On a Wing and a Dare

Submitted by Dozy on Sat, 09/19/2009 at 4:05am.

In 1994 two of my sons, Wayne and Neil, attempted something that had never been done in Australia before. They, and two of their clubmates, launched a hang glider from a hot-air balloon.

The location was Canowindra, just across the Blue Mountains west of Sydney, the acknowledged ballooning capital of Australia. Their pilot was a pastry chef who flew his balloon as a second job: inevitably he was known as The Flying Pieman.

When they checked into their motel they learned that the whole town had been talking about them. The manager had seen the hang gliders strapped to their vehicles and said, “Are you the four guys who are going to...” and she made a downward diving motion with her hand.

“That's us,” said Wayne.

“Look,” she said, “would you mind paying for your room in advance?"

Obviously nobody thought they were going to make it.

In chess terms there are many players who have gone where nobody has gone before—these are the people who take risks at the highest level and who prove that their ideas were well founded. People like Richard Reti, Aaron Nimzowitsch and even Ernest Falkbeer, a “fireworky” player. (See the current story about him in Le Blog de la Batgirl.)

Of course, it's not only the innovators, the trail-blazers, who fly high in the chess firmament. There have always been just a few giants who are able to create the kind of tactical magic that leaves the rest of us feeling spellbound.

One of the first such games I ever saw was Paul Morphy's famous victory over Carl Isouard and the Duke of Brunswick, played at the Italian Opera House in Paris during a performance of the Marriage of Figaro. The opera's sub-title, “A Day of Madness” may have been appropriate for this particular game which was all over in seventeen moves. As a beginner when I first played through the moves, I was left with a feeling of awe for such a man. Now that I understand better how he accomplished this remarkable win, the awe hasn't diminished much. This game is so well-known that I hesitated to post it here, but there will be some players who haven't seen it yet.

I read all I could about Morphy but then found the games of Mikhail Tal and he became—and remains—my chess hero. Ah, to play like that! With another 40 IQ points I still wouldn't be able to imitate his brilliance.

In the 1956 USSR Championship, following his sixth round loss to Spassky, Tal said his play deteriorated. He won one game, drew several others, and then came to the final round against Alexander Tolush. He dismisses the game as a “rather complicated combinative attack” but it's full of wizardry. By move 14 Tolush was two pawns to the good and Tal's king was on f2, but Tolush had only his queen out beyond the third rank. Over the next 17 moves Tal battered him unmercifully in a pyrotechnic extravaganza. (Does that sound like hyperbole? You bet! But that's how I felt about the game.)

Finally, here's a brevity from the Munich Olympiad in 1958. A.Russell of Ireland has obviously been discombobulated by Tal's moves.  His pain didn't last very long.

Two years later Tal defeated Mikhail Botvinnik to become, at that time, the youngest World Champion in the history of chess—a record that remained for twenty-five years, until Bobby Fischer forfeited his crown to Anatoly Karpov.

 

» posted in Dozy's Inferno
 

Comments:

by nuclearturkey - 3 months ago
International
Member Since: Aug 2009
Member Points: 923

I guess one has to have experienced the game to understand. 

by Dozy - 3 months ago
Blue Mountains Australia
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 2209

nuclearturkey: I feel the same way about the Morphy game. I was bamboozled as a beginner, but the beauty still hasn't diminished.

The great players have an ability to produce complicated combinations that, even now, I couldn't begin to understand but, like yourself, I get carried away by the wonder of it all. How can you explain to a non-player that a game whose pieces have only six different ways of moving can produce so many different and fascinating combinations?

by nuclearturkey - 3 months ago
International
Member Since: Aug 2009
Member Points: 923

I feel the same way about the Morphy game. I was bamboozled as a beginner, but the beauty still hasn't diminished. As for the Tal games, much like the hang gliding are great to admire from a distance, but as a fraidy positional pussycat it's not a lot of fun to be stuck in the middle of such a position myself... Smile 

by Dozy - 4 months ago
Blue Mountains Australia
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 2209

Mitchelman : Chess and hanggliding, the best combination.

Thanks, Mitchelman.  It's a topic I thought might have been interesting, but this post has had less readers than most of the others. Sometimes it's hard to pick the right introduction. 

Chess and hang gliding are both fascinating, but chess is kinder to the body when you bomb out. Wink

by Mitchelman - 4 months ago
Dresden Germany
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 3

besides the games shown...

Chess and hanggliding, the best combination.

Thanks for the story

by Dozy - 4 months ago
Blue Mountains Australia
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 2209

random-dHis pieces seemed to be flying about aimlessly like the legs of an epilectic octopus!

Full marks, random-d.  You may have invented a brand new cliche.

The great David Bronstein had this to say about Tal:  "How does Tal win?  He develops all his pieces in the centre and then sacrifices them somewhere."  Tal himself said, "There are two kinds of sacrifices: sound ones and mine."

The world is full of people who didn't understand Tal's genius, r-d, and a lot of those were grandmasters.

by random-d - 4 months ago
Oklahoma City, OK. United States
Member Since: Nov 2008
Member Points: 151

I can follow most grandmaster play pretty well, but Tal makes my head spin. I had no idea what he was up to most of that game. His pieces seemed to be flying about aimlessly like the legs of an epilectic octopus! How he achieves the results he does is beyond my level of comprehension.

by Dozy - 4 months ago
Blue Mountains Australia
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 2209

trentthechessnutThanks for the great article Dozy... Its kinda inspiring me to start my blog back up...

Thanks, TTC.  I'll look forward to seeing your blog up and running again.

by trentthechessnut - 4 months ago
Picton, NSW Australia
Member Since: Apr 2008
Member Points: 406

Thanks for the great article Dozy...... Its kinda inspiring me to start my blog back up....

by Dozy - 4 months ago
Blue Mountains Australia
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 2209

Archaic71 Losing to Tal was like trying to figure out how the magician ended up wearing your watch.

You left me chuckling with that one, Archaic.  It must have been exactly like that.

There were quite a few people who thought that he used hypnosis and once Pal Benko told a few friends, ahead of a scheduled game against Tal, that he was going to wear sunglasses so Tal couldn't hypnotise him.  Shows how little he knew about hypnosis! One of them told Tal (what are friends for?) who came prepared.  When Benko put on his sun glasses Tal pulled out an enormous pair and put them on too.

Everybody laughed, including Benko, but he didn't take off his shades for the whole of the game.

by Archaic71 - 4 months ago
Texas United States
Member Since: Nov 2008
Member Points: 241

You almost have to feel sorry for the 2nd tier masters that played Tal . . . all that work to get to that level and they get dismantled in a barrage that no amount of preperation could have prepared them for.  What do you take from a game like that?  At least losing to Botvinik or Fischer was a technical lesson that you could learn something from - losing to Tal was like trying to figure out how the magician ended up wearing your watch.

by Dozy - 4 months ago
Blue Mountains Australia
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 2209

batgirlIn Tav vs. Russell, I love 14.Nd4.

It's something I always enjoy in the best games.  The ability to keep adding pressure until the whole defence falls apart.  It all looks so logical when you see it there, but it ain't easy to find in actual play.

by batgirl - 4 months ago
NC United States
Member Since: Jun 2007
Member Points: 4475

In Tav vs. Russell, I love 14.Nd4.

Thanks for the games.

by Dozy - 4 months ago
Blue Mountains Australia
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 2209

White_PhoenixUgh...my head hurts

Me too.  I think games like these are in that zone when they become more like art or poetry than calculation.  It takes a particular kind of mind to be able to pull them off.  Enormous skill, enormous calculating ability, but a flair for the dramatic as well.  As you said, they're fun to watch, but I wouldn't want to go there.

It was Tal who said that chess is like a forest where two plus two equal five and the path out is only wide enough for one.

by White_Phoenix - 4 months ago
Sydney, NSW Australia
Member Since: Mar 2009
Member Points: 114

Ugh...my head hurts from not just seeing but understanding the combinational idea behind them.To me its like:

Sharp wild players are extremely fun to watch and even to play out(even if you're on the receiving end) , but they're so hard to understand that it ends up being a complex maze of mystery.(Morozevich, Shirov, Tal, all the romantic players)

Personally I tihnk games like Botvinik and Karpov are very instructive and can be of immense importance in understanding chess.However these games tend to be dull and ends up being a positional grind. (Kramnik ,leko, petrosian, botvinnik,karpov, capablanca)

Kind of like which waters do you prefer crystal clear and calm or stormy, muddy waters?

Then theres the last category which blends a mix of dynamism with excellent positional understanding.Players like Kasparov would never had become who he was , if not for Karpov.Players like Anand, Kasparov, Aronian, Fischer, Alekhine. injected dynamic life into the games without turning into a swampy jungle.

 

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.