< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
|Apr-15-13|| ||The Rocket: <This criticism of the Pirc is amazing. It's probably not the soundest opening, so what ? Kasparov played successfully even more risky openings in his time>|
Not comparable. Kasparov was an expert in those openings(they also happened to be better openings as well. Kramnik is NOT a good pirc player, yet keeps playing it, and keeps failing.
|Apr-15-13|| ||bubuli55: The question also is Does Ivanchuk play the Pirc? Very well? Perhaps Vlady K chose this defense to exploit Ivan's troubles with the allotted time. Remember Vlady K saw Ne6 to be drawish so then he veered away from it. He could have drawn the game. So to say Vlady K is not good with Pirc is a stretch. I think. |
Vlady K had his shot. And he did not fell it. Besides Ivanchuk also had a belt polishing game. Don't you think so? Maybe?
|Apr-15-13|| ||The Rocket: I would say he is not a very good Pirc player. Sure he had some drawing moments, but he is not exactly lighting the board on fire....|
I tried to analyze this game while it was happening, it was difficult finding suboptimal moves for white giving black the better position, that's how inferior this stuff is.
A grandmaster told me that he considered the sicilian dragon to be better than PD, which should tell you something....
|Apr-15-13|| ||bubuli55: Ok. That sounds reasonable. I agree :)
Vlady K probably was on his own here. A pointman can clean up the area most times.
|Apr-15-13|| ||Petrosianic: According to Kavalek, the game is lost on Move 35, and that 35... RxP 36. RxR N-B5ch draws.|
Of course the important question here is what was the position in Carlsen-Svidler at that exact moment? If Carlsen had seen Kramnik taking the draw, was it too late for him to to the same?
Did I mention how really dumb it is that the tournament came down to a game of double bluff, rather than just having one of the top two beat the other in a playoff?
|Apr-15-13|| ||perfidious: <The Rocket:....I tried to analyze this game while it was happening, it was difficult finding suboptimal moves for white giving black the better position, that's how inferior this stuff is....>|
When one has a bias against a particular opening, such as you do against the Pirc, one will see exactly what one wishes to see, especially as you can hardly be described as a player of international standard, despite your pretentiousness.
Maybe you can 'prove' why the opening is as bad as you say-we're all awaiting yet another pearl of wisdom from your immense storehouse.
Till that day comes, guess we can chalk you up as another online type who may talk a good game, but when push comes to shove, is a fraud and a sham.
|Apr-15-13|| ||BUNA: <Petrosianic: ...Of course the important question here is what was the position in Carlsen-Svidler at that exact moment? If Carlsen had seen Kramnik taking the draw, was it too late for him to to the same?>|
The recordings of the monitoring cameras are still online. Kramnik played 35... Rc8 at 3:50:21. But at that moment Carlsen wasn't lost. (At 3:50:17 he had played 30.Bh4)
|Apr-15-13|| ||Petrosianic: Okay, so even if Kramnik saw the draw, he might have felt he had to keep the game "going", in order to keep Carlsen's game "going", and just hope that it wasn't too late to save it after R-B1.|
Kavalek wrote of the position after this line: "Kramnik will remember this position for the rest of his life. White can't win:"
And I agree that the N-B5ch line draws, but if Carlsen had seen that being played, and grabbed the draw himself, this wouldn't have done Kramnik any good.
|Apr-15-13|| ||Eyal: <The recordings of the monitoring cameras are still online. Kramnik played 35... Rc8 at 3:50:21. But at that moment Carlsen wasn't lost. (At 3:50:17 he had played 30.Bh4)>|
Yeah, Kramnik himself mentioned in the interview from which I quoted earlier that at this point Carlsen still had a draw - at least - with 31.Bd5!, although that's a move which was <very> difficult to find and play in acute time trouble; in practical terms, the game already began to spin out of Carlsen's control when Svidler played 26...Bf3! (which was also very close to the moment when the same thing may be said to have happened for Kramnik in this game, on move 30…).
