How does Magnus survive without opening prep???

While chess is certainly won with talent, it is entirely possible to be well-prepared, and for the opponent to be unable to break out of that "shell of preparation".

sapiendust wrote-

Caruana could have a chance if he is on form, but that doesn't seem likely given his abysmal performance at Wijk aan Zee.

..........................................................................................................

The only problem with what you said above...is that Caruana will not be part of The Candidates.

The full participants will be-

Carlsen

Aronian

Kramnik

Gelfand

Grischuk

Ivanchuk

Radjabov

Svidler

I agree completely. And with the format favoring the player who bludgeons the rest of the field the most, I don't see either Kramnik or Aronian being able to keep pace with Carlsen, even if they win their mini-match against him! 

But if Carlsen does come down with a nasty stomach virus or is otherwise unable to perform as well as he might, only Aronian or Kramnik would be able to take advantage of the situation and win the tournament.

Too bad neither Nakamura nor Kamsky will be playing...

I'm so glad I did a thread on the Candidates two years ago! Just look at the predictions in that thread, then compare them to now. The Candidates is a very unpredictable thing

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/the-candidates?page=1

trysts you are awesome

Thank you!

• 9 hours ago · Quote · #61

  waffllemaster

  Catching a small error when it happens and using it to win is nearly impossible between equal players.  Maybe once or twice you get lucky, but to do it consistently is really not possible.  Carlsen's youth certainly helps him during these longs games, but I think his performance shows he is nearly a class above the number 2-10 players in the world at this time.

• 6 hours ago · Quote · #62

  NMozzie_c_cobblepot

  BobbitStitcher wrote:

  Carlsen is young, so obviously he hasn't had the accumulated opening knowledge that comes from experience. He frequently utilizes his youthful endurance to grind out wins from equal endings, a style which is not particularly admirable but which has worked for him.

  This is basically what I said, but rephrased. Again: Karpov reincarnated.

I find it funny that the 2 of you should say that. I can totally relate to the idea of just trying to get to an equal endgame, in which I can pull out a win. I think perhaps Magnus isn't looking to wow everyone 1/3 of the time and having to live with screwing up 1/3 of the time. He is looking to put himself in a position to win and at worst not lose, everytime. I think that is one of the smartest things Magnus has done, is stick to playing fundamentally sound chess, instead of trying to wow everyone who says he is the next champ.

"I can totally relate to the idea of just trying to get to an equal endgame, in which I can pull out a win"

Sure, anyone can relate to the idea. The task is actually doing it properly.

Yeah it is easier said than done, but I see some players who try to immitate Tal...or queen you to death as I call it...

Oops, can't believe I didn't notice that. I had seen the candidates list recently, but I guess I mentally conflated 'top GMs' and 'Candidate participants'.

Thanks for the correction!

Great points on the endings, Estragon! I haven't seen it explained so clearly.

Estragon's points make sense....

until you look at Carlsen-Karjakin. This is a game that any master would be expected to hold. Carlsen's magic in the endgame involves re-evaluating what is a "dead draw". He has shown that completely even endings where both sides have two rooks are often winnable. Carlsen is rewriting what positions can be considered easy draws, even at the grandmaster level.

There is lots of precedent for champion chess players limiting their opening preparation. Look at Capablanca, for instance, who was notoriously neglectful in this area. But when Marshall (for instance) sprung his long-prepared home-grown Marshall Gambit against him, he broke it over the board. And Fischer, who prepared his openings perhaps more than anyone, limited his preparation by sticking to the king's pawn game with white all the way up to the Spassky match, when he suddenly switched to queen's pawn like a boxer suddenly shifting to southpaw! Fischer also relentlessly sought out old lines that had been disregarded by others, finding new possiblities in them. Lasker, Alekhine, Tal, all often wandered away from the accepted theory of their time and by so doing enriched theory. We may not know exactly what Carlsen is up to until he tells us, and he is not going to reveal his competitive edge anytime soon.

You misread what I said. I didn't say that GMs would automatically agree to a draw in that position. I said that GMs would be able to hold that position fairly comfortably.

Every GM who commented on the game that I saw (and there were quite a few) expressed surprise that Black would lose from that position.

Carlsen didn't just beat anyone from that equal position, he beat the #6 player in the world from an even position. It took some collusion by Black to lose this, but Carlsen has made a habit of winning these comfortably drawish positions!

This isn't a skill that Fischer showed in abundance.His skill, and Capa's before him, was in recognising winning endgame positions before his opponents did. Carlsen wins from even positions.

I can't think of a player who did this as well as Carlsen, but he reminds me of Ulf Andersson more than anyone else. Andersson would find amazing resources in drawish endgames.

Still, it's interesting that often younger players are portrayed as being incapable of such subtleties (and they are said to require the maturity and experience of older GMs to manage such grinds).

I think it's all a big myth . I guess the reasoning goes the older players like to play wiser instead of going for "cheap tactical tricks," but what I find is that there are young players all over the place that like positional/grinding chess at practically every level, GM to amateur (myself included).

According to Keres (who I was just reading on the subject), young players tend to like complications and attacks and find technical matters dull (not to mention the fact that they haven't had time yet to do all the research).  He discusses all this in Power Chess (made up of the columns he wrote for Chess Life way back when).

But IMO it's not fair to call players in Carlsen's generation young and inexperienced in that sense.  After 10-15 years of studying and tournament play surely they've encountered enough chess to know how to play a technical game.

These talented 10 year olds, sure, they woudln't know how.

'Carlsen's strategy as white is different from most players. His goal isn't to gain a theoretical advantage, it's to reach a playable middle game. There's far more scope if you aren't concerned about gaining an advantage.'

Ah but then the Openings Forum will tell you the variation isn't 'playable' :)