Played in Wijk aan Zee, Netherlands 10-25 January 2015, with Round 5 in Rotterdam (January 15) and Round 10 in Den Haag (January 21). Crosstable ( ... [more]
Player: Vassily Ivanchuk
| page 1 of 1; 13 games
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 140 OF 142 ·
|Jan-27-15|| ||Gypsy: <Overgod: <Gypsy>:|
I appreciate your contribution, but note that the very exact notions you present have already been discussed and dispensed with many pages ago. We've discussed this all already. You're not adding anything new here, and I am not going to repeat myself.
Please stay on topic. This is about Tata Steel 2015, not about China being ranked at the bottom of the Global Creativity Index. If you have a problem with this, please contact the <Martin Prosperity Institute>. Let them know about your professor's ramblings there...>
|Jan-27-15|| ||chancho: <But his victory hinged (among other things) on a single, too-timid Ding Liren move a3 instead of f3.>|
Ding missed out on a defining moment by playing timid.
Some people can find that little extra that can make a difference while others collapse when they feel the pressure of the moment.
(Anand missing 14...Nxe5 move for instance.)
Magnus too, will have moments were he misses opportunities, and Ding as he gains experience will most likely do better in those defining moments.
|Jan-27-15|| ||Gypsy: <Absentee: <keypusher: <cow> There's also the ignore list.>|
It's not much use when the whole discussion gets derailed. >
Not perfect, but helps a lot. Take heart. :-)
|Jan-27-15|| ||Overgod: <Anand missing 14...Nxe5 move for instance.)>|
That move has become overrated. By no means did Anand have a guaranteed win there. Magnus would have defended probably for hours, and I am not convinced Anand would have been able to secure a win. He had weak pawns himself, so he would have been up a single pawn at best. That's by no means a victory -- especially with so much play left in the position.
Regardless, it was a big blunder for Carlsen to move from a clearly winning position, to an unclear, slightly worse position, that with perfect play might have ended in a loss.
People should stop pretending as if Anand missed a clear win. He missed having a clear advantage, nothing more. There was no forced win there.
|Jan-27-15|| ||john barleycorn: <Overgod> congratulations. just to let you know that you have made it into CG posters heaven where <AJ Goldsby I> and <Abdel Irada> used to reign supreme. Now, the unholy trinity is complete.
The king of the chocolate milk drinker open and the world's greatest unknown journalist in alliance with an outstanding australian philosopher. What more can one ask for?|
|Jan-27-15|| ||Absentee: <john barleycorn: <AJ Goldsby I>>|
How many are there exactly?
|Jan-27-15|| ||john barleycorn: <Absentee: <john barleycorn: <AJ Goldsby I>>|
How many are there exactly?>
|Jan-27-15|| ||lainulo: You have offended my family...
|Jan-27-15|| ||AylerKupp: <chancho> Ding missed out on a defining moment by playing timid.>
Yes, but it's understandable to be a little timid when playing the World Champion who is rated 132 Elo points above you, particularly on your first meeting. Ding's rise has been steady and I suspect that he will continue to improve. And he will probably not be as timid in their next meeting.|
|Jan-27-15|| ||keypusher: <<AylerKupp: <chancho> Ding missed out on a defining moment by playing timid.> Yes, but it's understandable to be a little timid when playing the World Champion who is rated 132 Elo points above you, particularly on your first meeting. Ding's rise has been steady and I suspect that he will continue to improve. And he will probably not be as timid in their next meeting.>|
Also, for the record, 16.f3 was not any kind of simple win, as you can see from the line <eyal> posted on the game page. Ding was apparently thinking of something quite different from the computer line anyway. So his decision may have had less to do with timidity than with miscalculation. He's young; he'll have plenty more <defining moments>. As will they all.
|Jan-28-15|| ||siamesedream: <Magnus Carlsen`s Blog
Winning Tata Steel 2015!
It feels like ages since I had my 6-game winning streak. There are not many above-ten rounds elite tournaments outside FIDE, and even if I really like to come back to Wijk aan Zee year after year the last week is always long.
Some of my young competitors seemed to have retained enough energy for the last round, and I needed a draw to avoid a five-way tie for first.
