It's early. I don't want to see Anand again either. He can't win against Carlsen and I didn't like the way he behaved in the post-game interviews during the match.
Carlsen vs Anand rematch
Sort:
"It's early. I don't want to see Anand again either. He can't win against Carlsen and I didn't like the way he behaved in the post-game interviews during the match."
+1
I don't know. I actually wouldn't mind anand in the championship match if he plays well enough to win the candidates tournament
tigerprowl wrote:
Instead of these stupid tournaments (no Nakamura or Caruana in the Candidates? Come on guys), let's see an Aronian Carlsen match. If Carlsen wins, then 1 month later, he plays Kramnik, wins, plays Nakamura, etc...
Instead of getting a winner from a contrived list arbitrarily picked to create a boring tournament, have a real match with multiple games. Same 2 players. None of these musical chair games, player 1 vs. player 2, player 1 vs. player 3 next day.
agreed +1
Man...it would be tough to remain world champion for very long if you had to defend every month.
Finishing second in a tournament shouldn't qualify you to compete for the world championship. Wildcard is questionable as well.
anand is an indian and i want a rematch and want him to win.
best of luck anand
What I like about Internet is that everyone there knows how to do anything in the best way.
Except, of course, how to become a man who decides how to do things
tigerprowl wrote:
"There is nothing arbitrary about it."
Someone or a group chose winners from a select group of previous tournaments. If we were to SELECT the winner from the London Classic 2013, then Nakamura would be playing.
If it had been chosen, before the Candidates round starts, that the winner from LC13 gets picked, there would have been more competition at that tournament.
Almost any selection rule is fine, as long as it's agreed upon beforehand.
tigerprowl wrote:
"Almost any selection rule is fine, as long as it's agreed upon beforehand."
How can Nakamura agree before he wins the London Classic 2013? It is not a selection. It is a manipulation. That is not "fine" homey yo.
Huh ? That's exactly the problem. You have to agree with the rules before the selecting tournaments take place. Otherwise you are just texas-sharpshooting.
Mar 15, 2014
0
#12
Yeah its pretty stupid...Caruana and Nakamura are in the FIDE top 10. They should have been there...
tigerprowl wrote:
"Almost any selection rule is fine, as long as it's agreed upon beforehand."
How can Nakamura agree before he wins the London Classic 2013? It is not a selection. It is a manipulation. That is not "fine" homey yo.
Lol, you're giving quite a show. Relax, buddy.
Anand is on fire:
@Phildoor 2000. What the heck are you talking about? Anand's was a very gracious loser and congratulated Carlsen in his post game press conferences.. so I dunno what you are talking about..
And second, his experience and match preparation gives him one of the best chances to defeat Carlsen, added to the fact that he will be extremely motivated if he manages to win the candidates.
The winner deserves to challenge, and ANAND is the KING!
LONG LIVE THE KING!
Mar 15, 2014
0
#16
If you think Carlsen - Anand was a dull chess match take a look at the Anand - Gelfand match the year before. MatoJelic on YouTube did videos of the games if you're interested in seeing them. If I remember correctly they were agreeing to draws after 20 moves with most of the pieces still on the board.
Mar 15, 2014
0
#17
@KnightDwarf: Anand behaved well enough with Carlsen but he was extremely rude to the woman who was the moderator. I only remember one occasion: she asked Anand if, in a certain critical position, he was trying to calculate every variation to the end. His reply was, "No, I was thinking about what to have for dinner tonight."
There were quite a few moments like that. Now, Anand had just lost a game and it is understandable that he might be touchy about it. Still, he was still World Champion at this point and he didn't seem to understand how little this made him look. I lost respect for him.
Well that is kind of a stupid question. Did she also ask if he likes chess?
Anybody who wins the candidate, deserves to challenge Carlsen. It does not matter what fans want. People said before the candidates that Anand has the zero chances apart from Dimitry while all others including Karjakin can win the this tournament but now Anand leads with two wins . Now if someone says, Kramnik, Aronian would win, we can accept it, but to say Karjakin and Mamedyarov can win but Anand cannot, is being biased to say the least. The fact is, anyone on his day could beat the other guy as at this level, it is more a matter of form and physchology. Differences in technical skills are non-existent or negligible regardless of what the ELO rating says.
Anand is tied for 1st! Carlsen vs Anand again? I don't want to see that crap! Does anyone other than Kramnik even have a chance against Carlsen?
I would be okay with these challengers:
Kramnik and Aronian because, their strength conceivably could keep it close enough that one stroke of luck could be enough for the upset.
Carauna because we don't know where his ceiling is, and so he could potentially challenge Carlsen.
Nakamura because, despite his history of complete failure against Carlsen, he still shows courage and thinks he is invincible. It's conceivable that if he stops blundering, he is crazy enough to score some wins.
Obviously Carauna and Nakamura will not be the challenger, but I would prefer to see them over any of the other 6 challengers. We know what the other 6 are, and it's not good enough to take down Carlsen. They are not quite strong enough, or lacking the courage to take a risk and go for the knockout.