< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 146 OF 146 ·
|Apr-11-14|| ||cro777: Chess is sometimes a game of work!
In the crucial game for the 1st place in the 2014 Polish Championship: <Duda, Jan-Krzysztof (2563) - Wojtaszek, Radoslaw (2713)>, after
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Bg5 e6 7. f4 h6 8. Bh4 Qb6 9. Qd2 Qxb2 10. Rb1 Qa3 11. e5 dxe5 12. fxe5 g5 13. exf6 gxh4 14. Be2 Qa5 15. O-O Nd7 16. Kh1 Qg5 17. Rf4 e5 18. Nd5 exd4 19. Qxd4 Kd8 20. Bg4 Bc5 21. Qd2
click for larger view
Wojtaszek played 21...Bd6!
"Such a move is just impossible to find over the board. It is clear that Wojtaszek knew it and yes, chess is sometimes a game of work!" (GM Arkadij Naiditsch)
The game continued:
22. Qa5+ b6 23. Rxb6 Bc7 24. Bxd7 Qe5 25. Kg1 Rb8 26. Qb4 Bxb6+ 27. Nxb6 Qe3+ 0-1
Duda is just 16 years old. It seems he fell into some nasty home preparation. (Wojtaszek is known as a "theoretical beast", especially in his main repertoire).
"We can see one more time how much chess has changed. On the top level, analyses are deep and players have to remember a lot not to get in deep trouble in the early stages of the game." (Naiditsch)
|Apr-12-14|| ||morfishine: <cro777> Now thats a sharp, exciting game! |
Speaking of preparation (or work), do you think Anand's legendary preparation acumen will be enough for him to have a reasonable chance of victory vs Carlsen? I think Anand needs to prepare comprehensively, that is tournament-wise and match-wise, to maintain the balance [ie: not lose control of the match]. Also, Anand could benefit from a basic overhaul in his approach to match-play in general. I think it would be wise for Anand to thoroughly prepare one or two lines (besides 1.e4) in an attempt to keep Carlsen somewhat off-balance. The main point here would be to strive for super-solid positions that have zero-chance of losing
With that said, I think Anand should "go for the throat" early, so to speak, and try to net a victory, ideally within the first 2-games. The view here (in such a short match) is to get the lead early, stay unbeaten through the middle stages, then save his remaining preparation for the last 3 games or so. Sort of like what Kramnik did in last year's Candidates, maintaining his position, and going all out in the later stages. The difference here is Anand would try to gain a win early, first.
|Apr-12-14|| ||cro777: <morfishine> Anand is changing his style of play. Could he play against Carlsen like he had played at the Candidates tournament (where he played dynamic chess and a good endgame).|
Anand also promissed to change his team of seconds. In Chennai, the most creative of his seconds was Sandipan Chanda. Sandipan was also his second at the Candidates tournament. The other core members of his team were Sasikiran, Leko and Radoslaw Wojtaszek.
Anand said: "I am planning to re-jig my core team and there would be a couple of surprises. Ideas are being thought about." As GM Harikrishna pointed out:
Anand needs, in his core team, a player(s) who can think like Carlsen!
|Apr-13-14|| ||morfishine: <cro777> An interesting coincidence: After the Candidates I was musing to myself: "What Anand needs is Kramnik as his second!". At almost the exact same time <DcGentle> mentioned to me that Kramnik was good friends with Anand and would make a great second. I had no idea they were such good friends and my wondering was purely in jest. Perhaps it will come to be. Somebody like a Kramnik would be beneficial from a positional perspective while also enhancing Anand's general match preparation, IMHO. |
|Apr-13-14|| ||Patriot: Hi <morf>! Here is Dan's response to the "theory" I had:|
"Playing potential increases with knowledge." - I don't believe this; I think abilities are more important and your potential abilities limit your playing potential, as you develop those abilities and pick up knowledge.
But yes, you get diminishing returns on areas where you are already good. Your "chain" is only as strong as your weakest link, often.
And yes, doing things way above your level also often gets diminishing returns.
Hopefully you can balance your play and theory! :)
The triangle: Study - Play - Get Feedback as in the NN "The Improvement Feedback Loop"
<<When you look at it from this angle, it's easy for me to see that many Saturday and Sunday problems are ridiculously too advanced for me at my stage of improvement. Sure, I may figure them out if given enough time but I think there is very little to be gained from this (for my level). It's like a 6th grader trying to work out a college level math problem, and even if they accomplish this with much effort it is misleading to believe they are just as good as a college level student.> I have mixed feelings about this comment. Don't sell yourself short. If you can work through a problem (even though it may take a lot of time) its not an issue of knowledge, but an issue of calculating speed or pattern recognition or both. After all, one has arrived at the correct solution, so that has to be a plus. I would think a 6th grader would be thrilled to find the correct answer and could care less about how much time it took.> I had some mixed feelings about my own comment as well but decided to throw it out there and see what your opinion is. It may be a better analogy if I said it wouldn't be very useful for a 6th grader to attempt college level algebra, before they learn the basics leading up to it. It's sort of like playing someone 500 rating points higher. It may turn out to be dehumanizing if done too often. Dan suggests 150-200 rating points higher at the most so that you are punished for bad moves, but they are not so high that they don't make some mistakes that give you a fighting chance.
|Apr-13-14|| ||cro777: Good news for endgame lovers: the re-introduction of adjournments.|
The second edition of the ACP Golden Classic will be held from July 12-20 in Bergamo, Italy.
The interesting part of this "unusual" tournament is that the players will be competing under the same time control as was used in the World Championship matches in the Golden Era of chess: 2,5 hours/40 moves + adjournment.
According to organizers, the re-introduction of adjournments should "provide an occasion for producing highly spectacular and imaginative chess, by giving the seven gladiators the most important ingredient needed for exploiting their skills and fantasy: time to think...
Hopefully the formula of the event should finally present chess lovers worldwide with a selection of high-level endgames".
|Apr-14-14|| ||cro777: Asked if he would consider working as a second for Anand, Kramnik said: "To be honest, I donít know. I havenít thought about that at all...If Vishy makes an offer I can think about it."|
|Apr-16-14|| ||cro777: The lost art of common (positional) sense in chess.
GM Lars Bo Hansen: " I am staunch advocate of the value of logical thinking and common sense in chess. Even in this time and day where analysis engines point out one exception to the old dogmas in chess after the other and where concrete variations seem to be the norm, I believe thinking logically and applying common sense can take you a long way in chess.
In round 3 of the Danish Championship, logic and common sense helped three Grandmasters win instructive games that are worth studying. In all of these games, logical thinking and common (positional) sense were more game-deciding factors than sharp calculations or intriguing combinations.
|Apr-16-14|| ||cro777: "Over the past two decades, the influence of powerful chess programs has profoundly changed the game of chess. Chess has become a much more concrete game with precise calculations. The narrow specific approach to each position has virtually replaced the more intuitive and general approach developed by the old masters.
For young aspiring chess players, this computer development comes with many pitfalls. To be successful in chess, building understanding and logical thinking must precede the use of computer-assisted analysis." (Lars Bo Hansen: "The Lost Art of Common Sense in Chess (What Would A GM Do?)")|
|Apr-17-14|| ||sevenseaman: Hi <morfishine>, how do you do? I am here in the US, (SanJose, ca) since April 15th and shall stay for some time.|
|Apr-17-14|| ||morfishine: Great attack by White, but there has to be a positional mistake for Black here: Yifan Hou vs N Dzagnidze, 2014|
|Apr-18-14|| ||morfishine: <cro777> I hope adjournments return in some form or the other|
(1) <Rasmussen vs Aabling-Thomsen> A very powerful game
(2) <Hansen vs Skytte> What an unusual opening which proves, if nothing else, the laws of chess cannot be broken, even if one tries!
(3) <Andersen vs Aagaard> Simple yet forceful. Very instructive positionally, though 33.Qh5 looks bad
Oh, and thanks for forwarding this nice game by Aagaard! You had mentioned him frequently, but I hadn't gotten around to looking at any of his games
|Apr-18-14|| ||Patriot: Hi <morf>! I completely agree with you. When Dan talks about abilities, I think he is talking about things like how well one can analyze, visualize future positions, recognize tactics, and how well you manage time. Those are major components and how well you perform those functions sets the stage for how strong of a player you can become. Knowledge of how to play out certain endgames, openings, and strategy only augment your game. So for example, knowing how to play the Lucena position won't help you much unless you actually reach that endgame, but until then the ability to analyze is going to be the determining factor.|
If my interpretation is correct, I think he is absolutely right. I've known player's who spend a lot of time studying openings and their ratings have not improved over the years because their "weakest link" is analysis.
But my "theory" of baseline improvement doesn't change. The aforementioned abilities are very strong baselines to improve upon, while other areas of study will help you to reach the maximum potential as set by those major baselines. I believe Dan thought I was suggesting that learning any type of chess knowledge will yield a linear improvement in play, which it wouldn't. How you play is mostly dependent on your "weakest link" in ability.
|Apr-18-14|| ||cro777: Magnus Carlsen explains his approach to chess:
"My strategy is as follows: At a time when all players prepare themselves with software, my goal is not to see if my computer is better than my opponent's. In the openings, I just need to reach a position that gives me play. The idea is to be smart rather than trying to crush the other. I try to figure out where he wants to take me and I do my best to not put myself in positions where I could fall into his preparation. I try to play 40 or 50 good moves, and I challenge my opponent to do as much. Even if the position is simple and seems simple, I try to stay focused and creative, to find opportunities that lie within. Not to play it safe. It is important to know how to adapt to all situations."
|Apr-18-14|| ||cro777: Anand: "I think many errors had cropped up in my approach to play chess. <I was becoming reliant on computers>. I was not oblivious to it but I was not able to address the problem exactly right...I had one of my best results in Candidates. I needed a good resul to get my confidence back and I am very optimistic now. I know even if I face the same mistakes, I will act now differently."|
|Apr-19-14|| ||morfishine: <cro777> Thanks for the latest Carlsen interview! The consistency of what he's been saying all along is refreshing and reassuring to hear. I very much like what Anand is saying as well as how he's playing. I think he will be a much tougher opponent for Carlsen this fall.|
|Apr-19-14|| ||DcGentle: <cro777>: Thank you for your postings about the latest trend, namely the critical look at computer analysis and "The lost art of common (positional) sense in chess".|
In my opinion Magnus Carlsen has shown the chess world how not to rely on computer analysis and win nevertheless.
Analysis of current engines must be understood, must be according to the position and fit to the respective style of the player, before it can be adopted. I guess GMs are slowly understanding that the positional play of the engines leaves something to be desired often.
Thank you, Magnus.
|Apr-19-14|| ||DcGentle: Something off topic:
On <Booomie>'s forum we are discussing time, chaos and life ;-)
In this context I recently discovered how to render some fractal images,
the results are here: https://onedrive.live.com/?gologin=...
The images are produced by myself, with the exception of the sphere.
No chess, but surrealism mostly.
|Apr-20-14|| ||morfishine: <DcGentle> Very interesting topics: 'time, chaos and life'|
I'll post something over in <Boomie>'s forum. I like reading about that stuff
|Apr-20-14|| ||DcGentle: <morfishine>: There is something for you on my forum as well. ;-)|
|Apr-23-14|| ||DcGentle: Too bad that Carlsen lost to Caruana today, I guess it was not necessary. I have analyzed a possible continuation after 23. Nd5, because I believe that Carlsen's misery already started with|
Position after <23. Nd5>:
click for larger view
[Event "Vugar Gashimov Mem 2014, Analysis line"]
[Site "Shamkir AZE"]
[White "Caruana, Fabiano"]
[Black "Carlsen, Magnus"]
[FEN "3k3r/p1pbbpp1/1p5p/2pNP3/2P3P1/1P3PBP/P5K1/R7 b - - 0 23"]
23... h5 24. a4 Be6 25. a5 b5 26. Rd1 bxc4 27. bxc4 a6 28.
Bf2 Bxd5 29. Rxd5+ Kc8 30. f4 hxg4 31. hxg4 Rd8 32. Rxd8+
Kxd8 33. Kf3 c6 34. Be3 Ke8 35. Ke4 Bd8 36. Bd2 Kd7 37. f5
Bc7 38. Be1 Bd8 39. Bc3 Ke7 40. Bd2 Bc7 41. Be1 Ke8 42. Bc3
Bd8 43. Kf4 Kd7 44. Bd2 Bc7 45. Be1 *
click for larger view
This position looks like a draw to me.
|Apr-23-14|| ||cro777: GM Vladimir Chuchelov (Caruana's coach): "Magnus unexpectidely blundered a pawn on c7. Nonetheless, he was worse already before the blunder - just worse according to all standards of Berlin...It wasn't hard to guess the opening, but strangely enough we also guess the line Carlsen would choose. We analysed it and Fabiano had a clear idea of what to do. We even checked the line once again before the game."|
18...c5 was the key strategic error.
click for larger view
19.c4 Rd7 20.Bg3!
Carlsen: "I think 18...c5 was inaccurate. I was fixated on this Bg3 and I was thinking that having the d4 square would be an asset for black but <it actually turns out it's the d5 square that is weak, not the d4 square>"
|Apr-23-14|| ||morfishine: <DcGentle> & <cro777> Thanks much for the postings on Caruana vs Carlsen: Caruana vs Carlsen, 2014|
I followed the game at work but only got to go thru the whole game once I got home. One thing noticeable, which may be a clue to Carlsen's "positional" style, is the "tightrope" nature of these drawn-out positional games. In other words, with the slightest slip, Carlsen suddenly faced the prospect of disappearing pawns, and there was nothing he could do. His future opponents may take heart going forward that in a long positional game, they are actually more "in the game" than is immediately evident and strive to continue on with the hope of finding an opening. Not that this game is the end of "King Carlsen", but that extended positional games may in fact offer them the best chance vs Carlsen [ie: Using his own medicine against him]
Of course, this may be a gross generalization, and if I'm sold on the idea that it is, I have the option of deleting this :)
|Apr-24-14|| ||DcGentle: <morfishine>: You are right to state that long positional games also offer chances for the opponent. No question about this. Carlsen's positional play is still superior, but the competition is not sleeping and may catch up, how well remains to be seen. In the above game against Caruana he faced a very good opening preparation, and we see that this still counts, even when some people seem dismissing this.|
Let's see what happens next.
|Apr-24-14|| ||cro777: <morfishine: Extended positional games may in fact offer them the best chance vs Carlsen, i.e. using his own medicine against him>|
The term is "out-Carlsen" (originally coined by GM Emil Sutovsky). Extended positional games may in fact offer them the best chance to out-Carlsen him. In the Berlin endgame against Caruana he was out-Carlsened.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 146 OF 146 ·
A free online game for all chessgames members!