Um pequeno excerto.
Losing can persuade you to change what doesn't need to be changed, and winning can convince you everything is fine even if you are on the brink of disaster. If you are quick to blame faulty strategy and change it all the time, you don't really have any strategy at all.
One of the tensest games of my life saw the opponent fail to have faith in his own plans. In 1985 I was locked in yet another battle with my longtime foe, Anatoly Karpov. It was the final game of our second world championship match, and I was on the lead by a single point. He had the advantage of the white pieces, and if he won, he would draw the match and retain the title for 3 more years.
He played aggressively right from the start and build up an impressive attacking position against my king. Then came the critical decision, whether to completely commit to his attack by pushing is pawns forward against my king or to continue with more circumspect preparations. I think we both knew that this was the critical moment in the game.
Karpov decided against the push, and the opportunity was gone. After spending the first twenty moves of the game preparing a direct assault, he got cold feet and missed his change. Suddenly, I was in my element, counterattacking instead of defending, The game entered complications on my terms and I brought home the victory that made me the world champion.
When it came time to play for the kill, Karpov played a move that fit his prudent style but not the win-at-all-costs situation that he himself had created. His personal style was in conflit with the game strategy that was required in order to win, and he veered off-course.
(Kasparov versus Karpov, 1985)
Kasparov refere-se ao jogo 24 do campeonato do mundo de 1985, que pode ser visto com toda a comodidade aqui.
Aparentemente, o lance correcto de Karpov teria sido 23. f5!, ameaçando uma maré de peões contra o roque de Kasparov e não o frouxo 23. Be3 que foi jogado.
One of the tensest games of my life saw the opponent fail to have faith in his own plans. In 1985 I was locked in yet another battle with my longtime foe, Anatoly Karpov. It was the final game of our second world championship match, and I was on the lead by a single point. He had the advantage of the white pieces, and if he won, he would draw the match and retain the title for 3 more years.
He played aggressively right from the start and build up an impressive attacking position against my king. Then came the critical decision, whether to completely commit to his attack by pushing is pawns forward against my king or to continue with more circumspect preparations. I think we both knew that this was the critical moment in the game.
Karpov decided against the push, and the opportunity was gone. After spending the first twenty moves of the game preparing a direct assault, he got cold feet and missed his change. Suddenly, I was in my element, counterattacking instead of defending, The game entered complications on my terms and I brought home the victory that made me the world champion.
When it came time to play for the kill, Karpov played a move that fit his prudent style but not the win-at-all-costs situation that he himself had created. His personal style was in conflit with the game strategy that was required in order to win, and he veered off-course.
(Kasparov versus Karpov, 1985)Kasparov refere-se ao jogo 24 do campeonato do mundo de 1985, que pode ser visto com toda a comodidade aqui.
Aparentemente, o lance correcto de Karpov teria sido 23. f5!, ameaçando uma maré de peões contra o roque de Kasparov e não o frouxo 23. Be3 que foi jogado.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário