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

Veselin Topalov vs Levon Aronian
Sinquefield Cup (2015), Saint Louis, MO USA, rd 9, Sep-01
Queen's Gambit Declined: Ragozin Defense. Vienna Variation (D39)  ·  1/2-1/2



explore this opening
find similar games 50 more Topalov/Aronian games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: To access more information about the players (more games, favorite openings, statistics, sometimes a biography and photograph), click their highlighted names at the top of this page.

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 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Sep-01-15  chessdgc2: Should White's N move again? Say, Nh4 followed by f4?
Sep-01-15  haydn20: Seems like the players are traversing a byway of the Ragozin, one which favors Black. I'd almost bet Aronian is in familiar territory while Topalov isn't.
Sep-01-15  BOSTER: It would be nice to transfer white queen to h6 , but black pawns are dangerous .
Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: 20..f5 appears to invite wholesale exchanges
Sep-01-15  MarkFinan: I see nothing wrong with 19.dxc. I don't see why he had to put the knight on f3 first
Sep-01-15  BOSTER: You trade good pawn for doble.
Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: now Black can pla22..Bxf3 followed by..cxd
Premium Chessgames Member
  Zugged: Ashley is saying it will end by perpetual check white will be two pawns down and have to force it
Sep-01-15  Marmot PFL: If Aronian makes a draw here soon I expect some other games will also end.
Sep-01-15  BOSTER: Now white can sacr .
Sep-01-15  Ulhumbrus: Either Shahade or Seirawan has indicated that Aronian does not need to try to avoid a draw by perpetual check, as a draw gains him the first prize.
Sep-01-15  Ulhumbrus: Draw agreed. Congratulations to Aronian, the Sinquefield 2015 winner
Sep-01-15  devere: A great tournament for Levon Aronian. I got the impression that if he needed to win this game he could have done that too.
Sep-01-15  Kasparov Fan: From Rags at Norway to Riches at USA
Congratulations to Aronian, and at last he's rough patch is over.
Premium Chessgames Member
  whiteshark: Time and again, at the end of a working day, I marvelled to see that Aronian, with the few lines and shadows that had escaped defeat.
Premium Chessgames Member
  plang: <devere: A great tournament for Levon Aronian. I got the impression that if he needed to win this game he could have done that too.>

Both players would have approached the game differently if circumstances were changed

Sep-01-15  MindCtrol9: Glad that Aronian did a great job getting 1st place without losing one game.In a field like this where all the participants are super strong.Congratulations for your 1st place,Levon Aronian.
Sep-01-15  Everett: <Premium Chessgames MemberSep-01-15 Absentee: <Everett: Strategical performance warps rating, that's why.> Umm, you're talking to yourself here.

Are you sure you read my question before hitting "post"?>

Yes, I'm sure.

Sep-02-15  Absentee: <Everett: Yes, I'm sure.>

Then maybe you should read it again, because your reply is completely unrelated to my comment.

Sep-02-15  RookFile: Brave play by Aronian as black.
Premium Chessgames Member
  whiteshark: <GM Jan Gustafsson> takes a look at this encounter: Enjoy!
Sep-03-15  Everett: <Absentee: <Everett: Yes, I'm sure.>

Then maybe you should read it again, because your reply is completely unrelated to my comment.>

Sure it does. I don't need to read it again.

Sep-03-15  Everett: <<<Tiggler: Topalov has no incentive to help Carlsen by beating Aronian, so this should be a quick draw.> Sep-01-15
member WinKing: Spot on <Tiggler>. I agree.>

Everett: <Premium Chessgames MemberSep-01-15 WinKing: Spot on <Tiggler>. I agree.>

Which is why ratings are not the best measure.>>

That is the beginning of my response. <Absentee> Seems you missed it.

Ratings weigh each game equally, yet the players know when it is best to play for the win or not, thus "adulterating" the value of those results.

This is the same discussion we always have. I surprise myself that I keep indulging it. Anyone who has had to peak at a particular point - for a job interview, for an end-of-season competition - knows that all events are not of equal value.

Sep-03-15  Absentee: I wasn't arguing about the merits or demerits of ratings this time around. I was saying that "not helping Carlsen" doesn't sound like a very strong motivation not to win a game (ratings or not - not helping Carlsen would help Aronian anyway, but why would it make a difference to Topalov? Unless he really hates Carlsen and would rather score worse than he could than risk him winning the event...).

Besides, are you really so conceited as to think I don't realize that games have a different weight? I do, believe it or not. The question is more complicated than that. Different players have very different incentives. Winning itself has always been incentive enough to try to win, long before there were ratings, championships or anything of the sort. Some players don't seem to need any additional material incentive: Fischer, who you lovingly hate, was one of those, Carlsen is another, Nakamura too. Others might be motivated by money, and again in this case the difference between a lower and a higher placing was a decent sum of money. Rating themselves work as an incentive.

Sep-03-15  Everett: Nothing to do with conceit.

I don't "hate" Fischer. I despise the illogical thinking of the fanboys who surround him. I also think worshipping any person, much less someone as deficient as Fischer in so many ways, is an extension of global problems we have with heroes, leadership, and politics. I love his chess though, and have numerous posts out there to prove it.

Ratings as an incentive <is> a negative aspect of modern chess. The numbers are given far more weight than they deserve. Science and math are funny things. They can only measure certain things, and to those things they put a numerical value. The next seemingly <logical> step is that <nothing> is of value unless it can be measured numerically. This is wishful thinking at best, hubris at worst. This leads to people extrapolating that someone who only participates fully in one of three candidates cycles during a decade can be considered the best player during that same time. Due to a number, based on playing in much less important events.

In any case, you hopefully can see it is a pet issue of mine to call out when emphasis on ratings fails. To my eyes, this last post of yours was a bit more nuanced regarding their place. You can of course think what you wish, and I have nothing personal against you in any way.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 3)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is totally anonymous, and 100% free—plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any gratuitous name-calling of any members—including Admin and Owners—or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. 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: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, 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 at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.

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?]
by egoego

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your 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 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC