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.
That's the way games used to be looked at before computers. I can recall watching at the Winnipeg chess club while the championship games were dissected like that by the players.
The Botwinnik, Smyslov and Tal championship games. There were some strong players in Winnipeg in those days.
If Anand didn't know where he made his mistake(s) in the endgame, even right after the game was over, that could be a very bad sign for him, indicating Carlsen is a player on a higher level, at least as far as endgames go. Fischer, for example, used to leave at least some of his opponents wondering where they went wrong after games at times.
It naturally would have been more principled for Carlsen to go into the main line of the Marshall Semi-Slav, but evidently he can beat Anand at least now and then by just playing quietly. Plus, why let Vishy use his preparation in the sharp lines with 6...Qxd4 (in case of 6.Bd2 instead of Magnus' 6.Nc3)? Personally, I would have ducked first with Black, too, by (the slightly suspect?) 4...Bb4 immediately instead of taking first on e4, but then again I've only begun to play the Semi-Slav now and then.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
As I write, Magnus appears on the verge of winning game six. Again, the ending should be drawn with best play but under extreme pressure, just at the second time control, Anand blundered with 60.Ra4 and sealed his fate.
(Susan Polgar) It seemed to be a draw and then Anand lost a tempo with 60. Ra4 and got a lost position.
Anand resigns on the 67th move after almost 5 hours play. Times on the clocks – Anand 38 min, Carlsen 1 hr 07 min.
Press conference (in part)
This had to be one of the most embarrassing I have ever seen – it was like roasting someone slowly over hot coals and shows what happens when you disappoint your countrymen.
(Magnus) I got a pretty solid position out of the opening- a little bit better and he sacrificed a pawn and I got a very good rook ending but I am not sure it was winning.
(Journalist) What is your mood after two successive wins?
(Magnus) I thought to capitalize on the win yesterday and press him today. I am in a good mood today with a healthy lead and six games to go.
(Anastasiya) I know you remember over 10,000 games. What games did you use for your plan with the knight maneuver?
(Magnus) It is a common motif in the Breyer.
(Journalist) Why did you give up the pawn Anand?
(Vishy) What can I say? Some days just go like that?
(Journalist) It was a big blow for you today, how will you work to end this big blow?
(Vishy) You just do your best.
(Journalist) I am still wondering what you mean by doing your best?
(Vishy) Doing your best means doing your best. I don’t know why you don’t understand English!
Comments (ChessBomb) –
- Those who call on journalists really should prioritise the intelligent ones -- those who have done their homework and have sufficient insight into grandmaster-level chess.
- Carlsen didn’t reply to the fact he knows more than 10k games
- I feel great sympathy for Anand having to deal with inanities, rudeness and lazy stupidity from journalists
- I don't think non-chessplayers realise how upset a serious player is after a loss
- The question is irrelevant. It is just a prompt for the WC to explain what he is going to do to get revenge.
Viewers’ Comments
- The most impressive game from Carlsen so far from my view.
…Be6 is not without risk IMHO and perhaps not so clear after white’s best answers. But it shows clear will for counterplay, and Anand’s reaction revealed, that he was not willing to try to build on possible risks of this move, but rather get the typical slow Ruy Lopez kingside pressure on the board step by step. And that still seemed to work quite well.
But after the Breyer maneuver Nb8-d7 and then the Bb6 retreat a lot of this possible pressure vanished. Still Anand’s piece exchanges - and even more allowing Bxe3 - surprised me. Now it is black who can try to press a bit.
What Magnus then did in the endgame was something only few human players would have risked: giving back a pawn allowing white connected queenside pawns. No problem for engines, but a human has to be sure that the whole idea is definitely fast and forcing enough for at least a draw. Then one single bad move from Anand was enough for black to win.
With the one exception of admitting white’s h5, this was really stunning high level play throughout the game from Magnus. He will definitely not feel as excited as at the beginning of the match ever again, and instead feel at home for the rest of the games now, no matter what Anand does.
- Susan Polgar was epic again! Today she explained algebraic notation and said that the chessboard actually has 64 squares!
- I find it interesting that both players seemed to think that 57. Rg8+ was the decisive mistake, allowing Magnus' king to move to e3, but the engines insist it's a draw until 60.Ra4.
- Commentary seems to be quite harsh on Anand already. The only "blunder", I would say, was Rg8 going for the c pawn, while Rc8 seems to take away any plans for black. This said, on first glance: what can be wrong with Rg8 followed by Rc8 and winning the c pawn?
- I have to admit that it has been a privilege watching this great match live over the internet. Anand has always been a hero and role model to me even though I am older. It hurts to see him crumble in this manner. I really wish that he would come out with major resolve and play an inspired game with white in the seventh game. He needs to shake Carlsen out of his comfort zone. In order for that to happen he needs to truly "believe" that he can do it.
- Hmm never saw so many obituaries to a living man.
