|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Dec-04-21 | | cehertan: Why on earth were they still playing with rook and 3 per side?? Zeitnot? |
|
| Dec-04-21 | | cehertan: I believe Magnus would play the Marshall if given the chance. The guy has guts to spare, and Caruana recently called him the best prepared player in the world. He is probably still also the best tactician in the world, so poking the bear can easily lead to running for your life. |
|
| Dec-04-21 | | metatron2: It's sad to see a player like Nepo unable to play anything other then anti-Marshal Ruy-Lopez in this match. He was so proud of his serious and intensive preparations, and all that he prepared there against 1.e4 e5 was a single opening line ??! no fallback in case Carlsen will be well prepared (as it seems to be the case)? That is so pathetic. He just throws a way his white games by giving Carlsen easy draws, even now, when he <has to win>. Just play something else Nepo, for crying out loud. |
|
Dec-04-21
 | | offramp: 
click for larger view
Did you know that White has the slight advantage? He has the romestest file. |
|
Dec-04-21
 | | Dionysius1: Haha <An Englishman>. Yes, it looks like OCD, this tendency to sacrifice a pawn to unstable the position. Heaven forfend - is Carlsen a one trick pony? Or they might be Ali-style rope-a-dope tactics.
All boxing analogies are null and void unless I make them :-)) |
|
| Dec-04-21 | | Ulhumbrus: The computer evaluations and analysis suggest that if 17 d4 exposes White's e4 pawn to attack and lets the advantage slip, the move which Carlsen has played at least once, namely, 17 Bc2! keeping the bishop and covering the e4 pawn is the way to keep some advantage |
|
| Dec-04-21 | | Albertan: This game has been analyzed by GM Anish Giri here: https://en.chessbase.com/post/world... Other articles about Game 7 are:
(1)Carlsen-Nepo 7:Magnus leads at halfway:
https://chess24.com/en/read/news/ca... (2)Another draw is a win for Magnus Carlsen:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature... Vidéos about Game 7 are:
(1)The press conference after Game 7:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5-...
(2)Calm after the storm Recap of Game 7 by GM Alejandro Ramirez: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dI... |
|
| Dec-04-21 | | Albertan: Confident Carlsen Equalizes Easily in FIDE World Chess Championship Game 7: GM Sam Shankland analyzes this game at:
https://www.chess.com/news/view/fid... |
|
| Dec-04-21 | | SChesshevsky: <... Problem is the Marshall is quite sound! Kasparov almost completely avoided 8.c3 (two examples in the database, one against a computer) because of it.> Think Nepo might have to bite the bullet and allow a Marshall with 8. c3. Seems a lot of the Anti-Marshall is that it moves toward a regular closed Ruy idea that white says my B's are clearly better and I can try to aim them to pressure the kingside and my N's can often get positioned there quicker too. That with Q possibilities over there and being very solid in general just might give real attacking chances. Can see why Kasparov would prefer this idea versus just up a pawn but giving black all the initiative. Problem now, and maybe for awhile, is that Black has come up with plans that go to nullify white's B's. Often trading off the LSB and making his DSB useful by positioning it best to defend kingside. Sometimes just dropping it back to f8. Idea of taking off the LSB is blatant in the 8.h3 Na5 line. Might eliminate any attacking ideas early at the cost of less than a pawn. In the 8. a4 lines, maybe white still has some opportunities. But probably not on the kingside. Seems black is able to exchange enough to hinder any direct attacks but maybe at the cost of giving up something somewhere. Kasparov vs Grischuk, 2002 Don't know? Is it worth banging one's head with 8. a4 and hoping to get and exploit a small to medium advantage vs. the World Champ and preparation? Or with 8.c3 d5, clearly getting a pawn with some potential possibilities down the road. But only if one can adequately dodge black's undeniable initiative and years of theory? |
|
Dec-04-21
 | | moronovich: If I were in camp Nepo, I would advice him to consider going 1.d4 in the next game. |
|
Dec-04-21
 | | Diademas: <moronovich: If I were in camp Nepo, I would advice him to consider going 1.d4 in the next game.> Looks like Nepo's preparations with white are in variations of Spanish. Don't know if changing that on a days notice is the way to success. How is life treating you down there in Copenhagen my friend? Are you enjoying the games?
I'm loving every minute of this epic match! |
|
| Dec-05-21 | | optimal play: I like the Ruy Lopez but Nepo isn't having any success with it against Magnus so he'll need to come up with something else. Nepo probably didn't want to take any great risks this game since to lose two straight would virtually end his campaign. |
|
| Dec-05-21 | | The Kings Domain: Hopefully another calm before a storm. |
|
| Dec-05-21 | | saturn2: <Caruana recently called him the best prepared player in the world> Others say Carlson is not too ambitious in openings, often chooses mediocre ones and overplays the opponents later. For this reason he is compared to Lasker. |
|
| Dec-05-21 | | 0ZeR0: <saturn2>
How can a player who regularly sacrifices pawns in the opening be considered “not too ambitious?” I think Carlsen’s opening preparation has greatly improved since he became the best player in the world around a decade ago. His versatility and creativity (in the openings) speak for themselves and make him one of the best prepared players in the world. |
|
| Dec-05-21 | | saturn2: ?! pawn sacrifices in the opening can be part of the stretegy to confuse the opponent and speculate he does not find the right answer under limited time. Carlson wants to 'play' with the opponent and not discuss opening theory OTB. I remember a Carlson Caruana blitz when as white he played 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Bxc6 dxc6
5. Nxe5 ?! which every opening book says is bad for white. Being best prepared player simply does not fit to being compared with Lasker. |
|
| Dec-05-21 | | Ulhumbrus: Capablanca said that it was a myth that Lasker had a poor knowledge of the openings and that the fact was that Lasker had an excellent knowledge of the openings, but freely disagreed with what passed for theory. Capablanca said that Lasker knew what he wanted from the openings, but his goals were not often the goals of the other masters. |
|
Dec-05-21
| | moronovich: Thanks <Diademas> ! Yes i am also enjoying every minute of the games...Especially with the excellent coverage from Anand and Anna.A very pleasant couple. Hope you are doing well and the the Christmas Month may bring good times to you, your friends and family. Cheers ! |
|
| Dec-05-21 | | 0ZeR0: <saturn2>
<Ulhumbrus: Capablanca said that it was a myth that Lasker had a poor knowledge of the openings and that the fact was that Lasker had an excellent knowledge of the openings, but freely disagreed with what passed for theory. Capablanca said that Lasker knew what he wanted from the openings, but his goals were not often the goals of the other masters.> And if you play through Lasker’s games today I feel one is often struck by his unique handling of the opening(s) which appears ahead of its time in a lot of respects. This would seem to validate Capablanca’s views (not that I would be inclined to disagree with him anyway). This description of creativity in the opening would seem to align Carlsen with a comparison of Lasker. Not to mention all their other outstanding qualities such as their abilities to find imbalances in the middlegame, endgame technique, and fighting spirit. |
|
Dec-05-21
 | | Clement Fraud: Nepomniachtchi has started performing heroically with the black pieces (for which I tip my hat to him), but with the white ones he is failing to secure any advantages. In this game, the journey of Nepo's Queen-Knight was weak and unimaginative (Nc1-c3-d5xf6); this only served to improve Black's position. The saddest part of all, from Nepo's point of view, is that (generally with the black pieces) Carlsen doesn't play the 1.e4 e5 lines particularly well; this game versus Kramnik is a beautiful demonstration.
Kramnik vs Carlsen, 2017 |
|
| Dec-06-21 | | 0ZeR0: <Clement Fraud> That’s a wonderful game that somehow I hadn’t seen before. Thanks for sharing. |
|
Dec-06-21
 | | PawnSac: < Ulhumbrus: Capablanca said .. > that sounds both reasonable and believable.
Interesting comment thank you! |
|
| Dec-06-21 | | saturn2: I understand this mentioned creativity of Lasker and Carlson not as an attempt to discover something objectivly better but as a provocation like saying: I know what I do is not the best but you are too dumb to show why. |
|
Dec-06-21
| | Clement Fraud: <0ZeR0> Many thanks to you - a great game indeed! |
|
| Dec-06-21 | | Albertan: GM Caruana,GM Hess and IM Rensch recap this game in a video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWZ... |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 5 OF 5 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
