Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Are Magnus games boring?


  • 6 months ago · Quote · #101

    SanktPeterburg

    incantevoleutopia wrote:

    Messi is a shit footballer because the goals he scores are too complex and 95 % of players won't be able to score like him so he is in fact useless because I can never learn how to be great as him and bla bla woof woof....

    so I also want mr. carlsen to play like a patzer so I will be able to emulate him and learn from his mistakes to make even worse ones....

    You bring up football in the discussion..wow, let's have fun. Carlsen is like italy at the time of zoff and lippi. Strong, solid, accurate, boring as hell but unbeatable. Tal is like brazil, fun, extroverted, genious in his own rights. Fisher is like Germany. Well organized, coordinated, strong as a panzer faust.

     

    That's the way I see it. And yes, it's prbably the usual world breaking difference between rationality or instinct, reason or feeling, deduction or intuition, art or science. 

    One is not universally better than the other. But one is remembered forever and the other one forgotten. People travel thousands of kilometers to see temples, museums or cathedrals, not to watch a new hospital or the recently built highway. And that's why people will never forget the artists.

    Tal, Kasparov, Morphy,Larsen, Fisher played immortal games..I am still waiting to see an immortal game by karpov, petrosjan or carlsen.

     

    Bye bye.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #102

    incantevoleutopia

    All this blah blah blah just to tell us that YOU, sir, have limitations? It's not my problem if you can't see the whole picture.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #103

    SanktPeterburg

    the only limitations here are probably the ones you have in front of a woman, wanker.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #104

    incantevoleutopia

    Classic, start trash talking when your theories go drunk in the night... nothing new

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #105

    Nekhemevich

    a lot of people say Magnus plays similar to Karpov. I can see the similarity, but I think Magnus plays similar to Tarrasch as well. Some of the prophylactic seems very reminiscent of Tarrasch and lets not forget that Tarrasch was a very strong player in his time. His innovations are very slow and pondering, but they strike with such raw uncut strength. That's my two cents.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #106

    fabelhaft

    Nekhemevich wrote:

    a lot of people say Magnus plays similar to Karpov. I can see the similarity, but I think Magnus plays similar to Tarrasch as well. Some of the prophylactic seems very reminiscent of Tarrasch and lets not forget that Tarrasch was a very strong player in his time. His innovations are very slow and pondering, but they strike with such raw uncut strength. That's my two cents.

    Kasparov compared Carlsen with Karpov, and it's not a bad comparison. One difference is that Carlsen has been criticised for playing games out too much, while Karpov sometimes was criticised for the opposite. Going by the Chessgames stats Karpov has 124 draws in 15 moves or less, 43 of them in 12 moves or less.

    The last dozen years Carlsen doesn't have a single game with classical time controls drawn in 15 moves or less, and the speed games at Chessgames that are given as drawn in 15 or less are all more than five years old and usually due to transmission problems resulting in the full score not being given, i.e. they were in fact much longer.

    One of the rare exceptions is a rapid game against Anand in 2008. Waiting for the award ceremony after Anand already had won the event both players blitzed out a quick draw, and the reaction was as expected furious :-) People called it scandalous, something that shouldn't be allowed to happen, everyone should just stop playing chess if this is how it's supposed to look etc, just going by some of the comments at Chessgames.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #107

    bhavik1978

    I personally feel, that, once you know that a particular way of playing is giving you success and name / fame etc.. you don't want to risk it playing out of the comfort zone. it happens with a lot of people. nobody wants to be remebered being a fool for playing risky when you are at the peak of success.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #108

    Sred

    SanktPeterburg wrote:
    incantevoleutopia wrote:

    Messi is a shit footballer because the goals he scores are too complex and 95 % of players won't be able to score like him so he is in fact useless because I can never learn how to be great as him and bla bla woof woof....

    so I also want mr. carlsen to play like a patzer so I will be able to emulate him and learn from his mistakes to make even worse ones....

    You bring up football in the discussion..wow, let's have fun. Carlsen is like italy at the time of zoff and lippi. Strong, solid, accurate, boring as hell but unbeatable. Tal is like brazil, fun, extroverted, genious in his own rights. Fisher is like Germany. Well organized, coordinated, strong as a panzer faust.

     

    That's the way I see it. And yes, it's prbably the usual world breaking difference between rationality or instinct, reason or feeling, deduction or intuition, art or science. 

    One is not universally better than the other. But one is remembered forever and the other one forgotten. People travel thousands of kilometers to see temples, museums or cathedrals, not to watch a new hospital or the recently built highway. And that's why people will never forget the artists.

    Tal, Kasparov, Morphy,Larsen, Fisher played immortal games..I am still waiting to see an immortal game by karpov, petrosjan or carlsen.

     

    Bye bye.

    The one thing I learn from that is that you won't consider a game immortal unless it features some monster tactics. Many will disagree.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #109

    michael432000

    Amazing Game: Magnus Carlsen's beautiful Queen Sacrifice game at the age of 12!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK5UUDYaK7g

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #110

    jscrulz

    Who cares? As long as he keeps winning.

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #111

    petrosianpupil

    Think carlsen has a lot in common with Karpov but

    Much more in the style of Botvinnik. Karpov took little risks, Caruana seems more like Karpov to me. More classical ideas of central control with pawn structures geared towards the endgame. Carlsen will adapt more to play the chess his opponent doesn't want to see

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #112

    incantevoleutopia

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #113

    QXF7_PATZER

    Carlsen is more flexible than Karpov

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #114

    Ironknight777

    No ways its boring, Love the way he destroys his opponent.  Infact,He is incredible. 

  • 6 months ago · Quote · #115

    SocialPanda


Back to Top

Post your reply: