|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jan-16-10 | | Bobsterman3000: Anand probably wasn't in the mood to play another 4 hours, and then draw... |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | Ulhumbrus: <yalie: Anand must have failed to count the pawns before offering the draw.> Or alternatively the final poaition is a technical draw. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | yalie: <Ulhumbrus: <yalie: Anand must have failed to count the pawns before offering the draw.> Or alternatively the final poaition is a technical draw.> why not let Karjakin demonstrate the technique then? As I see it, Anand can play on risk free - and if Karjakin makes a mistake, there might be chances for a queen swap or to go two pawns up. |
|
Jan-16-10
 | | kamalakanta: Anand can play on, but both players would be wasting energy needed for other games in the tournament. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | yalie: I played comp vs. comp twice in the final position and black won both times. I would like to know how this is technically drawn. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | yalie: <kamalakanta: Anand can play on, but both players would be wasting energy needed for other games in the tournament.> I think conserving energy is way overrated. How many times do you get a chance to play risk free for a win with black at this level? |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | dagwood2005: Anand has more important things to worry about---like his match with Topalov. I don't even think he's trying to win this tourney---just get in shape before the match that really counts. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | yalie: <I don't even think he's trying to win this tourney---just get in shape before the match that really counts.> pray tell me one instance where people get in shape by conserving energy:) |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | acirce: Pretty sure Anand was never intending to give it all in this tournament. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | Ulhumbrus: <yalie> Here is a small part of what Fine has to say on the subject of a material advantage in Queen and pawn endings in his book "Basic chess endings": "3. All the pawns are on one side
As is the case with other endings, if there are not pawns on both sides of the board, a win with an advantage of one pawn is rarely, if ever, possible. 2 vs. 1 and 3 vs. 2 are both practically hopeless draws, so that we need only consider 4 vs. 3 and 5 vs. 4" ( Fine) |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | anandrulez: This advantage is very minimal and probably computer can win but at gm level its tough . So definitely Anand conserved his energy which I think it wise . He might consider himself victorious to have dealt with all the white threats and reached a position which is  . |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | CruyffTurn: <yalie: I would like to know how this is technically drawn.> I don't think it is, but it is <practically> drawn, and with the clock ticking... draw. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | CruyffTurn: CruyffTurn: <yalie: pray tell me one instance where people get in shape by conserving energy:)> Anand took it very easy before playing Kramnik. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | yalie: from the report on coruschess.com
<The most exciting draw in first-round action was the encounter between Russia’s Sergey Karjakin and world champion Viswanathan Anand of India. “Vishy” was a pawn down in a Ruy Lopez with black and Karjakin felt he was on the verge of winning the resulting major-piece ending but the champ said afterwards he had “never been in any real danger of losing,” pointing out he “had ample compensation for the pawn.” The peace was signed after 40 moves.> Rybka sides with Vishy rather than Karjakin in their asessment of the game. |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | yalie: <Ulhumbrus: <yalie> Here is a small part of what Fine has to say on the subject of a material advantage in Queen and pawn endings in his book "Basic chess endings":
"3. All the pawns are on one side
As is the case with other endings, if there are not pawns on both sides of the board, a win with an advantage of one pawn is rarely, if ever, possible. 2 vs. 1 and 3 vs. 2 are both practically hopeless draws, so that we need only consider 4 vs. 3 and 5 vs. 4" ( Fine)
>
Hey! thanks for that. Of course no harm in making sure Karjakin knows his Fine:) |
|
| Jan-16-10 | | VaselineTopLove: Chessbase does call it a "theoretically drawn Queen ending". Maybe Anand is aware of Karjakin's endgame skills, based on similar endings played by Karjakin in the past and didn't wish to test it. |
|
| Jan-17-10 | | Eyal: Well, playing it out would have been pretty much like playing out a theoretically drawn rook endgame with the same constellation of pawns - only longer and more exhausting, because of the long checking sequences that queen endgames are prone to. |
|
| Jan-17-10 | | visayanbraindoctor: <yalie> These endings (Q + 3 P vs Q + 2 P) are nearly always drawn; and it takes a lot of effort to play them to the hilt. Occasionally the attacking side with 3 pawns wins if the defending side does not defend accurately. J Bernstein vs Capablanca, 1915
If we take the game above as a model of one way of winning it, what the attacker did was to exchange off one pair of pawns in such a way that he was left with a passed pawn. Then he started advancing the passed pawn, while at the same time creating threats against the defender's remaining pawn and King itself. In the case above, in the finale, the attacker disdained winning the defender's remaining pawn in order to use it as a shield against the defender's Queen, and directly attacked the opposing King with his own King and Queen. At all times the attacker had to accurately calculate tons of exhausting variations that would have led to a perpetual, so he could avoid them. Not an easy task at all. I think Anand was wise to take the theoretical draw, rather than spend nearly 50 moves trying to win, and then most likely still draw at the end. There is such a thing as psychological exhaustion over one prolonged difficult game, that would affect a player's next one or two games for the worse. Anand was probably thinking such a potentially exhausting game would upset his mental balance for the next one or two games when he took the draw. |
|
| Jan-17-10 | | vijaymathslpjz: anand said "sorry guys, sorry to disappoint u, still struggling with poor form, things just not going right for me, that incisiveness totally missing." i think he should have played on..i agree with <yalie> |
|
| Jan-17-10 | | dunkenchess: A world champion should be consistent in staying at the top in every tournament. The late Robert J. Fischer was consistent. The retired Garry Kasparov was consistent. Am disappoint at Anand. |
|
| Jan-17-10 | | dunkenchess: Disappoint is just halfway, not yet disappointed.
But at the end of the year and he can not regain the top billing in the FIDE rating, well..... |
|
| Jan-18-10 | | euripides: Mueller and Lamprecht seem to think winning chances in this kind of ending are quite good. They cite V Ciocaltea vs Unzicker, 1956 |
|
| Jan-18-10 | | euripides: Funnily, the same sort of ending cropped up in Corus B as well, but in a very bad version for the defending side: Ni Hua vs Sutovsky, 2010 |
|
| Jan-30-10 | | pablo333: So far we have seen 7 a4 and 7 c3 played for white in this position at Wijk 2010; I think that white's best try here is 7 Re1. |
|
Jan-10-12
 | | Penguincw: 33...Qf4 and black seems to be putting quite some pressure on white.
click for larger view |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