Remember, neither match nor Vishy´s career is over yet.
- This would have happened a year ago had it not been for Ilyumzhinov and his utter crap format for the previous Candidates.
Ilyumzhinov tried to derail Carlsen again this time by dictating the Chennai venue.
Let's hope Carlsen becoming World Champion will give the Kasparov campaign enough oomph to finally get rid of this dictator of world chess.
- Fischer in 1970-1972 was in some ways similar( to Carlsen), in that, as part of totally dominating the chess scene, he used to make his opponents play out technical positions that were 'known draws' and force them to prove they could draw it. For instance, take a look at the famous Geller-Fischer game from the 1970 Palma Interzonal, which has some vague similarities (2Rs apiece ending) to game 4 of the current match. What Fischer's opponents grew to fear in this period was the impression that he never made mistakes, reinforced by the 6-0 match victories against Taimanov and Larsen
- I generally don't like condescending comments by result. Anand has played lots of really good moves during the match, withstood a lot of tension and been very inventive in critical situations. All the games have been quite narrow, and I think BOTH players should be credited for that, even if endgame mistakes led to two Anand losses.
I also have to smile reading comments from hindsight, stating that any decent IM would have seen and correctly judged the possible danger of the black king walk sacrificing the last black queenside pawn. None of the commenting grandmasters saw that chance before it happened, and Anand failed to see the way to the draw in midst of the variation.
+++++++++
Sunday, Nov. 17 is a rest day. Games 7 and 8 will take place on Nov. 18 and 19.
Last edited by Wayne Komer; Sunday, 17th November, 2013, 01:52 AM.
Anand was able to draw until Ra4. I agree that b4 seemed best. The defense had to involve an extremely efficient combination of rook harassment of king and pawn, with counter threats from his own pawns. However, it's not enough to say he merely blundered at that move. The position was extremely difficult and I bet nobody gives the correct analysis until Karsten gives his take. Well, they could from move 61 figure it out but not from h5 gxh5.
Anyway the real issue is that the position was already difficult. He had hard moves to make and didnt find all of them. h5 was probably a good sac but why was it needed? If Carlsen at this stage made an error equivalent to Ra4 it would merely have made the game less dangerous for Anand. Several earlier mistakes by Anand and persistent play by Carlsen worked together to create this victory. Each mistake was important and Ra4 was merely the clincher.
Vishy got magged again! I thought Anand retained the psychological advantage after 4 games (ie underdog charms, more experience, etc) and was possibly on the verge of frustrating Magnus to the point of cracking him. Now he is up against the wall. It must be daunting to know that Carlsen will keep trying to seep through your position until the last drop has evaporated. I was astonished how he appeared to change the whole theme of the game today by giving up the c pawn which was so vital in the various pawn ending scenarios.
I have quite enjoyed the commentary from both teams, particularly with Houdini providing that 3 digit assessment which the commentators don't have. It's reminiscent of our "Master's Forum" from the good old days.
Re: World Chess Championship 2013-Don't Count Anand Out Just Yet
This may be whistling in the graveyard but I would not count Anand out. He has shown great resilience in the past and may yet pull it off. Don't forget Magnus's collapse in the Candidates' when he was extremely fortunate to win on tiebreak after Kramnik pushed too hard.
That said, perhaps our historian Stephen Wright could tell us whether anyone has come back from a two game deficit with six to play.
The odds definitely favour Magnus but he has to convert.
Re: World Chess Championship 2013-Don't Count Anand Out Just Yet
I wish you are right, but it seems an impossible task to recover. In six games Anand did not even have a position to his liking. Carlsen so far plays like Bobby Fischer 50 years ago, when he was winning equal endgames. Which makes me think that 50 years later, and even with the help of computers, we still do not understand fully this game.
Re: World Chess Championship 2013-Don't Count Anand Out Just Yet
Computers have proven we don't understand chess. Top grandmasters routinely draw each other where they would lose to computer play, and top computers don't draw each other nearly as often. Clearly people are missing something when it comes to winning possibilities in chess.
Re: World Chess Championship 2013-Don't Count Anand Out Just Yet
I don't think Carlsen's record is as impressive as that of Fischer. Remember that Fischer beat both Taimanov and Larsen 6-0 and then Petrosian 6 1/2 - 2 1/2 to win his chance to play Spassky. In that match with the conrtoversy, after 2 games Fischer was losing by 2 points. That counts the forfeit. I don't recall that Spassky won even one more game after the match resumed.
In the 1970 Interzonal, which Fischer won, his only loss was to Larsen who finished in 2nd place a full 3 1/2 behind Fischer. I think this made his score against Larsen in the Candidates remarkable.
In that match (Fischer-Spassky 1972) with the controversy, after 2 games Fischer was losing by 2 points. That counts the forfeit. I don't recall that Spassky won even one more game after the match resumed.
Spassky won game 11. The match was 7-3, with 11 draws.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Tweet
Comment