who do you guy's think will win.
Carlsen, by a huge margin. (curious to see what others say)
I think it will be close.
Carlsen, by a mile.
I think it will be close, and depending on whether Anand can out-prepare Carlsen. If Carlsen can't be caught in the opening, he should win with +2.
It is very hard to handicap these short matches. A single bad move early can put you a game down, which changes the whole strategy. That's the whole reason Fischer demanded the draws-don't-count system; the player with a lead cannot just run out the clock with draws.
The problem with that is it is impossible to get sponsors and reserve venues for indefinite matches. Even the players need to have an ending date so they can commit their schedules for later weeks.
Anand has won two title matches where he lost first and had to come from behind, but he probably can't do that against Carlsen. I think Anand has to draw first blood to have a real chance of winning the match - but a long string of draws at the beginning wouldn't be so bad for him, he just needs to avoid falling behind.
I still think a WC match should be 24 games.
But nobody's listening to me, as usual. So I'll leave it there.
Anand will not play any tournaments leading to the World Championship match.He will focus all his attention on preparation.He considers this his best chance.
Carlsen is ridiculously hard to prepare against though.He will try to tire Anand in the first few games by playing long winded endgames in the hope that in the later rounds,Anand will eventually crack
Anand should focus not on theoretical side but more on the opening positions that Carlsen favors like the
Ruy Lopez positions with c3-d4 ideas .One of Carlsen's favorite plans.
Maroczy bind positions
3 vs 2 majority pawns
I agree with The BBQ.
Carlsen won't be letting Anand off easy with 25,30-move draws, the way Gelfand did.
In that way Carlsen is much like Fischer. When you sit down across the board from him, you're in for a full game.
Of the winner is who has more 6 points. Quite obvious. I am neither Anand or Carlsen fans. And I don't expect one of them to win.
I'm hoping for more decisive games and fewer draws and it wouldn't shock me if it went into a tiebreaker after 12 classical games. