< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 121 OF 122 ·
|Jan-31-11|| ||Riverbeast: Since I've been digging into Christiansen's old Linares results, it looks like his tournament in 1981 was even stronger than Seirawan's at Haninge|
The young Christiansen tied for first with Karpov, the reigning WC, at +5...But he lost to Karpov in their individual game and Karpov was declared winner on tiebreaks
They were ahead of Larsen, Ribli, Spassky, Kavalek, Portisch, Ljubojevic, Gligoric, Quinteros, Bellon Lopez, and Garcia Gonzalez!
|Jan-31-11|| ||Everett: I really appreciate Seirawan as a player and person, but I must consider him behind Fischer, Fine, Reshevsky, Pillsbury, Marshall and now Nakamura as far as American greats. According to a few sources like chessmetrics and Elo ratings, he was never higher than top 15 or so.|
Still, out of Christiansen, Benjamin, etc., I would rank him the top in that generation.
|Jan-31-11|| ||Riverbeast: <Everett> You forgot to mention Morphyus :-)|
|Jan-31-11|| ||fixingguru: <Riverbeast: Mig Greengard mentioned Seirawan's win at Haninge in 1990 as a comparable win of a strong round robin by an American (outside of Fischer)> |
comparable strong field!? is that some sort of a joke or what? Haninge 1990 didn't have a especially strong field. Of those who played there Ehlvest seems to be the strongest player besides Karpov. Now in January 1990 Elhvest was rated 2620 points.
Here are some players who were rated higher than him on that list but didn't participate at Haninge:
My conclusion is Haninge 1990 doesn't even come close to Tata 2011.
|Jan-31-11|| ||sevenseaman: Isn't Anand fed up with his lack-lustre tournament performance and missed wins against lower ranked players?|
The way he tried for a win against Anish Giri in the penultimate round was much more praiseworthy than his effort against, L'Ami, MVL, Grischuk and Nepomniatchi et al.
Couldn't he have put in more effort there! Instead he kept clinging to 2nd position as though he had no ambition to win the event.
I think a Kramnik like malaise has overtaken him. He just does not seem to be bothered.
|Jan-31-11|| ||AgentRgent: <metatron2: It wasn't the US who made Kamsky the chess player that he is..> As a product of Soviet Chess, arising from the Cold War, there can be only one person responsible...|
Ronald Reagan of course!
|Jan-31-11|| ||crazybird: <sevenseaman: Isn't Anand fed up with his lack-lustre tournament performance and missed wins against lower ranked players?>|
2844 TPR...+4 in category 20 and unbeaten in each of the past 3 editions.. is lackluster. Dude, what are you smoking?
|Jan-31-11|| ||vanytchouck: If it's about the great Naka's achievement in this tournament, there absolutly no dispute.|
But if it's about history, a closer look must be taken.
The club of the + 2800 looks really scary but ...
* Aronian hasn't won (sole first(*) ahead of likes of Anand, Carlsen, Kramnik and Topalov) a single super-tournament since Linares ... 2006 !!
* Anand hasn't won a super-tournament since Linares 2008;
Of course these two players are, really, really great but in term of "winner of a super tournament", even if they are indeed high favourite, they are not the best in term of results as tournaments winner lately.
The Naka's + 5 score is impressive but still :
4 wins out of 6 are over the " bottom 4 ", one of the weakiest of the last 5 years in WAZ.
Don't misunderstand me, this can't be used to diminish Hikaru's win as all the other favourites have either met the "bottom 4".
He's not undefeated and hasn't performed well against the "big four" of the tournament.
So even if the field is not (even relatively) as "strong" as the field of WAZ 2011, being ahead of Karpov in 1990 (when the #1 and #2 were just on another planet) and beating him is not that far in term of achievement.
(*) first tie for WAZ 2008 and Tal Memorial 2010.
|Jan-31-11|| ||sevenseaman: <crazybird> nearly 200 plus difference in TPR and 4 out of 4 insipid draws? What has he got to show for being a higher ranked player?|
He took all the risks against only Giri (where he could well have lost). Why not against the four weaker opponents? At least couple of them merely made up the numbers.
My view is both Vishy and Kramnik are only trying to guard their stature and not enhance it, passing up opportunities in a kind of stupor. Not at all like Naka and Carlsen who are always pushing themselves to the brink.
|Jan-31-11|| ||sevenseaman: Of his 4 wins I am impressed with only the one against Wang Hao wherein he sacs a N to repair his pawn structure quite daringly.|
|Jan-31-11|| ||NGambit: <sevenseaman: Isn't Anand fed up with his lack-lustre tournament performance and missed wins against lower ranked players?>|
If you see his interview after Game 13, you could see that he in fact was very disappointed at not having won. But, the fact is a +4 (TRP 2844!) in such a strong field is not bad at all! A +4 performance has won the tournament 7(!!!) times in last 8 years at Wijk ann Zee with the exception of year 2006 when he himself scored a +5.
Therefore, your <He just does not seem to be bothered.> is definitely uncalled for.
|Feb-01-11|| ||Udayan Chawdhary: Hello, I am from India, the land of Anand. I wish to say that when one is young like Carsen and Nakamura, one tends to be agressive and flamboyant without a care in the world. When a man approaches 40 and thereafter, one becomes conservative in his approach, as is happening with Anand. It's a natural phenomenon.|
|Feb-01-11|| ||anandrulez: Lol @ Land of Anand :) Its a new usage . What Udayan mentioned is correct , exuberance of youth and maturity of a wise player .|
|Feb-01-11|| ||theagenbiteofinwit: <Isn't Anand fed up with his lack-lustre tournament performance and missed wins against lower ranked players?>|
I'm sure he goes home after every tournament, cries, then wipes his tears with his championship wreath.
|Feb-01-11|| ||chancho: <I'm sure he goes home after every tournament, cries, then wipes his tears with his championship wreath.>|
|Feb-01-11|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: Or the Euros.|
|Feb-02-11|| ||Texas Skybear: Udayan. Are you saying one has to be conservative in his approach to be a world champ? |
I haven't seen a teenager reach the top either.
|Feb-02-11|| ||DAVI DE RAFE: texas skybear, u have to be agressive to become world champion. once u reach there, be conservative and assertive.thats wat anand done.|
|Feb-02-11|| ||Udayan Chawdhary: Real World champs in any field have a healthy blend of being aggressive and being conservative. Anand is one of them. In India, we have litle sports icons as compared to other countries. Hence being an Indian, it is quite natural to be proud of Anand's accomplishments. Garry Kasparov who is universally accepted as the greatest of them all had a healthy blend of both. Even his agression had a conservatism blend and not recklesness as is the case with other youth icons. Your comments please.|
|Feb-02-11|| ||iamsheaf: If any of you have noticed. Anand doesn't usually "over-perform" or "under-perform" by a huge margin. I don't remember Anand performing at 2900+ in a very long time. Perhaps in Mexico 2007 he had that kind of performance. On the other hand Anand very rarely performs at 2700 level either. I can think of only 3 occassions in last 14 years when he did quite bad. 2001 dortmund, 2006 Olympiad and Bilbao 2008. Otherwise his performance is usually consistent, between 2760 to 2840 range..|
|Feb-02-11|| ||TheMacMan: this is anand after his draw with Nepo, putting him in 2nd place! he was MAAADDDD!!!!
|Feb-02-11|| ||plang: <* Anand hasn't won a super-tournament since Linares 2008;|
Of course these two players are, really, really great but in term of "winner of a super tournament", even if they are indeed high favourite, they are not the best in term of results as tournaments winner lately.>
I continue to be amazed at the "disappointment" with Anand's results.
Since 1997 he has won the World Championship in a tournament, in a match as well as defended his title in a match.
He is the undisputed World Champion - he shouldn't have to prove anything to anyone.
|Feb-02-11|| ||Winsome Knight: I feel that the way Anand trained himself for WC matches has made him more solid in his play. Of course, if he finds inaccuracies from his opponents he is pressing for a win or else he is finding it difficult to create winning positions. It is also true that opponents will be extra careful with Anand and will be happy to get a draw against him. I think only Magnus tries to play and presses for a win against Anand without compromising just for a draw. |
There is nothing wrong with Anand but it is just his approach that has changed after becoming world champion. And still he had come very close to winning a couple of tournaments! May be he will win one or two tournaments this year.
|Feb-02-11|| ||montree: <iamsheaf> Exactly. I agree. Anand always maintain a class. Nowadays he is playing more like 'Capablanca' style (not losing to any lesser player, draws don't hurt). I think people should be OK with that. World Champions should not be losing often.|
|Feb-02-11|| ||Penguincw: Just in case anyone's wondering here are the TPR (tournament performance rating):|
Nakamura : 2880
Anand : 2844
Carlsen : 2821
Aronian : 2821
Kramnik : 2793
Vachier-Lagrave : 2798
Giri : 2744
Ponomariov : 2739
Nepomniachtchi : 2711
Hao : 2711
Grischuk : 2627
l'Ami : 2638
Smeets : 2635
Shirov : 2600
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 121 OF 122 ·