Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

How is Levon Aronian number 2 in the worl if most notable games show him losing?


  • 10 months ago · Quote · #41

    Krestez

    JMB2010 wrote:

    Giri is only a top grandmaster "just a little." lol

    Giri is soooo overrated. 5 rounds in the Grand Prix in Paris, of which he lost 3. He's a good player, but blunders too much. I've seen him in other tournaments too. Not exceptionally good results either... On the other hand there are lower rated players, like Tomashevsky, who seem to play rock solid.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #42

    sapientdust

    theunsjb wrote:
    harryz wrote:

    people like capablanca and fischer lose a game about every 3 years. aronian loses games every 6 months

    The obvious answer is that in Capablanca's and Fischer's time, trains, planes and cars were not invented.  Petrosian travelled for more than three weeks on foot to defend his title against Spassky.

    Fischer spent months on a boat travelling to Iceland to face Spassky in their title match.

    They simply did not have the opportunity to play as many games.

    What the dolphin said! They hadn't even invented the telegraph in 1972 when Fischer won the WCC in Iceland. The chess players of today don't know how easy they have it. Capablanca had to swim the oceans to play his matches.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #43

    beardogjones

    I have an ancestor that would have been world chess champion except chess had not even been invented yet! He was better than Fischer.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #44

    sapientdust

    beardogjones wrote:

    I have an ancestor that would have been world chess champion except chess had not even been invented yet! He was better than Fischer.

    Pssh, that's nothing. My ancestor used to play before the concept of a game had been invented. They had to figure out the concept of game before they could even invent the rules, and all this without language yet existing!!

    But you try to tell this to the youth of today, and they won't have any of it.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #45

    Jion_Wansu

    LOL this thread is funny. People have good days and people have bad days.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #46

    royalbishop

    This Aronian vs Anand can be settled real quick

     by looking at head to head games.

    Should not have gotten this far.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #47

    DarknisMetalDragon

    royalbishop wrote:

    This Aronian vs Anand can be settled real quick

     by looking at head to head games.

    Should not have gotten this far.

    Head to head records aren't good judges because it is a course of many years. One player could get better and the other could get worse.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #48

    fabelhaft

    The Anand vs Aronian argument seems to be that Aronian can't well be better than Anand today since his better tournament results, higher rating and clear edge head to head are less important, as is the fact that Anand hasn't exactly been unbeatable lately either, and lost eight games this year, playing less than Aronian.

    A better measure should be how many notable games where Aronian lost the users at Chessgames.com have in their game collections :-) The latter I think may partly be influenced by the fact that someone usually has to play great chess to beat Aronian, so his losses are often great games.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #49

    Scottrf

    Plus he has the sort of spectacular style that involves taking risks.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #50

    macer75

    royalbishop wrote:

    This Aronian vs Anand can be settled real quick

     by looking at head to head games.

    Should not have gotten this far.

    Well, the argument that I was trying to make was that you can't just say that Aronian is flat-out better than Anand because he has a higher elo. I'm just trying to say that the Aronian vs Anand argument does exist despite their difference in rating.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #51

    DarknisMetalDragon

    fabelhaft wrote:

    The Anand vs Aronian argument seems to be that Aronian can't well be better than Anand today since his better tournament results, higher rating and clear edge head to head are less important, as is the fact that Anand hasn't exactly been unbeatable lately either, and lost eight games this year, playing less than Aronian.

    A better measure should be how many notable games where Aronian lost the users at Chessgames.com have in their game collections :-) The latter I think may partly be influenced by the fact that someone usually has to play great chess to beat Aronian, so his losses are often great games.

    The notable games part was what made me ask this question. I like your reasoning for this. I totally agree with you.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #52

    royalbishop

    Count the number of members from Anand's country in this thread.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #53

    FancyKnight

    Aronian doesn't always lose, but when he does, he does it spectacularly.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #54

    macer75

    royalbishop wrote:

    Count the number of members from Anand's country in this thread.

    none so far.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #55

    royalbishop

    Like to start the "Not a fan of Anand" Club.


Back to Top

Post your reply: