|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Aug-02-04 | | MoonlitKnight: I wouldn't call his rapid play garbage, since he is arguably the best rapid player on earth. I agree on what I think acirce's point was, though. It's a shame that these "classical" tournaments shall be decided by 15 minute games. Give me Linares and its draws anyday. |
 |
Aug-03-04
 | | acirce: <MoonlitKnight> Correct, that was my point. |
|
Aug-03-04
| | acirce: Yuck, more coming up - http://www.chesstigers.de/cc/2004/e... |
|
| Aug-03-04 | | rags: I think mainz will be a good match. Since Shirov just beat Svidler convincingly and lets see if he can improve his record with Anand |
|
| Aug-04-04 | | ajit: <Acirce> If you advice people to stay away from Kramnik's games if they find him boring.....
<On the one hand, only after rapid garbage in both the semi and the final> and <Yuck, more coming up-http://www.chesstigers.de/cc/2004/e...;...
Think about it?! |
|
| Aug-04-04 | | ajit: I love to watch rapids and blitz..
Why when a football game goes into extra time and penalties, becomes all the more exciting to watch? |
|
Aug-04-04
| | acirce: <ajit> Thought about it, what on earth is your point? There is no analogy, how Kramnik plays is his business, but I care about chess and it not being ruined by unserious time controls. Would you think I'm hypocritical if FIDE said "let's decide the World Championships by one-minute games" and I complained? |
|
Aug-04-04
| | acirce: then of course people are free to state their opinions about Kramnik's style, I am just annoyed at the frequency and hostility with which it is done, it almost seems people are obsessed with "boring" chess instead of just looking away from it which would be the natural thing to do. I think many of Morphy's one-sided wins in less than 20 moves are, let's say not very interesting, but I don't go to the Morphy page and post "BOO" "THIS IS BORING" every other day. |
|
Aug-05-04
| | acirce: <1. Draws aren’t the enemy, they are a part of chess. Short, boring draws without play are the enemy. 2. Style is style and players play what works for them and shouldn’t have to apologize for it. That doesn’t mean fans (and sponsors and internet chess columnists) have to treat all styles as equally entertaining. We all have preferences. 3. Don’t blame the players. Winning tournaments (and rating points) is what matters and they do whatever they think gives them the best chance to do that. Asking them to sacrifice their ability to earn money and play chess as a profession is wrong. The problem is that what works for a game or a tournament might be bad for the sport in the long run. 4. No blame doesn’t mean no shame. Fans and sponsors have a right to be annoyed when professionals don’t play for their pay. We have a right to encourage them to play more aggressively. This can mean cheering, jeering, or the sponsors changing the rules by adding incentives and penalties. Call it being against the war but supporting the troops.> http://www.chessbase.com/columns/co... |
|
| Aug-06-04 | | apprenticetocaissa: It seems Kramnik has begun playing e4. |
|
| Aug-06-04 | | tomh72000: He has also started playing the Najdorf, with rather inconsistent results. He should stick to his Sveshnikov. |
|
Aug-06-04
| | acirce: Or his Berlin. Anything but the Najdorf. I don't understand why he keeps playing it, it has been a disaster for a normally solid player like him. He must have his reasons but I just don't get it. |
|
| Aug-06-04 | | chesscookie: Maybe Kramnik is trying to experiment with the najdorf to add to his opening repertoire for the leko match. Then again, hes gotten bored of his famous/infamous berlin wall. |
|
| Aug-06-04 | | rover: <acrice>Isn't the Najdorf easier to play for a win then the Sveshnikov? He might be preparing for must-win situations. And it is a good weapon againt lower rated opponents where a draw might not be acceptable with black. *shudders* Although this tactic almost backfired against Kariakin it may still be sound in principle. |
|
Aug-06-04
| | acirce: <rover> The thing is only that it just doesn't seem to work, he loses way too much with it (both against Akopian and Adams only in Corus), and almost even loses to a player like Karjakin. It may be sound "in principle" but.. |
|
| Aug-06-04 | | rover: It depends on the final result. If after 5 losses he'll have a defense with which he can score 0.6 points on average against 2600 players I'll say it was worth it. The first results are not too encouraging but I think it's too early to give up on the experiment yet. |
|
Aug-06-04
| | acirce: True, then it could be worth in in the long run. And he's still young ;) I just wish he pauses the experiment for a while during the Leko match. |
|
| Aug-06-04 | | rover: Let's put it this way: I don't think Kramnik will play the Najdorf as long as Leko's lead isn't more than the number of white's Kramnik has left. |
|
| Aug-07-04 | | Calchexas: Ugh. I hope the Kramnik-Leko games here AREN'T a taste of what we're going to get next month. Too predictable. |
|
| Aug-07-04 | | ruylopez900: Hmm, I think its a weird format, the mini-matches should definitely be ditched. I think something more conducive to classical chess would be to have the two original groups and still have top two go on with the rest playing for consolation, but now have another two groups where the players play RR or DRR to decide the title. Mini-Matches just encourage draws in the two real games by many people. |
|
| Aug-13-04 | | nikolaas: How was this played? I mean, there were first groups, but on the official site is mentioned that all the games in Kramnik's group were draws, so how did they decide who could continue? |
|
Aug-13-04
| | acirce: <nikolaas> Rapid tiebreaks involving all four. They basically had a new tourney, double round robin, but with rapid games. This time there were more decisive games.. |
|
| Aug-13-04 | | nikolaas: Alright. Thanks <acirce>. |
|
| Aug-13-04 | | nikolaas: But I've another question now: Why did Karjakin play against Naiditsch? They were in another group, weren't they? |
|
Aug-13-04
| | acirce: Yes, after the group play there were both semifinals (for places 1-4, with Kramnik/Anand/Leko/Svidler, who qualified) and matches for places 5-8 (Bologan/Karjakin/Naiditsch/Rublevsky), nobody was "knocked out". First Karjakin lost with 0-2 against Naiditsch and then he lost the match against Bologan too - so he finished last. There were matches to determine every place in the tournament. The order was: 1: Viswanathan Anand
2: Vladimir Kramnik
3: Peter Svidler
4: Peter Leko
5: Arkady Naiditsch
6: Sergey Rublevsky
7: Victor Bologan
8: Sergey Karjakin |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Dortmund Sparkassen (2004)
