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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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!
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.
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'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!
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.
Fischer dominated in 1971, but Carlsen is much younger and would better compare to Kasparov 1985. Both are just starting their professional careers and will get better.
I am hearing some views expressed, that Magnus will be a boring champion (assuming he wins, which seems 99% sure now).
We are all going to be subject to 100 move games grinding out endings, waiting for the opponent to err out of boredom.
Re: World Chess Championship 2013-Don't Count Anand Out Just Yet
Fischer dominated in 1971, but Carlsen is much younger and would better compare to Kasparov 1985. Both are just starting their professional careers and will get better.
Re: World Chess Championship 2013-Don't Count Anand Out Just Yet
Thanks. I'd forgotten that Sicilian poisoned pawn game. In the Najdorf with 6. Bg5 that poisoned pawn variation is probably the best try, although it didn't work for Fischer in that game.
Leave a comment: