| Jul-11-07 | | argishti: good game. If Carlsen didnt have that pawn on d3. u could have drawn this game for sure. |
 |
| Aug-14-07 | | Gegga: If Magnus didn't have the pawns on a2, b2 and c2, Runde could have won! |
|
| Aug-15-07 | | contra: Its a rundebout way of saying black had no chance. |
|
| Nov-19-07 | | aazqua: If Carlsen didn't have that pawn on d3? Is that a joke? Carlsen sacced the rook just to show this chump up. Man was this a one sided contest. |
|
| Feb-24-08 | | BigW2619: I say you got some big balls to play a crazy sicilian like that against a player of Carlsen's level. |
|
| Feb-28-08 | | Akuni: <Carlsen sacced the rook just to show this chump up> No, I don't think he was showbaoting, he just knew that the KNight would interfere and the simplest thing was just to get rid of it. |
|
Mar-03-08
 | | al wazir: <BigW2619: I say you got some big balls to play a crazy sicilian like that against a player of Carlsen's level.> At the time, Carlsen's level was only 2148. |
|
| Mar-26-08 | | Knight13: He was 2148, but his REAL rating strengh was beyond that for sure. |
|
| Mar-26-08 | | slomarko: 
click for larger view
i think HAR's decisive mistake was 14...Qa6. instead 14...Qh3 15.gh3 Nf4! would give him a playable position.
click for larger view |
|
| Apr-20-08 | | positionalgenius: <slomarko> maybe. But carlsen is a pretty strong player..... |
|
Feb-02-10
 | | Richard Taylor: How could you let that patzer beat you?!! |
|
| Apr-03-12 | | MarkFinan: Wow!! I never realised you'd played Carlsen <frogbert>.. I haven't looked at the game yet, but i will and let you know what i think as there's not much kibitzing on the game itself.. At least you will one day be able to say you played the world champ! IMO. :) (im going to be accused of being one of those "fanboys" now, aren't i? Lol) Thats why i stay away from that page in particular tbh.. |
|
| Apr-03-12 | | pericles of athens: Fritz gives 8...fxe5 as dead even, and 8...Na6 +1 |
|
| Apr-07-12 | | frogbert: mark, it was a failed experiment to try 14... Qa6+. and alas, i didn't follow up very well either. i'd played the theoretical move Qxh3 followed by Nc7 in a previous game, which leads to an interesting ending that's hard to play for both sides, but in which white is slightly better (due to the pawn structure, black has decent compensation for the exchange). my reasons for leaving the well-throdden path were probably ill-considered. when carlsen played this game, he was only a little more than 11, he was playing at fm level already, and some months later he played the championship group of the norwegian champs. he was already 3-400 rating points ahead of me. :o) for some odd reasons this not very interesting game is present in at least two chess books: the norwegian edition of agdestein's "wonderboy" and "experts against the sicilian", edited by jacob aagaard. the presence in the latter is kind of nonsensical and probably simply a result of a) the relative rareness of the line and b) carlsen showing up in the author's search. but after all *i* was the one who deviated from accepted theory - which i happened to know well at the time; i'd just read an article by a fan of b29, the nimzo variation in the sicilian. the inclusion in the wonderboy book was simply due to my employer at the time being carlsen's first ever sponsor, and i served the role as some kind of chess connection "on site" for agdestein, receiving monthly update reports and such about young carlsen's progress. at 11 carlsen showed up at our offices and gave a simul exhibition (after a presentation/lecture held by agdestein), and it was also at this time i learned to know carlsen's father henrik. after that simul, when i let the carlsens out of the building, i was a bit amused when the 11-year old wanted to hear me out about whether i thought he'd be able to qualify to the top group of the norwegian championship later that year. ok, i was an adult, but he was already a much stronger player than me and technically a better judge of his own capabilities; maybe he admitted me a tiny bit of chess credibility because i'd just drawn him in a rook ending in the simul? anyway, he did qualify. :o) |
|
| Apr-08-12 | | MarkFinan: <frogbert> Thats a really good story about the young Carlsen.. So are you still in touch with his father?
And iv'e never heard of an 11yr old giving simuls, thats amazing!
I don't know too much about Carlsen's career, but what age exactly did he start playing?
And what age did he get his first FIDE rating?
Iv'e just realised after typing that, that it'll be in his bio here! Duh lol :) |
|
| Apr-08-12 | | Penguincw: At this point, black finally realizes they're down two pawns. |
|
| Apr-08-12 | | MarkFinan: <Penguincw> Two pawns is nothing, they're just sacs before mate is delivered with two knights, to an unwitting and extremely poor opponent ;) |
|
| Apr-08-12 | | frogbert: oh, i knew before move 20 that my move 14 experiment had gone bad and that i was losing. however, it was a team game (one of 6 boards in an otherwise reasonably tight match), and as long as there are minor chances of getting lucky i tend to keep games going under such circumstances. :o) however, after the (very) young carlsen traded down to a completely won pawn ending, there were absolutely no chances for him missing a "trick" like a fork or something. even taking carlsen's tender age of 11 into account (and most 11 year olds, even the strong ones, usually are a bit erratic with big variations in performance), i would've resigned much earlier if it would've been an individual game and not a league/team game. |
|
| Apr-09-12 | | MarkFinan: <frogbert> Sorry for my above post, I *do not* think you're an extremrly poor opponent, far far from it.. For some reason i thought this was your player page (Don't ask, it's been a strange few days lol) and i was making a poor subliminal chess *joke* about you and I being the knights, and "someone else" being the witless opponent! My humour just doesn't read well, lol :) |
|
sac: 32.Rxe7+