|
Who will win? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Vishy Anand |
|
3 | 2.26% |
| Magnus Carlsen |
|
30 | 22.56% |
| Kirsan Ilyumzhinov |
|
100 | 75.19% |
| Total: | 133 votes | ||
|
BurningStone posted:A very Carlsen game. I was up way too late last night and missed the whole game this morning, unfortunately. That was, as you and a couple others have said in this thread, a very Carlsen game. I'll be sure to wake up at 4:30 am (well, maybe 5 or 5:30) once we're at the point where one player has the chance to clinch though -- don't want to miss any historic chess moments.
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2013 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
So is Anand trying at all to avoid (or exact a penalty in return for) Carlsen's early Queen trades? Seems like we're seeing a lot of "Carlsen's type of game" here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
Now that he's down a game, Anand might try something very tactical. Before he didn't have a good reason to go crazy. But today's game was a semi-Slav, which can certainly get wild. Carlsen just picked a quiet variation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
Does Carlson just picking safe, draw-friendly variations from here on out?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2013 22:43
|
|
|
buttcoin smuggler posted:Does Carlson just picking safe, draw-friendly variations from here on out? Given how games 1 and 3 went, it's probably too early to try to draw from move 1 every game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 00:18
|
|
|
Yeah, way too early for that. There are seven games left: if he (or Anand, for that matter) were to take a two-game lead at any point, then it makes sense to play as solidly as possible and take absolutely no chances, but up only one game, I don't think that'll happen until...I dunno, maybe Game 10, when Carlsen would have two more whites and Anand only one. He can avoid anything too risky knowing he doesn't need to win another game, but he isn't taking any crazy risks to begin with, so that's probably a moot point. Edit: In other news, I was looking up the updated odds on the match, and bwin has Anand at a little more than a 5-1 underdog now (chess odds aren't nearly as uniform as in most sports though; I've seen it as low as 4-1 and as high as 12-1 at other bookmakers). More interesting is all the betting they allow on individual games. If you want to, you can bet on the opening move, what piece will be captured first, when the first check will occur, and much more! OrangeKing fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Nov 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
Anand misses d5 on move 29, Carlsen has a reasonable advantage. Not enough to win, but if Anand keeps up with the inaccuracies it could snowball. Then again, it's pretty much a drawn position. There's not a lot of play left, even with Rd1 instead of d5. edit: Qc7 looks great if Carlsen plays it on 32. Wonder what he will actually play. There's not a whole lot else to do, and it's a pretty elementary tactic that is pretty strong in the position. Re6 is awkward and a computer line mostly. edit2: Carlsen plays Qc7, Anand plays Kh1, Carlsen must be satisfied because now he has plenty of play left with another passive move from Anand. Khorne fucked around with this message at 13:07 on Nov 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 12:42
|
|
|
This looks like the kind of position where it is objectively drawn but Carlsen might be able work his tiny advantage into something tangible. I do think though with this many pawns and no minor pieces it does look like an almost impossible game to win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 13:13
|
|
|
This game is getting a little tense. Anand is a pawn down in a Rook ending and has just offered another pawn to break up Carlsen's kingside pawn structure. I wonder if Carlsen sees an opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 14:16
|
|
|
Ra4 from Anand seems like a huge mistake.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:09
|
|
|
How did Magnus go from a 5% win probability to 94% in 2 moves then 98% in another 2?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:10
|
|
|
massive blunder, complete collapse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
White Paper posted:massive blunder, complete collapse. Josh Lyman fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Nov 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
This looks terribly hard for Anand now. He needs a win in the next game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:30
|
|
|
It was a poor move by Anand but I wouldn't call it a massive blunder. Carlsen had Anand under pressure for hours now and was requiring very accurate play from Anand to keep the draw, and finally Anand played an inferior move. The win is all on Carlsen, any other grandmaster out there would have taken the draw long before.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:31
|
|
|
Well after Anand missed f4, b4 was so hard to see and the way it held a draw is pretty insane. Both of them immediately rejected it when it was suggested.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
I haven't followed chess terribly closely lately.. but from my perspective, squeezing every possible winning opportunity out of "drawish" endgames is Carlsen's number one strength. Obviously it takes a mistake to win a drawn endgame but he's done it to so many people so many times, you can't just chalk it up to the other guy having a bad day every single time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
you are correct in that assumption. I just find it weird that he manages to trap Gm's in reasonably uncomplicated positions in a rook/pawn endgame with such frequency, it is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 16:07
|
|
|
Wow - that's the kind of game that could potentially open the floodgates, since Anand might feel the need to take a lot more chances now. Anand didn't look too happy with himself in the press conference, though that's quite understandable. "Doing your best is doing your best. I don't know why you can't seem to understand English."King Pawn posted:I haven't followed chess terribly closely lately.. but from my perspective, squeezing every possible winning opportunity out of "drawish" endgames is Carlsen's number one strength. Obviously it takes a mistake to win a drawn endgame but he's done it to so many people so many times, you can't just chalk it up to the other guy having a bad day every single time. Yeah, those of us who follow chess regularly all had to come to this conclusion at some point in the last few years. Obviously, it takes a very strong player to play this way, but it's also supremely logical: if you can play on in an equal position with little risk, and/or you are the stronger player, of course you should. After all, people make mistakes, which is why we win chess games at all! I think it's great, especially should he go on to win the match - the more players who decide they're not willing to take draws in equal positions just because both sides would be okay with that, the more decisive games we get.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
So, I fell out of following professional chess for a while and am wondering about the interpretation of Carlsen's rating. He now beats Kasparov's peak by about 20 points, and he's pretty drat far ahead of #2. Is this because of differences in the strengths of each player's nearest rivals? Or are people inevitably going to be calling Carlsen the greatest player ever as long as he keeps up what he's doing?King Pawn posted:Obviously it takes a mistake to win a drawn endgame but he's done it to so many people so many times, you can't just chalk it up to the other guy having a bad day every single time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Carlsen's type of play has only become possible recently. Thirty years ago, long games were adjourned to be continued on another day. So the players would rest up while their seconds figured out the best way to play, and could consult endgame manuals. With that gone, it seems the gap between a theoretical draw and a practical draw has gotten larger. Edit: With ratings, it's important to realize that they only measure how a player does *against the current player pool.* If, for instance, you kicked all non-grandmasters out of the rating system, that would dramatically change the player pool. You might see the remaining players ranked in the same order they are now, but the numbers would be wildly different. If 10,000 Norwegians are inspired to join FIDE tomorrow, they will change your rating, even if you never play one of them. BurningStone fucked around with this message at 16:52 on Nov 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
BurningStone posted:Carlsen's type of play has only become possible recently. Thirty years ago, long games were adjourned to be continued on another day. So the players would rest up while their seconds figured out the best way to play, and could consult endgame manuals. With that gone, it seems the gap between a theoretical draw and a practical draw has gotten larger. This is definitely a factor. BurningStone posted:Edit: With ratings, it's important to realize that they only measure how a player does *against the current player pool.* If, for instance, you kicked all non-grandmasters out of the rating system, that would dramatically change the player pool. You might see the remaining players ranked in the same order they are now, but the numbers would be wildly different. If 10,000 Norwegians are inspired to join FIDE tomorrow, they will change your rating, even if you never play one of them. Yeah, it's really not worth comparing ratings across eras, at least not too seriously. There's been ratings inflation, and the pool of very strong players has likely become larger, and the top players as a group are objectively probably playing slightly better every generation...so trying to balance all of those factors is a headache. I await our influx of Norwegian rating points!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
I looked away from the game for fifteen minutes because I thought it was winding down, and when I came back Carlsen had magicked up another win from thin air. All rook endgames are drawn, but all Carlsen endgames are winning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 17:20
|
|
|
OrangeKing posted:Yeah, it's really not worth comparing ratings across eras, at least not too seriously. There's been ratings inflation, and the pool of very strong players has likely become larger, and the top players as a group are objectively probably playing slightly better every generation...so trying to balance all of those factors is a headache. I await our influx of Norwegian rating points!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
Is there somewhere to view the after-game interviews? (Are there any?)
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
When talking about 'best player ever' it's also important to remember that two very good candidate answers, Emmanuel Lasker and José Raúl Capablanca, predate the invention of the Elo rating system. I think that Lasker is actually a reasonably good comparison for Carlsen: he did not herald any real stylistic innovations* but rather won by simply being better than everyone else at their own style. For this reason, Lasker gets lost in conversations of the all time greats as he does not have much more than his wins by which to remember him. Catching up on today's game, it was quite hard to watch since yet again it features Anand trying to salvage a rook endgame down material. Luckily for him he has another white out of the rest day, so hopefully he can come up with something more open and ambitious. Right now I think he needs to come up with something similar to Karpov trying the Scandinavian against Kasparov: something so completely out of left field that it guarantees play from move 1, and will also let him play with pieces on the board. *Lasker was responsible for developments in the business side of chess, which again furthers the comparison to Carlsen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
totalnewbie posted:Is there somewhere to view the after-game interviews? (Are there any?) The official channel. Game score: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.d3 Bc5 5.c3 O-O 6.O-O Re8 7.Re1 a6 8.Ba4 b5 9.Bb3 d6 10.Bg5 Be6 11.Nbd2 h6 12.Bh4 Bxb3 13.axb3 Nb8 14.h3 Nbd7 15.Nh2 Qe7 16.Ndf1 Bb6 17.Ne3 Qe6 18.b4 a5 19.bxa5 Bxa5 20.Nhg4 Bb6 21.Bxf6 Nxf6 22.Nxf6+ Qxf6 23.Qg4 Bxe3 24.fxe3 Qe7 25.Rf1 c5 26.Kh2 c4 27.d4 Rxa1 28.Rxa1 Qb7 29.Rd1 Qc6 30.Qf5 exd4 31.Rxd4 Re5 32.Qf3 Qc7 33.Kh1 Qe7 34.Qg4 Kh7 35.Qf4 g6 36.Kh2 Kg7 37.Qf3 Re6 38.Qg3 Rxe4 39.Qxd6 Rxe3 40.Qxe7 Rxe7 41.Rd5 Rb7 42.Rd6 f6 43.h4 Kf7 44.h5 gxh5 45.Rd5 Kg6 46.Kg3 Rb6 47.Rc5 f5 48.Kh4 Re6 49.Rxb5 Re4+ 50.Kh3 Kg5 51.Rb8 h4 52.Rg8+ Kh5 53.Rf8 Rf4 54.Rc8 Rg4 55.Rf8 Rg3+ 56.Kh2 Kg5 57.Rg8+ Kf4 58.Rc8 Ke3 59.Rxc4 f4 60.Ra4 h3 61.gxh3 Rg6 62.c4 f3 63.Ra3+ Ke2 64.b4 f2 65.Ra2+ Kf3 66.Ra3+ Kf4 67.Ra8 Rg1 0-1
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Thanks. Nice of that journalist to say, "Can you elaborate on what "doing your best" means?" No tact at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 19:16
|
|
|
Try and save the draw as white with b4 It's incredibly difficult and Carlsen is ridiculously stronger than that computer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
You can't blame Anand for the end but he should never have given Carlsen a one pawn advantage for free like he did. Against anyone else it would have been fine but Carlsen is just too good at end games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
As a complete chess outsider, I've caught the last two games with commentary on https://twitch.tv/chessnetwork. I would have never done so were my interest not piqued by the supremely excellent OP. I don't understand like 90% of the plays, but when it gets to endgame, things are simplified enough that I can enjoy the game 
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
Xtanstic posted:As a complete chess outsider, I've caught the last two games with commentary on https://twitch.tv/chessnetwork. I would have never done so were my interest not piqued by the supremely excellent OP. I don't understand like 90% of the plays, but when it gets to endgame, things are simplified enough that I can enjoy the game This is pretty much what I am doing as well and it helps that chessnetwork is easy to listen to from a newbie perspective, at least to me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
Someone mentioned the commentary on http://sagarteacheschess.blogspot.com/ earlier in this thread and even as a newbie to the professional chess world I've found it comprehensible and lively. I'd be grateful for any additional links to move-by-move analysis with a low barrier to entry (other than this excellent thread itself).
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
Kingscrusher does analysis videos on youtube after each game, in addition to the hundreds of other historical games he's analyzed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQQbZ_UsmoE
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
Flayer posted:Try and save the draw as white with b4 I tried it a few times and couldn't do it. Then I looked at the lines, went back and tried to do it (without simply copying the lines given) and I still couldn't do it. But at least I'm getting closer! totalnewbie posted:Thanks. Nice of that journalist to say, "Can you elaborate on what "doing your best" means?" No tact at all. I can see why this seems like a really dumb thing to ask, and I don't think a chess journalist would ask it - but I also didn't think it was unreasonable considering there are a lot of non-chess people following this match. Believe me, I get why the question annoyed Anand, but anyone covering...just about any other competition would ask for more after a bland, general response like that. Of course, in chess there isn't much to elaborate on, and you're not going into your preparation in front of your opponent, so there really isn't anything else to say. Edit: If it was someone who normally covers chess, on the other hand, then it's a very stupid question. OrangeKing fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Nov 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
OrangeKing posted:Edit: If it was someone who normally covers chess, on the other hand, then it's a very stupid question. That particular journalist also comes across as a bit of a bumpkin (I am charitably basing this assessment on his rural Western Norwegian dialect and twitter handle 'bollesamba', which is a nonsense word I last encountered in kindergarten).
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
OrangeKing posted:I tried it a few times and couldn't do it. Then I looked at the lines, went back and tried to do it (without simply copying the lines given) and I still couldn't do it. But at least I'm getting closer! I got the computer to repeat moves by doing this (though I have no idea if it actually works or if the comp is just missing a win): 60. b4 h3 61. gxh3 Rg7 62. Rc6 Ke3 63. Re6+ Kd3 64. Rf6 Rg2+ 65. Kh1 Ke3 66. Re6+ Kd3 67. Rf6 Ke3 etc. But I think there are some more difficult lines. Among other things I saw some analysis that involved a race where both sides would queen on the same move, and black would have to settle for a perpetual.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
Why is the official FIDE website such a piece of poo poo that it doesn't even list the schedule for the overall match? Also, are there recommended analysis videos for a newbie that would explain what happened in the last two games, the ones that were won? edit: 60 Minutes did a piece of Magnus nearly 2 years ago. I have no idea why they wouldn't re-run it for tonight's episode in light of the world championship. Ugh. Josh Lyman fucked around with this message at 13:06 on Nov 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2013 12:50
|
|
|
For analysis I like kingscrusher although the ChessNetwork guy is also good. Both are on youtube.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2013 14:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
Chessnetwork guy puts obnoxious tags and thumbnails on his stuff so it shows up when you're searching for something else. So I boycott him 
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2013 14:31
|
|
