|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 48 OF 194 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| May-16-12 | | Lambda: <People find ways to whine about almost anything. I remember during the last WCC when there was so much tension and fighting chess, some people were complaining that the game were not "high quality" (whatever that means) and that players were making mistakes.> To be fair, that's probably different people complaining. |
|
| May-16-12 | | malathiswami: Solskytz: Actually, your suggestion of playing armageddon, then blitz, then rapid, then classical, and using them as tiebreaks in reverse order, is genuinely brilliant! It will lead to a very interesting build up to the match, and also to very tough tussles at each stage, since the person who lost the tiebreak at the previous stage will try hard to reverse it in their favour. And at no stage will both people be merely trying to achieve equality, one or the other will be motivated to take risks. And even in the classical match, one or the other is always behind... Hope someone sees your suggestion and adopts it (you can try sending it to chessbase or some such site, where it will be seen by lots of people). Would be much *more* useful for the candidates matches. Here's a tip: avoid posting in all caps, looks bad on a forum. If you want to quote when responding, can enclose the other person's text in delimiters, like this: >>> a truly brilliant original idea from your truly <<< By the way, I like your being objective though you strongly support Gelfand! May the best player win :-) |
|
| May-16-12 | | pubaer: As long as kramnik is not playing the wc match, it is fine by me.
Ok there is one exception, his match against anand where he got his a$$ kicked. |
|
| May-16-12 | | drkodos: chess is rapidly approaching its death as a meaningful intellectual pursuit |
|
| May-16-12 | | TheMacMan: theres a HUGE difference between being rated #1 and being world champion, world champion is the best match player so far carlsen has yet to prove he is a great match player, something anand has proved... even though now he is producing boring draws in current WC hes still the world champion |
|
| May-16-12 | | solskytz: <Malathiswami>
Thank you :-] you have understood my intention perfectly This is EXACTLY what I had in mind :-]
- - - -
I thought about this idea last year, as the candidates matches were played, and sometimes decided by the tie-breaks - but in the wrong order :-] I posted my suggestion on these pages already back then - but didn't get a response on that... so - here, again :-] |
|
| May-16-12 | | solskytz: <Malathiswami>
Now that I've read the rest of your post - so well, yeah you're right about the quote marks and not using block letters... hope I remember it next time I answer somebody :-] and thanks for appreciating my cool headedness and objectivity :-] |
|
| May-16-12 | | drkodos: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... |
|
| May-16-12 | | drkodos: " ...problem is that computers are killing the game. They have already killed correspondence chess, in all but name, and now classical chess is heading down the same twilight path to oblivion. The computer is now so powerful, that it becomes impossible to out-prepare another top player in the opening. In pre-computer days, Kasparov could analyse so much better than the other top GMs that he could routinely uncork novelties that refuted entire opening variations. Nowadays, though, that is just impossible – everybody is analysing the same opening lines, using the same powerful computers and programs. As a result, everybody is coming to the board, with much the same opening preparation, with the result that nobody can get a serious opening advantage any more." ~ Steve Giddens |
|
| May-16-12 | | drkodos: " classical chess is in its last days."
~ Giddens |
|
May-16-12
 | | FSR: The match will probably come down to who has Black, and thus draw odds, in the Armageddon game after all the other games have been drawn. That player will hold the draw and thus win the match. |
|
| May-16-12 | | NGambit: <solskytz, Malathiswami> Interesting |
|
| May-16-12 | | solskytz: <Bonjales> Oh come on :-] |
|
| May-16-12 | | qqdos: <drkodos> Steve Giddins is being over- apocalyptic. Why complain if the players reach, say, move 18 without "a serious opening advantage"? They'll have to seek one in the middle game! The same situation used to apply to the position after 8-10 moves and players had to strive for a late-opening advantage. Perhaps the players could now agree in advance on a chosen line and begin the game from a particular point. Let innate chess ability prevail!! |
|
| May-16-12 | | BadKnight: It will take few years, but classical chess at the top level will eventually become worked out and therefore boring. fischerrandom is the future of chess. |
|
| May-16-12 | | drkodos: qqdos: Giddens is spot on. Starting from 'tabiyas' would make it even worse.. |
|
| May-16-12 | | drkodos: Bad Knight: the future is upon us. |
|
| May-16-12 | | Rook e2: <Mahendrakumar: disgusting to see comments that the current WC match is not between two best players etc etc. They should understand that the best player is Carlsen because he is No.1 in the world. Then in that case where is the need for world championship. Let us treat the World No.1 as World champion.>
I was one of them. If Gelfand happens to win this WCC there would be about 20 players who would be favourite over him if they would met in a tournament. The World Champion should be the #1 player in the world and vica verca. So if this is not the case it's time for a WCC. :) |
|
May-16-12
 | | HeMateMe: Computer programs have raised the quality of chess, and given top players new ideas. Nothing wrong with any of that. I think the problem is that high quality opening prep can now go 24 moves deep. It can make the players lazy, in that they can play what appears to be a fairly long, high quality game, and if they don't want to try something new, if they don't have the energy that day, then they just agree to a draw, and it looks at though as though a well played game took place. That is what we are seeing in the Anand/Gelfand match--little desire to try new ideas, and take some risk. Twenty years ago, it was not so easy for two grandmasters to quickly reach a well played position, at 24 or 25 moves. The computer software has made it easy for players to be lazy and play for a "good looking" draw. This isn't the fault of chess in general, or computer chess--it's the fault of Gelfand and Anand, and their somewhat vanilla temperament. People like Morozevich get out of the books fast, Shirov was great doing this, in his prime. Carlsen wins enough of his games that no one is complaining. We simply have two very cautious players here, the chess they play is "corret" but not very exciting. |
|
| May-16-12 | | solskytz: <NGambit> Sure is!! <FSR> well, should it come to that... I remember that in a match from the recent past they were bidding for the Armageddon - that is to say, white got 5 minutes and the players were making ever lower proposals as to how little time they willing have as black, for the benefit of having draw odds. I think that I can hold the draw with 2:10 against 5
Oh - you think that you can do it with 1:50 minutes? Well go ahead :-] Fair is fair :-]
and then blitz, and then rapids, and then classical. |
|
| May-16-12 | | solskytz: <exOduz>
<He hasn't won jack @#$% major tournaments for ages since he became WC. If you can say that Gelfand is not a true WC if he beats Anand, then you can basically say Anand is weaker than Boris since Boris beat him, and Anand hasn't been winning many tournaments or playing 'inspiring' chess for ages.. so then how does that work?> it doesn't :-] this is the whole point of my postings. A championship challenge without Carlsen, Aronian and Kramnik having their D U E
chance is meaningless. <
WC is about a head to head, classical match. It's not about ELO or who won the most games/tournaments in the year. The qualification process might not be the best, but that's another issue altogether> well, that's the issue I'm making here :-] in case you haven't noticed |
|
| May-16-12 | | shach matov: <Rook e2:If Gelfand happens to win this WCC there would be about 20 players who would be favourite over him if they would met in a tournament.> This is nonsense. Gelfand already plaid many of these mysterious "20 players" in the qualifiers - and not just in one tourney game but in mini-matches - and he beat all of them to qualify to play Anand. Sure there are some players who are better tourney players but why does that matter if the world champ has always been decided by a match? Anand hasn't been impressing lately in tourneys but he beat Kramnik and Topa without much difficulty. Lets remember that truly dominant players like Lasker, Karpov and Kasparov, who dominated both in matches and tournaments, come along only a few times every century. They are exceptions to the rules. The more common title holders like Kramnik show almost no tournament dominance and concentrate all their efforts on defending the title, and sometimes (as in Kramnik's case) even drop below #6 or even lower in ratings. Anand has also been very careful in tourneys the past few years. So in this sense Gelfand is not an exception and would hardly be unique if he beats Anand. |
|
| May-16-12 | | rapidcitychess: < On Wednesday, May 16th the players will take a rest day and reformulate their strategies. On Thursday we'll find out what they've cooked up, when Anand takes the white pieces for round 5.> Anand: "Nope, Rybka says I have so far played perfectly. Continue as it is." Gelfand: "Houdini says I'm fine. Let's do the same thing." Both: "I'm gonna take a nap." |
|
| May-16-12 | | rapidcitychess: <shach>
After reading many of intelligent posts written on this page, I'm inclined to agree that a lot of positions are getting to worked out to be simply tame. It might possibly be that a dominant WC is not possible anymore. Of course, I would be very happy if any top 10 player proved me wrong... ;D |
|
| May-16-12 | | shach matov: <It might possibly be that a dominant WC is not possible anymore.> That's an interesting although arguable point. I tend to think that a dominant WC is still possible, it's just seems like no one player combines all the right qualities of superior talent, drive, ambition, hard work, etc., necessary to dominate. Carlsen has the talent but does not want to pay the price for the glory, at least at this point in his career, while Anand is not getting any younger. With the advanced state of opening and the free access to the best comps, it's a bit harder now to be as dominant WC as the two K's were, but it's probably still possible. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 48 OF 194 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
