"Andreikin beat Alexey Dreev, a nobody."
lol.
Who will win between Lagrave and Tomashevsky? And Dreev, a nobody? Well, you certainly know your stuff don't you?
Who will win between Lagrave and Tomashevsky? And Dreev, a nobody? Well, you certainly know your stuff don't you?
Compared to Levon Aronian, Dreev is relatively unknown. If you care to go out on a limb and make a prediction on the games, go for it.
"Andreikin beat Alexey Dreev, a nobody."
lol.
Perhaps I could've said it more delicately, but I was trying to grab the reader's attention with a bit of hyperbole to show the gap between Levon Aronian and Alexey Dreev.
there were a few completely moronic comments in there, that's for sure. firstly, peter svidler finished 3rd in the candidates, ahead of your god levon aronian, even if it was just on tiebreaks. pretty average, huh.
second ivanchuk had a crazy time at the candidates - losing 5 games on time, including one game where he was giving levon an incredibly difficult time in a budapest gambit of all openings, and then beating both vladimir kramnik and magnus carlsen. in terms of the chess he played, he performed far from poorly, he just went into self destruct mode and timed out way too often.
and thirdly, as has already been pointed out, calling dreev a nobody really shows your ignorance.
Kramnik has played beautiful games so far and as a highly rated player, he deserved to enjoy playing weaker players. I still believe Kramnik exprience and high class will give him better chances to win.
MVL FTW!! It's gonna be tough, but i want to support the "outsider". I also think he really believes he can take Kramnik down
The other pair are friends and team-mates playing against each-other. Tough call
I am not impressed by the creativeness of Andreikin (not in this tournament and not before). (Of course, he would beat me 10:0 in a match, I just don't see he has brought something new to WORLD chess so far.) In two matches he won in the tiebreak, he seems to be very good in making 'economic decisions'.
All other 3 players played very good and nice games (blunders seem to happen in KO tournaments more often, so we have to 'forgive' them). Especially I am impressed by MVL.
Nevertheless, my prediction for the final is:
Kramnik - Tomashevsky.
Vachier-Lagrave winning against Kramnik ? Sounds very unplausible.
For the other two, I don't know...
Vachier-Lagrave winning against Kramnik ? Sounds very unplausible.
...but not impossible!
WHAAAAT!!!? it's already started? meh, i thought the games would start later
:(
i don't think it's so implausible for MVL to beat Kramnik. he is playing very, very well at this tournament.
Ivanchuk took out Wei Yi.
which tournament is this ?
An imagined one, clearly. AFAIK, they have never played.
Ah well, maybe he took him out for a burger.
No doubt he will when he needs some tips on improving his play in the Candidates.
The first two games showed little determination of MVL or Andreikin with white pieces. It increases the odds in favor of Kramnik and Tomashevsky. Both are better than their opponents in the opening.
The first two games showed little determination of MVL or Andreikin with white pieces. It increases the odds in favor of Kramnik and Tomashevsky. Both are better than their opponents in the opening.
Totally correct and rather disappointing. Lagrave could've played on for a small advantage. I think he should've made Kramnik work. Kramnik is known to make a big blunder every once in a while. I think Lagrave could've softened him up a bit. As far as Andreikin goes, the commentators, and Kramnik seem to agree that he's just playing for rapid time controls.
I like Maxime Vacheir Lagrave to beat Vladimir Kramnik.
I like Evgeny Tomashevsky to beat Dmitry Andreikin.
Here is why. In the Lagrave/Kramnik match, Lagrave has a much higher motivation to win than Kramnik. Based on getting in to next cycle's world candidate's match Kramnik will already be in based on his high average rating. Lagrave would not be in unless he beats Kramnik. That's a motivational difference of significant value. Based on the competition they faced getting to this spot, I think Lagrave has played tougher competition. Round #1 both players won their lowly opponents 2-0. So no difference there. Round #2 Lagrave beat Ortiz Suarez 2-0 who knocked out Judith Polgar. Kramnik beat Kobolia 2.5 to 1.5. I give a few credit points to Lagrave here for being undefeated and winning a chess legend. In Round #3 Lagrave beat Perez 1.5 to 0.5 (No tie breaks necessary) Kramnik went to tiebreaks to beat Areshchenko 3-1. I would call it an even performance by both with a slight pull to Lagrave. In Round #4, Lagrave disposed of last year's runner up to the world championship, Boris Gelfand, 2.5 to 1.5. Kramnik beat up on poor old Vassily Ivanchuk who was one of the worst competitors in last year's candidates tournament, 1.5 to 0.5. I give a big plus to Lagrave here. In round #5 Lagrave beat one of the world's top 3 rated players, Fabiano Caruanna, 2.5 to 1.5. Kramnik took out Anton Korobov 1.5 to 0.5. I think it's obvious that Lagrave beats Kramnik.
As far as the Tomashevsky/Andreikin match goes, both players should be just as motivated as the other to win. So I wouldn't really give a motivational edge to either one. However, I feel Tomashevsky beat better competition so far. In round 3 Tomashevsky disposed of the #1 seed, Levon Aronian, then in round 4 Tomashevsky was almost eliminated but turned the tables by blowing out Morozevich in the last 3 games. Moro should be thankful Tomashevky gave him a draw in the last game. Then, Tomashevsky takes out Gate Kamsky in round 5 who some were claiming played the tournament's most brilliant game. Trent Lawrence said that! I'm pretty sure Susan Polgar backed it up. In round # 3 while Levon Aronian was being disposed of by Tomashevsky, Andreikin beat Aleksy Dreev, a nobody. The announcers were saying that Karjakin was not on his game and Svidler while being good, isn't one of the best in the world's elite. Notice Peter Svidler's very average performance in the candidate's tournament.
Winners will be Lagrave and Tomashevsky.
Agree? If so why. Disagree? Prove me wrong.