| GRENKE Chess Classic (2018) |
|
The 5th GRENKE Chess Classic was a 10-player round-robin held in Germany from 31 March to 9 April. The first 3 rounds were in Karlsruhe alongside the GRENKE Chess Open, then after a rest day the last 6 rounds were in the Kulturhaus LA8 in Baden-Baden. The field featured World Champion Magnus Carlsen and Top 10 players Fabiano Caruana, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave, Viswanathan Anand and Levon Aronian, as well as women's no. 1 Yifan Hou. The time control was 100 minutes for 40 moves, then 50 minutes for the next 20 moves and then 15 minutes to the end of the game, with a 30-second increment from move 1. If players were tied for first place a rapid play-off would take place. (1) The tiebreaks were as follows: 1) number of wins; 2) number of black wins; 3) head-to-head. (2) Fabiano Caruana won with 6.5/9. Official site: http://www.grenkechessclassic.de/20.... ChessBase: https://en.chessbase.com/post/grenk.... Chess.com: https://www.chess.com/news/view/car.... TWIC: http://theweekinchess.com/chessnews... Elo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
1 Caruana 2784 * ½ 1 1 ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ 1 6½
2 Carlsen 2843 ½ * ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ 1 ½ 5½
=3 Vachier-Lagrave 2789 0 ½ * ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 5
=3 Vitiugov 2735 0 ½ ½ * ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 5
5 Aronian 2794 ½ ½ ½ ½ * ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 5
6 Blübaum 2631 ½ ½ ½ 0 ½ * ½ 1 ½ ½ 4½
7 Naiditsch 2701 0 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ * ½ ½ 1 3½
=8 Anand 2776 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ * ½ ½ 3½
=8 Yifan Hou 2654 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ * ½ 3½
10 Meier 2648 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ * 3
Previous edition: GRENKE Chess Classic (2017). Next: GRENKE Chess Classic (2019). See also GRENKE Chess Open (2018).(1) Chess24: GRENKE Chess Classic https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-t... (2) Wikipedia article: Grenke Chess Classic#2018
|
|
| page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 45 |
     |
 |
|
| page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 45 |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 27 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Apr-13-18
 | | AylerKupp: <Check it Out> No less impossible than other listed desirable WC matches> It seems that you might want to visit the place mentioned in this post: Capablanca vs S Campos, 1927 (kibitz #24). But I suggest that you wait a while. |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | Petrosianic: <Then we had several situations where the challenger had to win by either 2 points or wins> For "several situations", say "one situation only". That was in 1886 when neither Steinitz nor Zukertort was the defending champion. The stipulation has not been used since, although there used to be suspicions about Lasker-Schlechter. Now, the 9-9 tie clause was used in a few other matches, in which no title was at stake, such as Tchigorin-Gunsberg. |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | botvinnik64: My favorite WCC that never was or shall ever be?
Ivanchuk in his youth against anyone! |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | Pedro Fernandez: Thanks my dear <AylerKupp> for your well aimed explanation. I knew about several games I studied about past WCCs but I was never interested about their regulations. Now I see that there were quite a few issues in the rules of those matches, I figure out that for FIDE as well as for the champions and for the candidates who participated in those championships. Greetings my friend! |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | not not: Dream match: Leko armed with SF vs Giri armed with SF. |
|
Apr-14-18
 | | perfidious: A match filled with vicissitudes.
As in not. (laughs) |
|
Apr-14-18
 | | Check It Out: <AK> Good one! |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | Clemens Scheitz: My pick:
Karpov vs. Kasparov
...What?,oh wait, someone is telling me they've already played. I must've missed it. Well then how about: F.J. Marshall vs. A. Shirov
V Gashimov vs. Wei Yi
B. Jobava vs. R Rapport
Capablanca vs. Carlsen |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | Sokrates: Not bad, Clemens. Capa-Magnus would be a titanic battle. I would love to have seen Keres in some matches (he didn't play many): Keres vs. Bronstein
- vs. Smyslov
- vs. Botvinnik (no. 1 wish)
- vs. Tal |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | LameJokes55: There were many, who deserved to be challengers. The list provided by contributors above is conformable. There is a player in championship history, who deserved to be the champion. He was a challenger on three consecutive occasions. It was his misfortune that he ran into formidable Karpov every time. Korchnoi was the de facto champion, IMO. |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | Count Wedgemore: <LameJokes55> Korchnoi was a great player, of course, and could well have been Champion, but at least he had the opportunity to play for the title. There are some other great players that never even had the opportunity. Rubinstein comes to mind.. |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | LameJokes55: I agree with you. Initially, I thought of adding my own list of players, who missed challenger's boat. The first name that came to mind was, of course, Rubinstein. About Korchnoi, I was talking about being challenger thrice. But not the champion even once. He was, probably, only one with this distinction. |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | Sokrates: A name which is often forgotten or ignored is Carl Schlechter. He was as close to beating Lasker as one could get. Only because Schlechter foolishly chose to make things extraordinarily complicated, he lost the last game to Lasker who therefore could keep his title with a hair's breadth. Schlechter died 1918 at the age of only 44 from pneumonia (caused by tuberculosis) and starvation. He was a soft and kind-hearted man, who could have been world champion had he had a cooler and more calculated approach to the last match game. A sad for fate for a brilliant player. |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | morfishine: <Sokrates> Schlechter was a tragic figure, not only for his health problems and early death, but for his blooping/blundering away his chance(s) to seize the title outright from Lasker I cringe every time I go over that game: Lasker vs Schlechter, 1910 ***** |
|
| Apr-14-18 | | Count Wedgemore: I will refrain from criticizing Schlechter's aggressive play in game 10 for one simple reason: we do not know for sure that Schlechter only needed a draw to win the title. There are some chess historians who claim that a two-point margin was in fact required (for the challenger, i.e. Schlechter). |
|
| Apr-15-18 | | Sokrates: Hi, Count W., According to information on this very site - and it seems to be objective and fair to me - he who scored the most wins would be the winner and declared to be the world champion. The +2 wins rule was connected with a first draft on the match where it should be over 30 games, and it was not applied to the actual match, which was fixed on 10 games, one leg of 5 in each of two locations. Lasker explained his lucky escape by the notion that Schlechter had wanted to defeat Lasker convincingly with 2 points, not 1 - a romantic path no player today would follow, said on a side-note. But according to the rules of the match, Schlechter did NOT HAVE TO do that. But you can read the whole story here: Lasker - Schlechter World Championship Match (1910) Besides being a tragic figure in the history of chess, Schlechter was also a player hard to categorize. Because he was pragmatic and "faceless", psychological spoken, he might have been this tough opponent for Lasker, whose games were very much based on his opponent's psychological profile. When we talk about how tough it is to earn money as a pro chessplayer today, if you don't belong to the top 60 or so, let us recall that this man, who had won several strong tournaments, died from starvation. There was not a shadow of social security for players before WW2, and apparently no sense of solidarity either. Lasker's ill economical fate, for instance, didn't seem to affect any other players. |
|
Apr-15-18
 | | offramp: <Sally Simpson: ...It took them (us) over 100 years to get his 'Dreihundert Schachpartien' translated into English.> Here is a puzzle. Irving Chernev loved <300 Schachpartien>. He called it The Holy Bible. Presumable Chernev spoke German (obviously he spoke Yiddish) - so why didn't he translate the bloody thing himself? |
|
| Apr-15-18 | | Retireborn: <offramp> Presumably Reinfeld's Tarrasch book (which is excellent btw) had suffered disappointing sales. In any case I suppose Chernev's real love was Capablanca; his book on Capa's endings (praised by Winter) was probably a long term labour of love. |
|
Apr-15-18
 | | Sally Simpson: Hi Lads,
Capa topped Chernev's Golden Dozen. (pub 1976)
1.Capablanca
2.Alekhine
3.Lasker
4. Fischer
5. Botvinnik
6. Petrosian
7. Tal
8. Smyslov
9. Spassky
10. Bronstein
11. Rubinstein
12. Nimzovitch
Game Collection: Golden Dozen (Chernev) No Tarrasch.
----
Think todays Golden Dozen we would be adding 4 maybe 5 extra names: Kasparov, Karpov, Carlsen, Anand and Kramnik. (so who do we remove from Chernev's list - the bottom 8 Smyslov to Nimzovitvh. Or do we call it the Golden 17.) |
|
Apr-15-18
| | offramp: <Retireborn: <offramp> Presumably Reinfeld's Tarrasch book (which is excellent btw) had suffered disappointing sales.> That's right; Reinfeld had a book out on the same subject, and it would have been a bad idea to possibly damage both books' sales. <In any case I suppose Chernev's real love was Capablanca; his book on Capa's endings (praised by Winter) was probably a long term labour of love.> That's a great book. Very modern in design and style. A very rare American book in standard notation. It must be Chernev's best book, although I really like the <Chess Companion>...Is there a better book to take on holiday?
I wish some intersting IM, such as Jonathan W Rogers (not Iam Rogers) would update each chapter of <CC> with a total of about an extra 100 pages. That would be superb, eh? |
|
| Apr-15-18 | | Retireborn: <Geoff> My personal (totally unobjective) Golden Dozen would look quite different; it would have Timman, Korchnoi, Portisch, Keres, Larsen, and A and C would only just scrape in. But I should admit that I don't know the games of top players from the last 12 years at all; and I get just as much pleasure from the games of slightly lesser lights. <offramp> Yes, CC was an amusing book. Not sure anybody writes such books these days. |
|
| Apr-15-18 | | morfishine: <Sally Simpson> Of course, you cannot remove anyone from the list, one simply adds to the list, like the British Open golf trophy or the Stanley Cup So in this case, don't forget to add Albin Planinc Albin Planinc ***** |
|
| Apr-15-18 | | Retireborn: <morfishine> I've been observing your Planinc-enthusiasm with interest, but I can't help wondering if you've missed the game for which he is (or was) most famous for:- Vaganian vs A Planinc, 1975 |
|
Apr-15-18
| | Sally Simpson: Hi Offramp,
Reinfeld also did a book on Capablanca which is not too bad but Chernev's written with passion is better. The Tarrasch book was a bit of a gamble considering the bad P.R. he had concerning the English speaking world, but with two teachers (Reinfeld by trade was a teacher) it could hardly fail. Tarrasch wrote once he played with his dear readers (that will be us) in mind and was noting up the game as he played it, sometimes, he deliberately played not the best move in the position but the took the more instructive path just for our benefit. Chess Companion is a good book. 'Is there a better book to take on holiday? ' Much to the annoyance of my new wife in 1977 I took 'Snatched Opportunities' by Lombardy on my two week honeymoon. The games are short and with the aid of the one diagram I could play them out in my head. (and I used some of the tricks and traps in latter games to good effect.) A good honeymoon that one...think I'll have another one day :) |
|
Apr-15-18
| | Sally Simpson: Yes Vaganian vs A Planinc, 1975 is a great game. Had that on my demo-board in front of an awe struck class a few times. |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 25 OF 27 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
NOTE: Create an account today
to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users.
Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username,
then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.
|
Please observe our posting guidelines:
- No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
- No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
- No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
- Nothing in violation of United States law.
- No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
- No trolling.
- The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
- Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.
Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic.
This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general,
visit the Kibitzer's Café.
|
Messages posted by Chessgames members
do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration. |
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Copyright 2001-2025, Chessgames Services LLC
|
Kibitzing
