|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Oct-31-03 | | seoulmama: No offence meant of course! Just saying that I have studied very diligently Anand's play. |
|
| Oct-31-03 | | billikid: such a good match..looks like both of them wanted some blood bath here but it only shows how genius this guy anand when it comes to screwing up bold attacking plans of wannabees like kramnik..(not bad for a tall player with small brain) |
|
Nov-02-03
 | | Open Defence: seolmama are you saying Anand prefers complications in a position ? |
|
Nov-02-03
| | Open Defence: look at Anand's technique here (of course it is a rapid game) .. he blocked the pawn structure and then launched his own attack, I rarely see Anand seek complications like Tal or Kasparov it seems to me seoulmama that you did not understand what my post meant (no offence) |
|
| Nov-02-03 | | seoulmama: Open Defence, what I mean is that Anand's play in itself may seem easy, but is very complicated underneath. |
|
| Nov-02-03 | | seoulmama: Open Defence, we should not be arguing about this - we both simply have different opinions. |
|
| Nov-02-03 | | AdrianP: <Seoulmama> <Open Defence>... I don't think that your respective views on Anand are necessarily exclusive. I find Anand's play "clear" in the sense that Fischer or Capablanca's play can be called "clear". <Seoulmama>'s point is that although things seem smooth on the surface, the apparent simplicity of play is informed by deep calculation / positional understanding / intuition. <Open Defence>'s point is also a good one, in that there a certain players, e.g. Tal, Shirov, Shabalov and Kasparov who positively like and play for "unclear" / "messy" positions; Anand is not one of those. |
|
Nov-03-03
| | Open Defence: <seoulmama> simplify /= simple .. that's why I said you misunderstood my post, what I meant was Anand does not seek unclear positions, I think Adrianp brought out the meaning of my post and hey chess is interesting because no two opinions may be the same :-D |
|
| Nov-03-03 | | seoulmama: I agree Open Defence (-: |
|
Nov-03-03
| | Open Defence: and no two smileys may be the same lol :-} |
|
| Nov-03-03 | | Ghengis Pawn II: Diggtydawn - Anand is Indian, not Russian. Did you mean Kramnik? |
|
Nov-03-03
| | Open Defence: <Ghengis Pawn II> erm where did diggitydawg say or imply Anand was russian ?? |
|
| Nov-03-03 | | Diggitydawg: <Ghengis> I think you misinterpreted my two unconnected statements <why don't you list Anand as one of your favorite players? You seem to have a fondness for the Soviet players> to be connected. |
|
| Nov-04-03 | | Benjamin Lau: Kramnik claims he might have missed a forced mate in seven somewhere in this game, around move 44 or so (it was a rapid game). |
|
| Nov-05-03 | | billikid: as for me, it's nice to see chess players having some nice games and making some money out of their efforts..anand simply put players'care first before his,and that shows why he is such a legend on and off the board,no wonder he gets sponsors happily in promoting chess coz he puts stability in chess unlike some greedy chess player who is sick in the head and he knows nothin but his own gain and desperately believing himself good lookin in his simple mind..hehe... |
|
| Nov-05-03 | | rags: there is no mate in 7 for black. GM Shipov gives a good analysis of this game in www.worldchessrating.com, he says he hasnt seen kramnik being clearly outplayed like this for long time. |
|
| Nov-15-03 | | darnold: What about exf5 at move 14, threatening f6 after Bxd5? |
|
| Nov-15-03 | | PinkPanther: <So Vishy has won... hey is this the sicillian pelikan or shveshnikov ?> The pelikan and she sveshnikov are the exact same thing, that's like saying "is this the russian defense or the petrov defense"? They're the same thing. It's really quite confusing, there are a ton of chess openings with more than one name. |
|
| Dec-31-03 | | talchess2003: < Further, Anand's style is to clarify and simplify positions, but (if I may be so bold to say this) he has not yet played the game that makes me weak in the knees like Karpov or Tal has .. so... > exactly. this is why Anand's style is so much like Capablanca's. |
|
| Jan-10-04 | | Benjamin Lau: It looks like Kramnik overextended his queenside pawns with 17...a5? This allowed Anand to play 18. Na3 which is difficult to meet. Kramnik is forced to push his pawns even further, leaving gaping weaknesses on his own turf. It's worth noting that Anand leaves his knight on the "rim" b5 square instead relocating it to the center because it serves a specific strategic purpose even though it violates a general rule. The move further undermines the d6 pawn. Anand shows his awareness of this weakness and the finesse to exploit it with 25. Rd2 and 26. Rad1, further weakening the pawn. 27. Bb3 and 28. c4! concentrate on the square right in front of the pawn, to prevent it from advancing without impunity. If Kramnik advances the pawn, his center crumbles and the position opens up with all of his pieces awkwardly and passively placed, while Anand will already have a battering ram on the d file. |
|
| Mar-03-04 | | Reisswolf: Chessgames.com, this game is a duplicate. Please delete it from the database. |
|
Jul-26-07
 | | tpstar: Jon Speelman: "The Sicilian Sveshnikov is strategically complex. I watched this game 'live' at the Internet Chess Club (ICC - www.chessclub.com) and although there were over 1,000 spectators, at least several dozen with international titles, nobody really seemed to know what was going on for the first 20 moves. "But things clarified - to my mind at least - after Anand's splendid 21. Ndc7! after which he succeeded in exchanging off Black's important [light] squared bishop and anchoring his knight on the very strong b5 square. Without the knights, Kramnik would have been fine but his [knight] was prospectless while Anand's [knight] defended the weakness on c3 and bore down on d6. Anand tied Kramnik down, then struck with 30. c5! after which his queen and bishop were a murderous attacking force." http://findarticles.com/p/articles/... |
|
Mar-18-08
 | | blazerdoodle: It's Anands first win over Kramnik since 2001. In between, in this drawfest of recent, Kramnik actually holds the advantage (of recent games - in the last two years). This win as black could mean that Anand has arrived. I like them both, actually. But just saying Anand is better doesn't make it so, so does it? He could beat all these "other guys," but still not beat Kramnik. He'll have his chance in a match, what are the dates? |
|
| Sep-17-09 | | yalie: <Benjamin Lau: Kramnik claims he might have missed a forced mate in seven somewhere in this game, around move 44 or so (it was a rapid game). > Ha! you misunderstood what was said in the chessbase article. It was Anand who missed a mate in 7 on move 44 [44. Ba2! is instant resign by black]. A jewel of a game against the Sveshnikov! |
|
| Mar-28-12 | | notyetagm: http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/329... |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
