< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 69 OF 69 ·
|Oct-15-10|| ||drnooo: for unferth: I was using, for Shirov, against the remaining world GMs, Topalov especially, his result
there: topalov might have even done better than Shirov, here result wise,
but head to head with Shirov he comes off worse than lacklustre: one win in the last 13 games and pretty badly thumped. So what I was getting at was in some grand top ten say challengers match Shirov would likely come in fourth is all, just where he was here. I have not checked on Shirovs results say against Aronion but I would still hold for Shirov winding up in this mythical challengers big match as fourth. But for a really wild guess now, and I am sure to hear howls of execration, in say a big ten, I am no longer so sure
that Carlsen would even be in the top three, but might even wind up fourth in which case not sure how that would place Shirov third?// fifth???
in short Carlsen now seems considerably further away from the big three for me and if this is just a brief stall I will be the first to admit it. Anyone here know if anyone is Carlsens bete noir? Not sure and too lazy to search all the big gms.|
|Oct-15-10|| ||ajk68: According to Chessmetrics, most chess players hit their peak around age 28. Carlsen still has a lot of time to get better.|
|Oct-16-10|| ||khursh: <I have not checked on Shirovs results say against Aroni<a>n>
Classical games: Levon Aronian beat Alexey Shirov 4 to 0, with 11 draws.|
|Oct-16-10|| ||alexmagnus: Chessmetrics is useless to determine player's peak because of the independency of the lists. That is, you may there even gain rating after a bad performance!|
|Oct-16-10|| ||alexmagnus: <That is, you may there even gain rating after a bad performance!>|
Or gain nothing despite overperforming.
|Oct-16-10|| ||siamesedream: <Magnus Carlsen`s Blog
Bilbao Grand Slam Final 2010 - Last round
In the last round as black against Anand, I went for the Ruy Lopez Breyer variation once again and got a very promising position. I was fairly optimistic about my prospects but unfortunately I made several dubious choices, and he gradually outplayed me in the late middle game. In the critical phase of the game I managed to create enough counterplay to secure a draw. Shirov and Kramnik had already drawn their game and I'd like to congratulate Kramnik on a well-deserved Bilbao victory! The two initial losses in the 6-round format basically destroyed any realistic chances to fight for first. My lack of form and mostly erratic play didn't help either. Anyhow, in a disappointing overall tournament there are certain positive aspects to take with me to the next tournament (Nanjing). In the second half I played one very good game (against Shirov) and also managed to fight to hold difficult positions against Kramnik and Anand. As expected I've got questions from the press regarding the potential impact of my activities outside chess. Last winter I decided that I wanted to work with my main sponsors Arctic Securities and Simonsen, and with G-star and I have certainly enjoyed doing so this year. I don't believe there is a direct connection between my activities outside chess and the poor form during the Olympiad and Bilbao. I look forward to playing in Nanjing next week. We are leaving Norway tomorrow afternoon travelling via Stockholm and Beijing. Round 1 starts Wednesday 20th. Magnus Carlsen, Haslum, October 16th, 2010
|Oct-17-10|| ||Softpaw: <Kapablanca: "Kramnik beat out Anand, Carlsen, and Shirov in this four player double round-robin".|
Did Kramnik beat Anand?? >
No, but he "beat out" Anand, Carlsen and Shirov in the tournament.
|Oct-17-10|| ||Mr. Bojangles: lol...|
|Oct-17-10|| ||kardopov: Carlsen's a patented eyepopper but not yet to be considered one of the greats unless he powers his way to the world championship crown. Every player deserving of such accolade need to meet this standard.|
|Oct-17-10|| ||kardopov: Carlsen's a patented eyepopper but not yet to be considered one of the greatesta unless he powers his way to the world championship crown. Every player deserving of such accolade need to meet this standard.|
|Oct-17-10|| ||shivasuri4: What do you wish to prove by repeating your statement?|
|Oct-18-10|| ||mastyin: <Bobwhoosta: <mastyin>: To be honest most of Carlsen's wins came at a <time when Anand was preparing for his match with Topolov and whenever he wins the tournament he rolls over the lower ranked players but has a = score against players like kramnik and anand> So against the Top 2 best players in the world he plays equally, and against the "lower rated" players he rolls over them???
Do you realize you're saying that Carlsen is going to have trouble winning tournaments with the cream of the crop because he plays the cream of the crop on equal footing???|
Yes, he will have difficulty. As much difficulty as Anand or Kramnik will, as they tend to play = against each other as well...>
Exactly what I am trying to say, he is no Kasparov at least not yet at best he is in equal footing with Kramnik and Anand.
|Oct-19-10|| ||jussu: <Kinghunt:
I wouldn't expect Kramnik to be tired after effortlessly drawing virtually all his games in his last event.>
(i.e. the Olympiad)
You didn't really watch a single Kramnik's game in the Olympiad, did you?
|Oct-19-10|| ||Kinghunt: < jussu: <Kinghunt:
I wouldn't expect Kramnik to be tired after effortlessly drawing virtually all his games in his last event.> (i.e. the Olympiad)|
You didn't really watch a single Kramnik's game in the Olympiad, did you?>
I watched all of them. And Kramnik is more than capable of scoring better than seven consecutive draws. His heart just wasn't into winning many of his games.
|Oct-19-10|| ||acirce: <And Kramnik is more than capable of scoring better than seven consecutive draws.>|
He did. He scored +2 for a 2794 performance rating.
|Oct-19-10|| ||polarmis: It is true he had 7 consecutive draws: http://chess-results.com/tnr36795.a...|
But bear in mind those were all against 2700+ rated players, and all of them had a rating performance at the Olympiad above their actual rating (yep, I know drawing Kramnik helped a little!). Even Ivanchuk in the winning team had a much easier run, managing to play 4 rounds before he got a 2700 player in the 5th. Kramnik had one sub-2700 opponent, and won that game.
|Oct-19-10|| ||acirce: My point was, how does it matter that the draws were consecutive? Or that they were draws instead of wins and losses? It was a weird argument.|
|Oct-19-10|| ||Mr. Bojangles: Gd insight Polarmis|
|Oct-19-10|| ||polarmis: Agreed, <acirce>. Plus of course lots of the draws involved good fighting chess (e.g. the Nakamura and Navara games).|
|Oct-19-10|| ||jussu: I had exactly the games against Navara and Nakamura in mind when asking the above question. Overall, Kramnik's road through the Olympiad looked like a late edition of Wijk an Zee, where he has indeed done better than +2, but this was one pretty good result nonetheless.|
Just for the record, the glorious seven consecutive draws were against:
|Oct-19-10|| ||Bobwhoosta: <jussu: Just for the record...>|
He should be beaten with a stick!!!
|Oct-19-10|| ||Bobwhoosta: <mastyin>
Are you saying Kasparov had more dominance at this age than he does??
|Oct-19-10|| ||Bobwhoosta: <BobWhoosta>
I guess a better way of asking the question would be this:
Was there anyone as dominant as Anand and Kramnik for Kasparov to face at that time?? Even Karpov was not as dominant then as these two players are now. They are playing amazing chess, and I'm not sure at this point even the Kasparov of old could crack their defense. Anand and Kramnik are both far better than their days with Kasparov, and I believe they would be able to hold him now as well.
It's impossible to argue, but I think Kasparov had no one like Anand, Kramnik, and Topalov to play against in 1982 (except perhaps Karpov). With the addition of Topalov to Anand and Kramnik, and I think the World's Elite is stronger now than it ever has been. Yet Carlsen is holding his own against them.
|Oct-19-10|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: < Anand and Kramnik are both far better than their days with Kasparov>|
I'm not so sure- but of course there were a lot of days, about 13 years worth. Anand is much better than he was in 1991 and 1995, but 2000? 2004? Perhaps now he's stronger overall but he seems to have declined in some areas.
In Kramnik's case, to me he seems to find his 2000-2002 form at the most opportune moments (or inopportune moments, depending on who you support). :)
|Oct-19-10|| ||Bobwhoosta: <SetNoEscapeOn>
You make a good point, it would be difficult if not impossible to prove they are better now than then. The main point of my post, that Kasparov did not have anyone like Kramnik, Topalov, and Anand (except Karpov) to "fight" against in 1982, still stands.
So when we compare the two at the age of 19, Carlsen has actually "proved" himself more so far, although you cannot deduce whether he is stronger from the data set (again, because Kasparov did not have opposition like the afformentioned trio).
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 69 OF 69 ·