I have no training in statistics, but that doesn't seem right, that if a player wins game 9 that they will have a 75% chance of winning the title. Also considering in the event of a tie there are additional games 75% seems like too nice of a round number... just because 4 games left (?)
By the way I want Anand to win -- it's nice that it's been a close match, lots of fun ok. But now Anand can go ahead and win the next 3 I don't want it to be close anymore :)
75% chance of winning?
Anand not comfortable in the Sicilian?
Whatever you are having pass it on cause it's obviously good shit.
if u give equal probability to win/draw/lose in each game (forgeting about TB for now), the chance of winning if anand wins game 9, would be close to 60% i guess, not 75%.
Being Indian I want that Annand should win 9th game.
I'd think that Anand may be done with the Catalan, maybe less so with teh Slav. But who knows, they have teams of some of the best chess players and theoriticians getting ready to spring that one special move. What would be surprising is if Anand played the Gruenfeld in game 10 or 12.
I wonder, will we see an increased popularity of Slavs and Catalans after this match?
I'm just really enjoying this match whoever wins - it's a pity that it wasn't 20 games instead of 12... Saying that, I do like Topalov and if pushed would say I was supporting him rather than Anand.
Like others, I think that Anand will stick with the Catalan for his last two white openings.
Anand has to stop this Catalan stuff. Enough already. Topalov is getting the gist of it. Anand, you one trick pony you. Stop it! Even baseball pitchers know enough to mix it up a bit. He keeps throwing the same pitch and it's not striking him out anymore. He's connecting. New pitch would make some sense.
Anand may open with d4 in game-9. He may still preserrve e4 for game-11
Wow, what a load of manure.
Anand is comfortable enough with the Sicilian to school Carlsen in the opening:
He is comfortable enough to play it blindfold:
Anand prefers 1.d4 against Topalov because while they are more or less equal in a tactical melee, Topalov resides in his shadow in positional battles.
I think it is going to be another draw in the 9th game!
Let's do this mathematically. According to wikipedia, before this match Anand with white was 13-4-16 against Topalov, while Topalov was 9-4-21 with white. In this match they are both 2-0-2 with white. So, now their records as white stand as 15-4-18 (Anand) and 11-4-23 (Topalov).
I'm too lazy to do the math so I wrote a computer simulation instead.
Based strictly on these stats (and games 1-8 already having been played), Anand will win the classical match outright 42% of the time, Topalov 28%, and it will be drawn 30% of the time (leading to tie breaks). If you think the rapid match is 50% for each (although people seem to think Anand has the edge, I will leave it at 50-50 for these purposes), then that works out to a win% of 57% for Anand, 43% for Topalov.
If Anand wins game 9 (with white), then Anand will go on to win the match outright 66% of the time, Topalov 9%, and it will be drawn 25%. That works out to about 78.5% for Anand, 21.5% for Topalov.
If Topalov wins game 9, then Anand will go on to win the match outright 6% of the time, Topalov 70%, and it will be drawn 24%. That works out to 18% for Anand, 82% for Topalov.
So, roughly speaking, if someone wins game 9, they are about 80% to win the match.
Wow, what a load of manure.
Anand is comfortable enough with the Sicilian to school Carlsen in the opening:
He is comfortable enough to play it blindfold:
Anand prefers 1.d4 against Topalov because while they are more or less equal in a tactical melee, Topalov resides in his shadow in positional battles.
Ok, so I am wrong about the Sicilian. My bad sorry.
Your past games played...especially over increased time lag, has no bearing on your future games results. Your past games results is a reflection of opening choice, line taken, and opponent's responses. Your future games, will also take into account your opponents replies, improvements in opening prep...and can include new openings etc. Thus, at the GM level Anand-Topalov the chances of winning any game is constant at 33.3% for either players...they can either win, draw, or loose. There are too many variants to try and predict chances of winning based on previous results. Even their seconds vary from match to match.
Your past games played...especially over increased time lag, has no bearing on your future games results. Your past games results is a reflection of opening choice, line taken, and opponent's responses. Your future games, will also take into account your opponents replies, improvements in opening prep...and can include new openings etc. Thus, at the GM level Anand-Topalov the chances of winning any game is constant at 33.3% for either players...they can either win, draw, or loose. There are too many variants to try and predict chances of winning based on previous results. Even their seconds vary from match to match.
Neither can loose.
Your past games played...especially over increased time lag, has no bearing on your future games results. Your past games results is a reflection of opening choice, line taken, and opponent's responses. Your future games, will also take into account your opponents replies, improvements in opening prep...and can include new openings etc. Thus, at the GM level Anand-Topalov the chances of winning any game is constant at 33.3% for either players...they can either win, draw, or loose. There are too many variants to try and predict chances of winning based on previous results. Even their seconds vary from match to match.
Of course past performance is no guarantee of future results. But I presented those statistics as an intellectual exercise for those who might find such things interesting. It at least has some basis rather than just pulling a number out of thin air, like 60% or 75%.
When the Boston Red Sox faced a 3-0 deficit in the 2004 MLB playoffs, I am sure people cited the statistic that 25 teams had previously faced a 3-0 deficit and none had come back to win. And I'm sure some people said (as you would) that those 25 teams have no bearing on the teams playing right then. But it's still an interesting statistic, isn't it?
Anyway, I'm not sure where you got that 33.3% number from. They're not flipping 3-sided coins. For the record, 55% of their previous games have ended in draws, and black has won only 11% of the games. Do you really think the actual number for draws and black wins for any game is closer to 33%?
I"m willing to bet that Topa put some prep time into his anti-catalan stuff over the break day (today).
Maybe we'll see him pull out a shock n' awe tactic.
The Dutch is not smart against someone playing like Kramnik. Remember what happened to Nakamura's Dutch at Corus!
The Dutch is not smart against someone playing like Kramnik. Remember what happened to Nakamura's Dutch at Corus!
There's only one way to beat someone playing like Kramnick, and that's to play like Tal. Just go sac-happy. Of course for that to happen that kramnick-like player would have to make a positional error, which by definition is not very kramnicky
Game 9 will be on in Thursday, May, 6, 2010. Anand will have the white peices while Topalov will have the black peices. This is a crucial game for both players. In fact if Anand or Topalov win this game, they will have a great chance of winning the World Chess Championship since its only 3 games to go after and gaining the World Champion title in 2010. It should be very exciting as I look forward to their opening play.
I think most likely Anand will play the Open Catalan again with 1.d4. Topalov will play the Semi-Slav most probably in response to that. For every game that Anand has played white in this series he has always played the Open Catalan. But it will be interesting if Anand goes with his original move 1.e4 opening with the Ruy Lopez.
Anyways these are just my thoughts. It should be a good game, Anand just coming back from the defeat in game 8. Topalov will definetly be more hopeful now. Who knows, we could have a new world champion.