< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 23 OF 23 ·
|Dec-18-14|| ||honeypot: About time we had some young prodigies emerging.
The 80s and 90s generation has failed us completely throwing up only one player worth his salt (Carlsen) and another half hearted one (Aronian).
That's why we are still having to contend with Anand, Gelfand, Kramnik, Toplaov, Ivnachuk, Svidler and Adams being top contenders still.
If the youngsters had some spunk, these ancient relics should have retired by now.
|Dec-18-14|| ||Absentee: <honeypot: If the youngsters had some spunk, these ancient relics should have retired by now.>|
Uhm, how would the youngsters force the ancient relics to retire? By murdering them?
Carlsen, Caruana, Giri, So, Lagrave, Karjakin were all born in the 90s.
You realize that ONE player can't take up more than ONE spot, right?
|Dec-18-14|| ||honeypot: It is a sign of the present age where we glorify sensationalim. Our news is devoted to worshipping perverts and drug addicts.|
Quality has no meaning, it is all about short term gratification and fastest way to profit.
Rapid, Blitz, Bullet...I am expecting someone to invent "Lightning" next with ELO ratings by 2015.
|Dec-18-14|| ||honeypot: <Absentee> Its not about Carlsen. We need other inspired youngsters like him to start hitting the top, but unfortunately that's not happening.|
|Dec-18-14|| ||honeypot: The only way to force the ancient relics to retire is by beating them consistently and repeatedly. |
It is something that only Calrsen and Aronian have managed in bits and pieces so far. We need more.
I'd hate another Carlsen vs Anand (or Kramnik/Gelfand/Toplaov) in 2016.
That's a very real and shameful possibility though.
|Dec-18-14|| ||dumbgai: And here I thought those 7-round Dortmund tournaments were too short...|
|Dec-18-14|| ||dumbgai: <honeypot> Aronian (32) is actually closer in age to Kramnik and Topalov (39), than he is to Carlsen (24). Not exactly part of the younger generation that includes Caruana, Giri, Karjakin, MVL, etc.|
|Dec-18-14|| ||honeypot: Carlsen vs Anand is like Mike Tyson vs Muhammad Ali. |
It would be amazing if we again find an old man punching across the table in 2016.
|Dec-18-14|| ||honeypot: <dumbgai> I agree, I included Aronian only because of lack of choice...even he is old now...but where are the damn youngsters??|
|Dec-18-14|| ||Absentee: <honeypot: <dumbgai> I agree, I included Aronian only because of lack of choice...even he is old now...but where are the damn youngsters??>|
Are you trolling or what?
|Dec-18-14|| ||Reisswolf: I rather fear that Aronian is slowly moving out of his prime. He is obviously very good, but he tends to lose at the most inopportune moments. The last two candidate cycles are very good examples.|
I think he will continue to be a top five player for at least another decade, but I don't think he will challenge for title ever.
The real challenge must come from Caruana, Giri, Vachier-Lagrave and others. Perhaps even Nakamura, if he can overcome his mental block against Carlsen.
|Dec-19-14|| ||PhilFeeley: <Our news is devoted to worshipping perverts and drug addicts.>|
I hope you're not talking about our chess players.
I don't think it's actually "worship" of such low-lifes that we get - more a fascination with error.
|Dec-19-14|| ||Sokrates: I think you are right about Aronian, <Reisswolf>. But even if he should be able to control his nerves, play at his highest strength, and get through to a match with Carlsen, I think these nerves wouldn't suffice for a match against the champ. Keres, Bronstein and Stein had a similar problem with their nerves when it really counted. IMO it was much due to psychological factors that Botvinnik managed to escape a defeat against Bronstein in their famous match in 1951. And in Curacao 1962 when Keres stumbled when it counted. Those with nerves of steel have a great advantage in chess.|
|Dec-19-14|| ||Troller: Agree on Aronian. He hasn't exactly been lucky in his Candidates tournaments (being ill on at least one occasion), but nevertheless he has participated in 4 events, counting Mexico 2007. And when it comes to these types of events, he unfortunately does not deliver.|
MVL and Karjakin should not be counted out just yet I suppose. MVL has been mostly a part-time player, and Karjakin has led a rather turbulent personal life. Both might raise their consistency. Still, right now Caruana seems the most likely challenger. Giri is another candidate, but does he really want it enough? He seems to have interests beside chess, and he may not have the killer instinct necessary. Of course, he is 20 years old, so one should not draw conclusions too quickly. And just behind these established players we have at least Wei Yi and Vladislav Artemiev waiting to jump onto the big scene.
|Dec-19-14|| ||Tal1949: Eight of the top 13 are currently aged in their 20's, so that would suggest that there are plenty of 'young kids' almost ready to step up. |
The problem is just that it is so hard to win the right to challenge for the world title. Remember that the wonder boy himself was very lucky to win his right to challenge Anand in 2013. In fact he fell over the line at the last moment.
|Dec-19-14|| ||KingchecksQueen: Merry Christmas everyone! Peace to all. B-)|
|Dec-19-14|| ||Sokrates: I salute that <KingchecksQueen:> and wholeheartedly return your wishes.|
|Dec-20-14|| ||parmetd: Tal1949, baloney. Carlsen withdrew from Kazan. He withdrew from an earlier Grand Prix as well. He usually didn't even play the World Cup. Carlsen wasn't even trying to qualify. When he finally did in 2013, he knew going into the last round that tie breaks were in his favor.|
|Dec-21-14|| ||Olavi: <parmetd: Tal1949, baloney. (...)When he finally did in 2013, he knew going into the last round that tie breaks were in his favor.>|
He lost in the last round... What point were you trying to make?
|Dec-22-14|| ||parmetd: Kramnik lost as well. I was refuting o0Tal1949's bogus point.|
|Dec-23-14|| ||Reisswolf: In my opinion, Kramnik's loss was the more inexcusable one. For one thing, Kramnik should have known that at his age, he would not get as many chances to challenge for the title as Carlsen. For another, he was playing against Ivanchuk, who had been losing left, right and centre in that tournament, mostly on time. Kramnik just needed to play steadily rather than spectacularly.|
Carlsen, on the other hand, actually did try to play spectacularly to ensure his passage. (He knew that he had the favourable tie-break situation against Kramnik.) And, if I remember correctly, later analyses even showed that ♗h8 could have won the game for Carlsen. But he did not continue his attack as accurately as he should have, and lost.
|Dec-26-14|| ||chancho: From an unbeaten result at Sinquefield to getting skunked at London.|
From Fabulous to Fabsuckulous.
It does happen to the best of us.
|Dec-27-14|| ||john barleycorn: <chancho> it is called compensating variations. Let us see how he handles TATA.|
|Dec-29-14|| ||kardopov: Being the revered players, oldies were always getting the invites. It's always the case. Why not make them play open tournaments on regular basis to know their current true form. Youngsters have lesser opportunity because of this system. The organizers would only invite one or two young players in what most of us call a very strong tournament, leaving aspiring talented younger player at the wayside. Some players having the talent and capability usually drop out in the early part of their career and choose another path to thread because of this. Make every tournament represented fifty percent by both the young and the old and let's see if the oldies can overwhelm.|
|Jan-31-15|| ||MTuraga: Why the aversion to someone's age? Why not focus on performance? Seems that we are biased on age factor which is not the right frame of thinking. Imagine how difficult it is for a 40 year old battling a 20 year old and holding his/her own against the younger generation. Human effort, determination and performance need to be appreciated NOT the biological accident of when one is born.|
Rates of decline are estimated using record bests by age for chess and for
various track and field, road running, and swimming events. Using a fairly
flexible functional form, the estimates show linear percent decline between
age 35 and about age 70 and then quadratic decline after that. Chess shows
much less decline than the physical activities. Rates of decline are generally
larger for the longer distances, and for swimming they are larger for women
than for men. An advantage of using best-performance records to estimate
rates of decline is that the records are generally based on very large samples.
In addition, the age range is large. In this study the age range is 35–100 for
swimming, 35–98 for track and field and running, and 35–94 for chess. The
estimates also do not suffer from traditional forms of selection bias.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 23 OF 23 ·