Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Magnus Carlsen vs Fabiano Caruana
Biel Chess Festival (2011), Biel SUI, rd 4, Jul-22
Scotch Game: Classical Variation (C45)  ·  1-0



Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 48 times; par: 38 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 114 more Carlsen/Caruana games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: The Olga viewer allows you to get computer analysis by clicking the "ENGINE" link on the lower right.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.


Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 11 OF 11 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jul-23-11  DrMAL: <achieve> LOL, whatever, I just play the game. Nice to share ideas and enjoyment with others on here, cheers.
Premium Chessgames Member
  jessicafischerqueen: <perfidious> I'm not in the least surprised.

I'm a "perma patzer" there's no doubt about it.

So if *I* find posters like <Dr.MAL> annoying- and he's far from the only one in this rude and inane habit- then imagine how <Carlsen> and <Gelfand> and other actual top grandmasters feel about it.

To them, such posting must be beneath contempt.

Jul-23-11  Al2009: I totally agree with Jessica, regarding her evaluation of "armchair GM" using engines to analyse games (during live games or after). Now, the question in my modest opinion is: "did computers HELP chess to get more players, to get more prestige, etc. , in the last 20 years?"

The honest answer is: "NO THEY DIDN'T!".

Probably many chessplayers do not realize how much chess has lost in prestige, now that (by using an engine) ANY patzer can show in a few seconds moves that for many GM would take many minutes to find. Probably not so many chessplayers know that Biel tournament in Switzerland (where Carlsen and other top GM are playing now) is now being played by "just" 200 chessplayers (more or less), while in 1989 edition there where 1200 (yes! one thousandstwohundreds) players, nearly 6 times more!

My personal decision was not to use any engines in analysing a game, for me engines are good just as database, or as a tool to search openings, games, etc. more quickly, but NOT to analyse a game (please, look my comments here, sometimes there are mistakes, sometimes I find good moves, but NONE of my analysis was never performed by using a computer), i believe it is dangerous to analyse a game by using an engine, because then you start to rely more and more on yr computer than on yr brain.

Morover, please, don't forget the huge problem of CHEATING through computers and electronic devices.

The famous Dutch arbiter Gijssen once wrote that he knew several GM who dropped to play, because they knew that some weak players won games by cheating with computers.

So, if you want that chess become more and more like making a long sum by using a pocket calculator, rather then a creative and wonderful mind game, keep on by using computers!

But then don't cry if media (TV, magazines, etc.) pay less and less attention to chess, and people have no idea of the name of today's world champion, while everybody remembers Fischer, Kasparov, Karpov, Tal, etc.

So, I perfectly understand Carlsen's annoyance, after having been questioned about the analysis by engines of his game with Caruana...

Jul-23-11  Shams: <OCF><I've blundered suggestions in live games. Many kibitizers have. That just proves we aren't as good as the GM's and we aren't using engines.>

Exactly. I've offered two or three howlers this week alone. No worries guys, on the house and more where that came from.

Jul-23-11  twinlark: <Al2009: the question in my modest opinion is: "did computers HELP chess to get more players, to get more prestige, etc. , in the last 20 years?"

The honest answer is: "NO THEY DIDN'T!".>

It's hard to tell exactly why, but there's little doubt that the demographic has drastically changed in the last 20 years. There are far more players registered with FIDE, including far more that can now achieve GM norms and titles.

Before 1990 there were only a handful of teenage GMs, while since that time there have been over 200. Engines, databases and the internet make chess infinitely more accessible than it was during the print only era , when only geniuses like Fischer, Spassky, Polgar, Mecking and Vaganian could acquire their titles as teenagers without IT assistance.

You'd think that the average age of GMs would have reduced as a result, but it's remained remarkably steady since 1950, as the same technology has also made chess infinitely more available to <everyone>, including <older> players that might not have otherwise made the grade.

<Probably many chessplayers do not realize how much chess has lost in prestige, now that (by using an engine) ANY patzer can show in a few seconds moves that for many GM would take many minutes to find.>

This is more apparent than real, as engines can provide patzers with answers they could never find, even in a few seconds, but top level GM play is far more complex than can be analysed and evaluated accurately in a few seconds or minutes.

I'd also venture to hazard a guess that chess's loss of prestige on the international stage has more to do with being run by a bunch of corrupt bureaucrats headed by a wannabe alien abductee/unsavoury dictator than anything to do with the use of engines. Competitive running didn't become obsolete when horses were domesticated or cars and trains invented, and nor will competitive chess become outmoded because of engines, for the simple reason that it still tests the limits of human mental capacity. Having the technology to ascertain more accurately how well humans perform is a given in all competitive endeavours.

Finally, I'd have to say that engines are an invaluable tool, and that the reaction against kibitzers using engines is a bit unfair, as some can do so intelligently and with grace in contrast to the offensive patzers to which this discussion has been referring.

Throw the babyshit, not the baby, out with the bathwater.

Jul-23-11  DrMAL: <twinlark> Yes, definitely more apparent than real. So what if any patzer, club player, master or GM can get a good evaluation from a computer? In every case, someone has gotten something they wanted to get, be it learning or verification or maybe even just another idea.

Frankly, all the bashing of people and engines or people who use engines (BTW this would include every GM) is just plain counterproductive. Why not post about CHESS? Some ideas, some real thoughts to share? Any analysis without gaping holes in it? Why not question what would have happened? What if??? This is what chess kibitzing is all about, not getting up on some high horse all constipated and full of $#&*.

I have a few people on IGNORE already. If they were chessplayers their posts would contain some ideas, some analysis, something productive about the beauty and truth about the game. Instead, they poke at those who try, calling them names like Armchair GMs while themselves playing a boring version of Armchair God.

Jul-23-11  Al2009: Thank you twinlark, i agree with you, for some of yr. remarks. No problem to agree with you regarding the corrupted management of FIDE, in the last 20 years, etc. But I am not throwing the baby with water, because I myself use Internet, computers as databases, for opening research, etc. However, I believe that in general, although engines (but there were also political changes, before 1989 just a few Eastern players could play abroad) made chess information easily available, the prestige of chess dropped dramatically. Of course, I am not saying "destroy computers", I am just saying that media are less and less interested in human chess performances than in the past, that's all.
Jul-23-11  Al2009: Moreover, now it is more difficult for GM to earn an income from lessons, comments, analysis, etc. Just to mention a fact: 20 years ago the Yugoslav Chess Informant was for everybody the "bible" of chess information, and many GM were earning money by sending their analysis and comments. Now Chess Informant (also for the death of Krnic) is in big troubles, chessplayers are not interested as in the past in analysis from GM, they just put positions in the engines...No, in the past even chessplayers having an "expert" level were respected, now people disregard even comments from GM!
Jul-23-11  twinlark: <Al2009>

But there are more people playing chess than ever, because the game has become more accessible. It seems the game is going through a transition, hopefully one that will survive its current weird, corrupt leadership, but also one that will find a new equilibrium following the advent of powerful technology.

If prestige is to be restored, then maybe tightening the requirements for master norms and titles to adjust to the new reality introduced by engines, databases and the internet may be in order.

Unfortunately, the weird corrupt leadership started easing the barriers to norms even before the advent of engines and other technology to please national federations that wanted their own titled players. It remains a political issue that is tied in with the leadership's grip on power acquired through bribing suitcase federations that have the same value vote as the chess superpowers.

Equally unfortunately, there is no end in sight to this screwed up excuse for leadership, especially when the Russian authorities forcibly intervened to ensure the status quo was retained in the Russian chess federation, the key to the governance of world chess, prior to the last FIDE presidential elections.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Everett: I wonder if those who have many kibitzers on "ignore" recognize the role they play in such relationships.
Jul-23-11  Shams: <Everett> Can you elaborate?
Premium Chessgames Member
  Everett: <Shams> apparently I'm on <Dr.Mals> ignore list as well, for the following:

Karpov vs Seirawan, 1982

Basically, there is a strong chance that individuals who have a long list of ignores bring it upon themselves. To attract such ire from other kibitzers and completely ignore responsibility is typical. I think these individuals could benefit from looking at their own posts, how they sound, and how they might be bringing negativity toward them.

But hey, I have to do the same thing, so I'm no better <though I don't have a big list of ignores> ;-)

Jul-23-11  Shams: <Everett> I see your point. Well...I guess in addition to all the other reasons I should check myself from time to time, I apparently have another ~45 reasons.
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <TheFocus: <DrMAL>

<No idea what <Focus> wrote, but I am sure it was very rude. Like a few others, he seems to pretend he some great player and judges others as inferior without a clue as to who they are. All part of some sad insecurity so he's been on IGNORE.>

ROFL-wonder whether he ever heard the one about the pot and the kettle......

<Poor, sad, miserable post from an opinionated prick. Didn't his bio once say he was a master too, after only a few tournaments? Hmmm.>

Awhile back, it stated he had been 2270 or some such, long ago.

<Everett> You horrible person; to make what appears to be a burgeoning list (same as your humble writer) takes supreme talent, don't you know, such as questioning pronouncements from On High.

Maybe someone should ask <DrMALadroit> how many people can be on that magical list.

Jul-23-11  drnooo: There is a case to be made that chess , chess in general was better under the soviets and KGB, no matter if a few of the true greats were strangled almost literally into performing well below their ability: you had a dynamic churning of milk into cream at that big ole country store, a real live enemy for Fischer to take aim with his abnormal paranormal paranoia at, a whole nation of ours to cheer him on, and fatten the registry of USCF ahhh the good ole days now we have more GMS than PEOPLE interested in chess and not a one of them of the ability of the russkies and bobby

what went wrong

Jul-24-11  Al2009: <twinlark>
Yes, it's true, now we have more people playing chess at a good level all over the world, while 30-40 years ago we had a big gap between masters/GM and other weaker chessplayers, because now it is possibile for everybody to find online 1000 times more information (openings, analysis, games, etc.) than in the past.

But don't forget that now we have very big problems:

a) Many chessplayers prefer to play online, rather than playing in tournaments.

b) We have more tournaments than in the past, but most of them are weekend, rapid...5-7 rounds tournaments, while it is more and more difficult for organizers to find money to organize 9 rounds (or more) tournaments (like Biel for instance), and to find money for good prizes.

c) Media pay almost no attention to chess, and without media you don't have sponsors + investors.

I don't believe it is just for corruption inside FIDE. Football, car racing, athletics, boxe, basket, biking, etc., have 100 times more problems of corruption + doping, but people watch them, and sponsors invest money.

My fear is that we will have more and more people playing chess at home with computers, and less people playing chess in tournaments, that's the trend.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Everett: <Shams><perfidious> we each make our own worlds on this site, and I sometimes wonder why I don't ignore certain people, as i often regret the energy and time I waste getting wrapped up in arguments. My own fault, of course.

And why not choose who to see and not to see? For whatever reason I have chosen to ignore very few, and not one in years, but I can't blame you both for your discretion and preferences.

Perhaps a better list would be one that had the names of the kibitzers most frequently ignored. That would be interesting. I wonder if <> would provide one for me

Premium Chessgames Member
  tpstar: <Perhaps a better list would be one that had the names of the kibitzers most frequently ignored. That would be interesting.>

They have consistently avoided keeping such records as it would only encourage duplicate accounts trying to set the anti-hero record. I suspect they have some internal sense of who gets ignored the most and the least but they wouldn't share such information.

The correct way to use the ignore function is to put that person on ignore and then don't talk about it. Telling someone you will or might ignore their posts is the emptiest of threats.

Computer analysis should help amateurs and professionals better understand the strategy (somewhat) and tactics (absolutely) without being some heavy-handed weapon proving one kibitzer's superiority over the rest. We are supposed to learn from each other. =)

Premium Chessgames Member
  Everett: <tpstar> thanks for the info. Makes sense.
Oct-17-11  notyetagm: Carlsen vs F Caruana, 2011

Game Collection: TRAPPED PIECES! TRAPPED PIECES! TRAPPED PIECES! 27 Re1-e4 1-0 traps the Black c4-knight which has NO RETREAT!

Oct-17-11  notyetagm: Carlsen vs F Caruana, 2011

Game Collection: CARLSEN TEACHES TACTICS 27 Re1-e4 1-0 traps the Black c4-knight which has NO RETREAT!

Oct-17-11  notyetagm: Game Collection: TRAPPED PIECES: NO RETREAT!
Nov-08-11  e4effort: Fab missed a draw sacking the knight 25...Ne3+! 26 Rxe3 Bxf4 27 Rf3 Bxc1
Premium Chessgames Member
  kevin86: a horse with no name-and nowhere to go.
Mar-26-12  LoveThatJoker: Guess-the-Move Final Score:

Carlsen vs F Caruana, 2011.
Your score: 52 (par = 40)


Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 11)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 11 OF 11 ·  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.
  8. Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

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 game 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.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.

Featured in the Following Game Collections[what is this?]
Power Chess - Carlsen
by Anatoly21
Game 32
from Move by Move - Carlsen (Lakdawala) by Qindarka
27 Re1-e4 1-0 traps the Black c4-knight which has NO RETREAT!
27 Re1-e4 1-0 traps the Black c4-knight which has NO RETREAT!
Scotch by Modern Players
by alligator
Biel Chess Festival 2011 Rd.4
from Selected Tournaments and Favorite Games (2011) b by partien
...bxc6 line; exchange sac; knight trapped in middle
from Scotch Game for White by prime rib
Magnus Carlsens Meisterwerke
by tmh13
Chess Prince
by MrMelad
"Bishop murder case"
from 99 Opening Tactics Easy Point & Fredthebear by fredthebear
Fabiano missed a draw 25...Ne3+! 26 Rxe3 Bxf4 27 Rf3 Bxc1
from Fab Italiano Car for Fredthebear's Road Trips by fredthebear
"Bishop murder case"
by PepeCarvalho
Carlsen e4 Caruana
by Kent Swearingen
...bxc6 line; exchange sac; knight trapped in middle
from Scotch Game for White by Patca63
A1b: Classical Variation
from Scotch Game by imsighked2

Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2023, Chessgames Services LLC