< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·
|Sep-25-12|| ||dumbgai: About time Magnus got a taste of his own medicine.|
|Sep-25-12|| ||achieve: What an appropriately explicatory username!|
|Sep-25-12|| ||Rob Morrison: I'm delighted to see that a player of Carlsen's caliber is capable of being in a complete dead draw and then botch everything up by overreaching and then get crushed.|
|Sep-25-12|| ||Gypsy: So, to simplify, it seems to me that Black essentially switched the order of his 80th and 81st moves. Thus he lost a tempo, and the game.|
Had Black played <80...Rb2!> immediately, then he is ready for <81.Ke3 Rxb2> and either for <82.d5 c3 83.d6 Rd2> or for <82.f6 Kg2> (only now!) <83.f7 Rf2>. This stops either White pawn from behind and sets up promotion of Black c-pawn.
(Of course, White can leave his K on d2 and move his passed pawns forward immediately. But Black rook can handle from the side that and Black will have time to activate his K.)
|Sep-26-12|| ||achieve: Maybe this was posted earlier, from Whychess, interview with Caruana, aug 25th, interviewer Atarov (A.A.):|
<Å.À.: What do you think when you look at Carlsen and his numerous victories?
F.C.: What can you say but well done. Magnus has won more strong tournaments than you could mention. Without doubt at this moment in time he’s the world’s best player.
Å.À.: What makes him stand out from the other strong players?
F.C.: His extreme focus on results and his ability to compose himself at the required moment. He’s got a lot of merits, but you know them all well. He’s simply the best…
Å.À.: Would you like to resemble Magnus in some area?
F.C.: Yes. I need to work and improve, but in order to become as invulnerable as he is desire alone isn’t enough. He’s got a very deep understanding of chess!>
Yet, earlier, probably with regards to the opening phase:
<Å.À.: It’s well-known there are chess player investigators and practical chess players. I doubt it’s even worth asking [which] of those types Caruana is?
F.C.: You’re going to count me as a purely practical player?
Å.À.: That’s not the case?
F.C. : I like both paths in chess. Of course, from time to time I get lazy like everyone else and I’m far from always perfectly prepared for a game. And, undoubtedly, I’m drawn to chess as a game, as a confrontation. But that doesn’t mean I’m not interested in working on chess… I admire Kramnik and his ability to find diamonds where others see nothing at all, but I also like Carlsen’s approach. He often knows less than his opponents but he’s capable of generating a fight out of nothing…
|Sep-26-12|| ||Eyal: <Gypsy: So, to simplify, it seems to me that Black essentially switched the order of his 80th and 81st moves. Thus he lost a tempo, and the game.> |
It's worth noting in this context that the actual losing move is 81...Rb2?; 80...Kg2? throws away the win, but it was still possible to hold the draw, though it required very precise play, with <81...Rb1!> 82.Kxe4 (82.d5? Re1+ 83.Kf4/d4 e3 84.f6 e2 85.Ke3 Rd1 86.Kxe2 Rxd5) 82...Rc1 83.d5 (or 83.Kd5 Rxc2 84.f6 c3 85.Kc4 Rc1 86.f7 Rf1 87.Kxc3 Rxf7 88.d5=) 83...Rxc2 84.d6 c3 85.Bg5! Re2+ (85...Rd2? 86.f6! Rxd6 87.f7) 86.Kd5 (86.Kd4 Rd2+ 87.Ke5 Re2+ comes to the same thing) 86...Rf2! 87.Ke5 (87.d7? Rxf5+ 88.Kc4 Rf8 89.Kxc3 Kxg3) 87...Re2+ 88.Kd5 Rf2 etc. Btw, <81...Rb3+!> 82.Kxe4 (82.cxb3? cxb3 83.Kd2 e3+!) Rc3 is just as good.
|Sep-26-12|| ||csmath: <79.Rxe4 was an exceptionally strong losing move…>|
Something like that.
It is very standard move that is visible from a mile away thus certainly not a stroke of genius. It is delightful for an eye of a patzer.
It is also a good move for time trouble because it changes situation on the board dramatically and forces opponent to calculate everything accurately.
So it is a good practical move that has a beaty in the eye of patzer meaning it is good for the audience.
It is still a losing move nonetheless.
The real beauty in that ending was 80. ... Rb2 which Carlsen could not find. That is truly beautiful and deep move that was not played.
|Sep-26-12|| ||csmath: Magnus will have to do one of the two things.
(A) Like Kasparov he will have to sit down and start working hard on his openings.
(B) like many (!) geniuses before him he can entertain himself for a while and then abandon chess once losing from worse players becouse too tedious for him.
|Sep-26-12|| ||latvalatvian: Carlsen could probably beat me--1500 rating points higher, but I wouldn't play him.|
|Sep-27-12|| ||narenillo: As endgame books say, centralising the king can never be incorrect; it can only be inopportune. that's what happened with Carlsen's Kg2 trying to bring his king back to the center.|
|Sep-27-12|| ||hugogomes: <hedgeh0g>, probably after 12. Qh5 black should play the safe Nc6. It can go wild from there, but black shouldn't be much worse.|
|Sep-27-12|| ||Eyal: <probably after 12. Qh5 black should play the safe Nc6. It can go wild from there, but black shouldn't be much worse.>|
12.Qg4 is probably stronger than Qh5 - it creates the threat of Nxh7! when the knight is not pinned along the h-file. But 12.Re3 was actually fine - Caruana missed his big chance on the next move; instead of 13.Be2? he should have played 13.Bxg6 hxg6 14.Qg4:
click for larger view
where Black's position looks desperate. Castling long allows Nxf7, White is threatening Rh3 (or Rf3, if the bishop moves from d7), and 14...f5 ends up losing the exchange: 15.exf6 gxf6 16.Nxe6 Qxh2+ 17.Kf1 Qh1+ 18.Ke2 Qh5 19.Qxh5 gxh5 20.Nc7+ Kf7 21.Nxa8 Rxa8.
A few moves later, 16.Bxg6 hxg6 (16...Nxg6 17.Rf3) 17.Rh3 should still give White a big advantage, but Caruana's passive 16.Ra2? allowed Carlsen to stabilize the position with 16...Nf5.
|Sep-30-12|| ||Yuan26: Nice game by both of them :)|
|Oct-02-12|| ||Rama: No one ever plays 5. ... cxd4. I like that, it is from Alekhine.|
|Oct-13-12|| ||kingscrusher: Csmath: When you say:
"It is very standard move that is visible from a mile away thus certainly not a stroke of genius. It is delightful for an eye of a patzer."
Do you mean actually delightful from a human perspective before the evil engines took over for forensic clinical post-mortem of games ?! :)
I can personally quite easily substitute "patzer" for human in your paragraph. I thought it was a winning move until I started viewing these comments. So I guess the evil engines look upon the game with a bit of scorn here ... if only they had emotions too - maybe they could in the future have their own Chess TV shows and take the mickey out of human games full of blunders.
Here is Houdini and Rybka in the future discussing blunderful games of the past:
|Dec-10-12|| ||John Abraham: Interesting endgame. Rare to see Carlsen outplayed.|
|Jan-26-13|| ||PeaceRequiresAnarchy: This is Carlsen's most recent loss (not counting blitz games).|
You can tell he was playing for the win rather than a draw, but he miscalculated and lost. I wonder if he was under time pressure by the end of it or not.
|Mar-27-13|| ||PaulLovric: awesome|
|Jun-21-13|| ||inmate5: A Car crash :-||
|Aug-18-13|| ||Kinghunt: <I wonder if he was under time pressure by the end of it or not.>|
Carlsen was under extreme time pressure. He had less than two minutes remaining on his clock at that point.
|Apr-23-14|| ||LIFE Master AJ: An incredible game ... not sure if it means anything in the long run, though.|
|Jul-20-14|| ||kimmo788: Exellent sacrifice!|
|Sep-09-14|| ||Albanius: 36..RXf3+!?! seems to draw at least, eg
37 gxf3 Rxf3+
38 Kh2 Rh3+
39 Kg2 Be4+
40 Kf2 Rf3+
41 Ke2 Rxc3
and B will have 5 Ps for a R, including connected passers on g&h files.
If 40 Rxe4 dxe4 B has 3 extra passed Ps, looks like a lot of comp for the piece:
41 Bd2 e3
42 Be1 e2
43 Rb1 h4
44 Bxh4 Rxc3 winning Pc2 or Pa3
41..h4 first might improve
W might try 39 Kg1 allowing a perp but B can play ..Be4 anyway.
All this analysis is in my head w/o a computer or even moving pieces around - did I miss something?
|Oct-23-14|| ||tranquilsimplicity: This was supposed to be a draw. I wonder why Carlsen did not settle for the draw. But then again it is such a will to win that makes him world number 1, and of course world chess champion.#|
|Jun-25-16|| ||perfidious: <twinlark: Wow...someone who can proselytise about all the things the world number 1 is doing wrong. He must be a sensational coach or player.>|
It has obviously escaped your notice that we have our share of those hereabouts.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·