click for larger view

<But why do they keep swapping that Knight on b6?

(Der...because a computer says so.) >

A. My SF10 at 33 ply/20 minutes picks 9.Nfe3 as best. Nxb6 is its second choice.

B. White plays Nxb6 there because he wants to keep his star KB (9.Bb3 Nd4).

C. Since Black has moved his knight three times, Dr. Tarrasch would have nothing to say about Nxb6.

Now, a petition. Since you know nothing about chess engines and will not learn, please just shut up about them, OK?

<Carlsen will look calm but inside he will be fuming. (job done).>

It's like Magnus stole the infinity gauntlet from Thanos and is wiping the floor with the top players on the FIDE list.

1) -0.60 (35 ply) 26.Qxb7 g5 27.Qf3 g4 28.Qe2 f3 29.gxf3 gxf3 30.Qxe3 Rxe3 31.Rxe3 c4 32.Bxc4 Qc5 33.Re8+ Kg7 34.Kf1 Kh6 35.Re4 Qf5 36.Re3 Qg5 37.Rexf3 Rxf3 38.Rxf3 Qc1+ 39.Kg2 Qxb2+ 40.Rf2 Qxc3 41.a4 Qg7+ 42.Kf3 Qa1 43.Bb5 Kg5 44.Rg2+ Kf5 45.Rf2 Qd1+ 46.Ke3+ Ke6 47.Bc4+ Ke5 48.Re2 Qc1+ 49.Kf2+ Kd4 50.Re4+ Kc3 51.h4 Qd1 52.Re6 Qd2+ 53.Kg3

Hi K.P. (part I)

<Since you know nothing about chess engines and will not learn...>

We (sic) together, know more about human v human chess than any computer ever will.

<My SF10 at 33 ply/20 minutes picks 9.Nfe3 as best.>

You must know by now I've never been impressed with anything a computer vomits up. Give me chess talk, not gobbledygook.

My old chess brain told me in 5 seconds that 9.Nfe3 was better. I've seen some of your non-engines posts, you do not need a computer to tell you Nfe3 is a better move.

<White plays Nxb6 there because he wants to keep his star KB>

Now I'm thinking you are in posting in anger about something else I have written. (what ever it was it was a joke) because that is not quite correct chess wise. Don't argue with me on this, I have you down as a chess player and I hate being wrong.

Go through the game again and see 'the star KB's influence on the game.

It allowed Black a d5 tempo, crawled back to a2 and never moved or threatened anything again.

These positions are Knight positions why do you think Carlsen chopped Bishops. His Knight ran amok, the 'star KB' was a big pawn onlooker.

And would Black take on c4. The d3 pawn takes back on c4 and we have this.

click for larger view

R Soltanici vs C Sinan Tezok, 2006

click for larger view

Black took on c4 with a Knight. White ganged up on the backward d6 pawn on an open file, won it and the game.

Of course chess is not that simple, one backward pawn on an open file does always lose but it needs watching. It is not so much losing the pawn, but if d6 falls what ever ends up on that square is right in your guts. (not to mention c5 and e5 now hang.)

Kasparov in a similar set up never chopped the b6 Knight and was willing to allow Nxc4.

click for larger view

White castled. Kasparov vs Radjabov, 2004 and Black never took on c4.

And why they are taking on b6 is beyond me. Your SF10 after a 20 minutes warming up it's chips seems to agree. My thoughts there were a stronger computer (sorry to insult your SF10 there K.P.) these lads have sees some non-human line 30 moves deep and prefers it over Ne3.

Either that or these players are stuck in the Bishops better Knights rut and 'look, Black has a double pawn.' which I do not believe for one moment. Svidler is perfectly capable of thinking outside that box.

and there is more..

Hi K.P. (part II)

<Yes, I'm sure Carlsen will be furious about being handed a won game six moves in.>

Carlsen is a systems player, he puts his own wee spin on openings. He needs knocking out of his stride. I'd have no chance of upsetting him positionally so it would have to be tactics (play to your strength) and it would have to be early on.

That position. (White to play)

click for larger view

I can force on Carlsen.

I'd get up from the board and wander about for 20 minutes just to let it go around the planet on the live sites. Can you imagine the posts. Carlsen has a good imagination, he could. I'd let him stew for a while.

All over the world people would be running out of the net-cafes to stop the traffic and passersby to tell them White has played Bc4, Qh5 and Qxf7+ against Carlsen.

Then I'd confidently sit down, 'accidentally' knock the Norwegian flag off the table, not pick it up and offer a draw. The controller would pick up the flag and say too early for a draw. I would say 'Heldig Deg' (Norwegian for 'Lucky You')

He would blow a gasket. It would be like Karpov v Miles 1980 (The 1...a6 game) all over again. (probably the same result - a Black win but I'd win the after match interview. They would have trouble shutting me up - which reminds me...)

<please just shut up.>

Charming. And I thought I was your friend.

(don't apologise mate, water off the proverbial ducks back.)

1) -0.60 (35 ply) 26.Qxb7 g5 27.Qf3 g4 28.Qe2 f3 29.gxf3 gxf3 30.Qxe3 Rxe3 31.Rxe3 c4 32.Bxc4 Qc5 33.Re8+ Kg7 34.Kf1 Kh6 35.Re4 Qf5 36.Re3 Qg5 37.Rexf3 Rxf3 38.Rxf3 Qc1+ 39.Kg2 Qxb2+ 40.Rf2 Qxc3 41.a4 Qg7+ 42.Kf3 Qa1 43.Bb5 Kg5 44.Rg2+ Kf5 45.Rf2 Qd1+ 46.Ke3+ Ke6 47.Bc4+ Ke5 48.Re2 Qc1+ 49.Kf2+ Kd4 50.Re4+ Kc3 51.h4 Qd1 52.Re6 Qd2+ 53.Kg3>

I was thinking exactly the same thing during the game.

<My old chess brain told me in 5 seconds that 9.Nfe3 was better. I've seen some of your non-engines posts, you do not need a computer to tell you Nfe3 is a better move.>

Exactly right. This is what I wrote during the game, shortly after Svidler had played 9.Nxb6:

<Count Wedgemore: Looking at the Opening Explorer, I am surprised to see that 9.Nxb6 is always played (as in this game). I think 9.Nfe3 is at least as good, or better. With 9.Nxb6, Black gets to play 9...axb6, and this doubling of pawns does not look at all bad for Black, quite the contrary. The doubled pawns on the b-file are not weak and Black can often make good use of his semi-open a-file if he at some point starts to engage in some aggressive maneuvers on the queenside.>

Svidler vs Carlsen, 2019 (kibitz #28)

So I'm with you on this, Geoff. And like you, I'm a bit bewildered by <keypusher>'s slightly confusing post regarding this move.

<<My SF10 at 33 ply/20 minutes picks 9.Nfe3 as best.>

You must know by now I've never been impressed with anything a computer vomits up. Give me chess talk, not gobbledygook.

My old chess brain told me in 5 seconds that 9.Nfe3 was better. I've seen some of your non-engines posts, you do not need a computer to tell you Nfe3 is a better move.>

9.Nfe3 was my first choice too, and I don't need a diagram to see its virtues. I gave the computer line just to show that your comment

<But why do they keep swapping that Knight on b6? (Der...because a computer says so.) >

...was just as as smug and moronic as every comment you make in which the word "computer" appears. Since you are not a complete idiot otherwise, you would do better to avoid the subject of computers completely.

<Count Wedgemore> Since 9.Nxb6 is preferred by grandmasters, and 9.Nfe3 is preferred by you, me, and Sally, none of whom are grandmasters, congratulations on our superiority in judgment over the likes of Leko and Svidler is...audacious, let's say.

Hi K.P.

I enjoy being smug, moronic (you missed out ill informed) v computers. My role here as grumpy ole luddite man is established. Somebody has to do it else you will all turn into drones. I am the lone voice of humanity howling in the wind. I may be the last one left.

And have I not been correct these past years by saying Fritz, Stockfish etc were all a load crap because along has come Alpha and it is kicking their wired up butts back to the stone age.

All pre-Alpha computer gunk should be scrubbed from the site. It was worthless then and it's even more worthless and outdated now.

Alpha is not the done deal yet but as I said years ago, one day they will have a computer that understands human - human chess and human limitations then the fun really will begin.

Regarding Leko and Svidler... Interesting that you picked two players who seem to spend more time in the commentary box than at the board.

Don't underestimate you, me and the Count. Our 'audacious' innate chess eye is telling us it's wrong.

Are we not allowed to disagree with a G.M's choice of move. Are they always right? What then is the point of a chess thread to a game.

Is it solely for people to post computers evals and not have their own thoughts.

I do not like it, where did it come from, why do some of them keep doing it. It, to me, my opinion, has the unhealthy whiff of silicon all over it...therefore...der...a computer. I blame computers for everything. It's not bulling an innate object, it has plenty of converted drones to stick up for it.

I may be wrong, (as I think you are for saying: <White plays Nxb6 there because he wants to keep his star KB> Your SF10 likes Nfe3 - so do I but for probably different reasons. I got brought up on Tarrasch. SF10 was programmed by some nerd who most likely thinks Tarrasch is an infliction road builders get (Tar Rash...gedditt?...Tarrasch....Tar - Rash...you know sometimes my wit surprises even me!)

Statistically it is suffering as well. Though we only have 6 games on here. Two losses and four draws. GM's as White should be getting more than that. It is not the best move to play in that position.

Saying Carlsen is a 'Systems Player' was not meant as an insult. It's how I see it. Again an opinion. (though the whole piece is a joke...knocking over a Norwegian flag etc..lighten up.)

He is not an opening expert in any given opening (say like an Ulhmann is in the French) he is universal and as he himself said:

"I don't play any orthodox openings. I prefer to give mainstream openings my own spin."

Which to me anyway is what a systems player does. Their own wee pet lines against anything and hard to pin down a style.

Sorry if you saw that as insult and sorry for not explaining myself better on that one.

---

"... an ENORMOUS amount of utter crap,...
"There is too much junk on this site as it is."

I agree but at least my junk is chess related.

Maybe not; my views on the topic are well known, if I am less vocal than your good self. It will be remembered that I seconded your remarks directed to <AJ> some years back, on the lines of: 'you're a good player--shut that dang thing off!' He is and you were, I believe, correct.

<As Bruenor pointed out, it was 27.Rfe2 that really made things hopeless>

I really should put you on ignore, because you keep getting stupider and stupider on this page.

Your latest is off the charts idiocy.

<All pre-Alpha computer gunk should be scrubbed from the site. It was worthless then and it's even more worthless and outdated now.>

By the same token, we should ignore every annotation by Karpov, because Kasparov was stronger.

Hi K.P.

"we should ignore every annotation by Karpov, because Kasparov was stronger."

Now it's you that being silly.

Inside Karpov's notes will be his thoughts, his fears, he reasoning.

Even in 100 years from now we can still learn from what Karpov says and fully understand what he is saying. There maybe be tactical errors in his notes to the moves, that is for the enquiring mind to dig out and such a task can be very rewarding, but his own thoughts and background on any position will be very beneficial.

Warts and an all I'd take Karpov or even the notes, thoughts, fears and reasoning of a 1400 player over...

19...g6 20.Bc2 Nd4 21.Bd3 Rd8 22.c5 cxd5 23.Bxd6 Rxd6 24.cxd6 Be6 25.Rc1 Rd8 26.Rc7 Rxd6 27.Rxb7 Rc6 28.f3 Kg7 29.Kf2 Nf5 30.a4 Nd6 31.Rb8 a5 32.Ke3 Rc1 33.Ra8 Rc6 34.Rb8 Rc1 -0.45

What good is that to anybody? A non-player could have copied and pasted that.

Computer evals that end in mate we keep. They cannot get that wrong, even though they tend to drag out any mate with pointless moves to prevent it being played quicker. The rest needs wiping. (don't lose sleep about it - it won't happen.)

You cannot put me on ignore, I'm unignorable and anyway you yourself said I'm nice.

<Magnus Carlsen will target his own all-time performance record when the world champion starts the Altibox Norway elite event on home soil at Stavanger on 4 June. The 28-year-old has just triumphed in three major tournaments in a row, triggering a debate on whether he, Bobby Fischer or Garry Kasparov is the greatest of all time.

Just as he did at Wijk in January and at Shamkir in early April, Carlsen swept the closing rounds of the Grenke Classic in Germany last week, winning his final four games. Leading scores were Carlsen 7.5/9, Fabiano Caruana (US) 6, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave (France) and Arkadij Naiditsch (Azerbaijan) 5.

Carlsen’s defeated rivals were left wondering what had hit them, and the commentator called it “scary” when Levon Aronian’s apparently level position fell apart. Fischer and Kasparov in their pomp both radiated a hungry energy at the board, and Jonathan Speelman once described the experience of playing the Russian as like being “bombarded with thought waves”.

Carlsen has a calmer presence, and the pressure on the opponent comes more with his universal style. He can majestically sweep through hesitant defence with flowing attacks, he can keep control, probe and induce errors, or he can grind out a marathon endgame. The psychological pressure can still affect his opponent, such as Vachier-Lagrave offering a pawn unsoundly and the eight-time Russian champion Peter Svidler making “difficult to explain” mistakes.

After Grenke, Carlsen’s live rating is 2875, seven points short of his official 2014 peak and 14 shy of the unofficial daily calculation on 2700chess.com. He could then try to reach a round 2900, which he used to think impossible but which he now, after his 2019 winning streak, refers to as “at least a half-attainable dream”.

Thus far his overall 2019 performance in classical chess is 16 wins, 15 draws, and no defeats. His tournament performance rating with the white pieces is over 3000. How does he explain this prolonged burst of creative form? “It helps me that I still have ideas and concepts from the world championship. I feel well in general. The conditions are there, but I never dreamed it would be this good.”

Carlsen will be in action again as early as Wednesday, when the 2019 Grand Chess Tour kicks off with rapid and blitz at Abidjan, Ivory Coast. He will be the first reigning world champion ever to compete in Africa, where his main rivals over 27 speed games are headed by the US champion and specialist in fast chess, Hikaru Nakamura, and by China’s world No 3, Ding Liren.

Who is now the all-time No 1, Fischer, Kasparov, or Carlsen? Direct comparison from different eras is hard, since Carlsen has the benefit of training with very strong computers and with the accumulated knowledge of his predecessors. Carlsen has the highest all-time rating, 32 points above Kasparov’s peak and 99 above Fischer’s, but the pool of players rated above 2700 who provide the required highly-rated opposition is now much bigger.

Kasparov had most consecutive tournament victories (15) and most consecutive elite victories (10). He was world champion for 16 years, which Carlsen would need another decade at the top to equal. His career percentage is higher than Carlsen’s, but the Russian was kept under wraps until he was 15 and already grandmaster strength, while Carlsen’s international career began at age 10.

Carlsen himself has said that Peak Kasparov vs Peak Carlsen would be very close, and that he thought every game would go down to the wire. The debate will continue.>

Hi Perfidious,

<"Maybe not; my views on the topic are well known, if I am less vocal than your good self.">

Together we are the last two from 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers.'

The thing I dislike most about chess computers is they are cocksure they will get the best reply and if a player makes a good move that is not Arghhh...ugh...ouch...gulp..

---

Chess computers are the future of chess without them the game would die. Embrace them.

---

(they have got me perfidious, you are on your own...keep off this site, they will hunt you down ...head for the hills.)