"I'm pretty sure he's won a few world championships over the last six years. So that's not really true"
6-6 in 12 games against Gelfand is a much worse result than winning the Candidates with a clear margin.
anand can beat carlsen
Sort:
Yes, Anand destroyed Gelfand 6 1/2 - 1/2 ...
DAILYWATERSITTING wrote:
Look, it's plain blindness and a sign of little man to use a gentlemen's game like chess for childish behaviour and escapades... just immature!
The game which is being played in your picture, is from a tournament Carlsen won. But I think you'll never get it. If Carlsen wins again, you'll come back saying "oh well Anand blundered but he is 5 times world champion"... bahhh
I've never said that Carlsen won the world championship because Anand blundered. I'm just saying I think Anand is going to win it this time round. There is no need to start insulting me because you disagree.
I mean, Anand plays well (nothing spectacular by the way, just solid chess) after years of dry games and dull draws (and a lot of losses) and people go like "Now he's back he'll win against Carlsen"... while Carlsen's worst results in the last years are 2nd place in tournament play a couple of times - plus Anand has not beaten Carlsen in classical in the last years... but ok! I said, it's stupid to even argue.
most indians will root for anand because he is indian
DAILYWATERSITTING wrote:
I mean, Anand plays well (nothing spectacular by the way, just solid chess) after years of dry games and dull draws (and a lot of losses) and people go like "Now he's back he'll win against Carlsen"... while Carlsen's worst results in the last years are 2nd place in tournament play a couple of times - plus Anand has not beaten Carlsen in classical in the last years... but ok! I said, it's stupid to even argue.
Lol Carlsens the master of boring chess games.
Oh man I just waited for you to say that... tipical finesse...mind you, I said "nothing spectacular", not boring.
DAILYWATERSITTING wrote:
Oh man I just waited for you to say that... tipical finesse...mind you, I said "nothing spectacular", not boring.
I'm well aware Anand doesn't play boring chess, I'm just pointing out that boring chess happens to be Carlsens speciality.
kornak wrote:
A 44 years man beating a 23 years« Mozart of Chess«, is that what we call...progress?
I think this more accurately describes Mr Carlsen - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-25059274.
Anyone who wants to bet on Annand will be offered some very attractive odds.
I would like to see Vishy wins this time...!!!
Priem_01 wrote:
I would like to see Vishy wins this time...!!!
So would I Carlsen really annoyed me with what he was saying after the first match.
Euler24 wrote:
DAILYWATERSITTING wrote:
I mean, Anand plays well (nothing spectacular by the way, just solid chess) after years of dry games and dull draws (and a lot of losses) and people go like "Now he's back he'll win against Carlsen"... while Carlsen's worst results in the last years are 2nd place in tournament play a couple of times - plus Anand has not beaten Carlsen in classical in the last years... but ok! I said, it's stupid to even argue.
Lol Carlsens the master of boring chess games.
So what if he is? He's better than all of us combined. So he can do whatever he wants.
xBrainChildx wrote:
Euler24 wrote:
DAILYWATERSITTING wrote:
I mean, Anand plays well (nothing spectacular by the way, just solid chess) after years of dry games and dull draws (and a lot of losses) and people go like "Now he's back he'll win against Carlsen"... while Carlsen's worst results in the last years are 2nd place in tournament play a couple of times - plus Anand has not beaten Carlsen in classical in the last years... but ok! I said, it's stupid to even argue.
Lol Carlsens the master of boring chess games.
So what if he is? He's better than all of us combined. So he can do whatever he wants.
That's true I was just giving the reasons as to why I prefer Vishy.
If you look at 2014 worldcup, spain was last time champion and now it is not even qualified for next round
Why are all you constantly making reference to this disgrace? :'(
Euler24 wrote:
xBrainChildx wrote:
Euler24 wrote:
DAILYWATERSITTING wrote:
I mean, Anand plays well (nothing spectacular by the way, just solid chess) after years of dry games and dull draws (and a lot of losses) and people go like "Now he's back he'll win against Carlsen"... while Carlsen's worst results in the last years are 2nd place in tournament play a couple of times - plus Anand has not beaten Carlsen in classical in the last years... but ok! I said, it's stupid to even argue.
Lol Carlsens the master of boring chess games.
So what if he is? He's better than all of us combined. So he can do whatever he wants.
That's true I was just giving the reasons as to why I prefer Vishy.
Oh okay. Well, everyone is entitled to their choices! So I can't argue with that! ^.^ I personally have been a Carlsen fan before he was WC, even before he was 2800+. I just love the way he's able to strangle his opponents, then deliver the final blow. He's a positional strategist. It's like the debate between a lion vs a tiger. There was once a debate about which one would survive the longest/ put up the best fight against a full grown Grizzly bear. Of course none of them would win. It was said that the tiger would put up the best match because the lion would run in there thinking he's hot sh*t and get his back broke, while the tiger would wait and pick and choose his strikes. I feel like at the top level of chess, all everyone wants to see is two lions, (a.k.a attacking tactical players) duke it out to the finish, hit eachother with everything they have and see who's left standing. I prefer the tiger, a fighter who's smart and not reckless, someone who will let the other fighter run straight at him and set up a trap, that the other fighter might not see, because he's so busy thinking about tearing the other fighter limb from limb. That's why Carlsen wins. Because he is the tiger of chess. And that's why I'm a fan, and I favor him in the match. I also think that's why he's beating all the other top grandmasters (2750+). Because he uses extreme strategy. He'll wear you down until you're no longer a threat, then go for the jugular and squeeze down until you die. (Get checkmated or resign).
Jun 22, 2014
0
#58
Euler24 wrote:
I don't understand all the Carlsen fans saying Anand only won because of a blunder. Thats all Carlsen ever does he just plays on drawn positions and waits till someone blunders.
This is not completely true. And then again, I must also note that "playing on" in a drawish position isn't that easy. If that were so, any normal GM could just play on and win due to stubbornness. No, Carlsen plays extremely accurately and finds the best practical chances in any given position.
Jun 22, 2014
0
#59
Euler24 wrote:
DAILYWATERSITTING wrote:
I mean, Anand plays well (nothing spectacular by the way, just solid chess) after years of dry games and dull draws (and a lot of losses) and people go like "Now he's back he'll win against Carlsen"... while Carlsen's worst results in the last years are 2nd place in tournament play a couple of times - plus Anand has not beaten Carlsen in classical in the last years... but ok! I said, it's stupid to even argue.
Lol Carlsens the master of boring chess games.
Well, to be entirely fair, Anand has played more than a few "boring" games in the last few years. I think every Top player has.
Jun 23, 2014
0
#60
DM_knight wrote:
I don't know why people are having this persective like anand have no chance against carlsen.
So stop acting like blind and get rid of your childish behavior and act like grownup.
I had the same perspective last year despite all the Anand fans predicting a close match. It is not childishness, but simple reality. Carlsen is both younger and stronger than Anand and I predict another crushing victory for the Triple Crown World Champion. 
"Candidates 2013 was one of Carlsen's weakest results in the last 18 months, whereas Candidates 2014 was arguably Anand's best result in the same time period"
Candidates 2014 was Anand's by far best result in six years, and I doubt he ever will score such a great result again.
I'm pretty sure he's won a few world championships over the last six years. So that's not really true.