< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 33 OF 47 ·
|Nov-23-11|| ||JoergWalter: <kingcrusher> do you mean that knight sacrifices on d5,e6 or f5 should be mandatory for white in a Tal memorial? |
Which particular draws do you consider boring in this event?
|Nov-23-11|| ||kingscrusher: <JoergWalter:> Some of the draws are clearly much more exciting games than others such as Kramnik vs Carlsen which I video annotated.|
Draws by nature are going to be viewed far less than wins on Chessgames.com and other places in the future, because people generally like to see a game with a decisive result.
So schemes which encourage decisive results, like what is used at the London Classic - 3 points for a win, may be interesting to consider. It was very exciting last year, and I look forward to the London Classic next month - I will be playing in the FIDE open, but knowing the Elite Classic will have the 3 point for a win points system really adds something I think to the event.
|Nov-23-11|| ||siamesedream: <Magnus Carlsen`s Blog
Tal Memorial 2011 R7 Short draw.
Today I'll keep the blog entry in line with the game against Anand; short. A long night sleep and I felt great before the round today. Not a bad idea as black against reigning World Champion V.Anand despite his solid but somewhat lackluster performance thus far. Finally he shifted to 1.d4 against me and I went for the popular Grünfeld defense. He chose 8.Qd2 and I tried to remember what to do next. I went for the most solid line with cxd4 and Nc6, and with some precise albeit fairly obvious moves the position was equal around move 20 as I controlled the c-file compensating for his advanced central pawns. Without much prospects for any of us moves were repeated shortly after. Draw. Overall the round was somewhat dry, but Ivanchuk won a nice game against Nakamura to make it a five-way tie for first with two rounds to go. After a tasty meal at TGI Friday´s I look forward to the game against same aged Nepomniachtchi tomorrow. Magnus Carlsen, Moscow, November 23th, 2011
|Nov-23-11|| ||JoergWalter: He may have asked for a medium to rare steak. Good luck for tmrw.|
|Nov-23-11|| ||Check It Out: Tal Memorial opening survey after 35 games:
Grunfeld - 10
QGD - 8
Sicilian - 4
English - 3
Ruy Lopez - 2
Queen's Indian - 2
QGD Slav - 2
NID - 2
Catalan - 1
Caro-Kann - 1
|Nov-23-11|| ||cjgone: Why is the Grunfeld Defense getting so much play at high levels? Is it superior to other lines against 1.d4?|
|Nov-23-11|| ||badest: <parmetd: Kingscrusher your conclusion that playing certain openings (ones you have an obvious preference for) is ridiculous. Aronian himself said he plays the marshall to draw and the berlin to win.|
I think the problem is we need to realize that the standard draw rate has gone because of better preparation (not just engines but methods, databases, seconds etc).
Changing the incentives could work but only if done right and most the suggestions are asinine in the sense they do not account for multiple point of views. Still the first question that needs to be asked is a framing question: why are they playing? For spectator amusement? No for their own gain: THIS IS THEIR DAY JOB. This is their livelihood and their income.> And exactly where do the money come from - outer space, perhaps? How does one get sponsors willing to provide big bucks? With more draws? I liked kingscrusher's idea of a Tal-prize.
|Nov-23-11|| ||Check It Out: I'm surprised there is no Tal brilliancy prize award - isn't that the point of a Tal memorial? These organizers are missing the boat. As far as finding $, just take 10% of the original prize fund and award a 1% prize to the most Tal-like game of each round - instant excitement every round!|
|Nov-23-11|| ||Domdaniel: We are discussing two different phenomena here, as I think <kingscrusher> pointed out -- the openings played by 2700+ GMs in elite events, and the openings *we* might use at lesser levels.|
I like the French. I can play a theoretical line to move 20, or a novelty by move 6. It's quite possible to find novel positions where neither player has made a real error. Last weekend, I had a game begin 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 a6 (rare) 4.e5 (rarer) c5 5.Nce2 (new).
At the same time, I have no illusions that such lines will be taken up by leading GMs. There's a fairly narrow repertoire at the very top, and it consists of two types of game: those considered safe draws for Black, and some more double-edged ones where Black has winning chances at the cost of a greater risk of losing.
The 'draw problem', however, is something of an illusion. Short draws have almost vanished - they were more prevalent 25 years ago. Today's elite draws are long, tough, balanced games.
The statistical evidence shows *fewer* draws at present than in the past, if you restrict the search to players in the world top ten. The 'problem' is actually tournaments like this one, where all of the players are in, or near, this super-elite bracket.
I prefer something like the upcoming London Classic -- the top four players in the world, and the top four British players. There may be some massacres, there may be an upset or two, but there will certainly be more decisive games -- even though the Brit contingent are all strong GMs.
And, to return to the point I started with, Nigel Short plays some interesting openings.
|Nov-23-11|| ||serenpidity.ejd: <Check it out> Are you not more surprised because there are no brilliant games? All these players are of the same level there is no one more superior to the other, to say the least. Lots of drawn games. No exciting games like Kasparov's.|
|Nov-23-11|| ||notyetagm: When does the <2011 WORLD BLITZ CHAMPIONSHIP START>??|
|Nov-23-11|| ||Domdaniel: <CheckItOut> Remember the *other* thing that Tal was famous for?|
Not, not *that*. The *other* other thing ... I mean his record-breaking unbeaten streak, 20 years after his world championship. Tal had a second career as a super-solid drawmeister, with occasional brilliancies (such as his 1987 win vs Hjartarson). He said himself (in 1979) that brilliant finishes were harder to find because defenders had improved so much -- and that was before computers had had much impact.
If you want brilliancies, the first requirement is obviously good players. But a disparity in playing strength helps too.
Basically, I think these all-elite tournaments are a bore. Roll on London.
|Nov-23-11|| ||notyetagm: A cute finishing blow from Ivanchuk.
40 ... ?
click for larger view
40 ... d3xc3! 0-1
click for larger view
Game Collection: PASSED PAWN VERSUS ROOK TRICK
Nakamura vs Ivanchuk, 2011 40 ... Rd3xc3! 0-1
41 c1xc3 b3-b2 b2-b1=
click for larger view
click for larger view
|Nov-23-11|| ||shach matov: Encouraging players with money sounds good theoretically but will it work in practice? These players are not Tal, he had a special gift and style and they have theirs. Keep in mind also that it's the computer age, all these payers use comps and their playing style is dramatically affected by it; most games may not be exciting but the accuracy level is usually high. As we know Tal's sacs were brilliant but usually not totally sound; not too many modern top GM's would even consider such moves against Anand, Carlsen etc. For sure, Tal could pull off many of his sacs even against Anand but he is not playing the Tal memorial.|
In other words playing like Tal while not being Tal against any of these players would usually result in a disastrous loss, lowering the quality of the tourney in general. However, some here would probably welcome that considering the popular anti-draw attitudes.
|Nov-23-11|| ||Domdaniel: Interesting that the five players *not* sharing the lead include the world champion, the previous world champion, the next challenger, the Russian champion ... and Nakamura, who is occasionally seen as a potential champion at *something*.|
Maybe the leaders have more to prove. Or maybe the margins are too small to have any statistical significance.
|Nov-23-11|| ||Domdaniel: <notyetagm> -- < When does the <2011 WORLD BLITZ CHAMPIONSHIP START>??>|
Any second now. There ...
No. Sorry, missed it.
|Nov-23-11|| ||parmetd: I am actually surprised there is no brilliancy prize or dedicated Tal website or mention of the tal blitz...all of these were regular features of past editions that made the Tal memorial truly special. This year its just cruddy Russian commentary on the rcf site instead of english commentary on a separate site.|
|Nov-23-11|| ||TheFocus: I think Tal must be rolling over in his grave at the amount of draws in this tournament.|
I am sure he would batch-slip some of these contestants!
|Nov-23-11|| ||matebay: Top GM's in a quagmire of draws...
What kind of WC this Anand.
Cannot even outdistance himself an inch from his pursuers...
Whereas Fischer rose above his contemporaries.
|Nov-23-11|| ||shach matov: There's no getting around it, all of them use comps as coaches and naturally copy their style of play. They all try to play like Rybka, just not as deep. Ergo accurate but dry games. Rybka doesn't like many of Tal's moves, it's not smart enough for them. And this trend will continue: expect two decisive games in the next Tal memorial.|
|Nov-23-11|| ||matebay: Rybka is a disgraced copy artist.
I doubt the GM's would like to emulate its brand of play.
|Nov-23-11|| ||Everett: Maybe Bronstein was right. For chess to become more popular and egalitarian he suggested three main things:
Eliminate the WC as the center of the chess universe, eliminate adjournments, and eliminate rigorous candidate cycles. Of course he said these things long before computers were such an influence.|
Only the first one still exists to some degree. The candidates cycle is not as rigorous while being extremely cumbersome, no?
Does chess need a prestigious World Champ? Does tennis suffer with their ranking system? Would we see more fighting chess if the WC was up for grabs much more frequently, say, once a year? Then those who would be champ multiple years in a row would get the prestige... This is kind of in the spirit of the Chess Oscar.
|Nov-23-11|| ||matebay: Inspirational quotes for bewildered Tal Memorial Guys...Hope you rise out of your foxholes...|
You have to have the fighting spirit. You have to force moves and take chances.
I am the best player in the world and I am here to prove it.
You know, I can beat all those guys.
There's no one alive I can't beat.
|Nov-23-11|| ||vsaluki: shach: "Keep in mind also that it's the computer age, all these payers use comps and their playing style is dramatically affected by it;"|
My thought is that whenever you play a risky move with the computer, the computer will find the weakness and exploit it. When you present such a move to a human player he may be a little surprised and primarily concerned with what your attack is going to look like. But the computer has no emotions. It will evaluate everything as usual and then make the best move without any concern for what you might be trying to do. The result is that playing risky moves gets you a spanking from the computer. That, over time, becomes conditioning against making risky moves. If you are playing a human, you might see the weakness in your own risky move, but you hope that you can get away with it. With the computer, you know that it will find the weakness and exploit it. With the computer, you don't even want to get behind by a pawn or two because you know that the computer will not give anything back cheaply down the road.
|Nov-23-11|| ||Check It Out: <SerendipityDomMatov>|
Personally the draws don't bother me; I'm rather more interested in the drama created by who will win, and at this point it's a tense race.
I agree that having a brilliancy award may not create more exciting games, the point being that we are in a different age, the computer age. It could be argued that Tal could only exist as he did when he did, the same for Kasparov, the ideal person to link the non-computer age with the computer age. Back in the late 60's and 70's, when the Petrosian/Karpov style became strong Tal had to adjust as <Dom> pointed out.
I still think there should be a brilliancy prize awarded either each round or overall; it couldn't hurt, and the award could be a % of the overal purse, so no extra funds are needed. If Nakamura fnally started playing like he could and suddenly found himself in situation where he could take the safe road or a risk, the chance for an extra $2,000 might just influence his move choice.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 33 OF 47 ·