|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 29 OF 30 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-28-11 | | positionalgenius: <Wise> The FIDE world elo rankings of course. |
 |
| May-28-11 | | achk: <Vladimir Kramnik: I personally prefer a round robin tournament, because it is more spectacular. In order to became a challenger (to win it) you have to play more agressively, it will make it interesting for spectators.> http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp...
Would you believe it? :D
We've already known that Vladimir can play agressive chess, but it is really surprising that he prefers DRR rather than matches. |
|
| May-28-11 | | Hovik2009: Lets be honest to ourselves, as much that I respect Gelfand and my desire to welcome him to be next world champion, but I can't see how that will happen. Among top players there are not many to match Anand in regular form, let alone him being in his better forms, currently Anand is in his prime of chess power aided with vast opening knowledge and quick calculative ability and in decision-making, his fighting and uncompromising style and many more virtues for a professional chess player that in my opinion, only Aronian and Carlsen and in some lesser extent Kramnik and Topalov had some chance to come out victorious against him in a future world championship challanging match. |
|
| May-28-11 | | Mr. Bojangles: < as much that I respect Gelfand and my desire to welcome him to be next world champion, but I can't see how that will happen. Among top players there are not many to match Anand in regular form, let alone him being in his better forms, currently Anand is in his prime of chess power aided with vast opening knowledge and quick calculative ability and in decision-making, his fighting and uncompromising style and many more virtues for a professional chess player that in my opinion, only......> That's exactly what people said about Kasparov before before London 2000. If Kasparov can be defeated and defeated decisively, who the hell is Anand? The outcome of next year's match may shock many a people. |
|
May-28-11
 | | amadeus: Gelfand (2001-2011, CG Classical stats):
+0 -1 =8 vs Anand
+0 -2 =10 vs Kramnik
+0 -3 =4 vs Topalov |
|
| May-28-11 | | Chessinfinite: Mr Bojangles, other than Kasparov, nobody in that age group had the balls to beat Anand, so cut down on the comparision with the 2000 match ok? Let face it, with all due regards to Gelfand, he is not the Kramnik of 2000, not even close. On the other hand,Anand has been playing better than ever. No one claims that Anand cannot be defeated, probably he will be defeated by someone younger later, but hey, the young ones need to qualify to do that, so till they do that, Anand remains Champion i think. |
|
| May-28-11 | | polarmis: Here's a Grischuk interview after the Candidates Matches. Some quotes: <I was worried I’d forgotten how to play chess…> <I was still behind Aronian and Kramnik in preparation, but no longer quite as dramatically as is usually the case.> <Boris and I have an excellent relationship, but on that point our opinions differ. He thinks my statement about “the burial of classical chess” is complete nonsense, while I still think that classical chess doesn’t have long to go.> http://www.chessintranslation.com/2... |
|
| May-28-11 | | bronkenstein: In the interwiew, I especially like the way he credits Gelfand´s excellent playing throughout the match ( ˝in our match he played only one bad move ˝(!) , ˝the main obstacle was wonderful Boris´s gameplay˝ ) also supported by the story how the computers didnt understand Gelfand´s strategy in the decisive game , concluded with <In principle, I only made one mistake: Bxh4. But even the computer (which I later looked at the game with) doesn’t immediately grasp that it’s a mistake i.e. the level of play by White was so high that I’d have had to play phenomenally not to lose that game. And it’s never easy to play phenomenally.> |
|
May-28-11
 | | CG Librarian: <alexmagnus: Actually if you do the search now you get +9 -5 =27. One Gelfand win from 1990s, present just a week ago, now magically disappeared... Maybe it was attributed to some different players.> Hello, I just saw this. The stats changed because I merged away a duplicate game that happened to be a Gelfand win. If you see any other duplicate games in the database, feel free to report them using the link at the bottom of each page. :) |
|
| May-28-11 | | Nadark: please why was Carlsen not ppicked among the eight to play against anand for the world title. Thanks |
|
May-28-11
| | amadeus: <Nadark>, Carlsen withdrew from the cycle a couple of months ago. I think the story starts here (he withdrew from the GP after FIDE changed the regulations)
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...
and it ends here
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... |
|
| May-28-11 | | Nadark: thanks |
|
| May-28-11 | | vanytchouck: I also think that Anand will be the clear favourite of the match. He has played matches against the greatest (Kasparov, Karpov, Kramnik, Topalov, Kamsky at his prime) and he's at the top since the 90'. Of course, the match won't be easy for Vishy, but the current world champion will have a fairly good edge. |
|
| May-28-11 | | kia0708: Well, so it looks like Gelfand has no chance agansit Vishy. <Gelfand (2001-2011, CG Classical stats): +0 -1 =8 vs Anand
+0 -3 =4 vs Topalov> |
|
| May-29-11 | | WiseWizard: < Pygeum Lycopene: maybe he also knows who red john is..> Alas! We've been meaning to solve the mystery of red john for some time now. |
|
| May-29-11 | | positionalgenius: I hope Gelfand wins so the chess world will hate FIDE and force a real structered cycle again. |
|
| May-29-11 | | I play the Fred: I don't see how that happens. Gelfand is not a guy who rallies big-time sponsors to finance chess tournaments. He is also not a guy who rattles sabers for change. I think Gelfand as WC would be more or less the same as Anand. Sure, it might be weird or unseemly to many of us to see a comparatively low-ranked player win the WC, but things aren't going to changed just because we get a little ticked off about it. The players are the ones who have a chance to make changes to the system, not the rank and file fans. |
|
| May-29-11 | | WiseWizard: <Alas!>
a-las
inter.
Used to express excitement. |
|
| May-29-11 | | I play the Fred: For What It's Worth:
Suppose we were to score match results in the way that we score tournament games: You win a match, one point. Draw a match, 1/2 point. Lose a match, zero points. Well, if Anand defeats Gelfand, he would tie for the second-highest percentage among world champions, with Kasparov and Alekhine, behind Lasker. (Fischer was one for one, but he was the only World Champ to play one WC match; everyone else played at least two) Here's the complete list:
Fischer 1/1 (100%)
Lasker 5.5/7 (78.6%)
Kasparov 6/8 (75%)
Alekhine 3/4 (75%)
Steinitz 4/6 (67%)
Petrosian 2/3 (67%)
Anand 2/3 (67%)
Karpov 3.5/7 (50%)
Kramnik 2/4 (50%)
Smyslov 1.5/3 (50%)
Capablanca 1/2 (50%)
Euwe 1/2 (50%)
Tal 1/2 (50%)
Botvinnik 3/7 (42.9%)
Spassky 1/3 (33%) |
|
| May-29-11 | | gazzawhite: <kia0708: Well, so it looks like Gelfand has no chance agansit Vishy. <Gelfand (2001-2011, CG Classical stats):+0 -1 =8 vs Anand
+0 -3 =4 vs Topalov> >
How does this imply that Gelfand has no chance against Vishy? Looks pretty even to me. |
|
| May-29-11 | | achk: <I play the Fred>, very interesting summary. However, it must be noticed that Alekhine is 4/5 (beating Capablanca, Bogoljubov (twice) and Euwe). It is also not clear how to count Kramnik's Elista '06 match - he won it in tiebreak, and in addition he was leading 6-5 in classical part. And Kasparov should be 5,5/8 (Sevilla '87 match was drawn). There are controversial circumstances of K-K '84 match, but I think you are right counting it as Karpov's victory (he was de facto winner). To the end, in my opinion percents don't say anything, but the numbers of world championship matches show how big domination of Lasker, Botvinnik, Karpov and Kasparov was. |
|
| May-29-11 | | blueofnoon: I think we should appreciate it if this match ever takes place, regardless of the result. More possible scenario is nobody wants to sponsor Anand - Gelfand as occurred in Kasparov - Shirov and Anand ends up picking different player as a challenger. |
|
| May-29-11 | | frogbert: no hurry. there's supposed to be a world championship final in 2013 as well. with a new challenger. |
|
| May-29-11 | | I play the Fred: <Kasparov should be 5,5/8 (Sevilla '87 match was drawn).> Here's how I scored Kasparov's matches:
1984 - 1/2
1985 - 1
1986 - 1
1987 - 1/2
1990 - 1
1993 - 1
1995 - 1
2000 - 0
Six points out of eight matches. As you can see, I counted the first K-K match as a draw. Why? The match was played without an official result and Kasparov didn't have to do any additional qualifying for the 1985 match. Kasparov was still challenger and Karpov was still champion, just as it was before the first match. If Kasparov was required to qualify again, I would have counted it as a win for Karpov. Yep, screwed up on Alekhine. That makes him the top match dog, Lasker second, with Kasparov third. Like I said, though: For What it's Worth. |
|
| May-30-11 | | NGambit: Interesting.
1)The problem with percentages is that for small numbers the "percentage result" is generally misleading. In this case, most people would agree that 4/8 is much more creditable than 1/2.
2)Also, is winning 2 matches against Bogoljubov = Winning(or even drawing) two against Kasparov? |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 29 OF 30 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
