< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 27 OF 194 ·
|May-10-12|| ||HeMateMe: < AVRO38 > You must be a very lonely man, if you so want to insult a complete stranger.|
|May-10-12|| ||PhilFeeley: I didn't see any other chess players in the audience at the opening ceremony. Perhaps it's protocol that they stay away?|
|May-10-12|| ||KKDEREK: I think (and hope) that Anand will crush Gelfand and all FIDE's idiosyncrasy altogether.|
|May-11-12|| ||HeMateMe: Gonna be a close one, boyz (and gurlz) Gelfie has already said that he wont take risks just to try and make something happen. He acknowledges that Anand is a superb tactician.|
Anyway, Anand has played consistenly well all year, but he hasn't really dominated anywhere. Plus one, +1 might win this match.
|May-11-12|| ||Ron: Strange. I saw that I had double posted, but when I deleted one post, the other duplicate post got deleted too.|
Well, this is what I think I wrote:
I followed the 1995 match between Anand and Kasparov by buying newspapers from a major newsstand in downtown Chicago, and going over the games and analysis with friends at coffeehouses.
Back then, I never imagined how I would be involved in chess today.
|May-11-12|| ||Reisswolf: I don't know if this has been mentioned in one of the earlier pages, but does Anand need a certain winning margin in order to preserve (or perhaps establish) his legacy? Or do you think a narrow win will be sufficient?|
|May-11-12|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: I've not seen any speculations about the respective team of seconds.|
Boris has Huzman and Rothstein (plus some others not named so far?!) -- these gents have been decent 2600+ GMs for years and also have worked with Boris for many years now.
Vishy has Peter Heine and the usual suspects -- a team that has been together for eg. the match with Topalov in 2010. Peter Heine's CV also contains work with Magnus Carlsen, work described by Kasparov as providing the (then) young Norwegian with decent opening knowledge.
The point being of course the importance of opening strategy and prep. in forming the course of the match.
|May-11-12|| ||ajile: 7am?
|May-11-12|| ||Ron: So the games are at 3PM Moscow time?|
|May-11-12|| ||kramputz: It is a lot of non-sense by < solskytz >|
|May-11-12|| ||tabul008: Anand is 42!how old is Gelfand?|
|May-11-12|| ||manaschess: Anand has better chance in winning against Gelfand @ WC2012.|
|May-11-12|| ||drik: <nimh: Inferior to methods that measure almost all moves, not simply blunders.>|
Not necessarily. This might be true for if computers were immensely stronger than the top players, but in reality there are many kinds of positions where this is not true. Simply increasing the number of datapoints can be counterproductive if they lack reliability. Blunderchecking may only be a partial measure of strength - but it is unequivocal.
<Nunn as an analyst obviously refers to game analysis, not comparative strength analysis of players from different eras.>
...& how do you propose to analyse the absolute strength of players from different eras, without analysing there games?
<I was specifically referring to the case where one simply counts how many datapoints are above a specific value threshold and how many are under, as opposed to determining the value for all datapoints you have.>
The bell-curve would apply, in BOTH situations.
|May-11-12|| ||thomastonk: Is it true that they change colors after every game?|
At chessbase there have been reports over the years that this is not a fair method.
|May-11-12|| ||solskytz: Just look at the last comments by <Kramputz>|
kramputz has kibitzed 355 times to chessgames [more...]
May-11-12 Anand-Gelfand World Chess Championship (2012)
kramputz: It is a lot of non-sense by < solskytz >
May-06-12 P Morriss vs J McDonnell, 2006
kramputz: Waste of space.
Apr-15-12 Dighton vs M Basman, 1982
kramputz: Lousy game
Apr-01-12 Boris Becker
kramputz: He is good at tennis but a real "dumkopf" in chess. Boris, stop making yourself look stupid.
Feb-27-12 Pillsbury vs Fernandez, 1900
kramputz: I learned this 67 years ago
Feb-07-12 M Goodger vs K Kuenitz, 2006
kramputz: Stupid game.Waste of space
Feb-06-12 Franz Gutmayer
kramputz: Karpova call Gutmayer a anti-semite. Why did Gutmayer hate the Arabs? Did Karpova mean anti Jew? Is that the only thing they can write in his bio ? I call it racist !!
Jan-30-12 Tata Steel (2012)
kramputz: Goofy demands $20,000 for a simultaneous when he comes to New York City.
Jan-12-12 Charousek vs Lasker, 1896
kramputz: <tentsewang:> Get your facts in order about Lasker, you idiot. You called Lasker a racist.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
A picture emerges. A lot of blind invalidation, with no respect, explanation, reason or discussion.
The guy describes his own writings - 'waste of space'.
I agree :-] these won't appear anymore on the pages I see
|May-11-12|| ||Richard Taylor: That "Extreme Chess" on Jennifer Sahade's site is hard case! More fun than the World Champs!!|
|May-11-12|| ||AVRO38: <HeMateMe><You must be a very lonely man, if you so want to insult a complete stranger.>|
I'd say that the exact opposite is true. I'm sure the people who don't like you far outnumber those that do. Therefore, I'd have lots of company in that regard.
As for the match, Gelfand is clearly the weakest challenger since Short. The talent gap between these two is huge.
I predict Anand by at least +2. My only worry is that Anand has developed an affinity for draws recently and this might allow Gelfand to stay competitive. If both players play their best however, it'll be an Anand blowout.
BTW, am I the only one whose noticed that the picture on this page is backwards? The chessboard is a dead giveaway!
|May-11-12|| ||offramp: Start time in London is given at chessbase as "12:00". |
You may not know this but Ray Keene's newspaper The Times has strict guidelines on this point: there is no such time as 12:00. Journalists are told in the style-sheet ONLY to use either noon or midnight. So you have all learned something (except for Ray Keene)!
|May-11-12|| ||HeMateMe: 4 hours..........|
|May-11-12|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: @<AVRO38>
the picture is one published by chessbase.com. They printed the same (correct!) picture with the comment they wanted to drive readers nuts.
|May-11-12|| ||APatzer: Good luck to both the players !
Hoping to see exciting, entertaining chess.
|May-11-12|| ||nimh: <jessica> What personal attacks? I beleive I've made none. I may have lost my cool at times, but this has hardy anything to do with ad hominems.|
Come on jessica, what do you think you're doing?
Bridgeburner may be a sensible user universally, but his ad hominems at me in his last post and earlier, instead of patching obvious and glaring holes in his methodology, can harde be described as sensible.
What I pointed out in my most recent post to bridgeburner were his deficiences in his communication with me.
Hopefully he'll give answers to my questions...
<drik> What do you mean by the vague term 'immensely stronger'? I believe current strength is more than adequate.
<...& how do you propose to analyse the absolute strength of players from different eras, without analysing there games?>
Strictly speaking, it's the analysis of moves, not games. Reading comprehension isn't your strong point? The methods of these two analysis types are completely different.
1) game analysis deals with finding the truth about games, which moves were decisive, and which alternatives could one have played instead.
2) strength analysis which deals with finding and determining the factors that affect the accuracy of moves, and establishing a hypothetical level of accuracy for all players if all factors were equal.
You cannot apply game analysis methods to strength analysis, because it doesn't measure the average difference between moves made and the moves suggested by the engine; also certainly other factors like thinking time and difficuly of positions have no role, except some vague statements "in time trouble he made..."; "he deliberately sought complications by..."; "he tried to swap queens as quicky as possible, in order to reach the endgame phase..."
<The bell-curve would apply, in BOTH situations.>
Yes, of course, but this wasn't the point. The level of certainty within the same set of datapoints would be lower.
|May-11-12|| ||extremeintellect: Thanks <Phil>|
|May-11-12|| ||Absentee: Let's just hope they can slough it through before either dies of old age.|
|May-11-12|| ||Rolfo: Then we are off. An important titlematch off course. Who will face the next generation in upcoming cycles? Gelfand is up to his chance of a lifetime. And how will Anand fare against an older opponent?|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 27 OF 194 ·