen but white can play Bxg5 countering g5, hxg5 isnt possible since h6 is pinned to rook. Ke7 makes queen support rook thus paving way for g5 but white plays Ne5 making way for queen
Agadmator is Love. Agadmator is Life.
Road to 100k! Do a giveaway at 100k
i'm from the future. antonio reached 1 million subscribers and also revealed the meaning of "agadmator".
@6:59 why not bishop e5 ? Pinning rook and queen.
Rxd1 with check and black can save the queen. However, it can be a good move.
learn from the best who makes crucial blunders regardless of the result
Can you make a video of Karpov or Kasparov's top 10 sacrifices ? Thanks.
9:30 what if h7 now? if bxf3 you get a queen. if rh2, rd1 pinning the bishop. if rxh7, bxh7
oh! its check - bxf3
Also i think the other idea of Ke7 is now the Queen is protecting the rook, so the Bishop can't jump to g5
11:07
#CuriousQuestion
Can't Reh1 be the best move ?
As, now if Bxf5 then h7 and pawn will be promoted !!
sarthak sharma The problem is that Bxf5 is coming out as a check and will also control the h7 square. That's why it is suggested for white to play Kc1, moving out of check and also attacking the black rook.
when someone says 'my engine' what does he mean by that? an engine he uses or developed by him? how many chess engines out there and which one is the best?
After Kc1 Rd4 BxB is the simplest win. On either recapture Rd1 pins the rook and the rook pawn queens. If RxPch Kb1 KxB Rh1 and the pawn cannot be stopped.
9:44 what if we keep pushing the pawn?
If h7 then bxf5 (check) king move then bishop take pawn so white loose...
You should do maybe a marble or very nice chess set and then sign it with a good note. That would be very cool.
Sir can u show game of nakamura where he used 6 knights to checkmate opponent king
At the position 2:46
If he plays Knight to G5, then it's a forced mate isn't it?
Joseph Coombs you mean 2:56 after the Qe7 move Ng5.. seems like Bf4 prevents Nh7 to attack the defender at f6, and if white plays Bh7+ its just repetitive Kh8 Kg8 since there are no good discoveries, it would be bad for Black sure but Agadmator analyzed the better Ne5 I think
does capturing bishop and after Rxd7 Rh1 work in 9:45?
İsmail Yılmaz no because then black plays Rh7 to block the pawn and pin the white rook from moving. Black has 5 pawns vs 4 white pawns
Do you know that Karpov RECENTLY won against Hóu Yìfan ? Make the vid on that event please
Isn't karpov variation is Steinitz variation
What if you push the pawn to h7? If the black bishop takes the white one you simply promote to another queen, but when the rook trys to challenge the past h pawn you go rd1 and you win a piece right? Somewhat around 10:00
Starting at 9:45
Agadmator, in the position you asked to find a move, what about instead og king c1 you play bishop h3 to block any attacks from the rook or bishop and if bishop captures the pawn is getting promoted, does it work?
Diego Rosas If bishop h3, then black can play rook h2, attacking the bishop and also preventing the promotion.
Thank you, now i feel so dumb for not seeing that
Plz do tal vs nezmethdinov (the one in which tal wins)#suggestion
11:18 Why not bishop to e4 and rook to h1? The trade is a must and the pawn is going to be promoted.
Karpov was probably the best chess player ever when it comes to understanding the game and pure talent. Fischer was a workaholic with no life besides working on chess. Kasparov was also a talented chess lumberjack.
If it's any consolation to both gentlemen, I didn't see it either....
Any of the games from Anand Vs Carlsen?
Ke7 is an engine move, looks dubious for humans at first glance
At 9: 45is the bishop trade not possible? Then afterwards moving rook to h1 protect fast pawn which gives advantage of one rook?while karpov needs to capture pawn
FOR GIVEAWAY!!!
select three lucky people..and you can give them 3.chess books 2.digital clocks 1.cash prize or deep blue engine will also do :D :D and of course amazon gift cards.
"Castling was never an option"
Pushing the pawn to h7 was a good move too. what say .
bishop takes bishop with check
wow this is genius. I wonder why kamsky didnt play it
I didn't see that .bishop takes bishop with check . My bad :) :D
How can Black answer at around 11:20 -11:25 at Be4 instead of Be5 ? The bishop can't be threatened by the bishop in any way if you threaten the bishop with the then simply Rook H1 and the pawn is either promoted or you have bishop vs rook End game with +2 pawns ( If this isn't winnable then I get it but please someone help me understand)
0:11 😁😁 really long career gata kamsky has..
