Do you think Anand went down w/out much of a fight!?!?!?

In the recent wc, I really think Anand wasn't really playing his best,

like that game where Carlsen played blitz speed and Anand drew,

so I'm wondering what you guys think.

He was playing as well as he could, he just fell far short of what was needed. It was always going to be an uphill battle for Anand to hold off Carlsen. We should remember what a great world champion he was and what a superb ambassador he is for the game.

I'm seriously hoping for Kramnik to win the Candidates this year..

I had a feeling he was going to try and draw his way to the end and keep it very close if the championship ended in a tie and went to rapid games that's where he'd win it who beats Anand in rapid? he's King in that.

But that's not how it worked out he blew it big time there's only twelve games when a challenger or champion takes a lead there's a small window to come back and when it's gone forget it.

I don't like 12 games myself that's not how the world title should be decided it's a war of attrition 25 games whoever survives is the man that's the way it's suppose to be.

I actually think part of the problem was he knew he'd get crushed in the rapid tie-breaks as well - meaning he was in a bit of a quandry...

There really wasn't much Anand could do. Carlsen is so much stronger than him today that he was happy get draws thanks to superior opening preparation in some of the first games. But it couldn't work in all the games, and when Anand finally was forced to play for a win he lost with white in 28 moves. Over the last three years Carlsen has 5-0 against Anand, and that after missing a couple of wins. The match was just as one-sided as expected and I think +4 for Carlsen was closer than +2. He was a bit too quick to trade down to a drawable endgame when he got a winning position in the last game, but then a draw was enough to finish the match anyway.

I bet he'd be like "what???? wait what??? what are you talking about??? fight?? what fight??? all apologies, I've been preoccupied with this swarm of well-funded well-connected mutant flying cuoidoiyoikoieoionts armed with advanced military grade tech that are continuously flying around my head annoying the living daylights out of me and obstructing my vision. please tell me more about this "fight"?"

If you run 100000 simulated matches between players whose ratings differ by the amount Carlsen's and Anand's differed at the start of their match, with the same match conditions (12 games, 6.5 points or more wins), guess what the most common outcome is?

It is the higher rated player winning the match in 10 games, with 3 wins and 7 draws. This happens in ~12.2% of the simulated matches.

Second most common is the higher rated player winning in 9 games, with 4 wins and 5 draws. This happens in ~11.7% of the simulated matches.

Overall, there is an ~49% chance that the higher rated player will win without losing a single game.

The above is assuming a 60% draw rate, which is common in grandmaster play. If we bump that up to 70%, figuring that at their level they are better at defending, then the most common simulated match outcome is still higher rated player in 10, with 3 wins and 7 draws, but now that happens in ~21.7% of the simulated matches.

Second most common is 11 games, with 2 wins and 9 draws, in ~17.4% of the matches, and third is the match going 9 games, with 4 wins and 5 draws.

Overall, there is an ~80% chance that the higher rated player will win without losing a single game.

When someone gets pretty much exactly the result you would expect from their rating, I don't think you can say they played badly or without a fight or any of the various other things that have been said about Anand. He played like a 2770, Carlsen played like a 2870. It's that simple.

I think he was beaten before they played a single game. He bought into the idea that Carlsen couldn't be beat and he accepted his fate... As evidenced by his statement that he probably won't play in the upcoming Candidates Tournament, he seems to have semi-retired.

He's stronger on paper. But they still have to play the games. What happens if Anand opens with some very obscure line that Carlsen has never seen over the board? Maybe only seen once in a book....  There are ways to even things up, at least a bit.... I'm looking forward to seeing Carlsen face a young hungry opponent that will take him to the limit! That should be some good chess.

.

It's not that simple, the rating system has some limitations near the top (basically, slow "mixing speed" : 2700+ players tend to play mostly with 2700+ players because of the events they join + rating protection : when you know you can break the world record of highest rating at the expense of skipping some tournament, you do it). Anand could have been preparing for his match but not showing it before it, hence keeping a "low" rating, etc.

Of course this would not change the general conclusion much, but the fact one gets exactly the results ratings suggested is most probably a coincidence.

Saying Anand went down without a fight would have been more convincing if it had been said during the games, and not after the event. I heard a lot of "bah, Carlsen is not even trying, he is not going to do the usual endgame squeeze trick against Anand, etc." during games one to four at least.

Anand fought as best as he could, but I sensed that he didn't have the usual confidence when facing Carlsen. It could be that he couldn't figure out a strategy to face Carlsen or he simply wasn't confident with his own ability. Furthermore, his playing level did decline in the past few years. During the match with Gelfand, I thought that Gelfand should be nowhere near Anand's level, but the result said otherwise. It was a close call. Anand needs to do some soul searching to find the wonder boy he once was.

age takes its toll....new player emerges to oust old king..it happens in all games ..all the time.....sooner or later,Carlsen who seems like unbeatale will be outgunned too.

Anand has earned his place among all time greats and nothing takes that away.....hopefully he will be back with bang.

Anand is a really great player, but his performance during the match was not good, as he said, he had the wrong match strategy. 

I thought he was a bit timid. He is a terrific player who has been a fine world champion but I would have liked to see him bow out with an all out fight. Maybe that would have led to a humiliating match score, which he managed to avoid, but to be spoken of as ranking with Kasparov, Karpov and Fischer he needed to show more fighting spirit.

I think it would've been better 4 Anand if he didn't only prepare openings but also middlegame + endgame.

But it's true that carlsen is better

alec98 wrote:

fluffy001 wrote:

In the recent wc, I really think Anand wasn't really playing his best,

I had a feeling he was going to try and draw his way to the end and keep it very close if the championship ended in a tie and went to rapid games that's where he'd win it who beats Anand in rapid? he's King in that.

But that's not how it worked out he blew it big time there's only twelve games when a challenger or champion takes a lead there's a small window to come back and when it's gone forget it.

I don't like 12 games myself that's not how the world title should be decided it's a war of attrition 25 games whoever survives is the man that's the way it's suppose to be.

It could also be first player to 3 and a half points or something like that

Carlsen was just too strong. Anand's game has deteriorated somewhat over the past few years but I don't think he would have won even if he had been in top form.

I wanted carlsen to win too