If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
With Carlsen's age advantage, it may even be a bit surprising that he didn't play out all the earlier match games, in an attempt to wear Anand down at least a little.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Carsen, Magnus – Anand Viswanathan 0.5-0.5
WCH 2013, Chennai IND 2013.11.12
Lawrence Trent and Tania Sachev are commentators for the first hour.
Yesterday was the rest day. Magnus likes to sweat it out and played some football and basketball and then headed for the gym in the hotel.. Vishy probably caught up on some movies. One of his favorite actors is Rajesh Khanna.
One of Magnus’ favorite films is Pulp Fiction and he has ordered Hangover 3 for later. He is also a big fan of bowling.
They both have private rest areas. It is often very productive to get up, throw a bit of water on your face, have something to eat and then come back and look at the position with new eyes.
The players are writing their moves down. Why? when they are being recorded in different ways - by television and digital boards. The rules for doing so have not changed
The written score sheets are collector’s items. {One is reminded that at the auction of the Dr. Robert Blass Chess Library in London, 1992, a complete set of autographed score sheets of New York 1927 were offered for an estimated £20,000. Too high a price, they didn’t go.}
(Trent) I have just been told that Reshevsky played this opening against Arthur Bisguier in 1972 and won a very nice game with it.
Both players wear blazers with their sponsors’ logos on them. Anand’s key sponsor is the software services firm NIIT Technologies Ltd. Carsen’s sponsors are Nordic Semi-Conductor and Arctic Securities.
Behind the players is a huge poster for the World Championship and prominent on that is a large photo of Chief Minister Jayalalithaa. She went from university studies to film and can speak English, Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Hindi. She was a force in both dance and song. One seemingly cannot avoid that photo anywhere in Chennai. It reminds me of Mom in the television cartoon series Futurama. Mom is the unscrupulous chief executive officer of Momcorp, one of the largest industrial conglomerates in the universe.
There is a big age gap between the two players – 21 years, only surpassed in World Championship play by Botvinnik-Tal (25 years) and Steinitz-Lasker (32 years). Even with the age difference, Vishy is looking very fit and well. He knows there can be games that could go six hours and he has to be prepared.
Susan Polgar and Ramesh come in to relieve Lawrence and Tania.
They both expect a long and decisive game. Susan says that you could reach this position from a Sicilian Dragon with reverse colours. Carlsen looks comfortable for the first time in three days.
She says that FIDE has 183 countries in its membership.
Ramesh says that Anand spent two months at a camp in Germany before the match. Supposedly he swam a kilometer each day and ran 10 km – losing 10 kg in the process.
Anand is a native of Chennai but moved to Spain because most of the major competitions are held in Europe each year and it is better to be based there.
The broadcast today is on television in India and Norway and in 48 other countries.
One of the reasons for Vishy’s longevity is that he has maintained his love of chess. He can’t have enough of it. For so many years he has had a hunger for the game and that has provided his motivation. He is also fortunate in his wife Aruna – she has taken a role as a supporter and manager as well as wife. Not every grandmaster is so lucky.
Lawrence and Tania come in and relieve Susan and Ramesh for the next hour.
This game is going on, so far, longer than the other two. They are at move 20. The players have to make 40 moves each to the first time control. They have about 50 minutes each on their clocks. They can offer a draw at any point in the game. In the case of a draw offer, the player may communicate directly with his opponent. Next year the Sofia Rules might be in force. They were first used at the Intel Tournament 2005 in Sofia.
They talk about Fischer and Carlsen, each having a huge influence on chess in their country and world interest. Lawrence met Magnus at a European Junior Championship when Lawrence was higher rated than he. He beat him at snooker and nothing else.
Tania met Vishy when she was ten years old at an exhibition match in Delhi. She lost. It was an inspirational time for her.
Susan and Ramesh take over again. Susan talks about how horrible the queen on h1 looks. The players have about 25 minutes left at move 28. Susan keeps talking about that bad queen position.
Both made their 40th moves. Anand offers a draw and Carlsen does not accept. Vishy makes another cup of tea. They play on until there are just kings and opposite colour bishops on the board (move 51), and shake hands. A 4.5-hour game.
++++++++++
At the press conference - Anastasiya with Magnus and Vishy.
Magnus said he made a couple of misjudgements in the middle game and stood worse. I am happy to just survive. He had some nerves and tension during the game.
Vishy wanted the two bishops but white always seemed to have counterplay. He thought white had enough play if he took the pawn on b2.
There are two questions about Kasparov, who is in the building. Both are non-committal about his support.
+++++++++
This is a rather odd situation. Kasparov and his wife arrived in Chennai and had no official invitation from the Indian Chess Federation. They were just treated like any other chess tourists. He was not to be allowed in the Press Centre. Kasparov said, “FIDE was “concerned” that he could get a lot of media attention in India and that the Indian Chess Federation wasn’t backing him as FIDE president."
Peter Doggers said in ChessVibes, “However, at the start of the round Kasparov was sitting next to and chatting with FIDE Vice President and chief organizer D.V. Sunar, so perhaps the relations weren't so bad after all.”
“However, during the game it became clear that Kasparov had not been given access to the press room (from where he could have given a press release), and he wasn't welcome to join the commentators either. Perhaps the latter would have been a bit too much, since Kasparov is a clear supporter of Carlsen, but it's clear that all 150 journalists present would have loved have a press conference. But FIDE didn't like the idea.”
+++++++++++
Viewers’ Comments
- It is to MC's credit that he survived this game. Quite a tenacity as is his reputation. I can't really think of many other GMs, in fact any other GM who might have survived this game as White. Incredible game to study and learn.
- What an exciting game! My thoughts:
I think Carlsen will drop this 1. Nf3 stuff for the rest of the match. He is getting trounced in the opening and went into this middlegame with serious problems.
Carlsen showed again that he is an extremely good defender. The fact that he was much worse and had very little time, but still found dynamic (but risky!) resources like e3?! bodes well for him: he is developing for match play the nerves he has in abundance in regular tournaments. He probably got a confidence boost from drawing this game after digging a huge hole for himself.
Anand played very well this game, and never let the pressure up until he, too, was short on time and Carlsen's pieces began to free themselves. Despite playing beautifully in the opening and middlegame though, we might have seen the first chink in the champion's psychological armor. I haven't watched the press conference yet, but I'm curious to see why he didn't take on b2 on move 29. Too much respect for his opponent? Seeing ghosts? Worried about missing some counterblow? Bd4 just smacks of playing it too safe, and the mass exchange on d8 was just giving up.
In any event, the last 15 moves or so of this game constitute a psychological victory for Carlsen. Now if he gets his white openings under control, and Anand goes for the throat when he has the chance, we could see some brilliant games.
Also, I notice that none of the three draws so far has been by mutual agreement. We have two repetition draws and an insufficient material draw. Are Sofia rules in effect, or is there some tacit understanding that one or both of the players isn't likely to offer or accept draws?
- It's not just seeing ghosts after 29...Bxb2 - put it through an engine. White plays Rae1, Bd5, Rxe6, etc. Black has to find some hidden tactics based on Bd4-f2 and Qf7, leaving himself open to a knight fork on e6, and a discovered attack on the queen. 29...Bd4 seems fine, but indeed 37...Rd8 was just giving up trying for the win. 37...Bd4 (this move just keeps coming up) followed by Rf8 was much stronger.
- I really liked Carlsen's response to the final question about how he is being treated in India. His reply was classy and sincere. I am developing a respect for this young man. This is shaping up to be a great match played by two classy players.
I was a bit irked by so many questions about Gary Kimovich, but then I cannot entirely blame the press for not exploiting such a juicy story.
- All in all, a narrow escape by Carlsen.
And a reminder to those who think him already the greatest player of all time. Kasparov or Fischer would never end up in such a position with a queen out of play on h1 blocked by its own bishop.
- Spassky v Fischer game 1 (1972) ... but Fischer did play Bxh2?? and lost his bishop and the game. Every great player makes mistakes, even Fischer and Kasparov.
- Anyway, Bxh2 was a one-move blunder. Getting your queen on h1 after like 8 moves is just missing something bigger altogether.
- Wow, just saw the press conference and I never saw Carlsen that devastated before
Last edited by Wayne Komer; Tuesday, 12th November, 2013, 11:20 PM.
Reason: tightened up the prose
Game four was the most exciting yet. Anand mounted a fierce attack but Carlsen held on and then turned the tide until in the end it was Anand who was content with the draw. Great stuff.
CV Reader Comment - Anand shows he can be a scrappy defender as well!
Another fantastic struggle. Carlsen played very aggressively, and Anand found some great defensive resources. Ne4 was particularly brilliant.
These last two games are already more interesting and hard-fought that half a dozen of the meager draws in Anand-Gelfand. Hopefully Carlsen holds true to his claim that "this is how the game should be played", referring to the continual attempts he made in the rook endgame.
It was really great to see both players smiling and analyzing right away, and to be so interested in discussing the game during the press conference. Carlsen seems to be completely comfortable at this point, cracking jokes, smiling, complimenting Anand's defense multiple times, etc. I liked Anand's quip after discussing Re6 at the very end, and how many problems Carlsen managed to pose even right up to the second time control. Just another day for Magnus, but not for him! The more comfortable and energetic Carlsen gets, the more I like his chances.
Anyways, I think the journalists should never speak Kasparov's name again in the press conferences. It is rude and he has said many times he is just there as a chess fan, nothing more. Leave it at that.
Finally, black has had a better time of every game so far, which is very surprising. I wonder what Carlsen has planned for his next white.
+++++++++++
Susan Polgar and R.B. Ramesh start today
Jon Ludvig Hammer is one of Carlsen’s seconds and is an expert in the C65 Berlin. They evidently have extensively analyzed the positions arising from it. Anand has looked at Carlsen’s games but also the games of his seconds! It is not so easy to remember though all the positions that your team examined months ago.
Anand is now examining whether he can trap black’s bishop on a2 (18..Ba2). Ramesh is impressed by his composure at the moment.
Tania and Lawrence come in. They discuss that pawn capture and mention Fischer’s famous trapped bishop (where he took h2) in his match with Spassky in 1972 and analyze lines where the bishop can get away and keep an extra pawn. Tania is a pretty good analyst. The viewers are peppering her with tweets – such is modern chess, I guess.
Susan and Ramesh come in for the next hour. Carlsen looks confident and relaxed. Someone relays to them that Stockfish has analyzed the position as having a big advantage for Black. This is at White’s 30th move with 40 odd minutes on each clock.
Ramesh asks what the ideal age is to teach a child chess? Susan plumps for 5 years-old. Ramesh runs a chess academy. He is not an active player anymore. His youngest students are six- and seven-years old. A 13-year-old there is partially blind and yet won the national junior championship - the Under 19.
Lawrence and Tania come on again. They say that Magnus has the extra pawn but his bishop and rook are locked in and Anand has some pressure.
With White’s 38. Nd4, Anand looks relieved and Magnus disappointed. Both players have reached the time control and walk away from the board.
The hour has ticked off and Polgar and Ramesh are back again.
(Susan) It used to be that they adjourned games. In the early 90s they eliminated adjourned games because of the appearance of chess computers. The whole idea was that you would play four or six hours and then adjourn. Sometimes it was a couple of days before you resumed that game. I had many sleepless nights while analyzing so I am happy that those days are over.
(Susan) We are down to a four-rook endgame with White a pawn down and Black one up. White’s dream would like to trade the e-pawn for a g-pawn because it would be easier to draw.
(Ramesh) For my generation of chess players there were no computers and no chess publications so we had to depend heavily on Chess Informator and The Encyclopedia of Chess Openings. Anand met with us one time and we asked about certain openings and lines and he was able to give us several games each from his memory. Later we learned that it is absolutely essential for a top player at that level to be up-to-date in theory.
(Susan) Anand stayed with my family for a week and he was absolutely amazing. He was like a walking chess encyclopedia. It was remarkable how much he knew and remembered. He would go through all the grandmaster games and become familiar with them. That is his secret of success and longevity. He was one of the first to use a computer to aid him the most. He was a pioneer in that.
(Susan) Nowadays there is a form of chess called Advanced Chess, where two players, with the aid of computers, contest a game.
There is an interesting article by Kasparov on advanced chess and other computer chess topics at
The commentators change again. After a bit, the players exchange a flurry of moves after the last time control. There is a handshake and the game ends in a draw on Carlsen’s offer and the players sit for a few minutes analyzing the game.
At the press conference Vishy said he was lucky twice before the time controls that he was able to gain some time by giving checks. Magnus said he was optimistic when he won the pawn but his opponent kept finding resources. It was a very good fight.
Both players looked happy with the result. The journalists are rather undisciplined and ask about Kasparov again. Did someone speak to him and tell him not to sit in the first row? What does Magnus think about Indian movies? Anastasiya looks angry. Magnus is absolutely beaming. The press conference ends.
The match score is Anand 2 and Carlsen 2 after 4 games. Tomorrow is a rest day.
++++++++++
The match organizers and the FIDE are selling copies of the Championship Chess Staunton set in hand-crafted wood for $470 each (free shipping).
(Nigel Short) – I note that the computer suggests 18..Bxa2. Such moves don’t normally do well in the World Ch.
- Shades of Spassky-Fischer Game 1, but with a likelier happy ending for the errant bishop
- Tremendous game today regardless of the eventual result. The match has burst into flames!
++++++++++
(Peter Doggers) - Carlsen had the advantage for most of the game, but the experts agreed that the reigning champion defended brilliantly. "Something went horribly wrong in the opening," said Anand, who saw his 1.e4 answered by 1...e5, instead of the Caro-Kann like in game 2.
"I made one illogical move after the next. I missed something with 18.Ne2 and then... I'm just basically lost," said Anand. About losing the a-pawn, the Indian said that he was "already drifting" and he mostly wanted to be consistent. Funnily enough, Kasparov, who spoke with GM Ian Rogers during the game, was one of the few who actually liked the pawn "sacrifice".
+++++++++
- I am worried for Anand that Carlsen is beginning to really settle down and play the kind of chess that he is comfortable with. These long, hard-fought draws will be much more draining on Anand than on Carlsen. Eventually, Anand will make some mistakes and Carlsen will pounce on them. I think Anand should ditch 1.e4 and move to 1.d4.
- Trent is an IM and rated 2433. Tania is also an IM and rated 2441. I think their commentary has been very good so far.
- Yes, they have chemistry
- I have not seen yet a bad comment for Tania, and maybe for a good reason.. she is lovely.
- Considering the Berlin defence: I remember Aronian saying that as black he plays the Marshall to draw and the Berlin to win. I guess because of known draw(ish) lines in the former, while the Berlin ending is unbalanced
- The 4 rooks ending was very instructive for me. Carlsen was pushing all kinds of threats when most people thought it was a straight draw and Vishy's defense was truly educational. Great game.
Last edited by Wayne Komer; Thursday, 14th November, 2013, 12:05 AM.
Reason: extra stuff
A couple of early observations. First, Magnus played a line favoured by his second, Hammer. Did Vishy's fabled prep cover this? For the first 13 moves (bad luck?) he followed a game Hammer drew last year against the lower-rated Berg.
Second, Vishy started to screw up in the early middle game, dropping one pawn for no particular reason. He then dropped another only to regain it but missed several opportunities to maximize the pressure. All in all, Anand must be quite relieved to have escaped with a draw. The good news is that he has a rest day to recover.
Magnus, meanwhile, should be licking his chops. :)
Lawrence and Tania commentators - A very sharp line.
(Lawrence, talking about a variation in the opening) It looks like White could get three tripled pawns on c3, c4 and c5- the Irish pawn centre! (Tania) Jonathan Rowson called it “a train without an engine”.
What do the players do right before the game? Vishy wakes up early in the morning and prepares a lot. On the other hand, Magnus gets up late in the morning and goes for long runs. (Lawrence) I have talked to Heinrich, Carlsen’s father, and he often has had to go and wake his son up, just before a game.
(Lawrence) The Karpov-Kasparov matches in the past went on for months in 1984. 48 games with only 5 decisive games. If the classical games here are tied at the end, then four tiebreak games will be played with 25 minutes for each player with an increment of ten seconds after each move (rapid). If the scores are level after that, then a match of two games will be played at a time control of five minutes with an increment of 3 seconds after each move (blitz). If five of such matches do not produce a winner then there is a sudden death or Armageddon game. The player who wins the drawing of lots may choose the color. The player with the white pieces shall receive 5 minutes the player with the black pieces shall receive four minutes. 3-second increments start from move 61. In case of a draw, the player with the black pieces is declared the winner. At the World Cup I was commentating on, the grandmasters were divided on which side they would rather be on.
In the last World Championship, Anand-Gelfand, they went to these tiebreaks. Vishy won in the blitz section without having to go to Armageddon.
+++++++
The computer evaluation of the moves finds three weak moves by Anand – 45…Rc1+ (better 45.... Ra1 46. Rg5 Rxa3 47. Bg8+ Kc6 48. Bc4 Bxc4+ 49. Kxc4 Re3 50. Rg6+ Kb7 51. Kb5 a3 52. Rg7+ Kb8 53. Rg8+ Kc7 54. Rg7+ Kb8 55. Rg8+)
and they accumulated into a loss for him.
+++++++++++
The challenger leads the match now 3-2.
At the Press Conference - (Magnus) It was a relatively interesting opening and I came out of it with an advantage – better bishop and better pawn structure.
Vishy didn’t know what the decisive mistake was.
He has white in the next two games.
The room is very noisy and it is hard to hear the questions from the reporters. The atmosphere is rather strained. The answers are very short - both players just want to get out of there.
++++++++++
Comments –
(Kasparov) Tarrasch said, "before the endgame the gods have placed the middlegame." Sadly for Anand, in the endgame the gods have placed Carlsen.
A strange match but oddly balanced. Carlsen plays without openings and Anand without endgames! Statistically, that's in Magnus's favor.
+++++++++++++
- The big blunder was actually ...Rc1+
- Ra1 is not a human move. Trouble started in move 44...Kd5 actually.
- How on earth could Anand lose this one?? Around move 33, he simply has to sit and do nothing and wait for Carlsen to offer a draw or die of boredom...
- Typical Carlsen's game: unpretentious opening, change of queens and some minor pieces, slow and long pressure, and fabulous technique at the endgame. Anand just made a couple of inaccuracies and...game over. Carlsen will win the match +3-0=7, as I predicted before it started
- 45 .. Ra1 was tough to find. Other than that Anand was pretty much OK, hard defeat to take
- Carlsen had some small advantage out of the opening, which is a good sign for him. He seems to have fixed his white openings? I wonder if Anand will be able to do the same. He has the white pieces twice in a row now, so he is in an ideal position to level the score.
I am amazed at the amount of counterplay Anand mustered from move 32 to the first time control. All the "basics" point to Carlsen having a much better position: black has more isolated pawns, worse rooks, a bishop tied to the defense of squares around the king, etc. But Anand managed to equalize and even lay some traps for Carlsen. It is a shame that he lost the second pawn after such great play, but Carlsen deserves credit for seeing exactly the continuation to win after Rc1+.
- Susan is fun to listen too..she talks and talks and talks about chess rules and theory...very determined and doing her job well (she is hired to explain chess to the general public, not the 1900+ here..) . She is really doing here best!
- I think it has to be acknowledged that most of the game was a fight on equal level once more. So no need for triumphant or depressive remarks for either side. In this endgame it was Carlsen who made less questionable moves or mistakes. And it was stunning how well he found his winning way through a still very complicated endgame.
Carlsen chose quite a risky opening setup with some development advantage but a King not looking too secure with queens on board. Anand's Bc7 surprised me: as if he wanted to slip away out of direct confrontation. After that Carlsen more or less had to go for a better queenless middlegame. So from my view that rather was Anand's choice than Carlsen's, and perhaps not the best black option.
Then Anand played very well to get room for his pieces, and Carlsen lost track a bit with Rf4 instead of Rd4. This looked a lot like a possible draw in dynamic balance.
Now two white games from Anand give him the opportunity to strike back, and I am very curious for the next games. Will he play more risky to build some pressure or wait for opportunities. Not easy to tell which strategy is better from his view.
The last three games have all been good fights, and I am beginning to like this championship for that reason.
- This game was won at the end not in the opening, often the game was considered dead equal by engines long after the opening was over. The commentators also thought it was drawn and little chance of another result.
- Carlsen is getting stronger in the match and Anand is getting weaker. I wouldn't be surprised if Carlsen ran away with the match now. Anand looked broken at the end of the game today. Comparing previous challengers Gelfand and Topalov is a mistake, Carlsen is much younger than those too were when they played for the title, and he is far tougher to beat. I see Carlsen winning more games and winning the match without too many problems now. A new young champion will be great for chess.
++++++++++++
(Chessdom) If you thought chess was not a spectator sport, think again. If the numbers generated during the ongoing FIDE World Championship Match are anything to go by, the game has caught the imagination of people. As many as 80 million viewers watched the highlights of the third round of the final between Viswanathan Anand and Magnus Carlsen on Doordarshan TV, informs The New Indian Express. As many, if not more, are hooked to the game through Twitter and other social networking sites. Never has chess been so keenly followed in the country since a young Anand took on Garry Kasparov on top of the World Trade Centre in 1995. And if chess fans depended on radio bulletins and TV news flashes back then, they have Twitter and mobile applications now.
Last edited by Wayne Komer; Friday, 15th November, 2013, 01:47 PM.
Magnus has just won a classic Carlsen victory, winning a drawn ending against the champ.
