Aug-29-04
 | | offramp: The last game of the most boring World Championship in history! |
|
| Aug-29-04 | | square dance: what made this more boring that the 2000 WC? |
|
Aug-29-04
| | offramp: Average number of moves, for a start. |
|
| Aug-29-04 | | iron maiden: I am surprised Anand didn't want to play this out; he certainly didn't have anything to lose. |
|
| Aug-29-04 | | acirce: Average number of moves
in Anand-Kasparov 1995: 30
in Kramnik-Kasparov 2000: 37.9 |
|
Aug-29-04
| | offramp: The averages don't in any case tell the whole tale; only one game went over 60 moves. I think only two games got to 40 moves.
The first 8 games were draws.
And seats - in the WTC - were $75 a head. |
|
| Aug-29-04 | | acirce: The longest game in the 1995 match was 63 moves, only two others went over 40. In 2000, 6 games was 40 or more. |
|
| Aug-29-04 | | mack: <I am surprised Anand didn't want to play this out; he certainly didn't have anything to lose.> Indeed. Why didn't he? |
|
| Aug-29-04 | | acirce: He had already given up hope as he was too far behind. Game 15 and 16 were the same - Anand accepting short draws in positions with life in them. |
|
Oct-12-04
| | offramp: I think the word is demoralized. |
|
| Oct-02-05 | | ughaibu: How about matches of undecided length? For example, spin the roulette wheel before each game, if it comes up green that becomes the final game. |
|
Oct-02-05
| | offramp: That reminds me of the lateral idea of having the penalty shoot-out in soccer at the start of a major cup-final, rather than the end. That way both teams already know who has won the 'tie-break'. |
|
| Nov-04-07 | | ViciousMentality: The reason they drew this is because anand didn't really have any chance to tie or win. It was just the matter of play this and lose the match. So he decided not to even waste his mental energy. |
|
| Nov-04-07 | | pacelli: Anand had no fighting spirit. He only plays well when he knows what to do. Agst Kasparov he was lost at sea after going behind a few pts. Agst Kamsky a few mths earlier he played brilliantly but he was only down a point (from a lost 'won' game). But agst a really tough, aggresive and intimidating opponent he crumbled and died without a fight. |
|
| Nov-05-07 | | KnightOnEverest: anand and kasparov where mismatch as per as this tournament is considered. There is no chess in the country (India) he belongs too and he was brought up in an era where chess could only be understood by asking the local newspaper guy to get the russian books especially and then that too would take months to arrive. Compare the advantage of Kasparov who actually belongs there and has seen the waters to its deepest. |
|
| Mar-26-08 | | whiteshark: And after that there was the spectator who bought an expensive ticket but arrived 15 minutes too late in the playing hall only to see both players shaking hands. :( <I'll never watch any match live again!> |
|
| Oct-17-08 | | gBizzle: the reason why Anand took a draw so fast was because Kasparov was winning the match by 1 point, and in the event of a tie, Kasparov would keep the title. So, Kasparov had already won the match, they just had to go ahead and finish the game. |
|
| Jan-02-19 | | Zirconium7Z: @KnightonEverest Yeah,despite the fact that chess originated in India,chess was almost non existence in India till vishy.
Now india is doing very well.The thing I call a chess boom has happened. Norway is witnessing the same thing after Magnus. |
|
Kibitzing
