Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Boring World Championship


  • 10 months ago · Quote · #241

    Ziryab

    r_k_ting wrote:

    I didn't catch all of the commentary on chess.com, but if the commentators here said that it was Carlsen who got caught in Anand's opening preparation, then that's quite interesting.

    Anand himself said after the game that he played the opening poorly, and other commentators were saying that it was Anand who stepped into Carlsen's preparation. Just goes to show how complex the position was.

    I didn't follow any commentary. I'm certain that Anand prepared 9.h3, which is an unusual (but currently "hot") move. He may have prepared up to 16.Ne1. That's my hunch. Here's my commentary on the end of the opening phase.

    9.h3

    The fourth most popular move made its first appearance, as near as I can discern from ChessBase Online database, in 1978 when played by Nona Gaprindashvili. In that year, she became the first woman awarded the Grandmaster title and also lost the Women's World Championship. She earned the WWCC title in 1962, and defended it successfully several times.

    Fabiano Caruana played 9.h3 against Levon Aronian in the final round of the Tata Steel tournament in January, a game that I blogged as it occurred. It finished with many moves of torture in a theoretically drawn ending of rook and bishop vs. rook.

    9.Nc3 is overwhelmingly the most popular move, and has usually been Anand's choice. Both Anand and Carlsen have played 9.Rd1+, however, which is the second most popular move. I have neither found games where Anand played 9.h3, nor located any where Carlsen faced this move. ChessBase Online has 169 games in the database with this position and nearly 5000 with 9.Nc3. Both moves are played often enough that changing the move order may transpose into a position that both players have played prior.

    9...Bd7 10.Rd1 Be7 11.Nc3 Kc8 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bxe7 Nxe7 14.Rd2 c5

    White to move


    15.Rad1

    Anand's move appears to be a novelty. Jakovenko -- Almasi, Khanty-Mansiysk 2007 continued with 15.Ne4 and White won in 102 moves.

    15...Be6 16.Ne1

    16.Ne2 is an alternative that appears to drop a pawn. However, 16...Bxa2? is unwise. The bishop does not become trapped, as may happen in similar structures without Black's advanced c-pawn. Rather, after some forcing moves, White gets excellent piece play and threats against a vulnerable Black king in exchange for the queenside pawns. 17.b3 c4 18.Nfd4 c5 19.Nb5 cxb3 20.cxb3 Bxb3

    White to move
    Theoretical Position

    16...Ng6 17.Nd3 b6 18.Ne2

    My computer likes Rf1.

    18...Bxa2

    Perhaps Anand's knight maneuvers were not the best way to build up pressure. The position is strategically complex with occasional tactics. As in my fantasy position above, White's a-pawn dropped, but there is no risk that the bishop becomes trapped. In this case, however, White's compensation for the pawn appears less clear.

    White to move



    19.b3 c4 20.Ndc1 cxb3 21.cxb3 Bb1 22.f4

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #242

    Adilbala

    Not boring at all...the fourth game was excellent ....I am an Anand fan but I have also become a Carlsen fan now due to the way he plays and conducts himself...very enjoyable stuff for me...I also love the way the two treat each other...

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #243

    SmyslovFan

    10...Be7 was slightly unusual. It had previously been played by Jon Ludwig Hammer, who is one of Carlsen's seconds. Anand did not seem fully prepared for it. 16.Ne1 was probably a mistake, and the reason that Anand himself said later that he didn't play the opening well.

    Game four was an opening victory for Carlsen.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #244

    Ziryab

    SmyslovFan wrote:

    10...Be7 was slightly unusual. It had previously been played by Jon Ludwig Hammer, who is one of Carlsen's seconds. Anand did not seem fully prepared for it. 16.Ne1 was probably a mistake, and the reason that Anand himself said later that he didn't play the opening well.

    Game four was an opening victory for Carlsen.

    Thanks. I missed that Carlsen announced his seconds. Or is Hammer a suspected or presumed second?

    Did the commentators discuss Hammer's game. Did Anand spend a lot of time thinking after 10...Be7?

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #245

    sapientdust

    If Anand really had prepared the pawn sac for the initiative (as suggested perhaps by Kasparov's comments), and Carlsen fought his way through that OTB and ended up with winning chances, that would have to be severely demoralizing for Anand.

    I wonder whether after the match is over we'll ever learn the real truths, like whether Anand was fibbing when he implied that he was already drifting by the time they got to the pawn sac position (although note that he carefully did not say that it was unintentional or not planned to arrive at that exact position).

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #246

    ConnorMacleod_151

    Its not boring Smile

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #247

    TheGreatOogieBoogie

    dashkee94 wrote:

    All these comments about the match being boring reminds me of the reply by Adolf Anderssen when he was asked why he wasn't doing as well against Morphy as he did against Dufrense--"Morphy won't let me!"  There's very little "swash-buckling" chess at this level because you can't "swash" if the other guy doesn't "buckle."  Neither player has been known to buckle too often, so don't come here expecting what they will not give you.  Appreciate the fact that Carlsen was in trouble in the first game and bailed out, while Anand did the same in game two.  Games 3 and 4 were close to decisive--so where's the boring part?  That you don't understand Super GM chess?  That's not their problem.  They are there to win the match, not to live up to your hype.  They will play the best chess they are capable of, and if you don't like that the games don't look like Anderssen-Dufrense, I'm sure they will not lose any sleep over it.  I think this has been an excellant match so far, and I look forward to the remaining games being of the same high quality--the only thing I don't like about this match is that one of these great players will lose.  I think they are both excellant players and excellant representatives of chess.

    Yep, they don't owe spectators anything and are just there to win.  Top level chess is typically boring anyway in the 21st century.  May as well watch Houdini play against itself.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #248

    chesswolf2000

    I hope Anand wins but I think Carlsen will. :1

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #249

    Robkin


    Yep, they don't owe spectators anything and are just there to win.  Top level chess is typically boring anyway in the 21st century.  May as well watch Houdini play against itself.

    Exactly my point of view!

    Romantic chess 100 years ago with sacrifices and full of small mistakes were for sure by far more interesting to watch then todays war of nerves between 2 perfect prepared players who need a team of computer specialists to find the smallest hole in the opening repertoire of the opponent..

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #250

    xbigboy

    So, any opening guesses for game 5?

    I would really like to see a King's Gambit played at the grandmaster level these days.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #251

    Ziryab

    xbigboy wrote:

    So, any opening guesses for game 5?

    I would really like to see a King's Gambit played at the grandmaster level these days.

    Reti! Carlsen will find a way to get equality with this stratgically complex opening, and he will win a game with it before Thanksgiving.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #252

    Timothy_P

    Ziryab wrote:

    Reti! Carlsen will find a way to get equality with this stratgically complex opening, and he will win a game with it before Thanksgiving.

    Shhh! Don't tell Anand!

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #253

    nameno1had

    SmyslovFan wrote:
    nameno1had wrote:
    ...

    Anand knows if every game is drawn after the classical time controlled games, he gets a larger share of the money, than he would had he lost prior to that. I think that is as much to blame as anything. However, I don't think forcing the reigning champ to play to win, in order to be champ again, would sit well with most, but it would certainly change the way the games were played some what.

    ...

    Chess will never be a spectator sport because it is just too complex. Even the drama of an armaggedon game won't be enough to TV draw crowds to watch the game live. Those games go too fast for intelligent commentary. Chess isn't camera friendly. 

    Yeah, certainly a lot of truth in that idea...except for true chess lovers...Wink

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #254

    shooblie

    KOLRAMI: Bah! (throws off the controls) 

    DATA: Why have you suspended the game? 

    KOLRAMI: Because this is not a rematch. You have made a mockery of me. 

    (Kolrami exits in high dudgeon) 

    RIKER: Data, you beat him! 

    DATA: No, sir. It is a stalemate. 

    WORF: No game of Strategema has ever gone this high. 

    LAFORGE: What did you do? 

    DATA: I simply altered my premise for playing the game. 

    RIKER: Explain. 

    DATA: Working under the assumption that Kolrami was attempting to win, it is reasonable to assume that he expected me to play for the same goal. 

    WESLEY: You didn't. 

    DATA: No. I was playing only for a standoff, a draw. While Kolrami was dedicated to winning, I was able to pass up obvious avenues of advancement and settle for a balance. Theoretically, I should be able to challenge him indefinitely. 

    PULASKI: Then you have beaten him. 

    DATA: It is a matter of perspective, Doctor. In the strictest sense, I did not win. 

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #255

    cimatar

    If your chess level of understanding is LOW then this championship is boring to you, but if you know or at least UNDERSTAND the subtle manuevers these GM's has to make in these games then definitly it is NOT BORING not by a long shot!

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #256

    kco

    Not so boring now huh guys, seeing that Carlsen has won a game.

  • 10 months ago · Quote · #257

    Shivsky

    shooblie wrote:

    KOLRAMI: Bah! (throws off the controls) 

    DATA: Why have you suspended the game? 

    KOLRAMI: Because this is not a rematch. You have made a mockery of me. 

    (Kolrami exits in high dudgeon) 

    RIKER: Data, you beat him! 

    DATA: No, sir. It is a stalemate. 

    WORF: No game of Strategema has ever gone this high. 

    LAFORGE: What did you do? 

    DATA: I simply altered my premise for playing the game. 

    RIKER: Explain. 

    DATA: Working under the assumption that Kolrami was attempting to win, it is reasonable to assume that he expected me to play for the same goal. 

    WESLEY: You didn't. 

    DATA: No. I was playing only for a standoff, a draw. While Kolrami was dedicated to winning, I was able to pass up obvious avenues of advancement and settle for a balance. Theoretically, I should be able to challenge him indefinitely. 

    PULASKI: Then you have beaten him. 

    DATA: It is a matter of perspective, Doctor. In the strictest sense, I did not win. 

    Loved that episode .. though this is flawed as Data is proven to not be able to "solve" the game (he loses .. which is proof enough!) but can somehow accurately "guarantee" 100% drawing play.

    If Strategema is a turn based game like chess that has yet to be solved, then just like a GM cannot "100%" force a draw against a skilled opponent if he wants it, neither could Data. Maybe make it likely, but not be guaranteed one!


Back to Top

Post your reply: