< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Sep-23-12|| ||csmath: Characteristics of a patzer:
1. Leaving king in center while pushing pawns on both wings forward. You have that in this game.
2. Losing in less than 20 moves. Giri is here totally lost on move 18 and strategically lost in 14 moves.
I have not see this kind of horrible chess on this level. Make it what you wish but this is certainly chess below 2000 level (in a blitz game).
|Sep-23-12|| ||Peligroso Patzer: < notyetagm: ....Giri played like a 1400 today....>|
On page 8 of the comment thread on the tournament page [FIDE Grand Prix London (2012) ], I compared Giri’s play today to a 2500 player, which I think is more apt. Mamedyarov commonly despatches mere 2500s in this fashion.
|Sep-23-12|| ||Peligroso Patzer: <csmath: ***
I have not see this kind of horrible chess on this level. Make it what you wish but this is certainly chess below 2000 level (in a blitz game).>
Well, here is Karpov (en route to the World Chess Championship) losing in 19 moves: Korchnoi vs Karpov, 1974
It can happen to any one (even players with stronger credentials than Giri) on a bad day.
|Sep-23-12|| ||Jim Bartle: "It can happen to any one (even players with stronger credentials than Giri) on a bad day."|
Not 21 moves, but Kasparov lost one game in 25 moves in the Kramnik match in 2000.
|Sep-24-12|| ||andrewjsacks: Christiansen-Karpov 1993, 12 moves, is another. Those things can happen. Period.|
|Sep-24-12|| ||achieve: Does anyone know, remember, what time Giri chose to use when he played 13...exd5 ?|
Clearly there is a violation of fundamental opening principles involved here, not by itself a crime or leading to a certain loss, but I remember after a game in a training match with Giri in 2010, Nigel Short exclaimed: "What unrealistic optimism by Giri! He's obviously not too bothered by what we were taught as Chess fundamentals, like 'development of pieces and King safety'!"
Giri found himself technically lost after <11>, yes, eleven, moves, as Short's Knight sac with 12. Nxd5! served as apt punishment for neglecting classical opening principles.
Obviously Giri hasn't learned too much from that experience [purposeful exaggeration] , and still takes liberties and indulges in the occasional frivolity when it comes to treatment of openings.
'Short-Giri Max Euwe Match 2010' -- Short vs A Giri, 2010
|Sep-24-12|| ||vinidivici: i think Giri isnt so familiar with this kind of opening.|
|Sep-24-12|| ||QueentakesKing: Cut the crap, Giri sucks. Period! There is no excuse.|
|Sep-24-12|| ||offramp: I'm impressed by Giri's ...h5, ...Rh6 attempt at a defence.|
|Sep-24-12|| ||maelith: <andrewjsacks: Christiansen-Karpov 1993, 12 moves, is another. Those things can happen. Period.>|
Hmmm..how about Anand losing in 7 moves against GM Zapata
A Zapata vs Anand, 1988
|Sep-24-12|| ||Eyal: Giri himself once won a miniature against a patzer who knows nothing about the basic principles of piece development (11.Qd2??) - Carlsen vs A Giri, 2011.|
|Sep-24-12|| ||achieve: <Eyal> You are so on point, and a prime example, yet a rarity, but Carlsen and Giri are both premier and prominent exponents of practical play in the computer age, appearing to act free from any conventions and dogma, at least when compared to when "we" learned the game, which is of course a good thing. What we <can> address is the fact that these young hot-shots, of course superbly masterful in coordinating pieces, are more vulnerable to entering opening variations where one miscalculation, or absence of a warning "bell" in the brain, can lead to a sudden collapse resulting from say "questionable development." They would probably use different terms, like "move X was too slow" and "after move Y Black is actually quite OK", or similar. More specific.|
The Short-Giri game, more to the point Short's reaction, is so recognizable, and I wish I had remembered Giri's own reaction to Nigel's remarks.
|Sep-24-12|| ||messachess: What a beautiful final move.|
|Sep-24-12|| ||messachess: Inexplicable play from so strong a master.|
|Sep-24-12|| ||achieve: Here's a post game interview with both combatants, from Macauley Peterson, which is quite clear, once you decode what Mamedyarov is actually saying... I'll attempt to transcribe Mamed's english:|
"Todayyy was very lucky because he played rook c8, and eh.. I mean he thought noz...z'opening, he just played some moves, and Anish is of course a good chess player, but sometimes eh, everybody can playz game eh like it" and there I more or less lose him. Link:
|Sep-24-12|| ||Eyal: <Niels> With regard to what happened in the opening - as I've mentioned in a previous post, Giri said after the game that the (unusual) development of the knight to d2 instead of c3 confused him (Black doesn’t have the same kind of counterplay in both setups). Also, both he and Mamedyarov mention that it’s similar to the Moscow variation, only without Black having an extra pawn on c4 – maybe when he played 10...Rc8 (a move criticized by both players) he was thinking about a continuation like 11.e5 g5, which leads to great complications and unclear position, ignoring the simple developing Be2 that Mamedyarov played instead. Giri also says that when he was considering the sequence with 14...g5 he was thinking about continuations "like in the Moscow" [Botvinnik?] with Nxg5 or exf6, forgetting about the simple 15.Bg3, after which Black is essentially lost.|
(The players' comments can be found in the video report of round 3: http://london2012.fide.com/en/compo...)
|Sep-24-12|| ||Eyal: This was cross-posting, of course...|
|Sep-24-12|| ||Stonehenge: Here's another game with 10...Rc8, I've uploaded it:|
24 moves, 1-0. Rating black: 2598.
|Sep-24-12|| ||achieve: <Eyal> Agreed completely. Thanks for the added clarification. I was in the process of reading up on the details. Eg I remember Giri stating clearly that his set-up required very firm/"concrete" treatment, and indeed with the Nb1 development to d2 instead of c3, plus as he said "not quite remembering my plans", you are headed for trouble I'd say... Giri is a very optimistic young man, and he easily and frankly admitted he missed the simple Bg3... Giri really needs to be careful and precise in these as you say complex lines, especially when you push both sides of the pawns upwards with such speed (so early).|
|Sep-24-12|| ||achieve: Edit
Giri: "I didn't remember quite frankly what I wanted to do, and I played Rc8 very quickly (less than 5 minutes), and then I realized..." and Giri goes on from there, addressing what <Eyal> previously referenced. Not optimal time-management at that important juncture, but Giri "felt" Rc8 was the right move to play, and goes on to admit that "I was mixing things up pretty badly."
|Sep-24-12|| ||iking: <perfidious: < csmath: Typical patzer game even though Giri is a strong GM. This is precisely the way a master candidate would beat patzer....>
< notyetagm: ....Giri played like a 1400 today....>|
These comments are almost amusing in their cheek as they criticise a strong grandmaster for his play on what certainly was not one of his better days.
My guess would be that neither of the above kibitzers could touch the loser of this game, yet maunder on and on about how horrible his play was here.
aptly said <<perfidious> ....
|Sep-24-12|| ||Eyal: <[...] the simple 15.Bg3, after which Black is essentially lost.>|
Instead of 17...h5, 17...Qe7 (trying to get at the e5 pawn) might have been more challenging. According to the engine, the most efficient way for White to win after 18.Nxe4 Nxe5 is 19.Bg4!!:
click for larger view
And now: (A) 19...Bg7 20.Bxc8 Bxc8 21.Nxc5 0–0 (Black manages to castle but he’s simply an exchange down)
(B) 19...Rd8 20.Nf6+ Qxf6 21.Bxe5 Qxe5 22.Rae1
(C) 19...Nxg4 20.Ra/e1! Winning the black queen
(D) 19...Bxe4 20.Qxe4 Nxg4 21.Qxg4 Rc6 (to block the e-file in case of Re1) 22.Qf3! Rf6 (22...Re6 23.Rad1! and there’s no good defence against Qa8+, e.g. 23...Re4 24.Bc7! or 23...Qa7 24.Rfe1) 23.Qa8+ Qd8 24.Qb7 (threatening, among other things, Bc7) 24...Bd6 (24...Rb6 25.Rfe1+ Be7 26.Rxe7+ Qxe7 27.Qxb6) 25.Qc6+ Qd7 26.Rfe1+ Re6 (26...Kd8 27.Qxa6 with 28.Rd1 coming) 27.Qa8+ Qd8 28.Rxe6+ fxe6 29.Qxd8+ Kxd8 30.Bxd6.
And a move later, 18...h4 fails to 19.e6! with a similar idea as in the actual game: 19...fxe6 20.Nd6+ Bxd6 (20...Ke7 21.Nxb7 Qb6 22.Bd6+ and White is a piece up) 21.Qg6+ Ke7 22.Qg7+ etc.
|Sep-24-12|| ||perfidious: <Eyal> Some clever stuff from our silicon friend; it would be interesting how much a human GM would, or could, see at the board.|
This game provides a cautionary tale of how easy it can be for even a very strong player to lose his/her way in sharp positions, as well as the consequences of a single routine move played without adequate reflexion.
|Sep-24-12|| ||achieve: <Eyal> <perf> Great analysis and reflexion, reflection?|
No GM today will be able to "see" the lines as Eyal laid them out, and the only one coming close to working out a portion of these lines OTB was Kasparov. I think I could support that statement. BUT - in no way will GMs with today's TC's be able to approach a position in this fashion, and will rely on short 6 ply calculations and subsequent judgement of the line. It seems clear that from a purely analytic objective, scientific, approach, the tablebase kind of approach to "solving" a position maximizing the risk taking ones are the most interesting and complex, and challenging. Meaning that the dynamic tension because of the result of one side adhering to safe and solid development principles, pitted against one with the "Giri approach", will deliver the most regarding dynamics. In fact it will be beyond human capability, arguably, to sail such wild waters, even if assisted by an engine.
Great observation, <perfidious>, and such insights could even help a 2730 player in his development as a chessplayer, especially since the demands on "practical play" are so strongly present with these young guys with GM titles by the age of 15/16.
Sorry to not have the time to edit but I hope I managed to be clear enough, and share and expand a bit on what you said.
|Jul-21-13|| ||perfidious: <achieve>: My remark above was, alas, the result of my own experiences, which have helped heighten my awareness of pitfalls, if not necessarily avoid them altogether!|
If this ordinary mortal could only see half the stuff which such players manage to visualise during a game....
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·