Aronian vs Carlsen - Norway Chess 2017

stxschlsv

 

stxschlsv

Everyone says Aronian played well, but was it Carlsen who played bad? If you had seen this game with no names, would you have thought it was a game between two grandmasters?

ESP-918

If I've seen this game with no names I could definitely tell it's 2700+ level of play , so many moves are so advanced and so many steps ahead I can instantly tell such high level of play.

stxschlsv
ESP-918 wrote:

If I've seen this game with no names I could definitely tell it's 2700+ level of play , so many moves are so advanced and so many steps ahead I can instantly tell such high level of play.

Are you serious? I think they both look like 1200-players. My uncle Jalavan says they look like 1200-players, so I think the same as him.

Anyone with a little more understanding of high-level chess who will care to comment?

LaLiam
You're a 1,200, telling a 1,800 that two super GM's play at the same level as you? Get off the site
bb_gum234
stxschlsv wrote:
ESP-918 wrote:

If I've seen this game with no names I could definitely tell it's 2700+ level of play , so many moves are so advanced and so many steps ahead I can instantly tell such high level of play.

Are you serious? I think they both look like 1200-players. My uncle Jalavan says they look like 1200-players, so I think the same as him.

Anyone with a little more understanding of high-level chess who will care to comment?

Well, what does a GM game look like? All players rated roughly 400 points higher than you will look the same. The difference between 2200 and 2800 is not noticeable for the great majority of amateurs.


Every move up to 16.Bxe4 seems logical to me. The exchange sac is surprising at first, but after 13.c5 it's already clear that black has problems and maybe even the queen will be trapped. No special calculation here, it just feels reasonable.

Maybe you didn't like 14...Ne4 because it loses a pawn, but the material isn't what's important here. 100% of black's pieces suck, and the queen is almost trapped. If black does nothing white will win easily. Part of black's pieces sucking is losing control of the dark squares, the knights blocking each other, and no targets or pawn breaks. Getting rid of the d5 pawn pressures white's pawns. For example imagine 16...e5 and if white captures that pawn then the d2 bishop is pinned and white's b4 and c5 pawns both lose a defender. And now the a5 break looks good too. Black is really close to punching back in a big way but then suddenly 17.Bxh7 and white wins his material back plus interest. I don't include 17.Bxh7 in my "seems reasonable" moves because it's surprising (to me) and requires a lot of calculation to back it up (at least for me it would).


So anyway, to me it looks like a high level game. The usual signs of a game played by players better than me are logical moves followed by surprising moves that turn out to be correct. No, I wouldn't say it's super-GM level, but again, no games look like super GM to me. Somewhere around 2300-2400 they all start looking the same to me.

bb_gum234

Oh, but the general pattern of moves 17-19 shouldn't be surprising. This is really close to a greek gift sacrifice. 17 was surprising to me because a lot of the common piece placement that makes the greek gift work isn't present in the position.

closedforce
stxschlsv wrote:
ESP-918 wrote:

If I've seen this game with no names I could definitely tell it's 2700+ level of play , so many moves are so advanced and so many steps ahead I can instantly tell such high level of play.

Are you serious? I think they both look like 1200-players. My uncle Jalavan says they look like 1200-players, so I think the same as him.

Anyone with a little more understanding of high-level chess who will care to comment?

You have got to be kidding me. Would you be able to play the same quality as Magnus and Levon did?

 

stxschlsv
closedforce wrote:You have got to be kidding me. Would you be able to play the same quality as Magnus and Levon did?

 

Usually no, but this game I would play better. I would also have beaten Magnus Carlsen, because I watched the game live on web, and before almost every move I predicted the moves chosen by Aronian. I would do the same as Aronian, therefore I would have beaten Magnus Carlsen.

ace_mar
Lol the hindsight bias from the OP is huge
SuperSam1

I know this might come as a surprise to you stxschlsv, but Carlsen IS human and humans sometimes make mistakes.surprise.png

stxschlsv
SuperSam1 wrote:

I know this might come as a surprise to you stxschlsv, but Carlsen IS human and humans sometimes make mistakes.

