He is not going to answer that, I already asked him twice. The guy is probably not even rated but has no problem trolling, describing combinations that #1 rated player in the world misses, as being easy and "basic".

We talked about the length of the combination and I asked him to explain why Carlsen played like that from move 28 if he didn't see the combination from there, but it seems like extremepleasure2 didn't even understand the question, he probably can't even imagine someone planning something like that so far ahead.

So instead he focused on lengthy explanations as to why he would have spotted 31.Rc7 (while assuming that the combination started from move 31 and not 28), that was pretty funny actually. I mean almost every dude who learnt moving the pieces Yesterday, could spot 31.Rc7 - it's the most <obvious> move in that position (dahh?!). The issue is obviously that if one is good enough to see black's Qd8 reply, most chances are that he would have dismissed the 31.Rc7 option, thinking that it was losing. Unless one plans it in <advance> (the way Carlsen probably did), finding a refutation move like Qd3 is not very likely to happen while u already have the feeling that your candidate move (i.e. Rc7) is a blunder. Apparently that is what happened to Topalov under classical time controls (not blitz), and to Hiarcs.

Asking me why I think the combination was difficult after my explanation about its deepness starting from move 28, and after I mentioned both Topa's and engines difficulties to spot it, was quite weird (to say the least).

Asking other kibitzer to "explain" to me how easy that combination was in view of their fit backs here, such as: "Fantastic game", "amazing game", "great game", "Qd3 is an amazing shot", "Wonderful show", "He [Magnus] has developed some extremely impressive calculation abilities", "Good attacking game!!", "impressive play", "Great finish by Carlsen!", "Wunderkind played it very, very well", "Carlsen is really something", "Amazing Carlsen!!!", "Magnus Carlsen played like a 2900 player in this game", etc. Was even weirder.

Considering also that he chickened out the blitz match I offered him twice after his continuous bragging about his blitz skills, leaves no doubt that this guy is a <Total Patzer>, who can't even tell the difference between a high level combination and a scholar's mate.

Now there is nothing wrong with being a total patzer of course, but when someone with such low level chess skills sees a combination that #1 rated player in the world has missed, and goes around bragging about how he would have found it in blitz, Diminishing Carlsen's achievement and making fun of all the kibitzers who were impressed by it, the way < extremepleasure2> did here, That is simply the <worst> kind of trolling as far as I concern.

Yes but <whole point> was that he wasn't talking about a puzzle, he wasn't even talking about classical time controls, he was talking about finding it in a <blitz> game...

<alex: In a puzzle, Rc7 would probably be even my candidate move>

Well, as I said: <every dude who learnt moving the pieces Yesterday, could spot 31.Rc7 - it's the most <obvious> move in that position (dahh?!) [..]>, But the big difference is that in a puzzle you don't have this part: <finding a refutation move like Qd3 is not very likely to happen while u already have the feeling that your candidate move (i.e. Rc7) is a blunder.>, that you do have in a real game.

The most difficult part in big discoveries of geniuses, is having the intuition of <where> to look for when they <don't know>, that there is actually something to look for in that path they have chosen (out infinite number of possibilities).

<But I think some ~2000 player would have solved it>

The knowledge that there actually <is> a (short) combination in a given position, may very well worth an astronomic amount of rating points such as 800, in some cases.

But there is another issue here: It all started with him responding to my: <[..] It was about the depth and the originality of the whole Ne7+h5+hg+Rc7+Qd3 idea, that was tough to spot even on its last move (Qd3), let alone <6 moves> ahead> , with his: <ep2: After the white's <27th move> [..] screaming for combinations [..] I won many similar games to that while playing blitz.>

So he was actually saying he would have found the combo starting from move <28> (and not 31) in a blitz game (that is, if he actually understood what he was talking about).

click for larger view

PEIN:

http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/eve...

<19.Rc2 Rdc8 20.Rdc1 Qf8 21.a4

Carlsen vs Topalov, 2009

21 a2-a4

click for larger view

<Carlsen’s brilliant win: New In Chess 2009/4

...

Carlsen does write that 23...Bxe4? was a "huge mistake" and after 27.f4 writes that "Black can hardly stir." By contrast 31.Rc7! is described as a "very pleasing move", 32.Kf2 gets a ?, and then the thus-necessary "trick" 33.Qd3 gets a !

click for larger view

Rybka 3:

<[-0.11] d=21 22.Nd1> c5 23.dxc5 b3 24.Rd2 Rxc5 25.Rxc5 Nxc5 26.Bxa8 Rxa8 27.Rd4 Rd8 28.Qc4 Rxd4 29.Qxd4 Qe7 30.Ne3 Qc7 31.Ng4 Nd7 32.g3 Qc6 33.Qf4 Qc2 34.Qd4 Nc5

click for larger view

Rybka 3:

<[+0.22] d=22 21.b3> c5 22.Bxa8 cxd4 23.Nxd4 Rxa8 24.f4 Qd8 25.Qf2 g5 26.g3 Nf8 27.hxg5 hxg5 28.Rd1 Qb6 29.Ne4 Rxc2 30.Nxc2 Qxf2+ 31.Kxf2 gxf4 32.gxf4 Ng6 33.Kf3 Bh6 34.Rg1 Rc8 35.Nd4

Nice point. Goes to show I didn't even calculate properly without the pressure of the clock ticking! :) >

<alexmagnus: Ng5+. Then, if Kh8, Nf7+ Kh7 Qxg6#. If hxg5, Qg6+ Kh8 Qh5+ Bh6 Qh6#.>