The final round draw against Saric was my fourth in a row, and although I was unhappy with my own play (reminding me of the near-loss against Caruana in the last round of 2010), it was enough to win outright at +5. It brought me a slight rating gain for the first time since February 2014, and my fourth Tata Steel tournament victory.
It is also my first two wins in a row (2013 and 2015) in Wijk aan Zee as I didn’t participate last year.
Vachier-Lagrave, Giri, So and Liren all ended at +4. Suddenly there are some 15-20 players in the world that may all win top events on the right day.
I need to continue to make progress to stay ahead in the future. A formidable challenge!
My 7 out of 13 decided games was more or less representative of the stat’s for the Masters group. It is always good to see a high number of decisive games.
On the way to the traditional closing event I was treated with an unexpected and heartwarming ceremony at the market square in Wijk aan Zee with the mayor, the local choir and lots of people present. Thank you!
The organizer did a great job as usual making the players feel most welcome and I think the “tour” – playing two rounds in other cities - works well.
It is less than a week till my next tournament in Baden-Baden, and after some rest I hope to be back in good shape for another interesting event starting February 2nd.
Magnus Carlsen, Oslo, January 27th, 2015>
|Jan-28-15|| ||chancho: <Carlsen: I need to continue to make progress to stay ahead in the future.>|
Good for Carlsen.
He gets it.
|Jan-28-15|| ||Sokrates: Thanks for the quote, <siamesedream>. I have sometimes critisized MC for acting close to impolite, but in this blog he demonstrates a great personal caliber, and the decent measure of selv-criticism, which should always be the generator, even for the very best. So well written, Mr Carlsen, and please continue on that path.|
|Jan-28-15|| ||Sally Simpson: Hi 0o0o0o0o0,
"I think that some plans are original to the position and might be the creative aspect rather than pattern recognition."
Again I'm not too sure. Need to see what is termed a creative plan.
This all started with me way back in 1980 when reading and discussing the note to:
Averbakh vs Kotov, 1953
In 'the Chess Struggle in Practise' game 96, note after move 32.
(I see others by looking at the kibitzing to the game tend to agree it's not creative. Kotov knew by intuition there was a mate there. Headed for time control so he and his chums could find it during the adjournment.)
The writer of the notes (Bronstein or Vanstein?) says you need imagination to be creative at chess.
"Imagination was and remains one of the foundations of chess creativity."
My argument being you can teach tactics but you cannot teach anyone to be imaginative. (an active imagination is a gift or curse...all depends how you look at it.)
The most creative chess players in my opinion are raw beginners who display a talent for the game.
Their minds are not cluttered up with all the baggage good chess player carry. They are creating fresh ideas all the time and learning.
Once they get their hands on their chess book or receive their first chess lesson they are doomed.
I touched on this in my second post here.
N Barsalou vs B Wall, 1980
Nice creative nickname you have there - looks like you are castling kingside, then Queenside and back again. :)
|Jan-28-15|| ||tamar: It's heretical, but working with computers can stimulate creativity.|
Think of the game just recently at Wijk aan Zee Caruana vs Carlsen, 2015 Caruana probably would not play Qb1 without computer preparation in a Rossolimo Sicilian, as it looks ugly and out of play for awhile.
But it poses concrete problems for Black, and Magnus had to accept doubled pawns to quell the main idea which is to get open lines for White's pieces on the Queenside.
Magnus then had to find his own creative answer, based on pattern recognition, certainly, but in a novel setting.
So openings like the Rossolimo Sicilian are more interesting now than before, as new ways of play become possible.
|Jan-28-15|| ||Gypsy: <My argument being you can teach tactics but you cannot teach anyone to be imaginative. (an active imagination is a gift or curse...all depends how you look at it.)>|
Things are not altogether as bleak: While we still can not teach creativity, for it still is an art and not a science, we can stimulate it.
When a student with innate talent is steadily exposed to imaginative ideas of others, and when he/she is also steadily challenged to perform, then his/her capacity for creativity (often) gets unlocked.
That is the principle behind the undeniable success of elite research schools -- the Stanfords, Caltechs, Berkeleys and such. It is not the quality of the teaching, for that typically is rather terrible to middling, it is the over-all environment of excellence instead. And even more than the excellence of the faculty, it is the overall excellence of the student's peers that counts.
|Jan-28-15|| ||Gypsy: It is the set of examples of creativity that counts most!|
I am reminded to Polya's exasperation (in the Intro to one of his books, perhaps to 'Patterns of Plausible Inference'; I do not have it readily available) with modern theoreticians of creative-thinking and of making-discovery, who themselves have never really invented anything (that is, besides those heavy handed theories of how to be creative).
In contrast, guys like Descartes or Leibnitz also embarked in their times on projects to codify rules for creative thinking; and those projects failed in their nominal goal. But they succeeded superbly in their partial results! These guys were then able to say: Here is how I usually organize my thinking and, behold, here is what I invented while doing so (like analytical geometry, infinitesimal calculus, and others).
|Jan-28-15|| ||Tiggler: <Gypsy>:< It is not the quality of the teaching, for that typically is rather terrible to middling, it is the over-all environment of excellence instead. And even more than the excellence of the faculty, it is the overall excellence of the student's peers that counts.>|
I've noticed that one can tell which are the really excellent schools: they are the ones in which excellence is not constantly demanded and boasted of. They just take it for granted.
Hi <Gypsy>, been a while since we talked.
|Jan-28-15|| ||Gypsy: <Tiggler:
I've noticed that one can tell which are the really excellent schools: they are the ones in which excellence is not constantly demanded and boasted of. They just take it for granted.>
<Hi <Gypsy>, been a while since we talked.>
My bad, of course. Have been fighting off alligators of real life, lately. :-))
But it is a real pleasure to come here from time to time and read intelligent comments from such as <tamar>, <keypusher>, <yourself> and many others.
(Exeptions are few, though vocal. :-))
|Jan-28-15|| ||patzer2: Perhaps it's noteworthy that the top 16 countries ranked as most creative in the creativity ranking list at http://www.businessinsider.com/most... are also countries ranked as economically free or mostly economically free on the index of economic freedom at http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking.|
Perhaps this comparison provides some support for my hypothesis that greater political freedom and economic freedom tends to foster greater creativity.
It also suggests any difference between the Chinese in Singapore (ranked number two in economic freedom and number nine in creativity) and China (ranked low in both economic freedom and creativity) is entirely due to environmental and societal factors (e.g. a more repressive Chinese government as compared to a more politically and economically free society in Singapore) and has nothing to do with race or ethnicity.
|Jan-28-15|| ||patzer2: Of course Singapore, though more politically free than China, is far more economically free than it is politically free.|
|Jan-28-15|| ||Sokrates: This endless, utterly tiresome debate on creativity has become lesser and lesser creative. There must be other sites on the internet for such non-chess related discussions.|
|Jan-28-15|| ||schweigzwang: If not, we should create one.|
|Jan-28-15|| ||patzer2: A quick glance at the Freedom House ratings of countries on civil liberties and political freedom in its "Freedom in the World 2015 Report" at https://freedomhouse.org/report/fre... would indicate that none of the countries ranked as "not free" or worse ranked high in creativity or economic freedom.|
Relating it back to Chess, I seriously doubt whether a nation's economic or political freedom has any significant impact on Chess creativity.
However, I do believe creativity, whether developed in the arts, engineering technology or the business economy, is far more influenced by environmental factors, and that race or ethnicity plays no significant role in the cultivation of creativity.
Certainly no one race or ethnic group has a monopoly on creativity or inventiveness.
|Jan-28-15|| ||Absentee: Does anyone really take groups such as "Freedom House" or the "Martin Prosperity Institute" at face value?|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 140 OF 142 ·
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply.
Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it
entitles you to features otherwise unavailable.
Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
- No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
- NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
- Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
- All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
- Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page.
This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or
this site, visit the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
your profile |
Premium Membership |
Kibitzer's Café |
Biographer's Bistro |
new kibitzing |
Tournament Index |
Player Directory |
Notable Games |
World Chess Championships |
Opening Explorer |
Guess the Move |
Game Collections |
ChessBookie Game |
Chessgames Challenge |
privacy notice |
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC