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.
...I'm looking forward to a Kramnik-Carlsen match.
Hi John:
Many are going to put out a contract on you!
I think there is every possibility that the next WCC may see Magnus-Vladimir. Many are terrified! BORING they chant at the demonstration against the pairing!
It seems to be the trend across Carlsen generation - "computer kids" - that will play quite precisely but boring. Is Caruana essentially different? Or Wesley So? Or MVL? Carlsen leads by a champion's determination and, to John's point, he shows that even top players play inaccurate.
Unfortunately, at that high level, there seems to be no other way to play. To his credit, it was Carlsen who beat Topalov recently in Tal's style.
I wonder how important the Adams vs Hydra match of 2005 was in this regards. I remember watching the games and thinking that positions looked about equal then suddenly Adams was just dead. It wasn't as if the computer won via tactics and out-calculated him in big complications. The computer just sort of ground Adams down for the most part, giving him little problems to solve, without doing much. For me it was a revelation: even 2750 players could lose equal positions where not much was happening. Seems the Anand v Carlsen match is another case in point.
Not me, I think it's fascinating, with computers and commentators saying draw draw draw, and Magnus working, working. There's a lot we don't know about chess. Magnus is exposing the essential weakness of some of the top players who are too quick to call a game a draw.
I'm looking forward to a Kramnik-Carlsen match.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Have you ever read the book "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell? He writes about seemingly disparate things like furniture, music, and food. The essence of the stories (at least what I got out of it) is that the gut reaction of the ignorant masses doesn't mean much when arrayed against those of a small group of experts. In other words, people will eventually come to love Magnus's style. They just don't know it yet. ;-)
I think there is every possibility that the next WCC may see Magnus-Vladimir. Many are terrified! BORING they chant at the demonstration against the pairing!
Anyone hold this view?
Bob A
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Have you ever read the book "Blink" by Malcolm Gladwell? He writes about seemingly disparate things like furniture, music, and food. The essence of the stories (at least what I got out of it) is that the gut reaction of the ignorant masses doesn't mean much when arrayed against those of a small group of experts. In other words, people will eventually come to love Magnus's style. They just don't know it yet. ;-)
On the other hand, there is a great deal of research demonstrating that experts don't know what they're talking about, especially when it involves forecasting the future.
For what it's worth, I believe Magnus may lead to a revival of the study of endgames. If I were a chess coach, I would take him as my template to get kids to work their way through the endgame maze. As I see it, he is consistently outprepared in the opening (not fatally but consistently as was Lasker), balances the game or even obtains some advantage in the middle, and then crushes his opponents in the ending. He sometimes overpresses (see Caruana-Carlsen, Sao Paulo 2012) but usually brings home the point. Sort of a blend of Lasker and Capablanca?
I was reading somewhere that 60. Ra4 loses a tempo so might have been the losing move. However, looking at it I wonder if something like 60. b4 h3 isn't also losing for white, although maybe it draws.
Last edited by Gary Ruben; Sunday, 17th November, 2013, 02:45 PM.
Not me, I think it's fascinating, with computers and commentators saying draw draw draw, and Magnus working, working. There's a lot we don't know about chess. Magnus is exposing the essential weakness of some of the top players who are too quick to call a game a draw.
I'm looking forward to a Kramnik-Carlsen match.
John's excitement notwithstanding, one has to fear for the future of chess and chess sponsorship if 100+ move games become the norm at elite levels. Serious and studious chess players will join John in his excitement for this. But the general public that chess is trying so hard to draw in (no pun intended) will turn away in droves.
Right now some of this group may be "window shopping" the match out of curiosity, but that has a lot to do with media hype (changing of the guard, a young new champion coming in). Once that young champion establishes long grinding endgames as the norm, and others at that level start emulating that, John Q. Public will be long gone. Not to mention a lot of younger chess players who will find such long games just too much to ask in addition to all the other sacrifices serious chess demands. All the creativity sucked out of the openings and middlegames, and left only to endgame play... not so bad if you can get there quickly, but it's not like the pitfalls of the openings and middlegame have just vanished. So you still have to take time and play perfectly. And THEN you get to be creative... maybe.
But personally I hope this does happen... it will be VERY good for my venture, offering even more of a contrast than there already is. Onward chess elite, to the endgame, and use all of your alloted time! "100 Moves or Bust!"
For the second half of this match, well, it appears Anand's match strategy has been a disaster. His passive play and willingness, indeed enthusiasm, to go into drawish endgames with Carlsen, with the hope of frustrating Carlsen's ambitions by holding all games to actual draws, has met up with Anand's own propensity for endgame errors. Is it really Magnus forcing those errors, or is Anand simply not a good endgame player?
