If Anand gets to +1 in the match...

...can he easily...and I do mean easily...draw the rest of the games to retain his title?

How easy is it for chess players of his strength to intentionally draw games, with the White or Black pieces? Carlsen and Anand both seem to be quite good...as Magnus says...to pull the emergency brake, forcing a draw.

---------------------------------

Match strategy: Unlike a tournament, in match play, a plus one score is all one needs to win a match. One win could do it. Do you think that both of these guys are waiting until they find a position, that with little risk, they can press for a win?

Why should either one of them press when the position is unclear, or just a slight advantage for one side? It sounds too risky, when winning one game, and drawing eleven is all one needs to win the match.

You know it is bad when we are not talking about the actual games/moves.

Did Anand publicly announce (t)his strategy somewhere?  Why are we rushing to judge (or even better, claim to know exactly what a super GM is thinking) from one "early in the match" game?  

yeah that makes sense, i agree that it isnt to hard to draw a game, to win on the other hand...

Shivsky wrote:

Did Anand publicly announce (t)his strategy somewhere?  Why are we rushing to judge (or even better, claim to know exactly what a super GM is thinking) from one "early in the match" game?  

----------------------------

I have heard of no announced strategy, from either side. My gut tells me that when one of the two feels like he can press on for a win, he will. My point is this: whoever wins the first game, does it stand to reason that that person will play it safe, only looking to draw the rest of the games?

Whoever is first to win one of the twelve games, if that even happens, will have a huge advantage going forward, I would guess.

Interesting thought due to Carlsen's unambitious openings... it may be very easy as long as Anand's in good form.  Hmm.

waffllemaster wrote:

Musikamole wrote:

...can he easily...and I do mean easily...draw the rest of the games to retain his title?

How easy is it for chess players of his strength to intentionally draw games

Interesting thought due to Carlsen's unambitious openings... it may be very easy as long as he's in good form.  Hmm.

---------------------

All of the commentators keep saying that Carlsen does not strive for any solid advantage out of the opening, but looks to grind down opponents in the middle and end, I guess like Karpov. That is what I am hearing. How true is this?

If Vishy is better at opening theory than Carlsen, which is also what I am hearing, then I don't see Anand struggling to equalize with Black. Carlsen's Reti opening in game one was pretty unambitious, don't you think?

Regarding Anand's health, he has lost weight and has been exercising, in preparation for this match. He is better fit than when he beat Gelfand.

No, why?

Scottrf wrote:

Musikamole wrote:

 Carlsen's Reti opening in game one was pretty unambitious, don't you think?

No, why?

----------

Anand got a great position. It looked like he was playing White. That's why.

I don't know better than the commentators :p

It seems like that's exactly what he's doing.

I do think Carlsen's openings have been unambitious.

It wasn't a poisoned pawn Najdorf or some sharp Slav line

But look after move 10 in game 1.  Anand is super solid with comfortable development.  White's c4 pawn is loose and b2 bishop will need work.  In games where white presses white has something he can point to and say "this is what gives me winning chances"

Conversely, the lines with most theoritical advantage are the most heavily analysed. He's showing ambition by trying to play to his strengths. He's the best player in the world with his way of playing, I'm not ready to criticise it after 2 draws against the world champion.

Yeah, he wants to win, and this may be his best way of doing it.

Waiting for those 80 move games where Carlsen shows us some of his genius maneuvering.

Oh, I see what you guys mean by ambitious, ok.

When I say unambitious I'm thinking in terms of the position on the board... from white's (or black's) perspective not Anand'd or Carlsen's perspective.

One thing about top level chess is certain positions, right out of the opening even, can be an all but guaranteed draw if they want the draw because the players have such good technique.  Of course if Carlsen makes you play for 80 moves in an equal position and you get tired then he has chances.  Or if he has a genius idea and plays in a way no one thought of (which he's capable of doing).

One could also argue that Anand is choosing the "play it annoyingly safe" route to antagonize/frustrate Carlsen into taking the first big calculated risk as there will be fewer and fewer games left to win the throne and and boy wonder will soon grow just a little impatient.

Just saying there's room for a lot of gamesmanship here that isn't necessarily pleasing to look at.

I doubt Anand pretty much  gives a rat's a## if people think of him as growing weaker-by-the-day or loses more fans on account of his style of play. 

Fear_the_Queen wrote:

You are confusing lack of ambition with lack of execution.

----------------------------

Carlsen wants to win. No doubt about that. He is an extremely talented and ambitious young man. Good grief, he is only 22. Wow!

I understand that the Reti is a real opening, an opening where White can play for an advantage. I think Carlsen tried that opening in hopes of steering Anand into unchartered waters. Well, that backfired, since Anand got the better position and Carlsen pulled the emergency brake.

Carlsen wants to get Anand out of book and just play chess. That is what I am hearing. Maybe the Reti is not the way to go.

I don't think we have enough data yet to evaluate their level of ambition.

One thing to bear in mind is that short draws with black will definitely favor Anand, there's no question about it imo. I don't feel the need to elaborate this point.

So. In the first game, white was caught off guard, and Carlsen "pulled the emergency break." And Anand was happy to achieve a short draw with black. In the second game, it was Anand who was definitely out-booked, and eventhough he was not in any trouble, he simply chose the least sharp line because he thought Carlsen might have analyzed the sharp lines and he would understand the position better. So he just traded the queens instead of Qg4. It's a rational, practical, intelligent decision. 

So when being outbooked in the opening comes into the scene, making an unambitious decision in the game is the ambitiously practical decision in the match. 

If the first six games are drawn, the odds of the first win being decisive go up significantly. It's not really possible to completely shut down an opponent, but it is possible for a +2700 to draw six games, as Grischuk has shown.

Some of the greatest players ever were able to "win on demand". Kasparov managed to do it in the final game of his 1987 match against Karpov. 

Shivsky wrote:

One could also argue that Anand is choosing the "play it annoyingly safe" route to antagonize/frustrate Carlsen into taking the first big calculated risk as there will be fewer and fewer games left to win the throne and and boy wonder will soon grow just a little impatient.

Just saying there's room for a lot of gamesmanship here that isn't necessarily pleasing to look at.

---------------------------

I've heard that theory: frustrating Carlsen with drawish play, and getting him to lose patience and overextend, which he has been known to do. It makes sense. I would not be at all surprised if Anand were just simply waiting for Carlsen to lose patience, and mess up.

Of course we do. They are playing for the world championship. You don't get there by accident. An unambitious person will never be world champion of chess.