| 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 24 OF 27 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-12-18 | | WorstPlayerEver: PS if anyone is interested -I am quite sure no one actually is- I could edit the wiki page in such manner that the given info becomes in a radius of a 5 sec attention span. However, since billions must have noticed wiki, I suppose no one is really interested in how it looks like; a true cluttered mess. |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | WorstPlayerEver: PPS I would now delete all my previous related comments to concoct a single one - however, since editing text is more cumbersome anno 2018 to deal with than chess, my time is restricted. Oh well, this is what the page looks like: "Sven Magnus Øen Carlsen (Norwegian: [sven ˈmɑŋnʉs øːn ˈkɑːɭsn̩]; born 30 November 1990) is a Norwegian chess grandmaster and the current World Chess Champion. A chess prodigy, Carlsen earned his grandmaster title at the age of 13 years and 148 days." We all would probably agree the fact 'champ' is the MOST relevant fact about Carlsen -WRONG! WE DON'T!- because then it SHOULD look like this: "Sven Magnus Øen Carlsen (Norwegian: [sven ˈmɑŋnʉs øːn ˈkɑːɭsn̩]; born 30 November 1990) is the current World Chess Champion since 22 November 2013." NB Speaking of editing: the fact he's a GM and a prodigy is completely irrelevant for the header. The fact he's the champ does though IMNSHO. The irrelevant facts above say more about the stupidity of the wiki-editor than about Carlsen FYI. |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | That Roger: <Petrosianic>
there is a difference between being able or unable to bear sitting through 24 6 hour games, and when all is said and done, having 24 games on record between the 2 best players in the world. |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | That Roger: <having 24 games on record>
though maybe thats part of it, not wanting to give away all their secrets to the world of their up and coming competition |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | That Roger: <24 games>
oh and you guys saying 24 made me say 24, I was saying before 14 or 16 would be significantly different. But then again, 12 games may be significantly acceptable if they are not all draws, and oppositely if 20 game match was all draws |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | AuN1: Reading about these hypothetical world championship matches, and some of the past ones, got me thinking about some of the incredible chess we never got to see. The ones I lament the most might be:
morphy v. steinitz
fischer v. karpov
and lasker v. pillsbury
What about you all? |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | WorstPlayerEver: Tal (1936)-Fischer (1943) 6 years |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | Count Wedgemore: Two great matches we never got to see:
Lasker vs Rubinstein
Capablanca vs Rubinstein |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | denopac: <What about you all?> Rubinstein vs anybody. |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | denopac: Dang, The Count just beat me to it. |
|
Apr-12-18
 | | Sally Simpson: Add to the matches we never got to see.
Alekhine v Capablanca II
Alekhine v Botvinnik (or Fine or Keres)
Kasparov v Shirov
and of course: Karpov - Fischer World Championship Match (1975) |
|
| Apr-12-18 | | jphamlore: Steinitz vs Tarrasch. Had Tarrasch been able to win the world championship, his Die moderne Schachpartie might have been translated into English. Then his critics writing in English would not have had the last, and only, word on Tarrasch's teachings, which would have considerably improved the standard of play throughout the English-speaking part of the world up through today. |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | Tal1949: Fischer was old and grumpy by 1975 so I did not miss seeing that WC. I did regret Morphy leaving the game however. It would have been real interesting to see his games in 1865-1875 period, providing he was in top tournament form, of course. Morphy-Steinitz or Morphy-Kolisch would have been epic. |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | That Roger: <matches>
1 on 1 matches are not as popular as tournaments. is this due to a stronger spotlight: if for instance the top players went around challenging other top players to chess duels, it could potentially too hurt the brand name if a top 10 lost to a top 10, 5-0 in a match? And it would take too much time and money and gall for every top 20 player to play an 8-10 game match with every other top 20 player |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | morfishine: My choice for match: Planinc vs Nezhmetdinov
***** |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | Sokrates: <Tal1949: ... I did regret Morphy leaving the game however....> Agreed. Unfortunately, Morphy was born in a time, where chess culture was in its prime and surely didn't offered him any really strong opponent. Only by the end of the 19th century adequately strong players appeared on the stage - when Morphy was long gone. Staunton might have offered some resistance to Morphy, but he was a low character avoiding any match with Morphy with the meanest tricks. IMO his behavior disillusioned Morphy and made him turn away from chess with sadness and disgust. Anderssen, well, in a few games he put up some equal fight, but in spite of his brilliancy, he was a class below Morphy, like all the others. Yes, it's very unfortunate that Steinitz and later players never got the chance to meet him. A sad book could be written about unreleased potentials in chess, players who died far too early or were prevented from unfolding there talents. Poverty, war, disease, were fatal opponents to many players from the 19th century and in the beginning of the 20th. An encouraging book could be written about the pioneers who - often with many sacrifices - made way for the chess life we know today. |
|
Apr-13-18
| | Sally Simpson: jphamlore,
Sometimes I dread coming on here wondering what piece of nonsense I will see (and no doubt contribute too) today. Then this:
"...his [Tarrasch's] Die moderne Schachpartie might have been translated into English. Then his critics writing in English would not have had the last, and only, word on Tarrasch's teachings, which would have considerably improved the standard of play throughout the English-speaking part of the world up through today." What a wonderful breath of fresh air.
You are of course 110% (sic) correct. (I've added the extra 10% for effect.) It took them (us) over 100 years to get his 'Dreihundert Schachpartien' translated into English. Game Collection: Three Hundred Chess Games (Tarrasch) He did not win too many English friends by prolonging a tournament to beat 'Old English' as Tarrasch put it. See: Tarrasch vs Blackburne, 1890 (kibitz #14) Tarrasch's humour and down to earth writing and teachings went right over the heads of the late Victorian and Edwardians. Then WWI happened and the anti-German feeling surfaced. His two greatest books never had a chance of getting translated into English. Fred Reinfeld (bless him) wrote what many (Edward Winter included) call Reinfeld's best book. I agree 110% Game Collection: Tarrasch's Best Games of Chess. Part I. Game Collection: Tarrasch's Best Games of Chess. Part II. Game Collection: Tarrasch's Best Games of Chess. Part III. All that is left is for us to enjoy possibly the last game Tarrasch played. NN vs Tarrasch, 1932 Dear reader, just go there, it will remind you why you fell in love with the game. |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | Sokrates: Great post, Geoff.
Tarrasch was great on all accounts, although he also was a man of his time. |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | morfishine: <Sally Simpson> I would hope that Reinfeld wrote Reinfeld's best book Heaven help us if someone else wrote it!
***** |
|
Apr-13-18
 | | chancho: I have that Tarrasch book.
(Getting swamped with too many books!)
Reinfeld also wrote (with Reuben Fine) about Lasker's Best Games of Chess from 1889-1914: https://www.amazon.com/Laskers-Grea... |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | Lupara: I have the old Dover edition of Reinfeld's Tarrasch's Best Games of Chess. I think I purchased it in the late 1970s or early 1980s. I also have the Dover edition of Reinfeld's book on Lasker's Best Games of Chess 1889-1914. <Chanco> I know the feeling of being swamped with too many books and yet I continue to buy and read. So many books, so little time. |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | Pedro Fernandez: <<AylerKupp>: ..."There were several other matches which had as a condition something along the lines of first player to win N games but champion retains title if score reaches N-1 to N-1 and other matches which specified the winner to be the first player to win N games but with a maximum of Z games and the winner would then be the player with the best score at the end of Z games."...> This is a bit tangled <AK>. Why do we have to speak about games and not about points? Say 5.5 to 5.5, or 6.0 to 6.0. Can you clarify this my friend? Okay! I suspect I'm missing something. Thanks! Another topic <AK>. Looking at FWCM 2018 RULES & REGULATIONS, I don't see any restriction about draws in common agreement (I mean in the number of moves). What do you think? Finally, I also want your opinion about the first time control: 100min. Don't you think it's more fair 120min? We are talking about of the World Championship! Unfortunately, like divorce, an Armageddon is a necessary evil. Don't you? |
|
| Apr-13-18 | | That Roger: (Son) Carl(,) u-wana? |
|
Apr-13-18
 | | Check It Out: No less impossible than other listed desirable WC matches: Capablanca vs Kasparov
Carlsen vs Lasker
Alekhine vs Tal
Botvinnik vs Fischer
Karpov vs Rubenstein |
|
Apr-13-18
 | | AylerKupp: <<Pedro Fernandez> Why do we have to speak about games and not about points?> Several reasons. One, <thegoodanarchist>'s question was whether a "first to 4 wins, draws not counting" had ever been a match condition for the WC. He's clearly referring to games and not points. Second, since throughout the history of the WCC many matches specified the winner as the first player to win N <games>, draws not counting, the score in these matches didn't count draws, so if N=10, the winner could have won 10-0 with no draws, 10-0 with 10 draws, 10-0 with 20 draws, etc. with the match score being 10-0, 15-5, 20-10 etc. In this case it's the number of <wins> that's important, not the number of games. But to make matters more confusing, some WCC matches had as a winning condition something like "First player to reach 10 wins or a maximum of 30 games, in which case the player with the highest score wins." And, of course, many WCC matches were limited to 24 games, with the winner the first player to exceed 12 points. Then we had several situations where the challenger had to win by either 2 points or wins such as the clause that the defending champion retains his title if the match score was 12-12 and Fischer's proposed match conditions that the winner in his match with Karpov would be the player that first reached 10 wins, draws not counting, but the champion (Fischer) would retain his title if the match score reached 9-9 . These were my references to N-1 to N-1. And there were also some tournaments and not matches that determined the WCC. So sorry that my explanation was a bit tangled but that's because the method for selecting the WCC has been tangled and there were many variations. Maybe I could have said it more simply but I didn't know how. I got my information mostly from <chessgames.com>'s excellent summary of all the WCC matches starting at History of the World Chess Championship. |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 24 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
