|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 53 OF 53 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Nov-27-16 | | Alexandro: I know that winning is the most important no matter how, but the win of Karjakin was superior than Carlsen's because: it was with less moves, with the blacks and the position was an inevitable mate or promotion of a second queen! What a beautiful game was meantime Carlsen has shown talent and insistence in this game. |
|
| Nov-27-16 | | Ulhumbrus: < mistreaver: For me, it was very hard to understand why 56...Rhh7 was blunder, and why 56.. Nh6 was to be prefered. Consider the following positions: > If you look at the third position which you have given Black's king's rook on h8 has access to the square c8 via the back rank for the counter-attack ...Rc8. If that rook goes to h7 it can't go to the c file as its way is obstructed by the rook on e7. The rook on e7 can't go to the c file in order to make a counter-attack as it is tied to the defence of the e6 pawn, so the rook on the h file has to do it. So by playing 56...Rhh7 Black has deprived himself of the ability to play this rook to the c file for the counter-attack ...Rc8 |
|
| Nov-27-16 | | Atking: <mistreaver> <1 b5 cxb5 2 Rxb5 Ne3! and after Nc4 Black is not worse.> Are you sure of that? GM So seems of an opposite opinion in his comments on ChessBase. The winning process might be longer but still 3.Rd3 Nc4 4.f4 then step1 Ke2&R3b3 step2 Kd4&R3b4 step3 Ra4&a6 then Black plays b6 and Nxe6 RxN Kxd5 recovers the piece with a strong passed pawn on e5. |
|
| Nov-27-16 | | mistreaver: <Atking>
Nope, I am not sure, but I have analyzed the position quite a bit and haven't been able to find a plan for White against passive waiting for Black.
For instance, once you accomplish the ideal Rb5-Rb4-Nc5-Kd4 setup, Black can play Na3 and Nc2+. |
|
| Nov-27-16 | | Atking: <mistreaver> I see. Clever! Then what about the same process with the other Rook. I mean not Rb5&Rb4 but Rb3&Rb4 the threat still the same. The difference is now a5 could be taken, but then Ra3 b6 Nb3 Ka6 NxN bxN Rba4 Rc7 Rxa5+ Kb7 Ra7+ Kc8 Ra8+ Kd7 R3a7 I suppose in this line both black rooks on 7th rank and white King on d4 |
|
| Nov-27-16 | | mistreaver: <Atking> Firstly, Black has some nice tactical solution in this position.
For instance consider the following position:
click for larger view
Here there is the following sequence:
1...Nxa5 2 Ra3 b6 3 Nb3 Ka6!?
4 Ra4 Ra7!
click for larger view
And now 5 Nxa5 b5!!
And White doesn't have anything better but to bail out with 6 Nc6+ which is a draw. Furthermore, in the diagram below, I think White doesn't manage to place both his rooks on a file.
click for larger view1 ... Ne3! 2 Rb2 Nc4 and now if
3 R2b4 Na3! 4 Rb6 Nc4
And black should be equal |
|
| Nov-27-16 | | Atking: Thanks. No doubt you did a great work about the games of this World Championship <mistreaver> however I still think your conclusion is still incomplete. On my suggestion (Your first diagram but with white King on d4) 1...Nxa5 2.Ra3 b6 3.Nb3 Ka6 4.NxN bxN 5.Rba4 Rc7 6.Rxa5+ Kb7 7.Ra7+ Kc8 8.Ra8+ Kd7 9.R3a7. True your 5...Ra7 6.Kc5 Rac7+ 7.Kd6 Rge7 8.Rxa5+ Kb6 threatening mate. Black has no problem. Thus your improvement in this line 4.R4a4 Ra7 5.NxN b5 6.Nc6+ bxR but now 7.Kc5 Rad7 8.Rxa4+ Kb7 9.Ra7+ Kc8 10.Ra8+ Kb7 11.Rb8+ Kc7 12.Re8 my impression is White chance are still alive. Even on 12...d4 13.Nxd4 Rd5+ 14.Kc4 if e6 falls N+2p should be more efficient than the Rook. |
|
| Nov-27-16 | | cormier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRp... game 10 |
|
| Nov-28-16 | | Vladimir Zukhar: Interesting game there. |
|
| Dec-03-16 | | Ulhumbrus: GM Wesley So has this to say of the move 16...Ng6: <Perhaps a small inaccuracy. The knight was just fine on e7, to guard the d5 and f5 squares. In fact Black has on his agenda an active option here to try to seize the initiative: 16...d5 17 exd5 cxd5 18 Nxd5 Nxd5 19 Bxd5 Rd8 20 Be4 and now comes the pin 20...Bg4! And White has to sacrifice material to get rid of this dangerous pin> If So is right, it suggests that at this point Karjakin played too cautiously and so passed the advantage to Carlsen. Spassky said once of Petrosian < Petrosian's tactics were too passive and too cautious and this can be dangerous against an opponent who ventures something> Something like this could have happened here. Here is a link to the page: http://en.chessbase.com/post/newsbl... |
|
| Dec-10-16 | | jerseybob: <Domdaniel: Berlin d3. Sigh.> You'd prefer the boring 4.00? |
|
| Dec-10-16 | | N0B0DY: Of course, <N0B0DY> could have possibly predicted that. |
|
| Dec-31-16 | | Albion 1959: What a game! The game of Carlsen's chess playing life. With the Sword of Damocles hanging over his head - one mistake and his title has gone, he plays an endgame like this. Akin to the final game of the Lasker v Schlecter match of 1910, a superb technical achievement, masterful endgame technique under extreme pressure with the eyes of the chess world watching and scrutinising his every move: |
|
| Jan-13-17 | | visayanbraindoctor: <Albion 1959>
The Lasker vs Schlechter, 1910 game was highly tactical, with Schlecter coming out punching. He did not need to. <Bridegburner> and I made some notes to this game that you could peruse. I think its nature was quite different from this game. Excerpt:
<It seems that both Lasker and Schlechter were not playing solid safe chess even at this point. Note Lasker's 14. Ne5 and Schlecter's 14... Nh5 practically inviting a pawn storm.> On the other hand, this was a highly positional game from opening to ending. Carlsen ground Karjakin down with his immaculate endgame technique, something we have seen as the World Champion's most reliable and probably best weapon. At any rate, I'm happy that Carlsen won the tie breaks in the end. He was in the same situation as Anand in his tied match with Gelfand. For the second time in chess history we could have gotten a World Champion that did so without properly beating the previous one in a classical match (had Gelfand or Karjakin prevailed in the quick game tiebreakers). My thoughts regarding the quick game tiebreakers: 1. Ideally the Champion must have beaten the old one to be Champion. 2. I hate these FIDE quick game tie-breaks to decide the Classical Champion. My suggestion (which I have previously posted on other pages) if the World Championship match ends in a tie: Two additional classical games. The Challenger receives two Whites. If the match still ends in a tie, the Champion retains his Title. This way the Challenger must beat the Champion in a classical game (not a quick game) in order to grab the Title, and in so doing win the match outright. Now the above gives an advantage to the Champion. All he needs is a tied match, secured by drawing the two classical tiebreaker games, to retain his Title. Giving two successive Whites at the end of the match to the Challenger gives an advantage to the Challenger. So things even out.
We still retain the tradition of the Challenger beating the Champ to get the Title. The Challenger gets to do it in a classical game, not a quick game. |
|
| Jun-10-17 | | Albion 1959: To VisayanBraindoctor. I share your thoughts on tie breaks to decide the outcome of a world title match. These are akin to a penalty shoot-out in football matches, not really a fair way to decide who is the best. Maybe one suggestion is sudden death? For example, say after 24 games it's 12-12, then they keep going until the next decisive game. This is probably unfair as it adds more pressure to both players and also the organisers would not know when the match would end. If anything it is like Karpov v Kasparov in 1984-85, there could be a run of 18 consecutive draws ! Is this really what we want to see ? Maybe someone out there has suggestion ? |
|
Oct-04-17
 | | perfidious: <Geoff....(Jonathan) Rowson says some of the best chess advice he was ever given came from a an elderly 1400 player. I have the recollection except my elderly 'coach 'Johnny Marr' never reached 2000.> Further proof, if any were needed, that playing strength is not the sole determinant of how well one may perform in that role. In the 1990s, I was acquainted with a player who was probably no more than 1200 strength, yet had a remarkable ability to work with others in getting her ideas across to them--and did a far better job than this experienced player. |
|
| Oct-04-17 | | Ulhumbrus: 36...Nf7 seems inconsistent. Having prevented 36 Nf5 by 35...g6 he does not play 36...e5 but plays 36...Nf7 |
|
Oct-04-17
 | | keypusher: <Ulhumbrus: 36...Nf7 seems inconsistent. Having prevented 36 Nf5 by 35...g6 he does not play 36...e5 but plays 36...Nf7> He didn't play 36....e5 because it would have eventually lost a pawn. Also, moving your knight out of the corner square isn't exactly inexplicable. |
|
| Apr-03-20 | | Mazymetric: <Alexandro: the win of Karjakin was superior than Carlsen's because: it was with less moves, with the blacks and the position was an inevitable mate>
Karjakin won that game because of two blunders on Magnus' part. 51. Qe6 and 52. h4. In this game, Carlsen pulled out a win from seemingly drawn position. Are less moves a criteria for a good game? Would you say that Fischer 5th game against Taimanov was better than his 4th game? Because it was also with black pieces and less moves. |
|
Apr-03-20
 | | alexmagnus: <it was with less moves> I've never understood this notion that fewer moves mean a more convincing win. It's not true. At any level. Miniatures are not crushing wins. They are opening disasters. Winning in the opening, in the middlegame or in the endgame are equally valued in terms of their "crushingness". |
|
| Oct-27-20 | | Chesgambit: Horrible game |
|
Oct-28-20
 | | fredthebear: A collection of Game 10 video links.
This game becomes a battle over backward pawns (especially f2 after g3) and who can capitalize on weak squares not defended by pawns (especially f3 square after g3). Black is doing well initially, but misses a possible knight perpetual check. Eventually the queens are exchanged and the White rooks take over with assistance from an advanced White knight. The king must be an active piece in the endgame. The penetrator wins! Black is knocked back from the precipice of making chess history! * MatoJelic analyzes Game 10 - simple and good, well worth your time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGD... * TheChessPuzzler takes us on a leisurely Thanksgiving walk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROa... * Kevin from the popular chesswebsite.com, but nothing special here: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * Danny King explains the Middle Game: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * Highlights from GM Niclas Huschenbeth: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * Karjakin's worried manager comments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubK... * Longer Chess Network Video of Game 10:
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * kingscrusher is an FTB favorite: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * Daniel Rensch talks a bit fast, but best explains the alternative moves not played: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...
Who knew that tickling was allowed in chess?
* Eight-time Russia champion Peter Svidler reviews Game 10: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * Post Press Conference: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * This master pair gave live coverage, 6 1/2 hours: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... * This master pair gave live coverage, 5 1/2 hours: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?... |
|
| Oct-29-20 | | SChesshevsky: Looks like great players, like Carlsen and Karpov, aren't shy about improving the position of a piece that's misplaced or to give it more potential. They seem to do it quickly and efficiently. Notable is how Carlsen works the N to be a force in the game from 26. Rfe1. Karjakin goes another way by centralizing the king. Still principled but turns out to be less effective. Game might be a good example that thinking about just repositioning that awkward piece can often payoff as much as thinking about trying for some tactical trick. |
|
| Jan-22-21 | | Sally Simpson: ***
Game 46 in the Soltis book: 'Carlsen's 60 Memorable Games.' all the games are titled, this threads game is called: 'Most Watched'Soltis says it may be the most-watched chess game of all time adding. "Chessgames.com received 53 pages of readers posts within the first two days after it was played." People are going to come here and read all our comments...we are all going to be arrested and locked up in a home for the clinically disturbed. (they will go for Harry first.) My copy arrived and I'm reading the intros and other comments before I select which games I am going to play over. Review:
Good solid book, won't fall to bits when you bend the spine back, lots windows (white space to invite the reader in) not too heavy on the analysis.
first game dated 2003 - last game is from 2020.
Not played over a game yet but Soltis writes for the 99.9999% of us who not IM's or GM's so it will be OK. End of review. Difficult subject because Carlsen is Carlsen and he won't sit still to be pigeon-holed. I don't expect Soltis to reveal the mystery but I relate to his style and do expect him to make a better job of it than others before him who came armed with a computer, a thesaurus and an armchair degree in psychology. ---
For a few sad seconds I thought I could do one of those Game Collections things picking out all 60 games from the book and giving them their titles. Sanity prevailed. I'm hard up, not fed up.
*** |
|
Apr-23-22
 | | Fusilli: The insanely strong & flexible world champion delivered a 100% Karpov style victory here. Nice 2021 article on Calrsen's style:
https://www.chess.com/blog/ThummimS... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 53 OF 53 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
