Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

GRENKE Chess Classic Tournament

Viswanathan Anand6.5/10(+3 -0 =7)[games]
Fabiano Caruana6/10(+3 -1 =6)[games]
Georg Meier5/10(+2 -2 =6)[games]
Michael Adams5/10(+1 -1 =8)[games]
Arkadij Naiditsch4/10(+3 -5 =2)[games]
Daniel Grigoryevich Fridman3.5/10(+0 -3 =7)[games]
* Chess Event Description
GRENKE Chess Classic (2013)

Sponsored by Grenke Leasing, six players participated in this first edition of Grenke Chess, which was played in Baden-Baden, Germany, 7-17 February 2013. Viswanathan Anand won with 6.5/10, ahead of Fabiano Caruana. Official site: TWIC: ChessBase: Crosstable:

Elo 01 02 03 04 05 06 1 Anand 2780 ** ½½ ½½ ½½ 11 ½1 6½ 2 Caruana 2757 ½½ ** 1½ ½0 11 ½½ 6 3 Meier 2640 ½½ 0½ ** ½½ 01 ½1 5 4 Adams 2725 ½½ ½1 ½½ ** 0½ ½½ 5 5 Naiditsch 2716 00 00 10 1½ ** ½1 4 6 Fridman 2667 ½0 ½½ ½0 ½½ ½0 ** 3½

Next edition: GRENKE Chess Classic (2014)

 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 30  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Caruana vs G Meier 1-0362013GRENKE Chess ClassicC10 French
2. Adams vs Anand ½-½432013GRENKE Chess ClassicC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
3. Naiditsch vs D G Fridman ½-½482013GRENKE Chess ClassicC47 Four Knights
4. D G Fridman vs G Meier ½-½262013GRENKE Chess ClassicA16 English
5. Naiditsch vs Adams 1-0792013GRENKE Chess ClassicE56 Nimzo-Indian, 4.e3, Main line with 7...Nc6
6. Anand vs Caruana ½-½402013GRENKE Chess ClassicC92 Ruy Lopez, Closed
7. Caruana vs Naiditsch 1-0382013GRENKE Chess ClassicB90 Sicilian, Najdorf
8. Adams vs D G Fridman ½-½582013GRENKE Chess ClassicE06 Catalan, Closed, 5.Nf3
9. G Meier vs Anand ½-½332013GRENKE Chess ClassicE00 Queen's Pawn Game
10. Naiditsch vs G Meier 1-0332013GRENKE Chess ClassicD12 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
11. Adams vs Caruana ½-½502013GRENKE Chess ClassicC78 Ruy Lopez
12. D G Fridman vs Anand ½-½582013GRENKE Chess ClassicA33 English, Symmetrical
13. Caruana vs D G Fridman ½-½412013GRENKE Chess ClassicC42 Petrov Defense
14. Anand vs Naiditsch 1-0382013GRENKE Chess ClassicC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
15. G Meier vs Adams ½-½352013GRENKE Chess ClassicE00 Queen's Pawn Game
16. D G Fridman vs Naiditsch 0-1452013GRENKE Chess ClassicE97 King's Indian
17. Anand vs Adams ½-½412013GRENKE Chess ClassicC78 Ruy Lopez
18. G Meier vs Caruana ½-½472013GRENKE Chess ClassicD12 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
19. Caruana vs Anand ½-½442013GRENKE Chess ClassicB90 Sicilian, Najdorf
20. Adams vs Naiditsch ½-½522013GRENKE Chess ClassicA20 English
21. G Meier vs D G Fridman 1-0602013GRENKE Chess ClassicE06 Catalan, Closed, 5.Nf3
22. D G Fridman vs Adams ½-½372013GRENKE Chess ClassicE34 Nimzo-Indian, Classical, Noa Variation
23. Anand vs G Meier ½-½562013GRENKE Chess ClassicC10 French
24. Naiditsch vs Caruana 0-1492013GRENKE Chess ClassicC69 Ruy Lopez, Exchange, Gligoric Variation
25. Caruana vs Adams 0-1542013GRENKE Chess ClassicE00 Queen's Pawn Game
 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 30  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 13 OF 13 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  morfishine: I don't know what I'm going to do with myself: No Live Broadcasts for the time being :(
Feb-18-13  Sem: Double round robin - robin, robin, I keep seeing a bird. How long has this been the technical term? Some years ago everybody in jazz started talking about a 'double bass' - what nonsense, it was always a bass. Our linguistic dexterity is dwindling per generation, but fortunately the language gets blown up like a balloon.
Premium Chessgames Member
Premium Chessgames Member
  LucB: <Jason Frost>, <HeMateMe>, <himadri>

Those are all "excellent" ideas.. This serves me right for wanting to initiate a discussion on this site!

(Remember the robot in 'Lost in Space'?? ... "Danger, danger"!!)


Premium Chessgames Member
  Dionysius1: Hi <Sem>. I read somewhere that the "double" means the instrument is designed an octave lower than its (non-doubled) counterpart. In Organ terms, it refers to a set of pipes which are literally double the normal length, hence sounding an octave lower. Still raises the question of what the non-doubled counterpart would be (one of the violin family I suppose). I don't know about "round robin though - I bet it's a corruption: can't have much to do with the sweet but very aggressive bird!
Feb-18-13  lost in space: Danger, danger!
Premium Chessgames Member
  LucB: Ha ha! Yeah, that guy!
Feb-18-13  lost in space: With the 3 points for the win, half a point for a draw and 0 points for a loss we would have the following result:

Anand: 12,5
Caruana: 12,0
Naiditsch: 10
Meier: 9
Adams: 7
Fridman: 3,5

Having in mind how active Naiditsch played, this counting system would make more sense to reward brave chess and to reduce the percentage of draws.

Premium Chessgames Member
  LucB: Only half for a draw? Not 1?
Feb-18-13  anandrulez: This tourney was good but Anand is playing players with much less rating hence outplaying in the opening is pretty evident . Need to see how he plays Kramnik Aronian Carlsen also the other 2750 club . Anyway good to see some sparks from Vishy .Kudos for playing aggressive chess keep them coming .
Feb-18-13  lost in space: Let's have a look to 3 for a win and 1 for a draw, <LucB>

Anand: 16
Caruana: 15
Meier: 12
Naiditsch: 11
Adams: 11
Fridman: 7

Maybe you are right, this is better than 1/2 for a draw.

Premium Chessgames Member
  LucB: <Maybe you are right, this is better than 1/2 for a draw.>

Well, I'm not sure whether I'm right or wrong; my comment was to point out the fact that the scoring that tries to encourage "brave chess" is 3-1-0 rather than 3-1/2-0.. One way or the other, I prefer 1-1/2-0 and no draw offers before move 40 myself.

Actually, what I REALLY like is this:

Anand vs Topalov, 2005

and this:

Topalov vs Anand, 2005

Look at the picture that accompanies this last game... wow!

Feb-19-13  lost in space: Fully respect your view. Fighting draws are much more interesting than easy wins.

Nevertheless: In Soccer the system of counting was changed a few years ago to 3-1-0 (before it was 1-1/2-0) with the result that soccer teams nowadays ate much interested in wining a game instead of defending the draw.

So I prefer the 3-1-0 system. My first post with only half a point for draws and 3 points for a win was a mistake of mine, somehow mixing the 2 systems. Silly me.

Feb-19-13  lolchair: <LucB: One way or the other, I prefer 1-1/2-0 and no draw offers before move 40 myself.>

I get the no draw offer part but why do you prefer the 1-1/2-0 system? It's the same as 1/2-1/2 / 1-0, right?

Premium Chessgames Member
  LucB: LucB: <It's the same as 1/2-1/2 / 1-0, right?> Yes, when I write 1-1/2-0 I mean 1 point for a win, 1/2 point for a draw and nothing for a loss. Sorry for the confusion; I'm not sure if there's a standard way of writing this out.

<lost in space>

I agree with you that 3-1-0 accomplishes what it intended on doing (i.e. reducing the number of draws), but for me what would matter most (if I were the boss of this joint, which I am obviously not!), would be to eliminate "GM draws", and not necessarily draws themselves ... I LIKE draws! There's nothing wrong with them if they're played out. The patzer that I am wants to be educated! Play the darned thing out and show me it's a draw ... This format in GRENKE seemed to accomplish this for me.

I dunno; maybe I should just learn my endgames! :D

Now the problem I have with 3-1-0 is that it values a decisive game more than one that is drawn, even if it is hard-fought, and to me that's unfair. However I believe that a short, agreed-to draw should be worth less than anything else ... but then how do you decide what is worthy and not? ... 'don't have an answer..

Feb-19-13  MTuraga: < LucB: I LIKE draws! There's nothing wrong with them if they're played out. The patzer that I am wants to be educated! Play the darned thing out and show me it's a draw ... This format in GRENKE seemed to accomplish this for me. I dunno; maybe I should just learn my endgames! :D>

The needs of patzers are different from professional GMs who earn their living playing 500 – 1000 games every year which is an average of around 2 games/day at least. They can assess a position as drawn much earlier than the public and so do not like to waste time and energy in continuing the game and hence agree for draws. They conserve their energies for the next game. When looked at from this view point a draw seems very logical.

Anand Topalov match at Sophia was governed by a no draw condition and the ultimate result was 7 draws and 5 decisive games. Many of us watching those games live, pitied the players for being forced to play on until a draw was shown on the board.

We have to remember the wise sayings of Steinitz, “You cannot win a game if both players play equally well. A game is won only when one player makes more mistakes than his/her opponent” and Capablanca, “When the technique is learnt by all the strong players then chess will become dull and full of draws. That will be the ultimate demise of chess.”

So we have to accept draws as valid as the knowledge of chess becomes widespread and most GMs play well against each other. The solution to keep chess interesting is to arrange tournaments where the players are of differing strengths, then we can see some sparkling sacrifices and interesting games where the public will become more thrilled. Otherwise it becomes like Rybka vs Houdini games……

Premium Chessgames Member
  beenthere240: It was nice for Caruana to give Fridman a draw and salvage his feelings. The mark of a gentleman. Cost him first place, true, but still a noble gesture.
Premium Chessgames Member
  LucB: <Mturaga> I hear you; like I said maybe I should just learn my endgames and that would be that!
Feb-19-13  dvpjal: It is not important that how best player you are but how you are playing now is counted. Hence discussing on the who is best player it will be better to observe who is playing best now?

Who is utilizing its 100% energy. knowledge and skill. Thanks

Feb-22-13  Jason Frost: <LucB>

To quantify my sarcasm a bit. I wasn't trying to dissuade discussion on the merits of the 3-1-0 system or the 40> move rule.

I just don't think the best way to go about it is with something like <I like system A> or <System B is a farce...> posts. Everyone likes long exciting games and hates short draws. The question is what achieves that and doesn't simultaneously go to the extreme of making game too long or diverting too much from chess as we know it. And to me it seems like you can't really do that without providing analysis or citing past studies of the 3-1-0 scoring system and other similar measures.

Feb-22-13  Jason Frost: Congrats to Anand on the nice comeback win. A bit surprised people are still favoring Kramnik over him in the Zurich chess challenge, given that Kramnik will most likely be hiding his opening prep.
Feb-28-13  Jambow: Interesting posts, Vishy is still a top player and was no doubt a worthy champ, FIDE really seems lost and I hope Anands legacy doesn't suffer. I don't think Anand or anyone else has to requalify through the candidates, he did that when he defended his title OTB.

I think Anand is one of the most respectable champs in recent history, but not a Fischer, Kasparov or even Karpov as far as domination goes. When I think Champ I think Carlsen now as everything but championship matches aside he has surpassed Anand at his peak. He should be able to approach FIDE and say look my record is so superior It is obvious I'm already qualified and everybody knows it. If Anand won his own champion title would be exaulted, if not we would have our new exiting champ in Magnus.

Mar-05-13  SetNoEscapeOn: <MTuraga>

<Anand Topalov match at Sophia was governed by a no draw condition and the ultimate result was 7 draws and 5 decisive games. Many of us watching those games live, pitied the players for being forced to play on until a draw was shown on the board.>

Kramnik-Topalov had no such condition and slightly more blood was shed, on average (6 draws and 5 decisive games). Kramnik Anand only slightly less so... 8 draws and 4 decisive games (probably would have been 7 and 5 if Kramnik had played on in game 12).

Which games in Sofia made you feel sorry for the players for "being forced to play on? I know they never complained themselves.

Mar-05-13  parmetd: There was one rook endgame that was so trivial even Topalov complained about having to play it after. That is the only game that comes from my memory (and frankly, I just remember it being Sofia... so it could have even been Mtel).
Mar-07-13  Sem: <Dionysius1>, thanks for your kind answer. On an organ I can imagine a double bass as explained by you. But the string instrument remains a problem. Or would 'double' indicate it is no bass guitar, i.e. that it also has a resounding back? So the robin is very aggressive, ho, ho, LOL. Imagine a round robin with Keres, Tal, Geller and Fischer. That would have been something!
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 13)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 13 OF 13 ·  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:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. 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.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

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, 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 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC