If Magnus wins tiebreaks, will people forgive and forget G12 Draw?

I rather doubt that it will be forgotten, after all, there seems to be universal condemnation of Magnus for offering the draw.

But I think the condemnation will diminish significantly if he wins the Rapids portion of the tiebreaker.  Both he and his fanbase will say that this result clearly justifies his decision to offer the draw in game 12.

And who could argue or dispute that? I wouldn't. The match rules are the match rules, and he played to his decisive edge in strength.  

On the other hand, I would feel great pressure to win on tiebreaks if I was Magnus.   Can you imagine the hoots and hollers of the chess world if Fabio pulls off the great upset?

"Ha!  Ha!  Serves you right Magnus for offering a draw in Game 12!!  That's what you get for mocking the Goddess of Caissa!"

On and on, and so forth.  I might even feel sorry for Magnus.  If Magnus had known that his draw offer in Game 12 would have received so much negative feedback, I think he would have never offered it.  I.e., I'm guessing he regrets his decision, even if he never publicly says so.

Two things I will say....

I would have lost that game 12 final position FROM BOTH SIDES.

Whatever Magnus, Caruana, or any other computer-trained guy does, it does not diminish my love for the game.

 

Depends on who you're playing.  If you were playing me, and I was in time trouble, you'd have excellent chances.  :-)

Sam Shankland and others seem to think that the move a4 was where Magnus blew his advantage and that he may not have been winning after that move.  I've played OTB games where I realize that I squandered a big edge soon after playing a poor move and it can affect you psychologically.

To answer the OP, I think it will be forgotten after a few years if Magnus wins, although the fact that every classical game was drawn makes this tourney stand out.  Issues like Topalov-Kramnik with their cheating allegations or Fischer-Spassky game forfeits tend to live on but stuff like this doesn't.

One time I came home form drawing a better position, and my wife asked, "what happened?"

I said: "I tried, I really tried, but it was not easy to go for the win. I really tried!

Her response floored me:

 

Interestingly enough in the computer simulations thus far the wins have been mostly for black not white. Maybe it was something he just considered a safe move because he's a favorite in both rapid and blitz.

 

He'll look like a real fool if he loses in rapids more so in blitz. Regardless I feel he should've continued to play the position at least into move 40 given the serious time pressure Caruana was under.

Edit: Thus far the only win with white has been Stockfish defeating Laser, its worth noting a +300pt rating difference. Even computers suggest that this position in equal time would be difficult to lose as black and often win-able.

 

I think that Carlsen's game 12 draw is a game changer. After that draw, there may be a movement to ban all agreed upon draws from competitive chess. 

Susan Polgar has already taken up the charge!

It has been interesting looking at the chess engines playing against each other in the final position. Most of the results are draws. White even managed to win once although it was a strong engine against a weaker one.

With time I tend to agree with the idea much of the advantage dissipated after a5 and a4.

But it is hard to fault Magnus for that as it would be difficult justifying the risk of something more aggressive without being able to calculate you would really be safe.

I wasn’t very happy with Magnus at the time, but I have to admit his decision was practical given the match situation.

I’m not happy that this is going to a rapid/blitz tie break. I would have been much happier if draw simply went to the champ. That would have forced more aggresive play by Fabiano.

 

That would be wild, some positions are well known draws though so playing them out doesn't gain much.

 

In the big scheme of things, first of all, it is not such a big deal that Carlsen drew game 12, or that Caruana could not see a "mate in 700" devised by some arrogant engine!

Second of all, we are getting what we deserve...and by that I mean, we want to have it both ways, and you know what? We cannot!

On the one hand, everybody has some "engine" or chess program, which allows us to jump on a GM when he misses a continuation that could have given him a "+0.00002" advantage. BIG DEAL! Ok, but since all the fans have engines, and the Internet, boy do we jump on the poor bastards! everything from "I told you. OBVIOUSLY he is over-rated. Any idiot can see that!".....and "He is not a real Champion. He's a chicken!".....

 

On the other hand, we want exciting games. We want them to take risks! who cares if it is sound or not? Attack!

And the reality is.....none of us can play as well as these guys. It is quite different to look at a computer eval at home, or on my phone, and it is quite something else to be there, playing the game, with the clock ticking and a GM rated 2834 across from you.

Still, we are within our rights, as chess fans, to criticize, and to air our discontent. Discontent is better than total indifference. We have not reached that point yet. I am glad we are still human enough to want excitement! There is hope!

 

It won't be entirely forgotten, but it will fade over time if Magnus wins on tiebreaks.  

 

But if Fabio wins on tiebreaks, then it won't fade over time.  And people will either yell, "Karma on Magnus!" or they'll put an asterisk next to Fabio because of Magnus's peace gift in Game 12.

In many endgames there is a way to offer trading off the material in a way that leads to a draw from insufficient. In other cases you just do the threefold rep. There may be a few you would have to play 50 moves. It would be at least interesting if a few tournaments tried it. And we might find some of these players don’t know their theoretical draws as well as they should.

Unfortunately, when the Christians were fed to the lions in the Roman Colisseum, there were people watching,. also. It was a "spectacle". Can you believe it? So fans have been blood-thirsty forever! Hard to please! Ahhh, humans!

Not likely, but s**t will hit the fan if (WHEN) he loses!

 

Lol.  Magnus's draw offer has actually increased my nervousness and excitement to see the Tiebreaks tomorrow!  So many different storylines at play tomorrow.  Will Magnus dominate and win the tiebreaks, thereby solidly justifying his draw offer in game 12?  Or will Fabio pull off the great upset, and the large majority of the chess community point to Magnus's draw offer in Game 12 as the turning point for bad karma for Magnus?  

 

And what about Garry Kasparov's tweet about Magnus's nerves being shaky, and that it will now manifest itself during the Tiebreaks?   That will be interesting to see if that's true.  Moreover, will Fabio and his team think that Magnus is psychologically frail because of the draw offer and the subsequent chess world outrage, and that it will propel Fabio to play exceptionally well in the Rapids?

 

Game 12's shocking draw is really setting up the tiebreaks for a dramatic conclusion for us chess nerds/fans!

How much Carlsen received under the table to provide tiebreaks ??? Zero ? I prefer to have no answer to that question.  

Pityful !

I think Garry is assuming too much by saying that Magnus offered the draw due to nerves.  It could just be cold blooded pragmatism. 

The draw does make his choice of the Sicilian seem a bit odd, although he clearly had prep that perhaps he wanted to use.  Fabi also declined a repetition around move 15, so maybe Magnus sensed that Fabi didn't want tiebreaks, unless of course that was a bluff .

I'm with Garry on this one, but I think he's a bit too pessimistic about Magnus' chances. Several facebook friends have mentioned that Magnus' sister said he's been overly tired lately. I do think nerves clearly played a part.

If this had been game 12 of 24, he would have played on. But being the last game, the draw assured him of the highest rating in 2018 and sent him to the faster time controls, which he prefers.

I also think that it is cold-blooded pragmatism on Carlsen's part.