Magnus Carlsen aims for "amorphous" positions in early middle games which offer lots of positional candidate moves, each with about equal evaluation, and specializes in winning the initiative in the middlegame, not the opening.
But against Anand, he could have a lot of mental energy to win back the initiative just to hold the draw as black. If Carlsen has shown a weakness it is in stamina - back-to-back losses in the final rounds of the candidates. I think longer match will favor Anand if Anand can manage to keep the score relatively close.
a quick search didn't find the answer here.
I want to know what people here think about Magnus Carlsen's openings, are they his strength or his weakness. In particular in his match comming up.
The arguments I've here on the net of expert level chess players and maybe some masters is that he may not know some openings as well as other top players. This would argue it to be a weakness.
The other side is that he has the greatest variety of openings of the top players. Obviously this argues it is his strength as he is hard to prepare against and may know obscure openings deeply that his contemporaries do not.
Are there any merit to either of these arguments and do either outweigh each other as to him having and edge or not over Anand?
Within my limits of chess knowledge, when I see his games over the last two years, I see him throwing a lot of different stuff out. I tend to lean towards it being his strength. But at the same time, I see these games being won in the middle game, so the answer could be neither. It is almost obsurd to claim a "weakness" with a player that high rated.