< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 16 ·
|Oct-14-13|| ||csmath: Svidler definitely has the upper hand in the second game.|
|Oct-14-13|| ||visayanbraindoctor: <jphamlore: I just heard a rumor the Bulgarians have withdrawn their bid to host Candidates 2014? Is this true?|
Who would the Russians prefer as the wildcard, Grischuk or Svidler ...>
The way Caruana has been playing recently, I would prefer Caruana. But I doubt if the Russians do.
They ought to make Grischuk and Svidler play match.
|Oct-14-13|| ||csmath: Matters little, I would prefer Caruana as well.
In either case, I do not see who could possibly beat Carlsen. Perhaps in 4-5 years when Magnus de-motivates.
|Oct-14-13|| ||csmath: Svidler is winning second game, this will probably be drawn by grace soon.|
|Oct-14-13|| ||csmath: They drew in completely lost position for Nepo. :-)
So Svidler is the "new" Russian champion.
|Oct-14-13|| ||tamar: Mr. Seven Times|
|Oct-14-13|| ||Natalia Pogonina: Russian Superfinal is a simple event: 10 men play chess, and at the end Peter Svidler wins!|
|Oct-14-13|| ||visayanbraindoctor: <csmath: Matters little, I would prefer Caruana as well.|
In either case, I do not see who could possibly beat Carlsen. Perhaps in 4-5 years when Magnus de-motivates.>
Among his generation, I do not think anyone can beat Carlsen. He regularly plays better than them.
However, contrary to what most chess fans think, I believe that the young Anand was stronger than the present Carlsen. I would have favored the 1995 Anand over Carlsen. This Anand was just done in by serendipity, that the Title holder was a real chess beast, both in tactics, position, and strategy. If the beast retired in 1994, Anand would have become one of history's <young world champions, 25 and below>. He would have been World Champion for quite sometime.
People forget what Anand used to be. He belted out games against the GMs of that time as though he were playing rapids, and committing nary an error in smoothly crushing them. He displayed a truly remarkable gift for spotting fine tactics, and in record time.
This present-day Anand? I truly favor Carlsen now to beat him; but who knows? There is still a finite chance it would be the 1995 version that would sit in front of Carlsen. Sees all in record time. Even Carlsen would find a player like that hard to handle.
|Oct-14-13|| ||visayanbraindoctor: I merely repeat what I previously posted:
Congrats GM Svidler. And Wow!
|Oct-14-13|| ||perfidious: <visayan>: Kasparov was much stronger psychologically than Anand in 1995.|
As you say, Anand was one of the coming talents back then and held his own in the first half of the match, but came unstuck thereafter, which was ruthlessly exploited by his opponent, who was generally keenly cognisant of all the psychological nuances.
|Oct-14-13|| ||csmath: @visayanbraindoctor:
Actually while I appreciate Anand my opinion is that Carlsen is one of the three strongest chess players in the whole history of 20th-21st century chess. Meaning beside Fischer and Kasparov. I do not think I have gotten such a strong impression from anybody's games since Kasparov. Bar none at least for me.
With a little more opening theory he would be as dominant as Fischer was even though these are more competetive times. As a matter of fact I would like him facing Kramnik because I think Kramnik would be beaten in a way not many people think. I would be absolutely shocked if Anand somehow pulls the win out of the upcoming match.
|Oct-14-13|| ||visayanbraindoctor: <perfidious> Yes. And more. IMO Anand was in the wrong time and wrong place. It took him more than a decade to finally claim the Title. |
<csmath> Actually,I would also be a bit shocked to see Anand win. I fully expect Carlsen to win the Title. But one never knows. It can be argued that present young Carlsen is stronger than the young Anand, but it can't be disputed that this young Anand was one heck of a chess player who would give present Carlsen a run for his money.
|Oct-14-13|| ||visayanbraindoctor: If Russia hosts the Candidates my wish list is that the Russian Federation holds an internal qualifier:|
1. Match between Grischuk and Svidler.
2. Double or even quadruple round robin featuring Grischuk, Svidler, Vitiugov, and Morozevich.
Either would be fascinating.
|Oct-14-13|| ||parmetd: wow kramnik lost that position? I am surprised...|
|Oct-14-13|| ||AuN1: Kramnik really embarrassed himself today. He got a position where the only two logical outcomes would have been a win or a draw and he loses. Yikes.|
|Oct-14-13|| ||acgneves: Kramnik didnt blunder his 69. ..b5, he bluffed, and thats a huge difference.. he needed to win, tried to squeeze it out of nothing but it didnt work out... that can explain his bad mood after the game Kudos to Svidler|
|Oct-14-13|| ||csmath: I do not think he bluffed and I do not think he blundered. |
I think he made an error that many would have made. It was unfortunate error and it was decisive. To call that a blunder would be to assume it was obvious. It was certainly not obvious to me at all. It only become obvious in analysis. Therefore that is not a blunder.
|Oct-14-13|| ||jphamlore: There is no denying Kasparov's greatness, but it seems to me he was somewhat fortunate that neither Short nor Anand had any ability to open 1. d4 against him at that time. Both Karpov and Kramnik crushed Kasparov's Grunfeld whereas no one in Kasparov's prime could consistently break his Sicilians.|
Even Fischer was somewhat fortunate he was matched vs Taimanov. I believe someone like Geller or Korchnoi would have given him a far stiffer challenge in a Candidates match.
|Oct-14-13|| ||Natalia Pogonina: Peter Svidler is a MONSTER in the good sense of the word! Vladimir Kramnik tried hard and did a tremendous job commentating on most of his games, signing autographs, giving interviews. He is a brilliant ambassador of chess, both as a player and as a person. I guess he got tired of all this attention/"community service". Also, those talks about him having not won a single medal must have gotten to him...Didn't see him at the closing ceremony. I think he left abruptly.|
|Oct-14-13|| ||csmath: Well, Kramnik had a lot more satisfying moments in his career than otherwise but there are always disappointments no matter how successful you are. |
He could have treated Nepo with little more class but it is understandable he didn't and I guess Nepo can live with that. Nobody is entitled to anything. I think Kramnik played this tournament well and within his expected result. I like the way he plays lately.
|Oct-14-13|| ||fisayo123: <Anand had any ability to open 1. d4 against him at that time. Both Karpov and Kramnik crushed Kasparov's Grunfeld>|
I think it has more to do with the style of play of both Anand and Short, not necessarily the opening. Anand also tried 1.d4 to no avail.
Other great players from Kasparov's time(Ivanchuk, Gelfand etc)also played d4 against him and got schooled.
|Oct-14-13|| ||fisayo123: I just hope Svidler can transform his prowess in this event to other Super-tournaments involving different nationalities.|
|Oct-14-13|| ||Refused: <jphamlore: There is no denying Kasparov's greatness, but it seems to me he was somewhat fortunate that neither Short nor Anand had any ability to open 1. d4 against him at that time. Both Karpov and Kramnik crushed Kasparov's Grunfeld whereas no one in Kasparov's prime could consistently break his Sicilians.
Even Fischer was somewhat fortunate he was matched vs Taimanov. I believe someone like Geller or Korchnoi would have given him a far stiffer challenge in a Candidates match.>|
That had more to do with Kasparov'S unhappy love affair with the Grunfeld.
Some other master apparently told him once the Grunfeld would be a perfect fit for his uncompromising style. And as you mentioned, when he tried on the big stage like his matches against Karpov, the Grunfeld would usually explode right to into his face. Kasparov's main response to d4 however was the Kings Indian, which served him quite well against Karpov. I would guess Kasparov's score with KID was at least as good as his scores with the Sicillian. It was a real dread esp. in the 1990s.
|Oct-14-13|| ||Vincenze: <Natalia Pogonina: Peter Svidler is a MONSTER> Yes we know what you mean. He out ground the grinder Carlsen at the candidates. He's 2800+ material for sure. As a Brit I applaud his enjoyment of our eccentric game, now dominated by the Indians. We ask how long before the Chinese pick up a bat. Among the women, has Gunina ever beaten Hifan? She has created a gulf after thrashing Ushenina . I wonder how Ushenina would have fared among the Russians (yes, she is Ukrainian, I know).|
|Oct-14-13|| ||Khapablanca: <I believe that the young Anand was stronger than the present Carlsen> I do not. Carlsen elo is much higher at the same age, even higher than that of Kasparov at ant age. Carlsen is the real deal at any given age.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 11 OF 16 ·