At any rate, Game Six was a watershed moment. Anand must reealize now that opening and middlegame complications and aggressive play are his only chance. So I would expect the second half of this match to be more complicated. How that will go is anyone's guess. But it should start with Game Seven... if Anand tries to stay the course, Carlsen will end the match early for sure.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
John's excitement notwithstanding, one has to fear for the future of chess and chess sponsorship if 100+ move games become the norm at elite levels. Serious and studious chess players will join John in his excitement for this. But the general public that chess is trying so hard to draw in (no pun intended) will turn away in droves.
Right now some of this group may be "window shopping" the match out of curiosity, but that has a lot to do with media hype (changing of the guard, a young new champion coming in). Once that young champion establishes long grinding endgames as the norm, and others at that level start emulating that, John Q. Public will be long gone. Not to mention a lot of younger chess players who will find such long games just too much to ask in addition to all the other sacrifices serious chess demands. All the creativity sucked out of the openings and middlegames, and left only to endgame play... not so bad if you can get there quickly, but it's not like the pitfalls of the openings and middlegame have just vanished. So you still have to take time and play perfectly. And THEN you get to be creative... maybe.
But personally I hope this does happen... it will be VERY good for my venture, offering even more of a contrast than there already is. Onward chess elite, to the endgame, and use all of your alloted time! "100 Moves or Bust!"
For the second half of this match, well, it appears Anand's match strategy has been a disaster. His passive play and willingness, indeed enthusiasm, to go into drawish endgames with Carlsen, with the hope of frustrating Carlsen's ambitions by holding all games to actual draws, has met up with Anand's own propensity for endgame errors. Is it really Magnus forcing those errors, or is Anand simply not a good endgame player?
At any rate, Game Six was a watershed moment. Anand must reealize now that opening and middlegame complications and aggressive play are his only chance. So I would expect the second half of this match to be more complicated. How that will go is anyone's guess. But it should start with Game Seven... if Anand tries to stay the course, Carlsen will end the match early for sure.
As GM Soltis once pretty much put it, there is God knows what (in the way of principles, etc.) still to learn in the Middlegame. I'm not worried about that phase of the game being exhausted anytime soon. The Opening is another story, but even not taking into account unfashionable sidelines or old main lines (e.g. the QGD Classical Orthodox) chess is nowhere near as exhausted as 8x8 checkers (openings between experts were eventually chosen by lot), which many people are still glad to play, say on the internet (and in MHO 8x8 checkers [which is solved, to be a draw] is a far duller game than chess, even in the Endgame normally, although it has the advantage/appeal of apparently being simpler).
The Endgame has had any number of great masters over the years. I think Swedish veteran GM Ulf Andersson, at least at one time, had the reputation that he would be world champion if the queens were removed from the starting position of a chess game.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
(Press Release) Viswanathan Anand once again allowed the Berlin Ruy Lopez, despite achieving little against this system in earlier games in the match. This time Anand quickly gave up the bishop pair to double the black pawns on c-file. Earlier this year he employed the same idea against Karjakin in the Norway Chess Tournament. But Carlsen deviated on move 6 by getting his light-squared bishop out to pin the white knight. Anand again allowed massive exchanges that soon brought about an endgame with queens and knights. Neither of the players was ambitious to press on and the game finished with moves repetition.
Carlsen actually left the stage, and returned to the board... only 18 seconds before the start. The term "zero tolerance" could be heard in the playing hall!
Susan Polgar says that more than 200 million people a day are following the match.
Lawrence Trent confesses himself disappointed. He thought that Vishy would come out fighting instead of letting Carlsen get into the slow positions he thrives in. Lawrence compares his technique with that of Capablanca with the will to win of Alekhine. Grandmaster Abhijit Gupta is Lawrence’s partner today. He says that it is difficult to come back after a loss and Anand has had two of them. Two players that bounce back well after losing are Kasparov and Caruana.
The players have their own restrooms with a fridge, soft drinks, orange juice and tea. They use that room to relax and sit down and they have a TV screen to see if the opponent has played a move or not. For the last game, Vishy didn’t get up once – he sat at the board for the whole six hours.
Abhijit asks Lawrence what side he likes the best at this point in the game (after 18 moves) and Lawrence says, “Neither. It reminds me of a famous quote about isolated queen’s pawn positions from Julian Hodgson. ‘I don’t know how to play the white side and I loathe playing the black side’.
It’s not my style – too slow, I am a more dynamic player. If I had to choose a colour, I would take white.”
(Lawrence) These guys are analyzing positions with their teams and by themselves. Magnus never stops thinking about chess, whether he is hiking or doing sport – he is always thinking. At that level, you don’t get to 2800 without always thinking about chess.
Both Magnus and Vishy look very relaxed. The whole game experience today is very sleep-inducing.
The draw is agreed. The total time taken is about 1 hour and 6 minutes.
+++++++++
Press Conference -
(Anand) I chose a line, which we have both played in the past, you get a very slow maneuvering game. White has two plans, to play f4 and playing on the h file. I thought I might be able to press a little bit but could not make it happen.
(Magnus) We both have played this line – there are many different plans – whatever you play is quite slow. I felt I was doing fine just a little bit worse. f4 can be met by f5 and everything goes off.
It is always going to be a bit better for white but my pieces are well developed and I have no particular weaknesses, so I have no major troubles.
(Anastasiya) How did you cope with the pressure yesterday?
(Anand) Because of the weather, I just stayed in the hotel and did some work.
(Carlsen) I played football and basketball – not too successfully.
[There have been two days of heavy rain in Chennai]
(Journalist) Are you disappointed that the game was short today?
(Magnus) No, I have the lead and won my last game with black, so I am fine.
(Journalist) Shall we expect some sharp play from you?
(Vishy) I will keep trying.
(Journalist) Talk about the psychology of the match.
(Magnus) The outcome of Game Five influenced the result of Game Six. I think that is unavoidable in a match. You try to move on but it is not so easy if you have lost.
(Journalist) Do you read any of the messages coming from social media? Do your teams relay them to you?
(Vishy) They let me know if there is something I should know but I don’t know what they are not telling me.
(Magnus) I have followed them a little bit. I am thankful for those who wish me well. For those who don’t, I don’t read it anyway! (laughter from audience)
(Journalist) What about the butterflies and nerves, Magnus?
(Magnus) They are still there, but as the match goes along, you settle in.
++++++++++
The journalists need copy and so could be asking questions forever. Carlsen sees the humorous side and Vishy tries to be helpful.
On one of the chat rooms someone has suggested an answer to the further enquiry about what “doing your best” means. Maybe Anand could have borrowed Kramnik’s words, “I accept responsibility only for the quality of my work, not its result.” V. Kramnik (2007).
++++++++++
The Hindu has a story on Frederic Friedel, who is in the city cheering for both Anand and Carlsen. He is friends with both.
“Of course, I have known Anand for much longer. He is now part of my family. I had met him long before he became a top player.
“I still remember meeting him for the first time in London a couple of decades ago. He had just finished a tournament and told me that he was going to play in another event in The Netherlands a few days later. I invited him to my home in Hamburg, and he accepted the invitation.”
It meant that the Friedels had to learn how to cook South Indian vegetarian food. “We now have it twice or thrice a week after finding it to be the best food in the world,” says the Mumbai-born Friedel.
“Aruna has taught us many new things too.”
Anand, on the other hand, has made his own contribution to the development of ChessBase. “He was one of the earliest users of the programme,” says Friedel. “He gave us several new ideas.”
The very idea of ChessBase, though, originated after a meeting with Garry Kasparov, the man Anand replaced as the World No. 1.
He met Kasparov in 1985 at a simul in Hamburg and they talked. When he came back again, he had a small database of hundreds of games for him. ChessBase was born and the sport was never the same again.
++++++++
Viewers’ Comments
- I think Anand is fundamentally a well-mannered, polite man, but anyone can get riled up after enough accumulated disappointment.
- Anand IS a gentleman, but when journalists keep repeating same utterly stupid questions after a terrible terrible loss in a WC match in his hometown with all the insane pressure, they kick a wounded tiger.
- Good! Anand steadies the boat and looks ahead!
- To "steady the boat" he needed to win. All he did was watch whilst the boat became more unstable. Think about it. His chances of winning with one less white and with one less game to go have gone DOWN, this is nothing but a deterioration of the stability of the boat.
- All those months of prep and this is the best he can do?
- Anand is a legend of the game and an extraordinary talent who delighted all of us with so many amazing games. All this relentlessly insulting him because at 43 he is losing against a 22 year old genius is really disgusting.
- I admire Magnus. He is probably the best player of all time, but I have a reservation. Is this style good for the game?
This eking out of small advantages (or no advantage at all) is turning chess into a test of stamina. I try and learn from him but at this rate, I might as well train for a 4-minute mile and with as much hope of success.
Fischer v Spassky I was inspired by. I wanted to play like them. Will this generation of 10-year-olds be similarly inspired? I doubt it. Give me Fischer or Kasparov any day.
I do not intend to detract from Carlsen's wonderful technique, but this is very much chess for the connoisseur.
- A very cagey draw, which obviously helps Carlsen far more than Anand. So far Anand's 'famed opening prep factory' seems to have been utterly neutralised by Carlsen's disinclination to get involved in 'debated' sharp lines.
As another of the 70s junior generation, though a much lesser player, I concur to some degree with what was said up above - it is not terribly inspiring fare for a wider audience, though one has to admire Carlsen's endgame mastery. I guess what it shows us as well is how much general technique and especially accuracy at the upper and especially 'Super GM' sort of level has improved since Fischer's day.
- Doing his best is doing his best! (like today, that was his best)
I don't know why you all don't understand English!?!
Last edited by Wayne Komer; Monday, 18th November, 2013, 05:28 PM.
Reason: added weather report
It looks like Anand is being as stubborn as Kasparov was in his 2000 World Championship match with Kramnik, when Kasparov kept trying and failing to beat Kramnik's Berlin. Perhaps Aronian should do Anand a favour, give him a call, and inform him of his own expressed sentiments that "Only Black has winning chances in the Berlin" (:
As GM Soltis once pretty much put it, there is God knows what (in the way of principles, etc.) still to learn in the Middlegame. I'm not worried about that phase of the game being exhausted anytime soon. The Opening is another story, but even not taking into account unfashionable sidelines or old main lines (e.g. the QGD Classical Orthodox) chess is nowhere near as exhausted as 8x8 checkers (openings between experts were eventually chosen by lot), which many people are still glad to play, say on the internet (and in MHO 8x8 checkers [which is solved, to be a draw] is a far duller game than chess, even in the Endgame normally, although it has the advantage/appeal of apparently being simpler).
8x8 checkers is too small a game to be very interesting in my opinion. Interesting though are facts about solving the game:
1) In reality, checkers was solved over a hundred years ago when the world championship featured an incredible run of IDENTICAL games. Identical because both players knew which moves were best and didn't dare to deviate. This is when they first introduced randomized openings, and the symmetrical opening they played then was banned.
2) A Proven solution only happened when Chinook got good enough that the opening search met up with the endgame table base. It was a weak solution they found and they only identified one drawing line. They have not solved modern checkers with the 100 standard, randomly chosen openings, but don't appear to be trying either.
3) Before Chinook had mastered the game, it lost a match to Marion Tinsely (the world's greatest checker player who had never lost a game in countless years). "In one game, Chinook, playing with white pieces, made a mistake on the tenth move. Tinsley remarked, "You're going to regret that." Chinook resigned after move 36, fully 26 moves later. The lead programmer Schaeffer looked back into the database and discovered that Tinsley picked the only strategy that could have defeated Chinook from that point and Tinsley was able to see the win 64 moves into the future."
4) International checkers uses a 10x10 board with different rules. Canadian checkers uses a 12x12 board. Both are much more interesting and difficult to play and have not been solved. In fact, last year a human won a 6 game match versus a strong computer. Evidently the programming has not evolved as much as chess has.
Last edited by Alan Baljeu; Monday, 18th November, 2013, 02:53 PM.
[U]Lawrence Trent confesses himself disappointed. He thought that Vishy would come out fighting instead of letting Carlsen get into the slow positions he thrives in. Lawrence compares his technique with that of Capablanca with the will to win of Alekhine.
I saw this section, and Lawrence was quoting Kasparov, who said apparently just a day or two ago that Carlsen's play reminded him (Kasparov) of the technique of Capablanca combined with the will to win of Alekhine. Gupta replied something like that was about the best compliment a chess player could get. Lawrence joked that no one would ever be reminded by Carlsen's play of Tal.
Gupta then asked Lawrence who Anand reminded him of. He almost couldn't come up with anything, then said hesitantly "... maybe Alekhine".
Later there was a tweet asking something along the lines of would Carlsen inspire many young players to imitate his style? Lawrence gave an emphatic "no" answer, saying in fact that many will be turned off by Carlsen's style, that there will be a backlash against these long maneuvering games. I rather like this Lawrence Trent. But he did say at one point that the reason he isn't around 2800 is because "maybe I need to learn to play these positional games."
They both commented something about a possible future Carlsen - Kramnik championship match. Can't remember exactly what they said, but they both seemed to not look forward to such a match.
Anand IMO is done now. I particularly watched this game to see if a dynamic, attacking Anand would appear, but whatever imagination and creativity he might have had are now gone. Carlsen seems like he doesn't even have to think, the computer-like moves just come naturally to him.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Tweet
Comment