Antonio you live very close to me so I would really like to play with you sometime.
"Karpov goes for the Karpov variation" - I would accuse him of being a craphole after this probably
Stockfish says that it is Steinitz variation and not Karpov's.
@@yvurrekpaulin255 stockfish is wrong then
#Suggestion
more Jobava Baadur games
Damn, Anatoly Karpov looks just like Chekov from Star Trek. And he's even Russian. Direct us to the Nuclear Wessels Anatoly!
Cover the best of naka carlsen 960 games this weekend! #suggestion
+fastpace101 I will :)
@agadmator,
Do you take suggestions from the comments or somewhere else?!!
+Kaushik Chail Mostly from comments
@agadmator,
Glad to hear from you!
I mentioned & #suggested these two games earliar:
www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1140914
www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1139890
Did you see?
Btw you're doing great man!..keep it up!!
agadmator's Chess Channel check out my suggestion for an awesome giveaway idea
Would Karpov have beaten Fischer in '75 if Bobby decided to play?
cr0mag Nops.Karpov himself mentioned in an interview that he had 40% chances and Fischer had 60% in 1975.But can't say the same about 1978.But he clearly mentioned that had he played Fischer,he would have been an even better player.
Bharathi Dasan thanks mate. Would have been amazing to see them showdown
cr0mag Yeah.Would have completely changed the history of the game .But fischer was a genius on the board and an idiot on other aspects of life.Its sad that the world didnt come to know the full potential of fischer.But one can't cry over spilt milk.What has happened has happened..no one can change that
cr0mag And as for karpov, I think he is a very underrated champion.He is one of the greatest natural talents the world will ever see.
What do his chances have anything to do with reality? Karpov was strong enough to beat Fischer and hungry enough. Bobby didn't give him the chance.
Bobby Fischer, Mikhail Tal or Nezhy games :)
Suggestion kasparov vs karpov game 16
2:00 doesn't g5, Qh3 then e5 trap the queen?
Michael Klene no because after p to g5 knight captures pawn and pawn cannot capture back because queen x rook
tiago ribeiro thanks :D
Coach I have a question it is a Karoov Saga I expect these all of this games win by Karpov? There are many games win Karpov to Kasparov. I know Kasparov is many wins than Karlpv . ❤ Y
"One bad move nullifies forty good ones." Okay sure, but what do forty bad ones do?
yeay Dortmund :D
What if here white plays pawn to h7?
What about Bxd7? Kxd7 then Rh1 defending.... Sounds simple
I realize I'm commenting after months.... Bcoz I started watching all ur videos and probably got addicted 😂
We want face reveal!!
A chess clock with your channel logo on it :) for the giveaway
I wish he could use our own games we play but he still makes awesome videos
I've sent in some of my own games but he hasn't replied yet
Both of you, he analyses master games not 1600 lol
I didn't find the move, but the move I came up with is based on the same idea. I want to lure the rook away from the d file. Passed pawns must be pushed, so I analyzed the possibilities after h7. White is threatening to queen with check forcing immediate resignation, so retreating the rook along the d file doesn't do anything to stop it. White is forced to play Rh2 to stop the immediate threat. Now, white plays h8=Q+, RxQ. White now wins with Rd1, winning a piece. I think my way is just as good and more creative than the blunt Kc1.
The reason is simple, after h7 is played, black just plays Bxf5+ and you would have to move your king and then after moving the black rook to the h file, the white rook cannot protect the h pawn, black can play Bxh7, Kc1 may not look interesting, but do you think h7 is good now after hearing this. Kc1 was to avoid the bishop fork, the fact that you did not see the fork means you completely glossed over why the king needed to be moved.
You know i wanted to ask are people getting better at playing chess.
I found Kc1 :)
+John LaBrie Nice! :)
#suggestion 100k subscriber prize? lessons from you!
What if 38. g7?? After Bishop captures f5 you got a queen
Daniel Hernandez Vazquez i think you ment to say h7 and actually after bxb on f5 it's a check followed by rook to h2 preventing king from caturing the rook and stopping the promotion
tiago ribeiro oooh! That's why I'm not a master haha. Thanks tiago
what about 38.bh3??
ah ok didnt saw that after bx h7 cant be played because of check on f5