|Apr-15-13|| ||Petrosianic: Do you have any idea how much time each of them had on the clocks at this point? If Kramnik had known that Carlsen needed to play 31. Bd5 (this is a big assumption), did he have enough time to wait and see if Carlsen played it before he made his own 35th move?|
|Apr-15-13|| ||perfidious: All taken, this was a tricky business, as underscored in the information provided by <Eyal>, and points up the difficulty of objective evaluations for even the greatest players under game conditions, the more so with what was at stake.|
So much for casting aspersions upon the course of these games by those who do not, or will not, understand the underlying circumstances.
|Apr-15-13|| ||Petrosianic: Yes, a lot of games can't be understood without knowing some of the off-the-board considerations. And there are lots of others that can't be understood without knowing the time situation. That's why I wish all scoresheets had time readings on them.|
|Apr-15-13|| ||Eyal: According to the live broadcast (http://new.livestream.com/WorldChes..., "Round 14 - Part 3") Carlsen had 1:20 minutes left for 10 moves after playing 30.Bh4 (remember, with no increments); Kramnik in comparison had oceans of time - about 10 minutes remaining to the time control when he played 35...Rc8.|
|Apr-15-13|| ||Petrosianic: In that case, maybe Kramnik should have tried to sit out the other game, and wait until it had reached Move 40 (or at least another couple of moves) before proceeding.|
How much time did Svidler have? It might not have been feasible for Kramnik to wait long if Svidler had a lot of time.
This whole business reminds me slightly of the Korchnoi-Spassky dispute from 1977. One of the arguments Ray Keene used against Spassky's box play was that it was illegal to analyze on a second board. He conceded that all GM's analyze off the demonstration board, but argued that it was illegal to do ALL of your analyzing off the demo board (actually the rules didn't cover such a thing at all).
But this seems like a similar situation. Clearly both Carlsen and Kramnik were analyzing off of each other's boards, and using knowledge of the other's games to help shape their own moves. I don't see any way to avoid this situation (you can't seal the players in booths or separate rooms). The only recommendation I can make is one you've already heard; that it was stupid to decide the challenger this way, rather than with a playoff.
|Apr-15-13|| ||Eyal: <How much time did Svidler have? It might not have been feasible for Kramnik to wait long if Svidler had a lot of time.>|
Yeah, as can be seen in the link that I gave Svidler had considerably more time than Carlsen, and he was using it - he was definitely trying to find best moves rather than blitzing in Carlsen's time trouble. Btw, at that stage Kramnik seems to be completely absorbed in his own game and not looking at the other board.
|Apr-15-13|| ||OhioChessFan: Of course, if Kramnik had played a more solid opening, the cries of Drawnik! would have been coming from the same crowd.|
|Apr-15-13|| ||Petrosianic: With good reason. It would mean that he wasn't even trying to win the tournament.|
|Apr-15-13|| ||perfidious: <OCF>: Quite true.|
|Apr-15-13|| ||Jim Bartle: <OCF>: Bingo!|
|Aug-22-13|| ||ajile: Nice the way White exploits all the weak squares on the d and c files.|
|Aug-23-13|| ||PhilFeeley: <Petrosianic: According to Kavalek, the game is lost on Move 35, and that 35... RxP 36. RxR N-B5ch draws.>|
Okay, maybe I'm coming late to this discussion, but none of the moves above make any sense. There is no 35...RxP possible, and the same for 36...N-B5ch. What did I miss?
|Dec-19-14|| ||Conrad93: <Till that day comes, guess we can chalk you up as another online type who may talk a good game, but when push comes to shove, is a fraud and a sham.>|
Like ChessGames mascot Raymond Keene?
|Oct-19-15|| ||Phony Benoni: Strange position after <14.Rd1)>|
click for larger view
While I support equal opportunity for women, you're still supposed to use the rook on a1 to castle queenside.
|Mar-24-16|| ||Imran Iskandar: The day Ivanchuk changed chess history.|
|Jan-29-19|| ||chessperson2222222: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1g...|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·