< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Mar-26-13|| ||Geronimo: Okay, that's a lot to take in with one go. On the surface it resembles club play - wild and full of surprises. I reckon this will generate a good bit of commentary, as we know these two aren't just slashing and burning. In any case, it must have been fun to watch live.|
|Mar-26-13|| ||kingscrusher: This game score is currently incomplete at move 41 - there were quite a few more moves.|
|Mar-26-13|| ||kingscrusher: Apologies my mistake - the commentary room analysis and the actual game are two very different things! The game did apparently end here!.|
|Mar-26-13|| ||pawnstar3: <Id go out on a limb and say this game is more interesting then all the rest of the games in this tournament combined.> |
I completely agree- I was following this game live and it was the only one in the tourney that I really was excited about. I'm sick of watching the top level draws or the grind it out wins like Gelfand against Aronian yesterday. These types of games are exciting and if Grishuk played Qe5 and won the bishop on the next move he would've been playing for a win. Oh well.
|Mar-26-13|| ||paavoh: Three games at CG after 12.f4 Neg4 resulted in rather quick White wins,
so Grischuk really found an intriguing novelty in a line supposedly good for White.|
Those with more complete databases, any additional input?
|Mar-26-13|| ||cormier: if 0.13 24.Bd4+ f6 25.Bf2 Qf4 26.Kg1 Rab8 27.Ne2 Qh6 28.Bd3 Rxb2 29.Rxg6+ Qxg6+ 30.Bxg6 Kxg6 31.Nf4+ Kf7 32.a3 Ra2 33.Rc1 Rd7 houdini|
|Mar-28-13|| ||AylerKupp: <kingscrusher> I know that you don't usually create videos of drawn games but you might want to make an exception with this one.|
|Apr-04-13|| ||Eyal: Kasparov says that he analyzed the knight sac on c4 back in the 90s (http://translate.google.co.il/trans...). What a surprise.|
|May-20-14|| ||Conrad93: Grischuk makes Carlsen look like chump change on a good day.|
|May-20-14|| ||Conrad93: This looks like it was engine prep.|
|May-20-14|| ||JointheArmy: <This looks like it was engine prep.>|
It was prep until the game got crazy with Svidler's queen sac.
|May-22-14|| ||perfidious: <Conrad: Grischuk makes Carlsen look like chump change on a good day.>|
Which, of course, is why Grischuk has never defeated Carlsen in nine classical games.
How do you conjure up such bizarre statements? From your fundament?
|May-22-14|| ||N0B0DY: <perfidious: <How do you conjure up such bizarre statements? From your fundament?>>|
His fundament is pure ignorance. And ignorance is bliss like they say...
|Sep-17-14|| ||hedgeh0g: Grischuk could hardly believe his eyes when 29...Qe5! was pointed out to him in the post-game press conference. |
Time trouble and deep calculations had no doubt taken their toll on the players.
|Jun-21-18|| ||Richard Taylor: If 29...Re5 surely 30. Re4 seems o.k.?
Grishuk's sacrifice looks a bit dubious. But he comes up with some creative ideas...
|Jun-21-18|| ||Richard Taylor: Why didn't Svidler play 17. Qd2? Did he want some fun?|
|Jun-21-18|| ||Richard Taylor: Grishuk may have meant to play 17. ... d4 which is possibly only equal. Looks as if they were both going for the win...|
|Jun-21-18|| ||offramp: Some chess games remind me of this great quote from the film Casino: |
<No matter how big a guy might be, Nicky would take him on. You beat Nicky with fists, he comes back with a bat. You beat him with a knife, he comes back with a gun. And you beat him with a gun, you better kill him, because he'll keep coming back and back until one of you is dead.>
|Jun-21-18|| ||ChessHigherCat: You beat Nicky with a bishop, he comes back with a cardinal. You beat Nicky with a cardinal and he comes back with the Pope! And if you bring back your own pope he'd better be better than his, cause udderwise he's gonna excommunicate yoass.|
|Jun-21-18|| ||cormier: Notes by Stockfish 8 19... h3 better is 19...Bh5 20.Bd4+ Kh6 21.Ne3 f5 22.O-O Rb8 23.Be2 Rb4 = -0.14 (31 ply) 20. Rd1 = +0.37 (31 ply)|
|Jun-21-18|| ||scutigera: <N0B0DY>: Do you know something about Conrad's fundament that the rest of us don't?|
|Jun-21-18|| ||perfidious: One certainly hopes <N0B0DY> does not know about that....|
|Jun-22-18|| ||ChessHigherCat: <csmath: <Id go out on a limb and say this game is more interesting then all the rest of the games in this tournament combined.>|
<It is not more interesting. It is just wild. >
Sorry but that's most pedantic thing I've ever heard! This is an immensely entertaining game, if that qualifies as interesting.
|Jun-22-18|| ||Richard Taylor: I think NOBODY was expressing his enthusiasm for Grishuk's inventive play.|
And Grishuk has played some interesting games.
But overall Carlsen is a stronger player and is capable of all kinds of chess. He has probably been (with a few exceptions where players are more or less close to his level such as Anand was). Caruana and Wesley So are examples of stronger players overall (than Grishuk) and both capable of 'ingenious play'.
|Jun-22-18|| ||Richard Taylor: In fact Svidler played well here also. Svidler is not to be overlooked.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·