mayB boris is the best in final round..

whatever is the outcome of this tournament we all know that this time the chess world is progressing because of the fast rising pushers in this coming years,prove to that are the ups and downs in this tournament

Another good job for Gelfand. 

malakhov and ponomariov game was a draw.... its right and its not killing the game.... yet it adds more exciting especially the 2 will go to  tiebreak with little allotment of clock timesetting.... here in philippines.. the chess game is more exciting and interesting to watch when in a blitz game.... coz it where how each players brain and talent be tested who's quicker to  think  impressive strategies and tactics.... better go for rapid or blitz and we willl watch fir it/.....

Grandmaster draws have been a feature of top level chess for decades.  Its their career, their hard work - and therefore THEIR decision, they shouldn't feel pressure to do ANYTHING OTHER than what they feel is in their own best interest.  If its blood and guts and death and glory you are after, perhaps watch ICC blitz tourneys, or change sport! 

If you think draws are boring, you miss a lot that ches has to offer.  For example, the many many draws in the Kasparov-Karpov matches were boring for many, but the quality of ches and the sheer drama of those clashes were terrific.

Who says a game has to be played down to an obvious draw, if they want to draw while still unclear, so be it.  Its a gamble.  One guy maybe gambling he'd be better suited to a play-off with less time on the clock, the other guy glad to get a draw with black, etc etc.

There's more going on than to simply say they are cowards for not fighting out to the death.  Someones going to win the match - and the loser may well live to regret drawing an unclear game... thats their lookout.  By that token, look at poker - you are not MORALLY OBLIGED to play every good hand you are served (or worrry about being called 'chicken' by patzers on the sidelines - who cares).  Many other factors come into play.  If you did play in such a gung-ho fashion, you'd be a poor player at best!

Archaic - i get your point but its a bit too simplistic.  Chess (and life) are way way too complex to make sweeping statements like that.  Your anaology with football isn't great either:  for a start, they are completely different in every way, your comparing chalk and cheese.  Secondly, i have seen many world cup games where both sides played it safe and settled for the draw (of course they would capitalise if the opponent made a mistake, but hats not the point).  It happens often when both teams are happy to settle for a penalty shootout, or group games when they would rather take the point against a strong team, and have another 90 minutes to get the win against another team.

You see? you can look at any situation, or example, and find a way to make it back up your point?  LOL

As for Gelfand - real guts to go for it like he did - and he was rewarded for his bravery.  But on the other hand, if he'd opted to simplify and neutralise - and went on to draw - people would have been equally congratulatory about his ability to suffocate Karjakin and close out the match...

I think people who complain about chess games and draws don't study chess games.  I say that because at one time I complained.  But then when I actually study the chess games of top players, I realize how amazingly talented they are. 

Karjakin has a Russian coach.  Karjakin lives in Moscow.  Karjakin says if he moves to Russia, he will do better. 

I would hate to be Karjakin right now.  I mean, if you had to come back to "the man who never smiles" and try and explain why your plan didn't work...

If you wonder who "the man who never smiles" refers to, just look up who Karjakin's coach is, and you will see what I mean

why carlsen didn't enter this tournament?

Karjakin you let me down, ok well it is either Boris or the underdog Malakhov. 

""draw is much better than a win" read that back to yourself slowy . . . I think you just made my point MUCH more eloquantly then I could have."

An obvious typo. I meant a draw is better than a loss. If you don't understand this, you don't understand chess. 

by bondiggity - 2 hours ago

"white only really has d6 to press for advantage. If he didn't see this move, or was low on time, Qd4 makes the draw obvious" -which begs the question, why was it accepted?  When an advantage is held, it should be pressed, not conceded. You're missing the point BD, these 27 move 'GM draws' are killing the game.  We, as chess fans deserve better than that. 

"draw is much better than a win" read that back to yourself slowy . . . I think you just made my point MUCH more eloquantly then I could have.

"its foolish to push for advantage when you can't" . . . I believe the word I used was 'cowardice'

Go Malakhov! wise decision to settle for a draw

and win tiebreak games

I agree with all you guys... new rules for draws should be implemented... instead of stupid rules that if a player is one minute late he loses... In all games rules keep changing in order to make the game more interesting... These guys hate losing... every one of them... so if they dont see a win nor does the other... then they are more than happy to draw leaving the game unclear... cowardly and boring...

quoting inotgramps:

I wonder why Karjakin didn't play....( 21 )....pxn on g5 ?...instead of Nb8 ?

Karjakin still cant take the knight because Bxc6 Qxc6 (this will allow the rook to enter the game decisively (Rd6) and push away the queen and the blockade from the c5 pawn opening the dark bishop with a lot of tactical possibilites...

So ...hxg5 Bxc6 Qxc6 Rd6 Qc7 C6 (threatening to take the knight and to open a deadly check with a free rook move... I couldnt find a good defence for black...

According to fritz black's best answer is to give up his knight and play Nc5 where after Qxc5 the attack is even deadlier than before he took the knight with the h pawn... Crazy tactical game... Gelfand played great... His calculations were as good as a chess engine in a crazy tactical battle... quite impressive... If there is a time Gelfand will be at the top of his game I would think it is now...

Cheers

PJM

Boris will beat who ever comes through the other match.

At the end of the Malakhov game, white only really has d6 to press for advantage. If he didn't see this move, or was low on time, Qd4 makes the draw obvious. 

As far as the outcry for "grow a pair" , a draw is much better than a win. Unless its a must win situation (which it wasn't), its foolish to push for advantage when you can't. More often than not, you'll just lose. 

I'm with you Archaic71, they are not deserves of what they have. chess world upset with this particular game

I wonder why Karjakin didn't play....( 21 )....pxn on g5 ?...instead of Nb8 ?

I'm sorry, but drawing a game like that is pure cowardice on the part of both players and a large part of why chess has such a difficult time make inroads into the mainstream. 

This is the damn world cup of chess fellas, grow a set!

Do you think that if Spain and Brazil are knotted up at 1-1 with 10 minutes left to play in the REAL World Cup thiscoming spring, that they will shake hands and walk off of the field with a draw??!?

GM's have got to start finishing their games - especially in KO tournys.  They should forfiet prize money everytime they agree to a draw in a wide open game.  They have same colored bishops and all the heavy pieces on the board for pete's sake.  Cowards.

bravo gelfand!  keep it up.