| Dec-12-15 | | kamagong24: great recovery by Toppy, holding on a hard fought draw against Carlsen |
|
| Dec-12-15 | | kamagong24: Carlsen complained about the 50 move draw which he thinks caused him the full point in this game, as he pointed out during post game analysis, he was gaining small advantages in the endgame so probably, one of the chinks in his grinding style has been exposed here... i think the 50 move draw can be removed to give chance to the player who has the clear advantage to continue play for a win now, to be fair with the audience and the organizers, i think a 15 second increment per move should be implemented upon reaching the 50 move mark, fair enough for me... |
|
| Dec-12-15 | | Ulhumbrus: If the attack 13 a4 will merely give Black a passed a pawn which White canot win this suggests the more conventional attack 13 Rad1 and 14 Rfe1 as in the games Polugaevsky vs Tal, 1969 and Spassky vs Petrosian, 1969 |
|
| Dec-12-15 | | blackdranzer: Lifting the 50 move ban might have given magnus a win at around 200 moves...but,I guess topi would have resigned long before!...he just doesn't kno how to wait in dry positions, as in his game vs Anand |
|
| Dec-12-15 | | knighttoefour: The 50 move rule applied here? I thought that rule meant that a player could claim a draw if there had been 50 moves since the last capture. But that's not the case here. Is there some other "50 move" rule? |
|
Dec-12-15
 | | WannaBe: I don't see/know how this is 50 moves, last capture occurred on move 89 by white... |
|
Dec-12-15
 | | Sally Simpson: FRom the press release.
"Topalov-Carlsen was a battle of attrition with Carlsen very nearly giving us another demonstration of how he can create something from nothing. With just rook, knight and three pawns each remaining, all on the same side of the board, Carlsen managed to tie the back marker up in knots. The spectators were puzzled as to why Carlsen decided to liquidate into a drawn endgame with rook and 3 pawns against rook and 2 pawns. Giri also demonstrated the drawing plan of Ra3-Ra6 pinning the e6 pawn. Afterwards, Carlsen revealed that he needed to avoid the 50 move rule and an interesting discussion ensued as to whether the rules need a tweak, particularly in games with increment. Carlsen was always making progress and he didn’t have enough moves to fully carry out his plans. Something for everyone to ponder after the tournament." Fiona Steil-Antoni,
Press Officer, London Classic. |
|
| Dec-12-15 | | scholes: between move 38 and 84 there was no pawn move or capture. If there is no 50 move rule, then carlsen will torture his opponents till they die or loose |
|
| Dec-13-15 | | Ulhumbrus: If the attack 13 a4 is going to lead only to a passed a pawn which Black is able to keep an alternative is the conventional development of Rad1 and Rfe1 as in the games Spassky vs Petrosian, 1969 and Polugaevsky vs Tal, 1969 |
|
| Dec-13-15 | | JoeBerylwood: So we should change the rules of chess to make it easier for Carlsen to win with his particular style? Is that a serious comment? |
|
Dec-13-15
 | | paulalbert: On the 50 move rule: Many years ago the 50 move rule was changed providing that in positions with theoretical forced wins that required more than 50 moves to accomplish, then if I remember correctly a 100 move rule went into effect. Since this was before table bases and computers, whether they properly identified such positions based on human analysis of course was always open to question. After some years, the rules reverted to just the straight 50 move rule based on captures and pawn advance tests. I don't remember whether this was a FIDE rule change o something just adopted by the USCF. Someone who wants to do the research or remembers more clearly than I might comment further. I doubt Magnus' position in this game would qualify, since I just assume with best play it is a draw, but I did not hear exactly what Magnus said. I regard the 50 move rule as perhaps arbitrary in a theoretical sense, but pragmatic, especially with the kind of time controls currently in effect. In the days of adjournments, maybe permitting games to go on for interminable maneuvering to allow a long forced win or some errors by one side leading to a decisive result might be advocated. |
|
Dec-13-15
 | | tamar: Despite its outcome, Carlsen looked energized, if frustrated after the game. He had seen a way to win the e pawn without exchanging knights. Whill this does not guarantee a win, the method he discovered, basically circling the board and returning for a concession no one else saw, moved him into a realm that only some engines could see. At the point he could see how he could arrange to win the pawn while keeping knights, the 50 move rule prevented him from carrying it out. |
|
| Dec-14-15 | | coolconundrum: I normally don't care to see draws but this long game is fascinating. |
|
| Dec-16-15 | | beenthere240: Has Carlsen shown his analysis? It would be intriguing. I think if someone can demonstrate a plan that takes more than 50 moves without a pawn move or capture it should be allowed -- providing it is not simply shuffling pieces and hoping for a blunder of a flag. Perhaps the player would be required to explain his idea to the director, who could then decide whether to waive the rule. It's scary to think of someone who can see that far ahead. |
|
| Dec-16-15 | | Petrosianic: It didn't take longer than 50 moves. He just didn't see it until the move count was too close to 50. |
|
| Dec-16-15 | | beenthere240: Well then, too bad for MC. |
|
Kibitzing
