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.
Extremely interesting game going on today; go to the match web site and have a look. Anand should win or draw, he has a knight for 2 pawns, one of which is on the 7th.
Paul was not alone in concluding that a draw was the inevitable outcome.:) After Anand's excellent h4 that should have been the result. Unfortunately, a few moves later, the champion found just about the only move that would lose, Bc3, and it was all over. Fantastic, fighting chess at the highest level.
Paul was not alone in concluding that a draw was the inevitable outcome.:) After Anand's excellent h4 that should have been the result. Unfortunately, a few moves later, the champion found just about the only move that would lose, Bc3, and it was all over. Fantastic, fighting chess at the highest level.
Bc3 was not a move played by Black, in fact Anand had the white-square Bishop. So I'm not sure what move of Anand's was just about the only move that could lose; the annotator Alexandra Kosteniuk didn't mention any such losing move on Anand's part. She wrote: "The most terrible thing that White can continue torturing his opponent for a long time, he can move his pieces from one side to another. He can always switch from the plan with the king on h6 to the king on e5 while time is running against Anand. That is why Anand resigns. He decided to give up probably he just didn't see how to defend and prefered not to continue this game. It seems that the plan g5, Bg7, g6 is too strong and Anand didn't see how to defend."
Personally, I don't consider this game as interesting chess, even though Anand was fighting for a draw. Again, Kosteniuk had a better description: "To tell you the truth, although the match of such players are always awaiting with big interest and enthusiasm, the strategy for this kind of matches nowadays are rather uninteresting. Players, like Anand or Topalov, or even Kramnik are trying to minimize their risk and play positions with a small plus for White and try to hold a draw in boring and slightly worse endgames. A match is not a tournament, even if you win with the score +1 it's enough to get the title. This makes players play differently, not in an open and exciting style they usually play in tournament, but rather in very academical and unrisky ways."
Game 4 was a very notable exception.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Bc3 = Bc6. A common notational error for those who learnt descriptive first (and even for those who didn't).
I make that kind of mistake all the time since, having used descriptive notation for about fifteen years before switching, algebraic notation is not my native chess tongue.
Rybka definitely goes from a slight plus for white to a loss for black about three seconds after Bc6 is entered.
My Fritz program goes from a " clear " advantage for Topalov, to a " winning " advantage for him, on Anand's fatal 54...Bc6?!.
Well so actually does Rybka on my machine - I misremembered that bit. In any event it goes right to +- as soon as 54 ..., Bc6 is played. That suggests that it isn't that deep. The move is a blunder for the concrete reason that it prevents the Bishop from taking part in the defense of the "h" pawn at a crucial moment.
Susan Polgar's site expressed amazement that Anand resigned there, but later gave the correct continuation. The Chessdom site still has this nonsensical note posted:
He decided to give up probably he just didn't see how to defend and preferred not to continue this game.
Actually I am quite sure that Anand saw the reason he was lost quite concretely. Heck, if I resigned every time I "didn't see how to defend" I'd have a lot less points than I have!
So I conclude that at least two GMs didn't really understand why Anand resigned at the time he did. Of course when I watched I didn't understand either, but it gives me some comfort to know that I was not alone!
Stephen is, as always, correct. I often make that transpositional mistake in my own notations: in either case, it is BQb3, n'est-ce pas. The losing move was Bc6 which deprives the h-pawn of protection.
My own untutored guess is that Topalov successfully followed the strategy I believe Shereshevsky described of just hanging around, probing here and there, waiting on the off chance his opponents makes a mistake, then pouncing. He had nothing to lose and even if he did not win he would be able to torture the Champion for hours. Anand, for his part, in a position which most commentators (including computers) considered drawn may have let his concentration slip for a moment.
The result may not have been a brilliancy but it is a superb example of fighting chess.
Any odds on who is most likely to win the match; which is tied at 4:4 (today is a rest day).
I pick Anand as the 3:2 favourite.
I am rooting for Anand primarily because I think that he is the nicer human being. I did not like Topalov insisting on a no speaking rule during the match, it shows that he is too uptight and tense, a typical type A non-personable trait...
3:2? Okay, I'll take a piece of your action. So if I put $500 on Topalov, you will put $750 on Anand? We can get Brad Thomson to hold the money. I'd wager more, but I'm married now and have to be conservative. ;-)
"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.
Tweet
Comment