< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 15 OF 15 ·
|May-16-06|| ||notyetagm: <Xaurus: According to this page Carlsen and Nisipeanu has an even tiebreak:>|
So what is the tiebreak formula at Sarajevo?
Carlsen and Nisipeanu both finished at +1 with the same S-B score of 27.00. They also drew both of their head-to-head games.
So does Nisipeanu win the tie-break because he had more wins (2) than Magnus (1)?
|May-16-06|| ||fxenderby: well.. with all the difference in time zones, the ending ceremony mus have already happened in sarajevo.. i wonder if no one can tell what happened to the first place trophy..|
|May-16-06|| ||fxenderby: I don't know why ('cause I don't know any "bosnian"..), but the official page lists nisipeanu as the winner in group A.|
|May-16-06|| ||virginmind: the oficial site sould tell us...but they don't. yet. :(|
|May-16-06|| ||notyetagm: <fxenderby: I don't know why ('cause I don't know any "bosnian"..), but the official page lists nisipeanu as the winner in group A.>|
Nispeanu probably wins the tie-break because he had more wins than Carlsen.
|May-16-06|| ||plang: "Fritz doesnt know anything about these positions."
I wonder when computers will be able to play endgames at a grandmaster level.
|May-16-06|| ||jperr75108: No official winner yet?|
|May-17-06|| ||virginmind: today all the official page says is listing nisipeanu on the first position. on their photo galery there is no photo from the closing ceremony.|
well, if nisipeanu is first, then i congratulate him
|May-17-06|| ||virginmind: for some reason (non-native english speaker) i thought tie-breaks means (include) some rapid and/or blitz games between those who share first position with equal number of points :)
i guess this is done only in matches.|
|May-17-06|| ||EeEk: Nisipeanu won officially, but they split the prize money.|
|May-17-06|| ||sagahelten: That's funny. chessbase.de says that Carlsen has a better correction. (22 against 21.75) |
|May-17-06|| ||Xaurus: <That's funny. chessbase.de says that Carlsen has a better correction. (22 against 21.75)>That's round 9 of 10, not 10 of 10.|
|May-17-06|| ||AdrianP: 20 games out of 30 drawn. That's a terrible percentage.|
|May-17-06|| ||acirce: I still don't understand what people can possibly have against draws, but it is an interesting phenomenon to try to analyse. Why is it that a hard-fought draw is less appreciated than a little-fought decisive game like Kamsky-Svidler? Reflection of our times or human nature?|
|May-17-06|| ||EmperorAtahualpa: <acirce> Not all draws in this tournament are exactly "hard-fought". Take a look at this one for instance: Nisipeanu vs V Malakhov, 2006|
Then again, you have games like this one: Sasikiran vs V Malakhov, 2006
|May-17-06|| ||acirce: <EmperorAtahualpa> I know, I have looked at all the games myself. That has nothing to do with what I'm saying.|
|May-17-06|| ||cannibal: chessbase.de says that in the game against Carlsen, Predojevic had "decisive advantage in the endgame", which he "dropped because of an inaccuracy".
They don't have any analysis yet, so does anybody have an idea which move(s) they refer to?|
|May-17-06|| ||Fischeristhebest: <acirce> I for one did not appreciate Kamsky-Svidler very much, in fact I would have played Nd5 even if it was a blitz game.|
|May-17-06|| ||LoFarkas: <cannibal>: I answered on the page of the game here: Carlsen vs B Predojevic, 2006|
|May-17-06|| ||scholar: Hi! Anyone know a website with good analysis of the Bosna games?|
|May-18-06|| ||scholar: Never mind, I found some from Zagrebelny at
|May-19-06|| ||Mulholland: <acirce: I still don't understand what people can possibly have against draws> Very good point. The same phenomenon may be seen in soccer games, where many people feel that a draw is a disappointment. In Norway, one year we even decided every drawn match in the premium series by penalty shootout. Even if the there are many goals and high quality of the play, we tend to enjoy the match even better when its a final decision. We like to see a boxer win by knock out, probably because its satisfactory to see a winner of a fight, to decide who was the best, at least in that particular event. Your point, of course, is that the beauty of the game, the soccer match or the boxing event (uh, not sure if that should be phrased a beauty) should be enough. Players must learn how to appreciate to defend a lost position, the spectators must probably learn the same.|
|May-20-06|| ||Gypsy: <Mulholland: <acirce: I still don't understand what people can possibly have against draws> Very good point. The same phenomenon may be seen in soccer games, where many people feel that a draw is a disappointment. In Norway, one year we even decided every drawn match in the premium series by penalty shootout. Even if the there are many goals and high quality of the play, we tend to enjoy the match even better when its a final decision. ...> |
I think most soccer fans will admire a 4:4 tie more than a 1:0 decision -- especially if the number of 'chances' (goal-posts, x-bars, fast breaks, fingertip saves) is commensurate. It realy is the drama aspect of the game. Trouble is, most 0:0 ties are bland; and so are many cautiously played chess draws, especially GM draws.
|May-20-06|| ||plang: I have nothing against draws or ties as long as they are interesting and hard fought.|
|May-20-06|| ||notyetagm: Yes, I have nothing against an exciting or hard-fought draw. It's just that the "GM draws" are no where near exciting or hard-fought as the famous Fischer vs Tal, 1960 draw from the Leipzig Olympiad.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 15 OF 15 ·