"The inspiration is lost amid the rampant desire of armchair champions and carlsen fanboys to cut his most recent opponent down based solely on age"
So Carlsen's play is not inspiring because you think "Carlsen fanboys" desire to cut down Anand solely because of his age? Any examples of these "fanboys"?
I wonder if there are any "Anand fanboys" that make his chess uninspiring?
It's cool that he can compete without playing all the theory that the other GMs do.
Very cool.
When I saw the thread title I remembered the game that got me interested in chess for the first time:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1019420
Exciting, isn't it? It doesn't need cheap tactical tricks (sorry, couldn't resist) to win a chess game.
OK, I exaggerated about it being totally lost. Carlsen is a good player, and I'm very inspired by the fact that he doesn't need to know a ton of theory. But if you really want me to hunt up an ageist, I will find one.
Carlsen knows a ton of theory.
A ton of theory more than the others' ton. It's naive to think he plays dice with his opening choices. To avoid reputable lines he (and his helpers) should swot even more than his opponents.
These days even Calrsen is lacking inspiration in his own play.
Granted, he finally won a tournament in London (don't get me started on the turd in the punchbowl that was the GCT tiebreaks) but he has drifted quite a bit this year without performing at his own rather high standards.
He seems to have lost motivation.
This is madness ...
How can seeing his games and results not inspire you?
Surely you feel inspired to study the game more deeply than you currently do.
I watch that man pull victories from thin air. Against GM's mind you. Unbelievable.
I'm a Bridge player, but recently getting back into chess purely because of Carlsen. No one else. Carlsen! What a legend.
I'm committing a lot of time out of my day to study endgames and positional chess. I'm going through Dvoretsky's endgame books to strengthen my currently massive hole in knowledge there.
His play inspires me greatly.
I agree with Matt.
You can safely say that someone who won 9 out of the last 11 tournaments he participated is "lacking motivation" - right? Normally he should have won all eleven of them, and shoot his opponents in the head- else he is obviously lacking motivation... At his last tournament he had more decisive games than ALL the other players combined, but this should not distract us from his apparent... lack of motivation.
I just wonder what the heck some people are drinking/ smoking.
You can safely say that someone who won 9 out of the last 11 tournaments he participated is "lacking motivation" - right? Normally he should have won all eleven of them, and shoot his opponents in the head- else he is obviously lacking motivation... At his last tournament he had more decisive games than ALL the other players combined, but this should not distract us from his apparent... lack of motivation.
I just wonder what the heck some people are drinking/ smoking.
To be fair, the comment about him lacking motivation was posted 7 months ago, before his latest string of victories.
It's cool that he can compete without playing all the theory that the other GMs do.