< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 205 OF 206 ·
|Dec-17-07|| ||parisattack: <KamikazeAttack: Yes, I didn't think much of Kamsky before this world cup.
Well, I ain't laffing anymore.
Kamsky's challenge is real and a threat to anyone. >
Just about my thoughts, also. The proof is in the pudding. He has time to prepare but can he hold the awesome edge he has right now? He seems to be adopting a Kramnik-style - very steady play, wait for the opponent to get too agressive, make a mistake. Its the winning way in classical chess now - like it or not.
I don't care much for Danialov much myself but seriously doubt Top cheats, really. He made a major change in his opening style and I think that was the difference.
|Dec-17-07|| ||Youjoin: <bgkuzzy> That happens because Topalov is from Bulgaria and Kamsky is an "American"...|
|Dec-17-07|| ||square dance: i think the only thing that is peculiar and baffling is the absurd comments that some bulgarians, and/or topalov fans seem to come up with, although i thought most of that was in the past. topalov's lybia performance was only ever questioned retroactively after san luis. kamsky, meanwhile, has been back for at least two full years now. its not as if he reappeared fresh from law school to play in this world cup. if you'd like to maintain some credibility, <bgkuzzy>, you may want to consider not distorting the facts at your whim.|
|Dec-17-07|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: <bgkuzzy>
Just 2 thoughts:
1. The view that Topalov is a cheater is not one that is held by the mainstream chess community. If anything, there may be a sentiment out there that, if the Topalov camp accused Kramnik of cheating, they should look at themselves first, because it is more likely that Topalov cheated than Kramnik. But there has never been any evidence that Topalov cheated.
2. Kamsky has not really "demolished everyone" just yet. The world cup win was great, but Anand, Kramnik, Gelfand, Morozevich, and other top players did not compete. Not that I doubt Kamsky can beat them too (he already won 2 games against Anand in the same tournament), but you cannot really compare his accomplishments to Topalov's run in 2005/2006- at least, not yet.
|Dec-17-07|| ||whiteshark: Khanty-Mansiysk doesn't respond anymore.|
|Dec-17-07|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: Besides, this is not really an "upsurge" for Kamsky, so much as a "getting back" (he beat Anand and Kramnik in matches in the mid 90's). Topalov's climb brought him to new heights.|
|Dec-17-07|| ||skrzypczyk: well kamsky won..he will beat Topalov,,
|Dec-17-07|| ||rover: I think some people overestimate the significance of Kamsky's performance. It's a great result and he played well to achieve it but really it's only one tournament. For now he's the weakest of the 4 remaining players by far and the match format probably hurts rather than helps him.|
Yes, he <could> win but Topalov is a huge favourite. I actually think Topalov was happy to see Kamsky win instead of someone like Svidler, Ivanchuk or Aronian.
|Dec-17-07|| ||cotdt: <rover> Not sure Kamsky is the weakest of the 4 remaining WC contenders. The quality of his World Cup games is higher than that of the typical Topalov, Kramnik, or Anand game. Have you seen the "super-solid" Kramnik's actual games? There are a lot more mistakes than in Kamsky's recent games. My engine agrees with me. The quality of Kamsky's games have been exceptionally high, except for the 1st game against Ponomariov. In my opinion Kamsky would only be considered the weakest if you look at the ratings and past results rather than the actual moves played in his recent games.|
|Dec-18-07|| ||rover: How about his whites against Adly and Svidler? Neither looked very impressive to me.|
In any case the number mistakes doesn't tell much IMO. Some positions are more difficult to play perfectly than others.
That's not to say he didn't play well. He did. I just don't think you can determine the quality of his play just by running his games through blunder check.
<In my opinion Kamsky would only be considered the weakest if you look at the ratings and past results rather than the actual moves played in his recent games.>
Well, ratings and past results predict future results better. Basically his performance is comparable to Naiditsch or Bologan winning in Dortmund.
|Dec-18-07|| ||keres777: May the best man win!|
|Dec-18-07|| ||TIMER: <rover> You should also bear in mind past results before Kamsky retired to see that this is not a one-off like Naiditsch or Bologan, but rather him recovering to his old level.|
|Dec-18-07|| ||acirce: Just like he recovered to his old level in MTel Masters last year?|
Certainly that was a more significant achievement than this one. Clear 2nd place in such a tournament! 1.5-0.5 against everyone except Topalov, including Anand.
Then he went back to so-so results, not bad but not that good either. I see no particular reason to think it's going to be different this time, although it's always extremely difficult to predict. What's clear is that we are once again seeing a lot of exaggerated hype after someone doing well in one single event.
On the other hand... Topalov is hard to predict as well these days. Since MTel last year he has only rarely shown anything like his best form. I'd want to wait for Corus to see just how well he will be doing on that level now.
|Dec-18-07|| ||KamikazeAttack: <The quality of his World Cup games is higher than that of the typical Topalov, Kramnik, or Anand game. >|
|Dec-18-07|| ||AdrianP: My impression is that Kamsky has been playing extremely high level chess ever since his return, comparable with any of the top 5. As <acirce> points out, Kamsky demonstrated his class at the MTel Masters last year. He's been held back by an innocuous opening repertoire with White and having to suffer for a considerable time in the opening with Black. In middlegames with equal chances, he's shown how danagerous he continues to be. Again, my subjective view is that he's made very very few mistakes even in complicated positions and, as he was when he left chess, he's extremely strong practically and psychologically. I find his play and approach at the moment not dissimilar to Korchnoi's when Korchnoi was at his best. |
In this world cup, he seems to have shown that he has done some serious work on his openings (I think I'm right that he's had some help from, query, Sutovsky on his openings) - e.g. against Ponomariov, Kamsky was happy to play the main line of the poisoned pawn 6 bg5 Najdorf, whereas previously he'd been playing the innocuous Nb3, and, in fact, it was Ponomariov who deviated from the critical line. Still, I think that this is the area in which he'll be most vulnerable to Topalov, who will be hoping to blow him away with home preparation.
|Dec-18-07|| ||AdrianP: As a contrast to Kamsky's success here and at e.g. the MTel Masters, one can look to Candidates Match: Gelfand vs Kamsky (2007) where Kamsky simply couldn't get started against a player with really top-class preparation, struggling to get winning chances even with white.|
|Dec-18-07|| ||acirce: <AdrianP> I think you're right to a large extent.|
His openings have improved a bit, but he still has a long way to go. If he works very hard on that for the next 10-12 months, he should have reasonable chances against Topalov, otherwise it's hard to see. The match against Gelfand is a case in point. But, of course, everything can happen.
<against Ponomariov, Kamsky was happy to play the main line of the poisoned pawn 6 bg5 Najdorf, whereas previously he'd been playing the innocuous Nb3, and, in fact, it was Ponomariov who deviated from the critical line.>
Yes, and the latter means that he wasn't really tested. What would happen against someone who is willing and able to enter the mainline? The same against Carlsen who is not exactly an opening specialist either.
|Dec-18-07|| ||Marvol: <acirce: Since MTel last year he has only rarely shown anything like his best form.>|
I'd argue that even in Mtel last year he didn't show anything like his best form. He needed a last-round win against a nervous Sasikiran and his TPR was 2751, rather ordinary.
|Dec-18-07|| ||acirce: <Marvol> that was this year, wasn't it? I fully agree he played rather badly this year.|
|Dec-18-07|| ||AdrianP: <What would happen against someone who is willing and able to enter the mainline?> Quite. I think I'm right that Shirov, who plays the Najdorf quite a bit and has done some serious work on the new critical line in the poisoned pawn, also did not want to see Kamsky's preparation, playing a Sicilian with 2. ...Nc6. But maybe Shirov was trusting *his own* preparation of the white side of this line rather than Kamsky's!|
|Dec-18-07|| ||KamikazeAttack: Kamsky has been ordinary for most of his comeback. In fact some of his games have been downright terrible. It is ridiculous to hype where none is necessary.|
He showed significant improvement in the world cup thx to Emil. From the just concluded WC tournament, he has shown that he can still play high quality chess.
But is he ready for the big boys?? Not in this backyard. I have no doubt that he would be crushed if they played right now. Kamsky is not gonna close the gap with months of work compared to years of work that the big boys have put in at this level. U delude urself if u think otherwise.
But can Kamsky be ready for the big boys? Oh yes. He has time to close the gap if given the right preparation.
The main point is he has the potential, nothing more.
|Dec-18-07|| ||AdrianP: <[Shirov] has done some serious work on the new critical line in the poisoned pawn> ... for this, I had in mind this game, which is not in the cg.com database.|
Shirov,A (2715) - Guliyev,N (2545) [B97]
Calatrava op rapid 2nd Calatrava (4), 06.04.2007
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.e5 h6 11.Bh4 dxe5 12.fxe5 Nfd7 13.Ne4 Qxa2 14.Rd1 Qd5 15.Qe3 Qxe5 16.Be2 Bc5 17.Bg3 Bxd4 18.Rxd4 Qa5+ 19.Rd2 0-0 20.Bd6 Nc6 21.0-0 f5 22.Bxf8 Nxf8 23.Nd6 b5 24.Bf3 Bd7 25.Nxf5 exf5 26.Rxd7 Nxd7 27.Bxc6 Rd8 28.Bxd7 1-0
|Dec-18-07|| ||AdrianP: The last 3 games here also suggest that Shirov is keen to go in for this line 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Qb6 8.Qd2 Qxb2 9.Rb1 Qa3 10.e5 h6 11.Bh4 dxe5 12.fxe5 Nfd7 13.Ne4 Qxa2 14.Rd1 Qd5 but no-one wants to see what he's got up his sleeve!|
|Dec-18-07|| ||acirce: Right, so it seems Shirov plays that line as White, but rarely, if ever, with Black. Then it shouldn't mean anything that he didn't want to play it against Kamsky either.|
|Dec-18-07|| ||AdrianP: <acirce> I guess so - it's actually hard to tell as although Shirov's happy enough to play the Najdorf as black, no-one's played 6. Bg5 against him since 2001 (so far as the cg database goes).|
But the general point that if S. is happy to play this as White he probably would not want to do so as black is fair enough.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 205 OF 206 ·