Jump to content

Anand-Gelfand 2012


gwnn

Recommended Posts

And it's a story because at half time it was:

 

1-2 Carlsen, Aronian 5/7

3-4 Kramnik, Svidler 3.5/7

 

And now it's

 

1 Kramnik 8/12 (after dropping only one draw in round 8)

2 Carlsen 7.5/12

3 Aronian 6.5/12

 

That is pretty awesome, especially if you think of how many people think Kramnik can only draw and how rarely you can win with black in top-level chess. It's also pretty awesome because it looked like for a long time yesterday that it was gonna be Carlsen at 8 and Kramnik at 7.5 instead, changing the odds and the tiebreaks dramatically. However, both Aronian and Carlsen played poorly, leading Kramnik to win instead of draw and Carlsen lose instead of draw. Also Carlsen had not lost a game of classical chess since October 2012 which is damn long ago. So are we allowed to talk about this or not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah silly me, if Carlsen ties Kramnik he will likely have more wins (unless Kramnik loses and wins in the last two games - unlikely). But Kramnik will probably get 1.5 or even 2 out of the last two, a tall order for Carlsen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also a story because Carlsen lost as WHITE to a guy who has lost 4 times on time this tourney and is one of the lowest rated players in this tourney. To put this into perspective, Carlsen lost only twice last year all year.

 

On the same day, Kramnik won as BLACK against the world #2 or world #3 (not sure which of kramnik and aronian is higher) who is over 2800 rating.

 

The odds of these two things occurring in the same round is so astronomical that it's pretty beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they are free to kib as much as they like.

So if they are tied before the last round, Kramnik has a drawn position, he should try to complicate matters just so Carlsen doesn't know Kramnik will draw. Carlsen either has to waste energy analyzing Kramnik's position, or may think he has to play for a win...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are underestimating how well/quickly they can analyze a position just looking at it imo. If it is basically a dead draw Carlsen will see that in about a second. If Kramnik actually complicates it so much that it might not be a draw anymore, well...it might not be a draw anymore.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting what Gawain Jones had said prior to the tournament about Vassily Ivanchuk.

 

" I don't see him managing to win the tournament, because I think his nerves will fail him at some point [...] It's possible that he beats Magnus and then loses to Kramnik and Aronian or something. He could be very vital for the final standings."

 

(Gawain Jones making predictions about Ivanchuk's performance before the tournament

http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/fide-candidates-predictions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I swear to god if Ivanchuk flags tomorrow...lol

 

edit: Just realized that implied conspiracy theory, wasn't intended that way, more was just gonna be tilted at him and lol at the same time. Who in the same tourney could beat Carlsen as black and also flag 5 or 6 times?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congrats to Carlsen, he is a deserving and worthy challenger to the title in spite of his defeat today. Do we have an Anand-Kramnik 2008 thread somewhere down in the depths of this forum? For a while, it looked like we might have had to go down and gravedig it....

 

People are complaining about the tiebreak, I think more wins is a great way to do it. Encouraging sharp chess is good for the game, and what a more effective way than to count a win and a loss as superior to two draws for the purpose of sending a challenger to play for the title? Kramnik may have played the best overall chess in the event, but in the end, his undoing was playing too cautiously and conservatively early.

 

About the double round-robin format ---- it was well-regarded going in, and worked out decently this time around. But in a parallel universe not so far away, Carlsen, Kramnik, Aronian and Svidler are all part of a four-way tie for first place. Imagine the ruckus that would have been stirred up by that clusterf***.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

People are complaining about the tiebreak, I think more wins is a great way to do it. Encouraging sharp chess is good for the game, and what a more effective way than to count a win and a loss as superior to two draws for the purpose of sending a challenger to play for the title? Kramnik may have played the best overall chess in the event, but in the end, his undoing was playing too cautiously and conservatively early.

 

When did they amend the tiebreak to this ? I was used to it being done by countback ie

 

Results against each other

Results agains each other and 3rd

Results against each other + 3rd + 4th

 

etc and on that Kramnik would have had the tie break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...