chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

🏆
TOURNAMENT STANDINGS
London Chess Classic Tournament

Fabiano Caruana6/9(+3 -0 =6)[games]
Ian Nepomniachtchi6/9(+3 -0 =6)[games]
Wesley So5/9(+1 -0 =8)[games]
Maxime Vachier-Lagrave5/9(+1 -0 =8)[games]
Magnus Carlsen5/9(+2 -1 =6)[games]
Hikaru Nakamura4.5/9(+0 -0 =9)[games]
Levon Aronian4/9(+0 -1 =8)[games]
Sergey Karjakin3.5/9(+0 -2 =7)[games]
Michael Adams3/9(+0 -3 =6)[games]
Viswanathan Anand3/9(+0 -3 =6)[games]

Chessgames.com Chess Event Description
London Chess Classic (2017)

Played in London, England 1-11 December, as the fifth and final leg of the Grand Chess Tour 2017. The ten participants played nine games at classical time control for a total prize fund of $300,000. The event was won by Caruana after four tiebreak games* vs Nepomniachtchi. Official site: http://www.londonchessclassic.com/. Crosstable with Grand Chess Tour points (GP):

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 GP =1 Caruana * ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ 1 1 1 6 12 =1 Nepomniachtchi ˝ * 1 ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ 1 1 6 10 =3 Carlsen ˝ 0 * ˝ ˝ ˝ 1 ˝ ˝ 1 5 7 =3 Vachier-Lagrave ˝ ˝ ˝ * ˝ ˝ ˝ 1 ˝ ˝ 5 7 =3 So ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ * ˝ ˝ ˝ 1 ˝ 5 7 6 Nakamura ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ * ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ 4˝ 5 7 Aronian ˝ ˝ 0 ˝ ˝ ˝ * ˝ ˝ ˝ 4 4 8 Karjakin 0 ˝ ˝ 0 ˝ ˝ ˝ * ˝ ˝ 3˝ 3 =9 Anand 0 0 ˝ ˝ 0 ˝ ˝ ˝ * ˝ 3 1˝ =9 Adams 0 0 0 ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ ˝ * 3 1˝

Grand Chess Tour final standings after GCT Paris (Par), Your Next Move (YNM), Sinquefield Cup (Snq), Saint Louis Rapid & Blitz (StL) and London Chess Classic (LCC):

Par YNM Snq StL LCC GCT 1 Carlsen 12 13 9 - 7 41 2 Vachier-Lagrave 10 8 13 - 7 38 3 Aronian - 5˝ 6˝ 13 4 29 4 Nakamura 8 - 3 9 5 25 5 Caruana 3 - 4 5 12 24 6 Karjakin 5 - 6˝ 9 3 23˝ =7 So 4 10 1˝ - 7 22˝ =7 Nepomniachtchi - 4 1˝ 7 10 22˝ 9 Anand - 3 9 2 1˝ 15˝

Carlsen won the Grand Chess Tour with 41 points, and took home $245,417 in total. The table shows the nine contenders that played in four of the five events; there were 14 others (e. g. Adams) but each of them played in only one event. For the points allocated in the events before London (the first four legs) see Grand Chess Tour Paris (Rapid Tiebreak) (2017), YourNextMove (Blitz) (2017), Sinquefield Cup (2017) and St. Louis Rapid & Blitz (Blitz) (2017).

Official Grand Chess Tour site: https://grandchesstour.org/2017-gra... Previous GCT event in London: London Chess Classic (2016).

*See London Chess Classic (Rapid Tiebreak) (2017). Caruana won the fourth game after three draws and got 12 Grand Chess Tour points - Nepomniachtchi 10. Both got $62,500 in prize money.

