< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 32 OF 32 ·
|Nov-09-14|| ||morfishine: <IndianFan> This comment about Anand is completely off base <And it doesn't hurt to have a personality, which also he sadly lacks both on and off the chessboard> Anand is personable, engaging, self-deprecating and humorous. For instance, last year Anand was analyzing a 2-rook ending with the commentator, who admitted he was rated "barely 1200". Three times during this post-mortem the "barely 1200" rated commentator interrupted Anand with better moves than what Anand was suggesting. On the third suggestion, Anand burst out laughing stating "These rook endings can sure be tricky". Its this quality, this humbleness, that his fans find so endearing |
<Take it from me - I may not be much of a chess player> I'd have to agree with this. Perhaps stick to checkers or tic-tac-toe
|Nov-09-14|| ||MissScarlett: <Anand is personable, engaging, self-deprecating and humorous>|
Not when talking to Karlovich.
|Nov-09-14|| ||Chris321: < csmath: <The Gruenfeld will be shown eventually to be a forced loss for black in most lines.> My guess is that you have no clue what you are talking about, like few others...> here >ya strange comment that!.But Generally the Grunfeld can "maybe"be used in the"right"circumstances,against the "right"opponent!.But if you feel uncomfortable or has lost too many games because you have neglected the centre or don't exactly know what to do with the centre,then i would say stay far away from the Grunfeld or Alekhine,because you will find yourself on the wrong side of space,and if you don't know how to break out or how to break when then you are quite dead in the water like a sitting duck.Play Nimzo or QGD instead!.My 2cents.|
|Nov-09-14|| ||Chris321: O ya forgot to mention:in the hands of strong players even so called inferior openings can be deadly weapons!|
|Nov-09-14|| ||Chris321: I wonder how many of us on here will draw against a 2500 player if we had the white pieces in the position 1e4 f6,if not,let him take any pawn off with the same opening moves and so on ,maybe we will be very imbarrased when he later take his rook off and still wins :)|
|Nov-09-14|| ||Cheapo by the Dozen: What was the refutation, if any, to 16 Rd5?
I'm thinking both of White's pawn structure and of the possibility of an attack with 17 Rxe5, balanced off against Black's play on the c-file and against White's pawns.
|Nov-09-14|| ||Everett: <IndianFan: <Wavy> There is an interview of Bob Dylan by Ed Bradley in which he asks him something like where did some his songs come from and Dylan says he doesn't know and that he cannot produce those kinds of songs anymore.>|
Perhaps he is tired of finding inspiration from others' words http://ask.metafilter.com/122822/Wh...
|Nov-09-14|| ||keypusher: <Pulo y Gata: Isn't the Gruenfeld busted or is Carlsen god?>|
No and no. Both are good, though.
|Nov-09-14|| ||Pulo y Gata: <keypusher: <Pulo y Gata: Isn't the Gruenfeld busted or is Carlsen god?>
No and no. Both are good, though.>
Right. I still think Carlsen was lucky to draw here. Just imagine how long <jphamlore> would rattle against the stupid choice of opening if he lost. I guess we are all lucky.
|Nov-09-14|| ||Everett: <Anand is one of the best tacticians of all time, but somehow he doesn't strike me as overaggressive. After 20... Rd6, Anand chooses the more solid 21. Rhe1. While Kasparov or Alekhine, the two greatest attacking players in chess history, would undoubtedly have chosen 21. h4 leaving the rook at h1 in order to support a direct Kingside attack. The weakness of doubled pawns and isolanis would not matter when tactics and attack begin to dominate the board, and the open files incurred in their creation might even prove useful.>|
I agree with this. I think sometimes a certain kind of belligerence is necessary in certain positions, and against certain opposition.
Imagine the attitude Alekhine and Kasparov had to have to dethrone their respective positional machines.
|Nov-09-14|| ||diceman: How ironic.
Yesterday Qb7 saved Anand.
Today it killed him.
|Nov-09-14|| ||Absentee: <Pulo y Gata: Right. I still think Carlsen was lucky to draw here.>|
How was he lucky to draw? Black had a solid position through the whole game, if not a slight edge.
|Nov-09-14|| ||Pulo y Gata: Read my whole post, Absentee. You're slacking on the fun.|
|Nov-09-14|| ||perfidious: <Pulo y Gata.....I still think Carlsen was lucky to draw here. Just imagine how long <jphamlore> would rattle against the stupid choice of opening if he lost. I guess we are all lucky.>|
|Nov-10-14|| ||Boris Schipkov: This game with my notes http://www.chessib.com/carlsen-anan....|
|Nov-10-14|| ||OhioChessFan: Thank you <Boris>|
|Nov-10-14|| ||OhioChessFan: <Boris> I noticed you misnumbered the 28th move:|
<The prophylactic 8. a3!? is interesting, 8...b5 >
|Nov-10-14|| ||jphamlore: <Pulo y Gata>
Actually I called this game 100% correctly days before it happened.
Carlsen-Anand World Championship (2014)
<Nov-06-14 jphamlore: My pick for the surprise opening of the match, and this is from someone who needles Gruenfeld disasters, is that if Anand opens 1. d4 early, Carlsen may play a Gruenfeld, especially if Nielsen is his trainer for this match. Carlsen played the Gruenfeld twice in the then most important event of his career, Candidates 2013, including against Grischuk. Furthermore an early Gruenfeld has the match advantage of getting under Anand's skin, hopefully from Carlsen's perspective forcing Anand to waste time in further opening preparation against the Gruenfeld when Carlsen can simply switch back to his Nimzo-Indian.
The reason Carlsen can play the Gruenfeld safely and others can't is that Carlsen understands the limitations of this defense and is always careful to avoid getting killed by the passed pawn in the center, even if it leads to drawish positions.>
Read it and weep. Every single word will probably be correct.
|Nov-10-14|| ||Pulo y Gata: I can hardly read with my weeping, <jphamlore>. |
Now please quote your numerous posts about the Gruenfeld as incorrect opening and unfit for top players.
I will read them too and laugh my heart out.
|Nov-10-14|| ||Pulo y Gata: Of course you promote yourself, mighty <jphamlore>, because Carlsen drew. But if he lost? You will flay him and mince his meat with your very tongue, for playing the Gruenfeld, a stupid opening, against which you have been pontificating since time immemorial.|
So quote yourself now, <jphamlore>. I'm almost done with my weeping.
|Nov-11-14|| ||jphamlore: <Pulo y Gata> Here's the typical Gruenfeld catastrophe, involving a common victim Karjakin:|
Nakamura vs Karjakin, 2013
Note the comments, not by me:
<csmath: I don't want to call Karjakin names but I think Grunfeld might not be suitable to his style. I do not think he has done careful study of this opening. Today was surely a good lecture for him in Grunfeld d-pawn blocking which is I think the first thing one needs to learn while playing Grunfeld.>
This kind of defeat NEVER happens to Carlsen in the Gruenfeld these days. That is why Carlsen is the world's greatest Gruenfeld player, just like I have asserted.
|Nov-11-14|| ||Pulo y Gata: No, quote yourself and your views on the gruenfeld as opening. Come on now!|
|Nov-11-14|| ||Pulo y Gata: Let me help you a little then, with some highlighted portions. You know there's more of that in this site, so go dig in your heels and defend your turnaround:|
<Oct-09-14 jphamlore: Caruana is a monster at the moment because he tossed his Gruenfelds and Kings Indians as Black into the trash can and has started to play the <defense of champions, the Queen's Gambit Declined, > and not necessarily the Semi-Slav variations.
The reason why the championship mantle is apparently skipping a generation going from Kramnik and Anand to Carlsen and maybe someday Caruana is a whole generation in between was ruined starting out playing the Gruenfeld as a first and main defense as Black versus 1. d4 in their early teens. Not coincidentally that was also the time after Botvinnik's passing and the collapse of the former Soviet Union resulting in a dramatic decline in the quality of chess mentorship.>
<jphamlore: <A simple question for those who are asserting that openings don't matter: So why bother to defend the Gruenfeld?> If openings don't matter then why not encourage the young to play the Queen's Gambit Declined, an opening that will never be refuted and that they can play all of their lives at any level. The Queen's Gambit Declined will be good for the young's chess education and will give them insight into many classic games.
<Actually, try defending the Gruenfeld using rational arguments instead of attacking the messenger. >Because the more irrationality I get, the more I'm going to use examples from this site to show just how badly the Gruenfeld is performing at top level play. On the other hand, give me a rational argument that teaches some chess and prove me wrong.> FIDE Grand Prix Baku (2014)
|Nov-11-14|| ||Pulo y Gata: The world champion himself has refuted your foolish assertions about the gruenfeld, so you try to cover your trail now.|
But of course you can redeem yourself and proclaim your keen insight <if> he loses with the Gruenfeld, that opening deserving of the trash bin.
|Nov-15-14|| ||Raj Dey: 40.Qf1?! not strong.
40.Qc8! was slightly better.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 32 OF 32 ·