Andrew Smith wrote: ↑Thu Feb 29, 2024 6:07 pm
1. Sultan Kann v Capablanca (30)
2. Penrose v Tal (46)
3. Yates v Alekhine (24)
4. Nunn v Beliavsky (67)
5. Short v Timman (72)
6. Miles v Spassky (61)
7. Keene v Kovacevic (52)
8. Steanv Browne (54)
9. Miles v Karpov (64)
10. Pratten v Maczynski
Does anyone else want to put these games in order ?
1. Alekhine v Yates, where Black had one of his "best -player-on-the-planet-for-the-next-six-hours" days;
2. Beliavsky v Nunn, about which the winner understandably wrote that "if you play a game such as this, thinking of it will give you a warm glow for at least the next 25 years;
3. Penrose v Tal. The only game the Soviets lost in that Olympiad, and getting a standing ovation from the assembled experts;
4. Miles v Spassky, a very accurate sustained attack against one of the strongest players in the world, which won a brilliancy prize and showed once again how wrong B. H. Wood was when he wrote that "it's when you have champions up against rabbits that you get the brilliancies";
5. Karpov v Miles. Any game that irritated Karpov so much deserves a high ranking;
6. Keene v Kovacevic. A lovely reminder that before he took to writing pot-boilers, Ray Keene was actually a very fine player indeed;
7. Stean v Browne. Out-combining Walter Browne took some doing, even if there may have been a hole in it;
8. Short v Timman. It's spectacular but I can understand why Short is fed up with only being remembered for it;
9. Maczynski v Pratten. Incomparably beautiful finish, but, as others have said, less than top-rank opposition and with a whacking hole in it;
Disqualified: Sultan Khan v Capablanca. I had the excuse for including him that he was a citizen of
British India and that he played for the
British team at the Olympiad; but
English he ain't. Damn fine game, though.