< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
|Jan-24-17|| ||SirRuthless: <1971: <SirRuthless> Sorry to burst your very momentary bubble. Carlsen is the most dominant player in the world, deal with it. Wins more and loses less than everyone else. Time periods matter in chess, it's been 7 years and over 1,000 games since 2009 It's the most relevant part of his career when comparing records.>|
This doesn't address my remark at all. No one is claiming that Carlsen hasn't been the most dominant player in recent memory or questioning his achievements. What is happening is that people are questioning the state of his game right now and whether Wesley So is the strongest player in the world now. People are also wondering when Carlsen peaked and how far he has moved from that peak to where he is now on the rating list. Your emotional outburst was wholly irrelevant with respect to the comment chain.
|Jan-24-17|| ||alexmagnus: Those comparisons can be made valid without omitting any games if we calculate performance ratings and not percentages|
|Jan-24-17|| ||1971: <SirRuthless> You responded to this garbage: |
<Gopi: Magnus has the most wins, I'll give him that, but he has the most losses as well. More losses than Anand or Kramnik, who spotted him 15 years. He doesn't even have the best win percentage (So at 64.7% with ONLY 73 losses).>
<SirRuthless: <gopi11> Enlightening data. Thank you sir!>
It's embarrasing that you were "enlightened" by this. Tell me which part of that was "enlightening" for you.
That Wesley wins more? Yeah, because he plays most of his games against 2500 competition. I went 14-1 in my club 2 years ago, am I better than Carlsen too? I hope that wasn't the enlightening part for you. Level of competition is basic stuff. You got fooled by a So bot's idiotic inference based on faulty data. What does that make you.
No, it must have been his claim that Carlsen loses more than anyone else that opened up the world of truth for you. Except he used lifetime records. That includes games from back when all the players were around 9 years old. If you think that's interesting or relevant results, you're more biased than I thought.
I didn't mention any of this at first, I was being nice. I simply set the parameter to 2009, when Carlsen and the rest of this generation was around 18 years old and establishing themselves as top pros. <The stats that show Carlsen does indeed win more and lose less than everyone else by a wide margin, unlike gopi's original claim.>
Let's look at these objective stats. https://www.chess.com/news/view/why...
After becoming 18, Carlsen shot up around 300 rating points accuracy wise and stayed there ever since. That's 7 years and over 1000 games, so it isn't like some flash peak with a small sample size. It's the most relevant part of his career, anything before that and we're not talking about the Carlsen we've come to know. He was a kid. 515 out of his 644 wins came after 2009. If we're comparing who is the better player that's what they have to match, not his games when he was 9 years old. Again, sorry to burst your "enlightened" bubble.
|Jan-24-17|| ||1971: <alexmagnus> That's obviously preferable and more efficient. I couldn't find those find performance ratings though. I figured looking up the formula and calculating them myself would take the same amount of time as simply posting the results, which do paint a clear picture.|
|Jan-24-17|| ||talunanIM: 1971@you like boyz especially Carsen. Go send him a love SMS and I'm sure he wouldn't mind a gay patzer who is an age pensioner since 1971 ;()hehe|
|Jan-24-17|| ||SirRuthless: <1971> I think you need to seek professional help for your affliction.|
|Jan-24-17|| ||1971: I am the professional.|
|Jan-24-17|| ||Eduardo Bermudez: An excellent example of how to defeat the world champion !|
|Jan-24-17|| ||keypusher: <Eduardo Bermudez: An excellent example of how to defeat the world champion !>|
Kind of like the games discussed here:
< keypusher: <SirRuthless: <JohnBoy> He could use his winnings from the 2015 US Championship to pay Saric and Naiditsch to show him how it's done. They seem to have Carlsen under lock and key.>
I'd love to sit in on those training sessions. "You wait for him to sacrifice a bishop, then respond strongly, but get into terrible time trouble and let him get away and wait for him to screw up again. Alternatively, keep an eye out for Bird's Defense.">
GRENKE Chess Classic (2015)
|Jan-25-17|| ||yurikvelo: 5 mistakes in a row - not a Carlsen style...
|Jan-25-17|| ||Penguincw: Video analysis of this game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a1....|
|Jun-22-17|| ||frogmanjones: This game should be called "Rapport Card"|
|Jun-29-17|| ||offramp: Today's pun is "Rapport Cart" which is based on the phrase "Apple Cart" because here Mr Rapport most egregiously "upsets the apple cart" of world champion Magnus Carlsen.|
In fact the apple cart of Mr Carlsen's position was as upset as one of those apple carts that appear out of nowhere in a James Bond high speed car chase.
|Jun-29-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: Think Carlsen missed 29. Rb6|
|Jun-29-17|| ||offramp: <offramp: Today's pun is "Rapport Cart"...>|
It has now been changed to "Rapport Card", as <frogmanjones> suggested. A pun on "Report Card".
|Jun-29-17|| ||Eusebius: Surprisingly clear game.
Wonderful how the two connected knights secure White's defence at the end. While Black is not able to resolve his weakness on 8th rank.
|Jun-29-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: <let's look at all the top players in <2016, Classical, 2700+> Carlsen: +14 -3 =27 | 44 | 62.5%
Kramnik +9 -3 =34 | 46 | 56.5
Nakamura +23 -12 =52 | 87 | 56.3%
So: +8 -2 =39 | 49 | 56.1%
Anand +11 -5 =35 | 51 | 55.8%
Caruana +14 -7 =48 | 69 | 55%
MVL +7 -5 =26 | 38 | 52.6%
Karjakin +9 -7 =48 | 64 | 51.5%
Aronian +8 -9 =40 | 57 | 49.1%
Giri +10 -13 =72 | 95 | 48% >
Interesting. Seems to be the case that Giri and Naka were most active in 2016, when it comes to classical chess. Carlsen least active. Even less active than the 'oldies', Kramnik and Anand.
Sign o the times? Carlsen's classical rating slowly declined since he scored his top rating. Just saying. Is it a coincedence we are drowned in rapid/blitz nowadays?
Take notice; nothing between humans does exactly happen coincedentally.
|Jun-29-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: PS maybe it's also interesting to notice that when you try to erase something in a text editor, first it goes too slow and then suddenly incredibly fast. |
Most annoying, but you know.. how these things go in the human world: someone programmed the first text editor in 1969 (NB in Hotel California) and the rest is copy&paste+pretty useless additions because people haz work to do: Arbeit macht frei. History.
Voilá, state of minď of development anno 2017; no progress but decline.
|Jun-29-17|| ||Ironmanth: Great game!|
|Jun-29-17|| ||ColeTrane: CG already fixed the pun typo|
|Jun-29-17|| ||RandomVisitor: 22...d3 was the start of the end. Better perhaps was:|
click for larger view
<0.00/50 22...Rb8 23.Rxb8+ Qxb8> 24.Qa4 Qc8 25.Qb5 g5 26.Nxc5 Qxc5 27.Bxd7 Qe7 28.Bf5 Qxe2 29.Ne4 Nxe4 30.Qe8+ Kg7 31.Qe5+ Kg8 32.Qe8+
|Jul-28-17|| ||Clashero1880: <1971> Sounds like an ass, but he's right|
|Jul-28-17|| ||tuttifrutty: <No, it must have been his claim that Carlsen loses more than anyone else that opened up the world of truth for you. Except he used lifetime records. That includes games from back when all the players were around 9 years old. If you think that's interesting or relevant results, you're more biased than I thought.>|
< I simply set the parameter to 2009>
It's only correct to include lifetime record...setting parameters like year 2009 seems like you pick the time to suit your ideas. That's the truth...no questions asked.
|Jul-28-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: Lol 22... d3 is positionally such a bad move. It just makes the White LSB strong and vice versa. Gives White an option to play e4-e5. I wonder why I am not the champ ☺|
|Oct-05-17|| ||ZackyMuhammad: Carlsen greatest lose|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·