 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 45  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Carlsen vs Caruana ½-½542017London Chess ClassicD27 Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical
2. I Nepomniachtchi vs Aronian ½-½282017London Chess ClassicC78 Ruy Lopez
3. W So vs M Vachier-Lagrave ½-½312017London Chess ClassicA04 Reti Opening
4. Adams vs Karjakin ½-½302017London Chess ClassicA13 English
5. Nakamura vs Anand ½-½442017London Chess ClassicA04 Reti Opening
6. Anand vs Adams ½-½482017London Chess ClassicC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
7. M Vachier-Lagrave vs Nakamura ½-½472017London Chess ClassicB77 Sicilian, Dragon, Yugoslav Attack
8. Caruana vs Aronian ½-½312017London Chess ClassicC78 Ruy Lopez
9. Karjakin vs Carlsen ½-½302017London Chess ClassicC50 Giuoco Piano
10. W So vs I Nepomniachtchi ½-½272017London Chess ClassicD70 Neo-Grunfeld Defense
11. Adams vs M Vachier-Lagrave ½-½582017London Chess ClassicB51 Sicilian, Canal-Sokolsky (Rossolimo) Attack
12. Aronian vs Karjakin ½-½332017London Chess ClassicE00 Queen's Pawn Game
13. I Nepomniachtchi vs Caruana ½-½312017London Chess ClassicA07 King's Indian Attack
14. Nakamura vs W So ½-½312017London Chess ClassicA33 English, Symmetrical
15. Carlsen vs Anand ½-½312017London Chess ClassicE04 Catalan, Open, 5.Nf3
16. Nakamura vs I Nepomniachtchi ½-½322017London Chess ClassicB91 Sicilian, Najdorf, Zagreb (Fianchetto) Variation
17. M Vachier-Lagrave vs Carlsen ½-½422017London Chess ClassicC53 Giuoco Piano
18. Anand vs Aronian ½-½312017London Chess ClassicC84 Ruy Lopez, Closed
19. Karjakin vs Caruana 0-1422017London Chess ClassicB48 Sicilian, Taimanov Variation
20. W So vs Adams ½-½312017London Chess ClassicA07 King's Indian Attack
21. Carlsen vs W So ½-½682017London Chess ClassicC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
22. Adams vs Nakamura ½-½322017London Chess ClassicB76 Sicilian, Dragon, Yugoslav Attack
23. Aronian vs M Vachier-Lagrave ½-½252017London Chess ClassicD70 Neo-Grunfeld Defense
24. I Nepomniachtchi vs Karjakin  ½-½302017London Chess ClassicE34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation
25. Caruana vs Anand 1-0392017London Chess ClassicC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 45  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

TIP: You can make the above ads go away by registering a free account!

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 21 OF 21 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  john barleycorn: < tuttifrutty: Fried chicken loaded with steroids...>

Ok, Andok's? Chookstogo? Max's or Savory?

Dec-12-17  BOSTER: <John barleycorn>.Thanks.
Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: <but a cold assessment tells me that neither he nor any of the others will be able to push Carlsen off the throne.>

Not so fast...your assessment is real cold to the bone...it's affecting your thyroid.

Lemme tell you...you haven't been taking note lately...so here are the FACTS that you missed.

Wesley was beaten by the top players.
1. Aronian
2. Nakamura
3. Anand
4. Magnus
5. MVL
6. Karjakin
7. Caruana

Can you see what I see??? Can you see the sun rising slowly???

If not, heads up...Wesley is learning how to beat them back.

First, it was Aronian who beat Wesley at ease and them bam!!...wham!!...found the solution and Wesley went on to beat him back like he was alpha zero...

Second, it was Naka style that worried me the most but again, Wesley found the formula and made Naka shut his hole...on his birthday...once and for all.

Then...it was Anand time to be given a nice birthday present on the penultimate round of this tourney...who Wesley made him look like a patzer with his la bamba dancing knights...

Soon it will be the rest of the field turn to get spanking...as Wesley thrive to study his opponents by implementing Bruce Lee's rule number one...the art of war number one rule...KNOW YOUR OPPONENT. Slowly but surely we are now seeing the results...give him time...and he will deliver as prophesied...the heir to the throne.

Go Wesley.

Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: I did not include Kramnik on the list as Wesley beat him at the get go...much like Nepo...
Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  john barleycorn: <tuttifrutty: ...

Can you see what I see??? Can you see the sun rising slowly???

If not, heads up...Wesley is learning how to beat them back. ...>

Yeah, good luck and eventually in 20 years.

Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: Uh huh...Wesley will never need luck like Magnus...to show who the boss really is...and is coming soon at a theater near you.
Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: <Wesley was beaten by the top players. 1. Aronian
2. Nakamura
3. Anand
4. Magnus
5. MVL
6. Karjakin
7. Caruana >

So now...can you see the trend???

1...2...3...-mission complete.

Who could be the next???

Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  john barleycorn: <tuttifrutty: ...and is coming soon at a theater near you.>

Yeah, and the title is:

<how I almost became a challenger and never happened to be <So>>

Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<tuttifrutty> So now...can you see the trend???>

There are trends and there are trends, and you clearly don't know the meaning of "trend". OK, let's look at a <REAL> trend. These are So's average ratings (to smooth out the rating fluctuations somewhat) at classic time controls for each quarter from 2015 to 2017 and his average rating gain and loss from the previous quarter:

2015-Q1 2779 -
2015-Q2 2781 (+2)
2015-Q3 2777 (-4)
2015-Q4 2767 (-10)

2016-Q1 2773 (+6)
2016-Q2 2773 (0)
2016-Q3 2771 (-2)
2016-Q4 2792 (+21)

2017-Q1 2817 (+25)
2017-Q2 2816 (-1)
2017-Q3 2804 (-12)
2017-Q4 2788 9-16)

So has a terrific 2016-Q4 and 2017-Q1. During that period he was playing the best chess in the world and his rating went up an incredible 46 points. He won 5 out of the 6 tournaments he entered and was part of the gold medal-winning US Team at the 2016 Olympiad.

But all hot streaks end sometime, and since 2017-Q2 to 2017-Q4 he's lost 28 points and not won any major events. And the rate by which he's losing rating point is increasing, although he did gain 4 rating points at the 2018 London Classic. Let's hope that this represents the start of a reversal of form. But he's now within 18 rating points of where he started in 2016-Q3, a rating more indicative of his actual relative playing strength than the rating he enjoyed during his hot streak in 2016-Q4 and 2017-Q1.

<So> now ... can YOU see the <REAL> trend???

Dec-12-17  not not: Giri's devious plan of planting chip in the head of Nakamura worked perfectly: having taken control over the mind of once ferocious tactician, Giri steered all his games into draws from his dutch lair, thus taking next step closer to implementing new chess world order of imperturbable drawmasters overtaking top tournaments. Is there a James Bond figure to stop him? Where is Tal (who'd rather loose than draw) when you need him? Where is Morozevich? Where Topalov? O, sancta simplicitas! O, fortunatam natam!
Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: <<So> now ... can YOU see the <REAL> trend???>

Yes I do, I see Wesley finding ways to beat these elite players one by one...and take my word for it... Magnus is...next.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: Haha...the last time I check the meaning of trend it says to be concise...<change or develop in a general direction.>

Just because you go to a fashion show every now and then, doesn't mean that's the trend I was referring to.

What you failed to mention was that...while the rest of the field were being pampered, Wesley was by his lonesome...with the aid of a dinosaur pc by his room all alone. You failed to mention that Wesley has just started playing against the elite...where as...Magnus and company has played against each other countless times. Just for starters...Naka vs Magnus...

<Classical games: Magnus Carlsen beat Hikaru Nakamura 12 to 1, with 23 draws. Including rapid/exhibition games: Magnus Carlsen beat Hikaru Nakamura 33 to 14, with 41 draws. Only rapid/exhibition games: Magnus Carlsen beat Hikaru Nakamura 21 to 13, with 18 draws.>

<Magnus Carlsen beat Levon Aronian 14 to 7, with 33 draws. Including rapid/exhibition games: Magnus Carlsen beat Levon Aronian 27 to 19, with 54 draws. Only rapid/exhibition games: Magnus Carlsen beat Levon Aronian 13 to 12, with 21 draws.>

After 2 player against Magnus, I lost count.
Now...can you see while his elo is up there??? He has been beating the same players over and over and over and over again and again to infinity.

I command you search the rest of the field games against each other and present it as evidence of my claim, pronto...and I am quite sure that I will be vindicated by the judge and the jury.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: <So has a terrific 2016-Q4 and 2017-Q1. During that period he was playing the best chess in the world and his rating went up an incredible 46 points. He won 5 out of the 6 tournaments he entered and was part of the gold medal-winning US Team at the 2016 Olympiad.>

Again...you failed to mention he won the gold on board 3 too. Can you be accurate sometimes??? I hate to see your intelligence go to waste because of attention to detail deficiency.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sokrates: Thanks, <AylerKupp> for another brilliant score of facts by your hand. Unfortunately - and you should know that - it is wasted on the poster to whom it's addressed. Just like you can't convince a religious person with arguments of science.
Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  tuttifrutty: <Thanks, <AylerKupp> for another brilliant score of facts by your hand.>

This... is a chilling assessment, brought to you lacking sufficient resources...meaning, a novel without imagination...pffft.

Dec-13-17  Kapmigs: While it is true that Carlsen has been beating the same players over and over again, it is equally obvious that So has been drawing the same players over and over again.
Dec-13-17  not not: Giri, Leko and Kramnik enter the bar to find Nakamura sitting at their table with picture of Slechter in his hand.
Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <Just like you can't convince a religious person with arguments of science.>

<Sokrates>

Arguments of science? Science itself has no arguments. Which you probably did not realize, when you wrote such nonsense.

I suppose you mean the logic of scientific arguments. That logic tells me, ironically, that one can't convince a religious person.

Simply because science denies the concept of a conscious moderator when it comes to general existence. Et voilá! There you have YOUR *logic*

In comparison to the *logic* of a religious person, who denies a random factor, considered general existence.

Ironically, it's the same factor *random*, which is declared as the holy grail by our *logically* operating scientists regarded to that same existence.

Beware: it's not that both camps have any REASON, whatsoever, to make a call on reality with their claim. Go figure how pathetic it is!

It's just like two kids yelling yes! and no! to each other when they are having an argument.

And you're just one of those kids. Btw... it's YOUR turn, if I am correct..

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sokrates: <WorstPlayerEver> Wow, what a hurricane of words! I am slain to the ground gasping for air. You are obviously making comprehensive efforts to insult me, but - sorry to disappoint you - it doesn't work.

I have read your response a couple of times to understand its substance - but I failed. Probably because I am not at your high level, so please bear with me.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <Sokrates>

Well, it's pretty low level, actually.

Usually when people are insulted by someone who gives an alternative vision, it simply means they have no argument.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Sokrates: <WorstPlayerEver: <Sokrates> Well, it's pretty low level, actually.
Usually when people are insulted by someone who gives an alternative vision, it simply means they have no argument.>

I hesitate to reveal my codex in such cases, but here you go: It takes a person of great calibre to insult me.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<tuttifrutty> Yes I do, I see Wesley finding ways to beat these elite players one by one...and take my word for it... Magnus is...next.>

At this level any player can defeat any other player, even Carlsen. So is certainly a top player and will eventually defeat Carlsen in a classical time control game, just like Nakamura eventually did. That's not a trend, that's perseverance and the rules of probability And I wonder where or when you looked up the definition of "trend". Clearly you just didn't understand it since what I showed by looking at So's quarterly rating averages was a <change in a general direction>. Which apparently you failed to see.

And you obviously failed to mention that So might have been by his lonesome some time ago, just like all top players when they were getting started, but he isn't any longer. His rating continues to fall even though he is now also a "pampered goldfish". Maybe it started to fall once he began to play against the elite? That's certainly a possibility.

And I can see how you lost count after 2 players against Magnus. You always had difficulty counting once the count reached high numbers.

You "command" me? Ha, ha, ha, don't make me laugh. We've been down this road before. You're just too lazy and inept to collect and present pertinent data so you "command" others to do it for you. Ha, ha, ha.

Mentioning that So won gold on board 3 seemed like a relatively small accomplishment compared to winning 5 of the 6 tournaments he entered. That's not inaccuracy, that's omission of less important details so not to distract from his more important accomplishments. Or did you think that winning gold on board 3 (even though he was the 2nd highest US player behind Caruana) was a more significant accomplishment than the tournament wins?

And don't worry about my intelligence going to waste, worry about yours.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Socrates> Yes, I know that trying to point flaws in <tuttifrutty>'s "reasoning" is a waste of time, he simply doesn't have the capacity to understand what you're trying to say.

At any rate, he's just a troll trying to elicit a response from others. But from his virulent and nonsensical overreaction to my previous post it's clear than in this instance the troll has been goaded into the reaction that he himself was trying to elicit. So he didn't even get the effect that he wanted. Ha, ha, ha. What a silly person he is, just like the other <So>bots. Too bad that such a fine player like So is associated with such mindless "supporters".

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  zanzibar: <<Sokrates> Wow, what a hurricane of words! I am slain to the ground gasping for air.>

Not wanting to fan the flames too much, but I do have to admire the above literary flourish.

Dec-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <I hesitate to reveal my codex in such cases, but here you go: It takes a person of great calibre to insult me.>

<Sokrates>

Lol it that case it can't be me :P

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 21)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 21 OF 21 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, 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 login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


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, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC