What makes Carlsen the better player...

...in tournaments, and now, in match play? In game 7, it seems as though Anand is intimidated by Carlsen's playing strength, playing a very safe line as White in the Ruy Lopez with d3.

Is it as simple as this: me playing against someone rated 200 points higher and getting my butt kicked? What makes Carlsen better than Anand, and better than everyone else?

What makes Carlsen better than everyone else? Endgame technique? Positional chess superiority? Better calculation? All of the above, plus more?

The 4. d3 line is fine for white, a tiny bit better. And better than 4. 0-0 as in game 4, where Carlsen gets a position he loves: Endgames, where the best player wins. He got a winning advantage, but failed to convert it. However, it was unpleasant for Anand to defend it.

Carlsen plays like a computer in the endgames. Precisely, finding the best winning try, and doesn't stop pressing before it's very dead. Noone can actually explains what he does, he just wins more games than his rivals.

Asked differently:  What exploitable mistakes does Carlsen really have a history of making? 

I can't really answer that one :)

What made Da Vinci and Einstein smarter than most? What made Michael Angelo a better artist than most? What made president Bush a bigger *** than most? What made Mohammed Ali a better boxer than most?

I guess it's getting a good start with talent and complimenting that talent with a lot of practice and work. Wether it's hard work probably depends on the level of enjoyment.

A combination of nature and nurture in short.

Shivsky wrote:

Asked differently:  What exploitable mistakes does Carlsen really have a history of making? 

I can't really answer that one :)

Nice twist. Daniel Rensch recently said that Carlsen is the most consistent player, playing move after move with computer like accuracy. I guess that means, like you said, what of Carlsen's play can be exploited? I guess, none.

Anyone know who kept the world championship title the longest, and do you expect to see challenging Carlsen for the title, that is, if Magnus continues to make little to no mistakes and beats Anand?

Emanuel Lasker held the title the longest: 27 years. For Magnus to match that record, he would need to hold onto the title up to age 49!

Wilhelm Steinitz (1886-1894)

Emanuel Lasker (1894-1921)

Jose Raul Capablanca (1921-1927)

Alexander Alekhine (1927-1935, 1937-1946)

Max Euwe (1935-1937)

Mikhail Botvinnik (1948-1957, 1958-1960, 1961-1963)

Vasily Smyslov (1957-1958)

Mikhail Tal (1960-1961)

Tigran Petrosian (1963-1969)

Boris Spassky (1969-1972)

Robert James "Bobby" Fischer (1972-1975)

Anatoly Karpov (1975-1985)

Garry Kasparov (1985-2000)

Vladimir Kramnik (2000-2007)

Viswanathan Anand (2007-current)

Maybe we'll have Kramnik as contender in the next cycle and a fight between Naka and Caruana in two years ? That would be nice

What sets Carlsen apart from all the other players is his will to win. Sure he's also a beast when it comes to calculation, positional play and all that stuff(he's the worlds no.1 player after all).But what really makes the difference is that Carlsen actually manages to win a technically drawn Rook and Pawn endgame against the world champion, while even Club players would probably fall into automatic draw mode.

Attox wrote:

What sets Carlsen apart from all the other players is his will to win. Sure he's also a beast when it comes to calculation, positional play and all that stuff(he's the worlds no.1 player after all).But what really makes the difference is that Carlsen actually manages to win a technically drawn Rook and Pawn endgame against the world champion, while even Club players would probably fall into automatic draw mode.

Excellent point: Carlsen's will to win. If it had been Gelfand, for example, in those rook and pawn endgames, Gelfand would have offered a draw with Black. And who wouldn't? Both games where Carlsen won were technically drawn rook and pawn endgames. Perhaps in his old age of 43, Vishy lost concentration?

hicetnunc wrote:

Maybe we'll have Kramnik as contender in the next cycle and a fight between Naka and Caruana in two years ? That would be nice

I would really like to see Nakamura against Carlsen in the next world championship. It would be like Karpov against Kasparov, positional vs. tactical. Nakamura has said that he really likes Kasparov's attacking style, and had emulated it.