|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 79 OF 99 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Feb-24-09 | | ontocaustic: so you're saying that since obama is watching the match toppy is responsible for the economic melt? that might be untrue. |
 |
| Feb-25-09 | | Babar47: this thread is going places
|
|
| Feb-25-09 | | Skafi: I guess that Kamsky will survive these 8 rounds. He is very creative, he just have to stop blundering :) |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | geezerbloke: <possible depression.> spoken like a true optimist |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | amateur05: Just like Kramnik did not deserve to win against Topalov in 2006, Topalov does not deserve to win this match. So far he has shown nothing interesting. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | didiablito: <amateur05> To some extend you are right - Topalov is obviously not in his best condition. But, on the other hand, Kamsky is so far unable to benefit from this - he is either in insufficient condition as well or is just not of Topalov's level!
Nevertheless, Game #2 was a real masterpiece of tactics and strategy - rather psychological than chess one, but still an excellent tactical manouvre, exploiting Kamsky's proclivity to clumsy thinking! |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | TrueBlue: Kamsky is a marginal player. It will be the upset of the century if he wins. They are just players in different leagues. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | MaxxLange: What are the tiebreaks like if the match is drawn? Topalov leads by only one point, and he has the disadvantage of the White pieces tomorrow. If Kamsky wins one game and holds a draw, then the |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | Cacoethes: <MaxxLange: What are the tiebreaks like if the match is drawn?> Rustam Kamsky vs. Silvio Danailov [naked oil-wrestling match] |
|
Feb-25-09
 | | acirce: <If Kamsky wins one game and holds a draw, then the> Yeah, I think you're
Tiebreaks are supposed to be 4 rapid games of 25 10, unless they've changed that as well without telling anyone else. Then blitz. Then Armageddon. Maybe literally, if we're unlucky. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | percyblakeney: I think that would be |
|
Feb-25-09
 | | Absentee: <Skafi: I guess that Kamsky will survive these 8 rounds. He is very creative, he just have to stop blundering :)> Well, he certainly isn't gonna die. He's just going to lose the match. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | NakoSonorense: You obviously don't know his father... |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | MaxxLange: Then Yahtzee |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | veerar: Kamsky still has got a chance,if only, he plays fast enough,(The main reason for his loss in the second game,was,time and ambition. Topalov's innovation too).His seconds are good.The next game will be very interesting. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | eternaloptimist: <TrueBlue: Kamsky is a marginal player. It will be the upset of the century if he wins. They are just players in different leagues.> lol I hope you are joking. |
|
Feb-25-09
 | | e4ia: Follow-up in more detail to acirce's correct post;
A) Tie-breaks System: 4 games at 25 min. and 10 seconds increment B) If 2nd tie-break needed: 2 games at 5 mins and 10 seconds inc. C) If 3rd tie-break needed: one game at 6 mins(white) and 5 mins(black)
white must win only,
or loses candidate match in this case! |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | Whack8888: <Trueblue> Not true -- Kamsky is a fine player. He is still out of form, and may perhaps never get back into the form of his youth. However, he is still a top player and a victory for him would not be all that great of an upset. I think most people figured Topalov would win but Kamsky could win if things fell right. If Kamsky gets another win, he has a good chance in the rapids. In any event, Kamsky (and Topalov) have both played fine chess. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | Riverbeast: Kamsky has proven throughout his career that he is an elite player who can play with anyone in the world This match so far has been very close...And if the winning margin for either player ends up being one point, or if it goes into rapid or blitz tiebreaks, then it only confirms that eight games is way too short for a match of this importance |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | Petrosianic: Honestly, even Kamsky at his best is not as good as Topalov at his best. It's hard to believe that even at his best, he could virtually gift Topalov two points and still win, but in a short match, anything can happen. It's possible that Kamsky could pull another win out of his hat (Topalov does blow a lot of games) but I don't think it will happen. Topalov's morale must be pretty high now and he's in front of the home crowd. But if it did somehow get to Blitz or Rapids, then of course ANYTHING could happen. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | Jim Bartle: I'm with you, RB. A very tough player. But Kamsky's basically given away the game in both his losses, first with his disastrous use of his time, and the second by missing a combination a GM should have seen easily. |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | ontocaustic: how can rustam and dialnolow serve together in a russian naked oil match for the tie break? that doesn't make sense to me, because wrestling is nothing like chess, and they aren't even the main contenders...although true, they are important part of the team, will the seconds from each side also do some battle or oily stuff? |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | s4life: <ontocaustic: because wrestling is nothing like chess> That's exactly the point |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | Riverbeast: <Jim Bartle> I don't know if Kamsky gave away two games....He used a lot of his time in the first loss because he was surprised by an obscure variation....And the game where Kamsky blundered was not exactly a dead draw...White still had pressure Still, what I would love to see is Kamsky winning the next two games...... Then I'll bet you'll be able to hear a pin drop throughout the entire country of Bulgaria |
|
| Feb-25-09 | | praddy06: <amateur05: Just like Kramnik did not deserve to win against Topalov in 2006, Topalov does not deserve to win this match. So far he has shown nothing interesting.> I Agree with you on the first point but Kamsky does not deserve either he has played worse than wat he was around wen he won the World cup. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 79 OF 99 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
