|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 16 OF 16 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-27-10
 | | zarg: <Go here>
stuck on move 50... and game over? :) |
 |
| Jan-27-10 | | Xeroxx: I had a deja (é? à?) vu (ú?) moment there for a while. I have seen this before. Oh wait:
Ivanchuk vs Kramnik, 2009 |
|
| Jan-27-10 | | GreenFacedPatzer: Can someone better than me explain why this end position is a draw? I see a very dynamic unbalanced position with threats and counter-threats all over the place. If the game was played on, it's not clear to me which player would win, but it's not an obvious draw. Is there a forced perpetual that white must play here, now that Ivanchuk has survived his attack? Something like that? |
|
Jan-27-10
 | | Domdaniel: <GreenFacedPr> No, none of those: just two players accepting that a draw is in their best interests. You're right to say that the position is unbalanced with threats and counter-threats, but Kramnik's attack was running out of steam - and engine analysis gives a slight edge to Black. On the other hand, both were running low on time -- nothing terminal, but not what you want in a complex position. Call it a <draw by mutual acceptability> ... |
|
Jan-27-10
 | | HeMateMe: Is Wijk ann Zee very close to amsterdam? On chess base, it looks like the players went to Amsterdam on the off day. |
|
| Jan-27-10 | | percyblakeney: <Is Wijk ann Zee very close to amsterdam?> Everything is close to Amsterdam in the Netherlands :-) It's probably 20-30 kilometres or something like that. |
|
Jan-27-10
| | zarg: <Is Wijk ann Zee very close to amsterdam?> It's Holland!
http://maps.google.no/maps?f=s&utm_... |
|
Jan-27-10
 | | Marmot PFL: Very densely populated country but you don't notice it so much as not everyone drives and those that do are about 1/10 as rude as most US drivers. |
|
Jan-27-10
 | | boz: It may have changed a lot since I was there, but I remember beautiful blondes on black bicycles. |
|
Jan-27-10
| | Domdaniel: <Everything is close to Amsterdam in the Netherlands>
Well, nearly everything. There are a few islands in the Nordzee where they still speak Anglo-Saxon, and a corner in the south-east of the country that is distinctly *uphill*. Might take an hour by bicycle. |
|
Jan-27-10
 | | Dr. Funkenstein: Wow, another great argument for the Sofia rules to force players to actually play on in interesting positions. Of course under the current rules it makes more sense for both players to take a draw and so this incentive must be removed. Imagine if in football a weaker side is tied 1-1 with 15 minutes to go but the stronger side has a man or two sent off. Both sides would probably be happy to take a draw at that point, but it's just not allowed under the rules. We need the same for chess. |
|
| Jan-27-10 | | SufferingBruin: 1000 rating, trying to get better.
Higher rated players, which includes damn near everybody, please finish this sentence. <This is a draw because...> |
|
Jan-27-10
| | HeMateMe: <percyblakeney> they might have to institute that drug testing, after all... |
|
Jan-27-10
| | Domdaniel: <SufferingBruin> The key point is that the answer to your question does not lie on the chessboard alone, and there's no point in beating your brains out looking for it there. It's a draw because both players found that result acceptable at that point in time. Of course this includes the position on the board. But there's also a lot of psychology - how they're feeling today, how their previous games have gone, how confident they feel about making ten or more moves quickly, how seriously they rate their winning chances if they play on... Kramnik certainly had an initiative for much of the game. But, going by computer analysis, never quite enough for a clear win. By the end, he'd let that initiative slip away. Ivanchuk defended well, and is probably slightly better in the final position. But he's short of time, with black against an in-form ex-world-champion against whom he has a poor record... All this points towards a draw. It doesn't make one automatic. Other players would play on, and both sides could still reasonably play to win. But a drawn endgame is a likely result anyway: that's the bit that experience helps with. Hope that's of *some* help.
Recovering 2000 rating, getting worse. |
|
Jan-27-10
| | Domdaniel: <Dr Funkenstein> That's a good argument, but the football analogy breaks down because of numbers -- the number of players and the number of watchers. If all the remaining 20 (or whatever) players agree to draw - or are ordered to take that result by the captain or manager, I see no major problem. From the players' point of view, it beats losing to a last-gasp goal, a real risk for both sides. But the crowd *want* that goal. Anyhow, agreement would be difficult, and the crowd would be unhappy. Rioting in the city, TV schedules in tatters, unplanned gridlock, police overtime, train crashes... Doesn't really happen in chess, much, does it? |
|
Jan-27-10
 | | An Englishman: Good Morning: Drawn by mutual fear (or as we politely say, "acceptability"). Probably the sanest and smartest result under the circumstances. |
|
| Jan-28-10 | | polarmis: The moves: 26.Qxg6+ Kxg6 27.Nf4+ Kxf7 28.Nxd5 Bxd5 29.Rc7 Kf6 30.Re1 Bb4 31.Rd1 Bc6 32.Rd4 Re8 33.h4 Re1+ 34.Kh2 Bc5 35.Rd2 a5 36.Rc8 a4 37.Rg8 Re4 38.Kh3 Re1 39.Kh2 Re4 40.Kh3 Re1 1/2-1/2 need to be added to this game. http://www.coruschess.com/year/2010... It wasn't drawn by mutual fear. |
|
| Jan-28-10 | | percyblakeney: If the official site is right Ivanchuk was close to winning that endgame, for example 36. ... Bb4 would have won him a crucial pawn after 36... Bb4 37. Rd3 (Rc2 loses to Bd6+ followed by h5) Re2 38. a3 Bc5 39. b4 axb4 40. axb4 Bxb4 and the passed pawn supported by two bishops (together with the pressure on white's kingside) makes it a tough position for white:
click for larger view |
|
| Jan-28-10 | | percyblakeney: It's possible that the pgn of the official site just is post game analysis that was picked up by the transmission. |
|
Jan-28-10
 | | Eyal: <It's possible that the pgn of the official site just is post game analysis that was picked up by the transmission.> Yes, probably - the official report says explicitly that the game was ended on move 25. |
|
| Jan-28-10 | | polarmis: No, the moves were definitely played. This post (in Russian) on the Chesspro forum has Ivanchuk and Kramnik commenting on events, with the moves taken from Ivanchuk's score sheet: http://chesspro.ru/guestnew/looknul... I think doka is Yury Vasiliev, who writes the Chesspro reports. It sounds as though Ivanchuk slipped into the three-fold by mistake. Kramnik thought he could hold the position, though Ivanchuk would make him suffer. Ivanchuk thought he let real winning chances slip - which seems to be the case. |
|
| Jan-28-10 | | percyblakeney: <polarmis> Interesting, things have really been going Kramnik's way in Corus this year (against Short, Tiviakov and Ivanchuk), but as they say good players are lucky :-) |
|
| Jan-28-10 | | polarmis: Agreed! After the Nakamura game Kramnik said he was inspired by getting lucky against Short the day before, so how about a win with black against Shirov tomorrow? :) |
|
Jan-28-10
| | Eyal: <polarmis> Thanks for the info, I posted it in chessgames.com chessforum (that's where you should post this kind of thing if you want it to be fixed, btw) and asked them to check it. It would really be quite ridiculous if the reporter of the official site didn't know that (well, maybe not more than calling Carlsen's win over Karjakin "lucky"...); also puts the discussions here about the early draw in a somewhat ironic perspective... |
|
| Jan-28-10 | | SufferingBruin: <Domdaniel> Much obliged for the thoughtful post. |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 16 OF 16 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
icon.