The end of Kasparov is near

Quit wriggling around on the hook C13 ! hehe.

Now about the spelling ? 

But why are you there champion?

Referring to nutscratch trolling the old timers' forum yesterday and picking fights with them. But he left after getting slapped around. I think he's up for a rematch, though. But we've gotta pry that bottle of sauce out of his hands first. Won't be easy; he's got a Kung Fu grip on it

But its the internet! not physical

He's wrong twice in less than an hour. But will the hippo admit it ! No chance. :))

Which illustrious-publication do you actually write for then C13 ?

The print version is not free with a standard membership.

Did you read the story, ostensibly, about Poe and the Turk in the last issue.  I think that is what our Scottish friend is talking about.

I'd be surprised to learn that Chess Life employs an editor who knows his abc's.

At best @Chesspolly is an underemployed writer, on the site for about 5 weeks now.

He apparently holds forum conversations in which he speaks for both sides, so perhaps he writes comic books.  That surely keeps his prose sharp and his wit rapier-like.

Don't expect a straight answer from him.  That's asking way too much.

hmm. Well hope it wasn't him that wrote the '' Poe & Turk '' article then ?  Basic attempt at proof-reading prior to publication would have revealed its awfulness quickly enough to correct.  

I am an employed writer.  Fortunately for the reading public I am not employed at being a writer.  Like a girl from Essex, I give it away.

And Chesspool, leave Netzach alone - he is a nice guy.  So far I have only seen you troll him.

And back to the prematurely surmised demise of Kasparov, is Fischer dead?  Is Capablanca dead?  Is Bronstein dead?  Well, possibly literally...point is as long as we find joy and lessons in their games and writings they will never reach an end.  Houdini and the like are higher rated than Carlsson will ever be but do we respect them?  Do we enjoy their games?  Probably not.  You can nod when what the computers do becomes clear but the worth of a player is not in the rating or accuracy of the moves.  If such were true we would not glory in Tal.

Amusingly, the author of that article mentioned his "book" several times in the article.  I've never seen a better advertisement to not buy something.

Thanks @Plenty.  A breath of on-topic sanity is always worth reading.  Much appreciated.

Seriously?

Carlsen is just an excellent elite player with an extremely high rating. Kasparov is a great player who reigned as a world champion for 15 years. You can't top that with a rating that has been continously inflated over the years anyway.

In fact, the same goes for Anand and Kramnik. Compared to them, in my view, Carlsen is "just another elite player." These guys have however, made history with such amazing fights in which they have proved themselves over and over.

There are good players, and then there are great players.

I don't think Carlsen is on some much lower "non-great" level than Anand and Kramnik. The latter were never even close to continuously score such results in their careers as Carlsen scored the last five years. Yes, he hasn't won the World Championship, but then he hasn't been given a title match after failing to qualify like Kramnik or played in a World Championship tournament like Anand. So to me Carlsen isn't "just another elite player" together with Radjabov and Nakamura. Since the first unofficial rating list from the end of the 1960s only Kasparov, Karpov and Fischer have been #1 for a longer period than Carlsen, who still is only 21 years old.

Appropriate or not, I think he already is more than just a good player that has the potential to one day become a great player. Over the last 50 years at most three players repeatedly scored results comparable to or better than Carlsen in a similar time frame. He has been top three in his last 20 tournaments, his Elo performance in his last eleven tournaments has been higher than the rating of any other player on the rating list, etc. I don't think he will become the greatest player ever, but that's much to ask when there is a Kasparov to compete with. 

My impression is that Carlsen never will have the same attitude as Kasparov, who wanted to win at almost any price for decades. Nigel Short said at some occasion that Kasparov was competing against Morphy and Lasker and Fischer in every game he played, and he worked very hard. Carlsen seems much more relaxed, and wouldn't enjoy chess if he worked as hard as Kasparov. I wouldn't be surprised if he would quit the game 5-10 years from now rather than compete against Morphy and Lasker.

Is this son 55?  :-p

I heard Carlsen quit working with Kasparov because he thought Kasparov was too demanding

What's your source for that ? & where did you hear it ??

http://blog.chess.com/SonofPearl/carlsen-on-working-with-kasparov

I think I read it in NIC but it may have been an online article that was linked on a chess website I used to play on. After the Carlsen- Kasparov split, Kasparov supposedly worked with Nakamura for a while. Kasparov is intense; could totally see where that kind of intensity could be difficult to deal with over the long haul