"winning a drawn ending" seems to imply that all Anand had to do was push some pieces around and it was clearly a draw. I don't
think that was quite the case. Once the bishops came off the board it was clear that Anand very clearly had his work cut out for
him and Carlsen had all of the chances and Anand had pretty much a purely defensive role. Of course, if you back up enough it
can look drawish but that is what Carlsen does - he pushes and squeezes everything out of every position - this is why he is so
dangerous even in 'drawish' positions.
A writer in Slate advocates taking chess along the same road that tennis has blazed:
Tennis doesn’t have a world champion, and rightly so. That sport measures greatness by elevating four tournaments (the grand slams) above all others and assessing a player’s results there. Peaks and valleys are measured by a ratings algorithm that’s updated from week to week.
Chess has the ratings algorithm, and it has the big tournaments. Now it just needs to kill the world championships. And to do that, it needs someone with the standing to do the job. Enter Magnus Carlsen.
I like the idea in principal of moving away from a World Championship cycle, and opting for a Grand Slam type of format. However, the writer fails to mention in his comparison of tennis to chess that the four tennis Grand Slams are played on vastly different surfaces: Grass (Wimbledon); Clay (French); Acrylic Hard (US Open), and; Synthetic Hard (Australian). While the last two are the closest in style of play, some players much prefer one type of hard court over another. One of the reasons why only a few tennis players have won all four Grand Slams is because hard court specialists and clay court specialists tend to be on opposite ends play-style spectrum. A player needs to be very versatile in order to win consistently on all four surfaces.
If all four chess Grand Slams were to have different tournament formats (elimination / Swiss / round robin) and different time controls, then I think it would be a very good idea to have a Grand Slam system instead of a World Championship. I can see that as a good benefit to the chess world.
However, if all four Grand Slams are the same in format and/or time control, and the only difference being location, then this would make the need for four large tournaments rather redundant.
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
"winning a drawn ending" seems to imply that all Anand had to do was push some pieces around and it was clearly a draw. I don't
think that was quite the case. Once the bishops came off the board it was clear that Anand very clearly had his work cut out for
him and Carlsen had all of the chances and Anand had pretty much a purely defensive role. Of course, if you back up enough it
can look drawish but that is what Carlsen does - he pushes and squeezes everything out of every position - this is why he is so
dangerous even in 'drawish' positions.
Fair point. With the benefit of hindsight and computer analysis, however, I am a little disappointed that Anand did not hold the position. I had always regarded him as the modern "universal" player (a la Spassky) equally at home in the opening, middle game and ending. So far, it does seem that Carlsen is the stronger player in the ending.
Re: World Chess Championship 2013-Game 5 won by Magnus
In terms of ending play, I would have to say the contest is between Carlsen and Kramnik. They both love to play with incremental advantage in near draw positions. Not sure which of them is better. I had always thought Kramnik, but now.........??
I would be interested in what others believe was the turning point in the game.
The commentators are quoted below as saying:
"- The big blunder was actually ...Rc1+
- Ra1 is not a human move. Trouble started in move 44...Kd5 actually."
My own analysis, with computer assistance, suggests that as of move 45, Anand made a series of imprecise moves whose cumulative effect was lethal:
After 45....Rc1+ White has a minimal edge.
But 46....Rg1!? compounds the error and heads Anand off on the wrong track. He would have done better to hunt down the e-pawn with Re1, etc.
And the fatal mistake was 51....Ke6 diverting the King to block the e-pawn rather than the a-pawn. If, instead, 51....Kc6 Carlsen was still clearly better but Anand was still in the game.
But after Ke6 the game was hopeless.
I stand to be corrected by other, stronger players.
I’m glad you checked this, Gordon. I had HIARCS churning away while I was writing my post and it changed the evaluations recommended by the commentators.
I found a 20-screen (!) analysis of the game by a Norwegian at:
Winning is everything and today Carlsen is a hero. He won.
The interesting part for me reading the message board is the comments seem to revolve around what an individuals computer "thinks". Comments like "I don't like the position" or "the position looks losing to me" seem to be missing. Only the computer opinion.
I think Ra1 is a very human move. Going for an outside passed pawn is always a good thing to consider. There were two other pawns worth going after and those should have been the major candidates. Rc1+ seemed bad because it only gives white a chance to defend the a pawn, and gains very little otherwise. Admittedly it was a complicated position and I haven't understood it all, but you can't call Ra1 mysterious.
Tweet
Comment