gwnn Posted May 11, 2012 Report Share Posted May 11, 2012 Interesting first game with the Grünfeld. Should Gelfand have pressed longer with his bishop pair knowing that Anand can almost certainly hold? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted May 12, 2012 Report Share Posted May 12, 2012 It is highly likely that the position was dead drawn. Sure, you and I would have liked to have seen more moves, but you can't blame Gelfand for saving his fuel for one of his White games, where he has a better chance to get something in the middlegame that he can convert. A bishop pair and an outside passed pawn are good assets, but are they enough to push for a full point at this level, with both pairs of rooks still on the board? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted May 12, 2012 Report Share Posted May 12, 2012 Exciting game, though short Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted May 14, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 After a slightly boring second round draw (to people like me who never really understood the strategical subtleties of the Slav), another intense game in the Grunfeld. Too bad Gelfand didn't go for Dembo's 3 .. e5 :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted May 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 15, 2012 yawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antrax Posted May 20, 2012 Report Share Posted May 20, 2012 Finally :P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted May 20, 2012 Report Share Posted May 20, 2012 oh SNAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 nice choke gelfand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 yikes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 nice choke gelfandBit harsh! The commentators (Leko and Nepomniachtchi, who are no slouches) didn't see that coming either, and were recommending Qf6. It's quite a subtle trap, really - a quiet move (Qf2) in a variation which just looks lost for white. It is understandable, perhaps, that Gelfand didn't devote as much time to that variation as, in hindsight, he should have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted January 15, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 This is poetry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted January 25, 2013 Report Share Posted January 25, 2013 Can someone just pay a ton to aronian and carlsen to play a long match and we will all know that is the real world champion lol? Geez they are both playing so well, lol at carlsen just doing weird stuff in the opening to get an equalish but unknown position in the mid game and always converting to a win in the endgame. It is so amazing. Positions that anand would just offer a draw after 20 moves with are always 80 move wins for carlsen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 Hence the criticism of the non-match-based Candidates format (Carlsen can squeeze out a win against positions 3-8 so no need to perform well against #2). However, it will definitely be an improvement over what happened in 2011 (several super short draws, most matches being decided by rapid/blitz playoffs). Anyway, you are unduly dismissive of Kramnik who has played some great chess in the past year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 as usual not sure what the question is we can all debate the answer ARE YOU REALLY SURE THAT IS THE Question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 as usual not sure what the question is we can all debate the answer ARE YOU REALLY SURE THAT IS THE Question?'What is the fairest Candidates format that is still compatible with the financial needs of today's players?' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 'What is the fairest Candidates format that is still compatible with the financial needs of today's players?' and? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 and?and now you know what the question is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 and now you know what the question is. you make zero claimsonlimits...zero at this point you claim zero indv rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zasanya Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 'What is the fairest Candidates format that is still compatible with the financial needs of today's players?'After a lot of experimentation FIDE has settled on the present format whereby the world's strongest Grandmasters play a tournament to decide the challenger for the world title.The reigning world champion then plays a match with the challenger to decide the next world champion. This seems a fair format.Comparing Anand and Carlsen, Carlsen does show a willingness to go on playing till he can squeeze out a win whereas Anand does not show the same spirit. But then Anand is 41 years old and has won the world title 5 times in different formats and has held the number one rating slot many times in the past. Carlsen is 23 years old, at present has the highest elo rating in history but has yet to win the world title. Surely this explains the motivation levels of the 2 grandmasters? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted February 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 'What is the fairest Candidates format that is still compatible with the financial needs of today's players?' After a lot of experimentation FIDE has settled on the present format whereby the world's strongest Grandmasters play a tournament to decide the challenger for the world title.The reigning world champion then plays a match with the challenger to decide the next world champion. This seems a fair format.Comparing Anand and Carlsen, Carlsen does show a willingness to go on playing till he can squeeze out a win whereas Anand does not show the same spirit. But then Anand is 41 years old and has won the world title 5 times in different formats and has held the number one rating slot many times in the past. Carlsen is 23 years old, at present has the highest elo rating in history but has yet to win the world title. Surely this explains the motivation levels of the 2 grandmasters?It is definitely better than the super short matches from last time around but I'm not sure if it's best. Anyway it seems to favour Carlsen and I'm a Carlsen fan so why not? :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted March 5, 2013 Report Share Posted March 5, 2013 Carlsen -149 to win candidates on betfair lol. Surprisingly to me (but not to gwnn!), Kramnik is slightly better than Aronian (+460 to +500). If anyone wants to make some friendly bet I'll take Aronian to win over Kramnik (if neither wins, it's a chop). Ofc I think Carlsen will win so it won't matter. Kramnik is probably a fave cuz he has done it before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted March 6, 2013 Report Share Posted March 6, 2013 so is carlsen the GOAT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted March 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2013 so is carlsen the GOAT?are you trolling, jjbrr? :) you need to define what GOAT is first, but it's hard to believe that if Carlsen 2013 and Fischer 1972 were to play against each other via a time machine, Fischer would take anything more than a few draws here and there. Yes but what about opening theory and what about people learning from previous players' mistakes? And you have databases now and bla bla bla bla bla this has been discussed millions of times before and there are people who think new is automatically best and people who think that Morphy was the beez kneez and argh yes I think you are trolling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjbrr Posted March 6, 2013 Report Share Posted March 6, 2013 Didn't mean to troll. My chess knowledge is very limited. So you're extrapolating that '72 Fischer with 2013 technology would still get curbstomped or are you just saying that 2013 chess is so more advanced than it was several decades ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted March 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2013 What do you precisely mean by '72 Fischer with 2013 technology? Giving Fischer a few months to prepare openings as they're played today? Or having him born 40 years later and train from the beginning with the internet? These are all scenarios that people try to make up. In my opinion though Carlsen would kill Fischer in most scenarios because the collective knowledge in openings and middlegame play is much richer now than back then. Carlsen also has much stronger opps than Fischer, thereby making him tougher. I have no idea about Carlsen vs Kasparov though.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.