Exactly what I say. That is why I could have beaten Magnus Carlsen. In fact I did actually beat him, because I made almost the same moves as Aronian. I believe Aronian thinks like me when it comes to chess.

BlunderLots
UtrechtRose wrote:
stxschlsv wrote:
closedforce wrote:You have got to be kidding me. Would you be able to play the same quality as Magnus and Levon did?

 

Usually no, but this game I would play better. I would also have beaten Magnus Carlsen, because I watched the game live on web, and before almost every move I predicted the moves chosen by Aronian. I would do the same as Aronian, therefore I would have beaten Magnus Carlsen.

 

The important word, in this post is "almost".

 

I too would have played almost all the same moves as Aronian.  It is the few moves that we would have played differently that are responsible for the huge gulf in strength between Aronian and me (and stxschlsv)

 

 

Exactly. It's easy to guess many of Aronian's moves. But those small, subtle moves that come unexpectedly? Those moves are built on an understanding of the position that goes deeper than ours, and it's why Aronian is 2800+, while the rest of us aren't. tongue.png

stxschlsv
UtrechtRose wrote:
stxschlsv wrote:
closedforce wrote:You have got to be kidding me. Would you be able to play the same quality as Magnus and Levon did?

 

Usually no, but this game I would play better. I would also have beaten Magnus Carlsen, because I watched the game live on web, and before almost every move I predicted the moves chosen by Aronian. I would do the same as Aronian, therefore I would have beaten Magnus Carlsen.

 

The important word, in this post is "almost".  

Your assumption would be correct, was it not for the fact that the few moves not similar: mines were better! Your unison appraisals for grandmaster's moves resembleses religious beliefs. Off course someone with 1200 can make good moves too! Uncle Jalavan agree with me, so nothing to discuss really. Thank you.

stxschlsv
Little-Charles wrote:

Try picking them live BEFORE he plays them. Your mileage may vary.

As I already enlightened you, that is exactly what I did. Off course, anyone can be master in retrospect.

Honestly, I have beaten Magnus Carlsen. There is no way around that fact. You can choose disbelief, but most will see the realities. 

closedforce

I'd choose disbelief if it comes to it, because a 1200 cannot understand subtle moves. And grandmasters are called grandmasters for a reason: They can consistently make good moves, and also can consistently beat lower-rated players like 1200s.

closedforce
stxschlsv wrote:
UtrechtRose wrote:
stxschlsv wrote:
closedforce wrote:You have got to be kidding me. Would you be able to play the same quality as Magnus and Levon did?

 

Usually no, but this game I would play better. I would also have beaten Magnus Carlsen, because I watched the game live on web, and before almost every move I predicted the moves chosen by Aronian. I would do the same as Aronian, therefore I would have beaten Magnus Carlsen.

 

The important word, in this post is "almost".  

Your assumption would be correct, was it not for the fact that the few moves not similar: mines were better! Your unison appraisals for grandmaster's moves resembleses religious beliefs. Off course someone with 1200 can make good moves too! Uncle Jalavan agree with me, so nothing to discuss really. Thank you.

Also, yes, 1200s can make good moves. But they can't make 30 straight good moves either without the aiding of a chess engine.

BlunderLots

In regards to the OP—Carlsen himself has said that Aronian is the one player he struggles against the most.

Many of us have that one equal opponent who always seems to give us a difficult time ... For Magnus, it's Levon.

gingerninja2003
stxschlsv wrote:

 

Usually no, but this game I would play better. I would also have beaten Magnus Carlsen, because I watched the game live on web, and before almost every move I predicted the moves chosen by Aronian. I would do the same as Aronian, therefore I would have beaten Magnus Carlsen.

that is complete and utter BULLSH oh wait the dinners ready.

also you said almost every move so the moves you didn't predict would've changed the coarse of the game and you'd have lost.