chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
Wesley So vs Magnus Carlsen
PRO Chess League (Knock-Out) (2017) (rapid), chess.com INT, rd 5, Mar-26
Bogo-Indian Defense: Wade-Smyslov Variation (E11)  ·  0-1

ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 12 times; par: 58 [what's this?]

Get this game explained with Decode Chess
explore this opening
find similar games 135 more So/Carlsen games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: If you do not want to read posts by a certain member, put them on your ignore list.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  Later Kibitzing>
May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: You're full of crap, <pulo y gata>.

There was a time when Kasparov held an edge over Shirov, Shirov held an edge over Kramnik, and Kramnik held an edge over Kasparov. Who was the best player then?

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  chancho: Shirov holds an edge over Kramnik?

search "shirov v kramnik"

Kasparov held an edge over Shirov?

search "kasparov v shirov"

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: Come on <piggy>, read. It says "There was a time..."

And there was, around the time Kramnik defeated Kasparov in the WC match.

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  chancho: There was a time, that Shirov could not beat Kasparov, and there is a time where that has not changed.
May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: But <piggy>, I was just pointing out that there can be a triangle where A beats B, B beats C, and C beats A. The idea that head-to-head score absolutely determines who is the better player is just ridiculous.
May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  wordfunph: Hmmmn. But I think it's the better of two players. Not the best of all.
May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: That makes no sense.

You're saying then that yes, Gulko is the better player between him and Kasparov, but Kasparov may be the best of all?

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <keypusher:

You may wish to change your handle to <Dunning-Kruger>.>

Ouch, that was harsh.

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <saffuna> The idea that head-to-head score absolutely determines who is the better player is just ridiculous.>

Then why do you think that world championships are traditionally decided by a head-to-head match? That and the expected higher revenues for a world title match instead of a tournament of course.

Granted, all that proves is which player was better <at that particular point in time>, upsets are always possible. It is also possible that one player has an Indian Sign over another player, meaning that one player has a lopsided winning percentage against another player, even though their playing strengths are comparable or even when the player with the lopsided winning percentage is the weaker player overall.

If you want to know who is the best player overall, based on the most number of games played against the largest number of different opponents, one need look no further than the players' FIDE ratings. But that would certainly be boring, wouldn't it?

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<tuttifrutty> "Twas a gift to Magnus after Wesley's team clinch the title.>

I didn't know that So had such a generous nature and was such a nice guy. Either that or was he just lazy or lacking a fighting spirit after his team won the title? Did So just decide to roll over and play dead? Or did he think that he had no chance against Carlsen and therefore why bother putting out a strong effort?

A world champion must have a killer instinct. Lack that and that person will never reach the top. If So lacks such an instinct, he must develop one. We all know where nice guys finish.

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: Because at the point of a World Championship match both have earned their right to play in that match.

If it grants who's the better player at that particular point in time, meaning that particular day or during that particular tournament, I will grant that.

But better player just because he has a better head-to-head, come on...

Given a couple of hours I could come up with a dozen triangles among GMs where A has a plus against B, B has a plus against C, and C has a plus against A.

It's also possible one player simply has a style that an overall-superior player cannot handle, the way Nadal used to beat Federer simply because Federer could not handle the high-bouncing shot (which only Nadal had) to his backhand.

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: Vasily Smyslov beat Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian 6 to 3, with 25 draws.

Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian beat Mikhail Botvinnik 7 to 4, with 21 draws.

Mikhail Botvinnik beat Vasily Smyslov 29 to 24, with 52 draws.

Minimum 32 games between opponents.

Who's the best player?

Must admit, NOT as easy to find as I had thought!

May-13-17  Hunter16: Head-to-head records don't necessarily determine the better player unless they're crushing.
May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<saffuna> Given a couple of hours I could come up with a dozen triangles among GMs where A has a plus against B, B has a plus against C, and C has a plus against A.>

Don’t bother. Given the large number of similar triangles I doubt that it would take you (or anyone else) a couple of hours. And, as you said, what would that prove?

That's why I made the qualifier <at that particular point in time>. That's all that a particular match or tournament proves. And even that might be questionable since the typically relatively small number of games probably invalidates the statistical significance of the results. But, other than ratings, what <objective> measure might you suggest?

Funny that you mentioned style. To that in a WCC match I might add health (Tal - Botvinnik World Championship Return Match (1961)), endurance (or lack of) (Karpov - Kasparov World Championship Match (1985)), and possibly other factors.

By coincidence, just today I was looking into Carlsen's record against Nakamura in classical time control games. From 2005 through 2016 it stands 12-1 Carlsen with 20 draws. Carlsen's and Nakamura's average rating during those games were 2823 and 2761 for an average rating difference of 61 points. This gives an expected winning percentage for Carlsen of 58.6% compared to his actual winning percentage of 66.7%. Perhaps that qualifies as Carlsen having an Indian Sign on Nakamura, an advantageous style, a psychological advantage, or who knows what else. Or perhaps it's just chance, although 30 games is usually enough to consider the results to be statistically significant.

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<Hunter16> Head-to-head records don't necessarily determine the better player unless they're crushing.>

And even if the head-to-head records are crushing there might be extenuating circumstances;, see my response to <saffuna> above. For example, if Carlsen and I were to play a match and he was unconscious during the entire match, I think that my results against him would be "crushing". OK, maybe I might be able to draw the match under those circumstances, or at least not lose too badly.

May-13-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <That's why I made the qualifier <at that particular point in time>. That's all that a particular match or tournament proves. >

I agree entirely. Karpov was certainly the world's best player in February 1994.

May-14-17  tuttifrutty: <So wasnt laughing I can assure you after that loss.>

Yes he was...he was laughing all the way to the bank to cash in his first place paycheck. On the other hand, Magnus efforts were null and void...'twas game over...a consolation prize if you will.

<I didn't know that So had such a generous nature and was such a nice guy.>

You are misinformed...Wes is a very nice guy...he allowed Magnus to smooch on his enormous talent by paying Wes expenses in exchange for a training session....sometime ago. If Wes wasn't as generous as he can be, would you think he will accept the deal? You tell me.

<A world champion must have a killer instinct.>

Is your name Stevie Wonder? Wes has more than it takes to be a champion. But don't take my word for it...ask Kaspy...he carries more weight than everybody else on this site combined.

Lookie here:

https://chess24.com/en/read/news/ka...

< We all know where nice guys finish.>

Yes we know, nice guy finish first...unless you are still living in the stone age.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rr6...

May-14-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: < Hunter16: Head-to-head records don't necessarily determine the better player unless they're crushing.>

I agree with this.

Trouble is, at what point is the disparity "crushing"?

May-14-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  chancho: A player who is the most successful among his contemporaries in terms of tournament wins and championship defenses is the one who can and should be argued as the best of the lot.

Wesley So has shown he is elite material and he has been winning quite a bit on the chess circuit.

But, he still has a lot to prove.

Carlsen has already proven himself in his career and definitely is the one to beat for bragging rights by anyone who aspires to take his place on the throne.

The head to head can sometimes be a reliable barometer, but in other occasions not so much.

One only has to look back at how Capablanca dominated Alekhine but lost in their 1927 match.

Or Fischer who was owned by Spassky until they met in 1972 for their world championship match.

Maybe Wesley So can do something similar in a future match with Carlsen.

But until then, Carlsen is da man.

May-20-17  The Boomerang: "Yes he was...he was laughing all the way to the bank to cash in his first place paycheck. On the other hand, Magnus efforts were null and void...'twas game over...a consolation prize if you will."

Null and void lolololol....why dont you ask your hero if it was null and void on the So page. Obviously their rivalry is much bigger then some small cheque...

I mean team competition in an individual game can only show so much.

Its a battle against the best players in the world.....to me their encounter was more important than the whole league.

May-20-17  The Boomerang: "Trouble is, at what point is the disparity "crushing"?"

I would say when it hits 5-0 or 5-1 onwards.

Kasparov's 40-0 Over Gelfand, Adams, Shirov was crushing!!!!

May-20-17  epistle: I say it is crushing when you have a crush on your opponent, is always sexually agitated whenever you play against him, so you never win. That is crushing.
Jul-06-17  The Boomerang: "You're saying then that yes, Gulko is the better player between him and Kasparov, but Kasparov may be the best of all?"

Why point out thr anomaly with Kasparov's head to head to argue your case?

If a match was orgsnised between Gulko and Kasparov at the time of those losses, and you had to bet yout family's life on it who would the bet be on?

Head to heas is a very good indicator of who is stronger, you dont have to searxh for an anomaly to try and probe otherwise.

Jul-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  saffuna: <If a match was orgsnised between Gulko and Kasparov at the time of those losses, and you had to bet yout family's life on it who would the bet be on?>

Kasparov.

I would NOT use head to head as my primary indicator.

Jul-06-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <Pulo y Gata: If the question is who is better between the two of them, the head-to-head score is always the answer....>

This is clearly rubbish.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 3)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 3 OF 3 ·  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.

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 Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: RAPID. 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?]
A3: Bogo, Wade-Smyslov Variation
from Bogo-Indian Defense-Black wins by imsighked2
Tactical themes (Rook)
by lomez
#79 So u blundered ur queen
from So's failures by Nina Myers
By Heart GoD
from d4 : Bogo Indian Defense : Wade Symslov by ISeth
MKD's Favourite Games
by MKD
rpd
from 02_QR endgames II by whiteshark

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 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC