Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Candidates tournament round 14


  • 13 months ago · Quote · #1

    WannaPlayLot

    Today Carl Magnusen is playing Svid Petler with white and Kramnimir Vladnik is playing Ivan Vassilchuk with black. Who do you think has more chances to win the tournament?

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #2

    Rasparovov

    Magnus.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #3

    repossession

    Aronon Levian 

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #4

    WannaPlayLot

    Rasparovov wrote:

    Magnus.

    Sorry?

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #5

    Rasparovov

    WannaPlayLot wrote:
    Rasparovov wrote:

    Magnus.

    Sorry?

    Oh I didn't read carefully. Ofc I meant Megsen Carlnus.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #6

    MSC157

    Haha, good one. I hope Vladisovič Borimir wins.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #7

    GenghisCant

    It has to be Cagnus Marlsen.

    Basically, Kramnik needs a better result than Magnus. If they both win, lose or draw, Carlsen wins.

    Svidler is no walk over but, with the white pieces, Magnus has better winning or drawing chanches against him than Kramnik does against Ivanchuk with black.

    Provided Ivanchuk remembers that the clocks went forward here over the weekend that is.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #8

    repossession

    If it was still round 1 I would have opted for Radjamour Teibov

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #9

    WannaPlayLot

    repossession wrote:

    If it was still round 1 I would have opted for Radjamour Teibov

    Well, he did very badly for his rating. He was actually no. 4 in the world at the time. But I must say Gelfis Borand did quite ok, despite being the lowest rated player.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #10

    waffllemaster

    WannaPlayLot wrote:

    Today Carl Magnusen is playing Svid Petler with white and Kramnimir Vladnik is playing Ivan Vassilchuk with black. Who do you think has more chances to win the tournament?

    Don't you mean Kram Vladimirnik?

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #11

    Lateriflora

    The tournament is over.  Both Kramnik AND Carlsen lost so Carlsen won on the elaborate tie-breaking system.  It's already written about on chessbase.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #12

    ViktorHNielsen

    It's fantastic. The 2 best players in the tournament had to win, but both lost. 

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #13

    Lateriflora

    Pretty sad when the co-"champions" BOTH lose on the final day.  The 8.5/14 result of the winner vividly illustrates that their are no Morphys, Fischers, or even Kasparovs in chess today ... regardless of what the putative "ratings" are supposed to indicate.

    The whole ELO system should be remade.  I do not go along with the argument that guys rated 30th in the world today are better players than Karpov, Alekhine, Tal, and so on.  You give Karpov, Tal, etc. the fact base plus computer simulations that players have today and I think those guys would KILL these guys.  

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #14

    GenghisCant

    I've seen other people saying similar things about the tie breaking system being elaborate but it seems very straightforward (unless I'm missing something which, let's face it, is entirely possible)

    1. Games against each other

    2. Total wins

    3. Neustadtl score

    It's about as straight forward as it gets.

    In the World Cup (football) there are 7 criteria for determining the winner in a tied group, the last of which being drawn lots by FIFA.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #15

    Scottrf

    Scutellaria wrote:

    Pretty sad when the co-"champions" BOTH lose on the final day.  The 8.5/14 result of the winner vividly illustrates that their are no Morphys, Fischers, or even Kasparovs in chess today ... regardless of what the putative "ratings" are supposed to indicate.

    The whole ELO system should be remade.  I do not go along with the argument that guys rated 30th in the world today are better players than Karpov, Alekhine, Tal, and so on.  You give Karpov, Tal, etc. the fact base plus computer simulations that players have today and I think those guys would KILL these guys.  

    Because nobody over 1200 defends like Morphy's opponents.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #16

    TitanCG

    There were a couple of high rated NNs here and there.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #17

    Abhishek2

    Genghiskhant wrote:

    Cagnus Marlsen

     

     

     

    lol

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #18

    GenghisCant

    Scutellaria wrote:

    Pretty sad when the co-"champions" BOTH lose on the final day.  The 8.5/14 result of the winner vividly illustrates that their are no Morphys, Fischers, or even Kasparovs in chess today ... regardless of what the putative "ratings" are supposed to indicate.

    The whole ELO system should be remade.  I do not go along with the argument that guys rated 30th in the world today are better players than Karpov, Alekhine, Tal, and so on.  You give Karpov, Tal, etc. the fact base plus computer simulations that players have today and I think those guys would KILL these guys.  

    ...or, it could mean that the top flight are all just stronger these days, making the 6-0 results Fischer pulled off 50 years ago all the more difficult.

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #19

    MSC157

    What a round! Woow! No words!

  • 13 months ago · Quote · #20

    PIRATCH

    Genghiskhant wrote:
    Scutellaria wrote:

    Pretty sad when the co-"champions" BOTH lose on the final day.  The 8.5/14 result of the winner vividly illustrates that their are no Morphys, Fischers, or even Kasparovs in chess today ... regardless of what the putative "ratings" are supposed to indicate.

    The whole ELO system should be remade.  I do not go along with the argument that guys rated 30th in the world today are better players than Karpov, Alekhine, Tal, and so on.  You give Karpov, Tal, etc. the fact base plus computer simulations that players have today and I think those guys would KILL these guys.  

    ...or, it could mean that the top flight are all just stronger these days, making the 6-0 results Fischer pulled off 50 years ago all the more difficult.

    1970 is only 43 years ago! *lol*


Back to Top

Post your reply: