|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-26-18 | | raadsheer147: It seems like a few people here are intimate friends with the players. Nice that this is shared with all of us. Who's gonna win, Fab, Ser or Shak? Or maybe Car, Kar or Mam? Ding is Ding, or is he Dili?. Will he be the one to face Mag? It's definitely not gonna be Al, Vlad, Wes or Lev. Also, Gri, Kram, So and Ar won't be the one taking on Carls. |
|
Mar-26-18
 | | technical draw: <AylerKupp> <Don't take it personally, I get that all the time.> I've been on this site for a hundred years and I think that sometimes I post a lot but I have never seen that warning. I guess it must be posts on a single page that warrants the warning. |
|
| Mar-26-18 | | sudoplatov: Before Fischer, which American challenged? Marshall? |
|
Mar-26-18
 | | Penguincw: Video analysis of this game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50U.... |
|
Mar-27-18
 | | AylerKupp: <<rogge> In this scenario, if Mamedyarov draws and ends up with 8.0 as well, Ding wins the Candidates. (Between the three it is Ding +1, Caruana 0 and Mamedyarov -1)> You and others are right, I stand corrected. I didn't consider Ding Liren's results against Mamedyarov, just his head-to-head against Caruana. |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | csmath: <I can't believe both players missed 31...Nxb4.> Why? Would you have seen it without engine? Both were down into couple of minutes left for 10 moves.
The idea of Nxb4 was to bring one rook on d4 and another to g8. Even then it is not clear what black's continuation would have been but he would be two pieces down in a totally messy position. I think this would require some calculation and surely Aronian had no time for that. Apparently he had another idea with e4 to bring knight into the game more directly. 32. Rh1 is a very precise move and more obvious but even there Caruana spent some time to find it. These guys are not engines but I am sure they are a lot better than the rest of us here. Not even Svidler saw this without engine. He also went for e4 which tells you how distorted your view is. |
|
Mar-27-18
| | AylerKupp: <<technical draw> I've been on this site for a hundred years and I think that sometimes I post a lot but I have never seen that warning. I guess it must be posts on a single page that warrants the warning.> I believe it's the number of posts in a small time period that triggers the message, not the total number of posts over a long period of time. I can't remember the thresholds but I think it's something in the order of > 5 posts in a 5 minute span. I can see <chessgames.com>'s point to try to prevent users from flooding a forum but unfortunately it affects how I post somewhat. But it's nothing more than a minor annoyance. As I mentioned earlier I typically have a series of responses ready to post resulting from reading several pages of earlier posts. If I get that message I just wait a few minutes and then resume. Moral: You can slow down a blabbermouth like me but you can't stop him completely. :-) Perhaps if <chessgames.com> kept track of the number of posts a user makes over a longer period of time, say, one day, calculate the average time between posts, and only trigger the message if this time is "too" short since that would indicate a large volume of posts in that one day by that user. Since as a result of my methods my posts come in bursts after relatively long periods of inactivity, the average interval between my posts should not exceed whatever threshold they select. However, I don't expect <chessgames.com> to change their method just to accommodate little old me, I can work around it. |
|
Mar-27-18
 | | ChessHigherCat: <csmath> I know, I hate that kind of snotty comment, too. |
|
Mar-27-18
 | | Richard Taylor: <AylerKupp: <<devere> I think if the NBA wants you, you will know. Do you think that Kobe Bryant or Lebron James were in any doubt?>
I think that we have lost the original thread of this discussion. <jphamlore> indicated that <The amount of money almost all chess players can earn simply does not justify the risk of not going to university>. To which I agree, but pointed out that the amount of money almost all high school basketball players can earn...> If you make decisions based on whether you risk making money so early in life you may as well do nothing and look at your navel. What about the interesting things you can learn at a university? People can live quite happily NOT succeeding in the conventional sense. There is nothing wrong with being a truck driver or a labourer, or becoming a sparkie or whatever. You can still enjoy life as someone who has supposedly "failed". There are no risks, unless you are going to lose your life. So you just do what you like doing or are interested in... |
|
Mar-27-18
| | Richard Taylor: <DansChessLounge: Fabiano Caruana had so many ways to win this game! I can't believe both players missed 31...Nxb4. For a recap of the game with analysis, check out the video --> https://youtu.be/wk4Xf5S6E_w > But he did win the game so what is the problem> ?! I don't know the move you mean but anyone can miss anything. That in fact is one of the things that is what makes chess interesting. That is what makes it a game full of uncertainties. It is error which makes chess interesting. |
|
Mar-27-18
 | | hoodrobin: <technical draw:I've been on this site for a hundred years and I think that sometimes I post a lot but I have never seen that warning. I guess it must be posts on a single page that warrants the warning.>
Are we sure, first of all, that it really exists?
:-O |
|
Mar-27-18
| | ChessHigherCat: Roughly speaking, that "too many posts" warning is based on the number of posts per unit time, but there's also a "zing factor" that makes allowance for unusually interesting content, and a "gong" factor that is triggered when CG's lab mice die of boredom. |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | Ulhumbrus: <devere: According to Stockfish 31...e4? was the losing move, and instead the brilliant ...Nxb4!! 32.cxb4 Rd4 equalizes for Black. The continuation might be 33.Kh3 Qg5 34.f6+ Kh8 35.Bd1 Rg8 36.Ng2 Rf4 37.Rxe5 Rxf2 38.Bxg5 Bd4 39.Bh4 Rf1 40.Re1 Rxe1 41.Nxe1 Bxa1 with a very slight edge for Black. I am doubtful that any human who ever played chess is capable of seeing all that with a clock ticking.> This suggests that if a sacrificial attack appears to be failing, it is necessary, as Alekhine put it, to invest more in the business |
|
Mar-27-18
| | AylerKupp: <<rogge> You and others are right, I stand corrected. I didn't consider Ding Liren's results against Mamedyarov, just his head-to-head against Caruana.> After sleeping on it, I'm not sure whether if Caruana, Ding Liren, and Mamedyarov tie with an 8.0/14 score that Ding Liren wins the tournament. The first tiebreaker under section 3.7.a) says "The results of the games between the players involved in the tie." This can be interpreted, at least by me, in one of two ways: 1. You add the <total> results among the 3 players involved in the tie. The results of Caruana / Ding Liren were 1/2-1/2, and 1/2-1/2 with 1.0 points for Caruana and 1.0 points for Ding Liren. The results of Caruana / Mamedyarov were also 1/2-1/2, and 1/2-1/2 with 1.0 points for Caruana and 1.0 points for Mamedyarov. The results of Ding Liren / Mamedyarov were 1/2-1/2, and 0 - 1 with 1.5 points for Ding Liren and 0.5 points for Mamedyarov. That gives Ding Liren a total of 2.5 points, Caruana 2.0 points, and Mamedyarov 1.5 points. This is the interpretation that you and others have had, and since it gives Ding Liren the greatest number of points so he's declared the winner based on tiebreaker #1. 2. You look at the <individual> results among the three players. Ding Liren scored 1.5 points in his games against Mamedyarov so Mamedyarov is eliminated. But Ding Liren and Caruana both scored 1.0 points in <their> encounter, so we then go on to tiebreaker #2. This was my original interpretation. And tiebreaker #2 is thankfully clear, "the total number of wins in the tournament of every player (remaining) involved in the tie." And here Caruana had 4 wins vs. Ding Liren's 2 wins so Caruana is declared the winner based on tiebreaker #2. I just don't know what FIDE's intent and interpretation of tie breaker #1 is. Leave it to FIDE to make the description ambiguous. |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | PJs Studio: Sadly, Ruben Fine didn’t compete in AVRO and went into the mental health field instead. He was arguably the strongest chess player on the planet when he jumped ship for a far easier vocation. 😉 |
|
| Mar-27-18 | | PJs Studio: Sorry, I stand corrected. Fine played in AVRO and tied for first(!) He skipper the candidates tournament in 1948 which he COULD have won. He did retire from international play in ‘48 not ‘38 |
|
Mar-31-18
| | Penguincw: I see a lot of times in a tournament, whenever the player in first faces the player in last (and especially with white), black tends to win. Not here though, as Caruana beats Aronian. |
|
| May-05-19 | | actinia: what a great game. not sure how I missed this last year. |
|
| May-05-19 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 22 dpa done
1. + / = (0.59): 22...Qe8 23.Nh4 Ne7 24.Nxg6 fxg6 25.Bd2 Rd6 26.Nh2 Rbd8 27.Nf3 Rf6 28.a5 Ba7 29.Be3 Bxe3 30.Qxe3 Nc6 31.Red1 Rfd6 32.Ne1 Nf6 33.Rxd6 cxd6 34.Rd1 Qd7 35.Bb3 g5 36.Nd3 g4 2. + / = (0.61): 22...Qe6 23.Be3 Bxe3 24.Qxe3 Nf6 25.N1d2 Ne7 26.axb5 axb5 27.Red1 Bh5 28.Nb3 Rxd1 29.Bxd1 Bxf3+ 30.Qxf3 Nc8 31.Nc5 Qe8 32.Qd3 Nd6 33.Ra7 Qe7 34.Bb3 Rd8 35.Qe2 Kg8 36.f3 Kh7 37.Ra6 Kg8 |
|
| May-05-19 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 24 dpa done
1. + / = (0.45): 20...Qe6 21.Nh4 Bb6 22.a4 Nf6 23.axb5 axb5 24.f3 Rfd8 25.Nxg6 fxg6 26.b4 Ne7 27.Ne3 c6 28.Ra3 c5 29.bxc5 Bxc5 30.Rb3 b4 31.cxb4 Bxb4 32.Rd1 Rxd1 33.Bxd1 Nc6 34.Qc4 Qxc4 35.Nxc4 Rd8 36.Bc2 Nd4 37.Rb2 2. + / = (0.45): 20...Nf6 21.Nh4 Bb6 22.Be3 Qe6 23.Bxb6 Rxb6 24.Ne3 Na5 25.Red1 Nc4 26.f3 Nxb2 27.Bb3 Nc4 28.Nxc4 bxc4 29.Bxc4 Qc6 30.Rab1 Rxb1 31.Rxb1 Rd8 32.Nxg6 fxg6 33.Rb4 Rd6 34.Rb3 g5 35.Rb8 Qc5 36.Rc8 Nd7 |
|
| May-05-19 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 23 dpa done
1. + / = (0.31): 19...Nf6 20.Bc2 Kg8 21.a4 Bh7 22.axb5 axb5 23.Rd1 Bd6 24.g4 b4 25.Ng3 Ra8 26.Be3 Qd7 27.Nf5 b3 28.Bxb3 Nxe4 29.Qc4 Bxf5 30.gxf5 Nf6 31.Rxa8 Rxa8 32.Bc2 Na5 33.Qa4 Qc8 2. + / = (0.42): 19...Kh8 20.Rd1 Qe7 21.Bc2 Nf6 22.b4 Bd6 23.a4 Qd7 24.Nh4 Bh7 25.f3 Rfd8 26.Ne3 Ne7 27.axb5 axb5 28.Ra7 Nc6 29.Ra6 Ne7 30.Nhf5 Nxf5 31.Nxf5 Bxf5 32.exf5 Ra8 33.Rxa8 Rxa8 34.c4 Ra2 35.g4 Qc6 36.c5 Kg8 37.Rd2 Nd5 38.Rxd5 Qxd5 |
|
| May-05-19 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 23 dpa done
1. = (0.01): 18...Nf6 19.Bc2 Qc8 20.g4 Rd8 21.Be3 Bd6 22.Ng3 Na5 23.Nd2 c5 24.Nf5 Qc7 25.Rad1 Be7 26.Qf3 Bxf5 27.exf5 Nd5 28.Nf1 Nf6 29.Bc1 Nc6 30.Ng3 b4 31.Qe2 Qb6 32.Be3 bxc3 33.Rxd8+ Rxd8 34.bxc3 2. + / = (0.31): 18...Bb6 19.Rd1 Qf6 20.a4 Rfd8 21.Rxd8+ Rxd8 22.axb5 axb5 23.Bc2 b4 24.Be3 Qe6 25.Bxb6 cxb6 26.Nh4 Na5 27.Ne3 Nf6 28.Nxg6 fxg6 29.cxb4 Nc6 30.Rd1 Rxd1+ 31.Qxd1 Nd4 32.h4 b5 33.Bb1 Qe7 34.Nd5 Nxd5 35.exd5 Qxb4 |
|
| May-05-19 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 24 dpa done
1. + / = (0.36): 18.Bd5 Ne7 19.Rd1 Bd6 20.Bb3 Qe8 21.Nh4 Nf6 22.Nxg6 Nxg6 23.Ne3 Nf4 24.Qc2 Qc6 25.Nf5 Qxe4 26.Bxf4 Qxf4 27.Nxd6 cxd6 28.Rxd6 a5 29.Rad1 e4 30.Qe2 a4 31.Bc2 Rfe8 32.a3 Qe5 33.Bb1 Qf5 34.Ba2 Rbc8 35.Qe3 Rc7 36.R6d4 Rd7 37.Rxd7 Nxd7 2. + / = (0.34): 18.Be3 Bxe3 19.Qxe3 Nf4 20.Rad1 Qe7 21.Kh2 Qf6 22.g3 Ne6 23.Kg2 Bh5 24.N1h2 Rbd8 25.Ng4 Bxg4 26.hxg4 Ne7 27.Rh1 Ng6 28.a3 Rfe8 29.Bd5 Ne7 30.Bxe6 Qxe6 31.g5 Rxd1 32.Rxd1 h5 3. + / = (0.28): 18.a4 Qf6 19.N1h2 Rfd8 20.axb5 axb5 21.Ng4 Qe7 22.Kh2 Nf4 23.Bxf4 exf4 24.Bd5 Rb6 25.Bxc6 Rxc6 26.Nge5 Re6 27.Nxg6 Rxg6 28.e5 Qe6 29.b4 Bb6 30.Red1 Re8 31.Ra6 Qb3 32.Rd2 Qxc3 33.Qxb5 Rge6 34.Raa2 c5 35.bxc5 Bxc5 |
|
| May-05-19 | | cormier: 
click for larger viewAnalysis by Houdini 4 d 24 dpa done
1. + / = (0.26): 17...Bd6 18.a4 b4 19.Bd5 Ne7 20.Bc4 bxc3 21.bxc3 Nf6 22.N1d2 a5 23.Bd3 Qd7 24.Nc4 Nc6 25.Rd1 Rfd8 26.Rb1 Rxb1 27.Bxb1 Bh7 28.Bc2 Qc8 29.Kh2 Qa6 30.Bd3 Qb7 31.Qc2 Be7 32.Ne3 Qb6 33.Kg1 Qc5 2. + / = (0.35): 17...Bc5 18.Bd5 Ne7 19.Rd1 Bd6 20.Bb3 Qe8 21.Nh4 Nf6 22.Nxg6 Nxg6 23.Ne3 Nf4 24.Qf3 Qc6 25.Ng4 Nxg4 26.hxg4 a5 27.g3 Ne6 28.Qf5 Qe8 29.Bd5 Rd8 30.Be3 a4 31.Kg2 a3 32.b3 Qe7 33.Bc6 3. + / = (0.42): 17...Nf6 18.Ng3 Bh7 19.Bc2 Bd6 20.a4 Qc8 21.Bd3 Qb7 22.axb5 axb5 23.b4 Rfd8 24.Rd1 Ra8 25.Rxa8 Rxa8 26.Nh2 Nd8 27.Ng4 Nxg4 28.Qxg4 Bg6 29.Qe2 Rb8 30.Nf5 Ne6 31.Be3 Nf4 |
|
| May-05-19 | | The17thPawn: Aronian's performance was reminiscent of Radjabov's horrendous display in the 2013 Candidates. Hopefully he doesnt plummet into near obscurity and take 5 years to make his way back into contention like Teimour. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 9 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
icon.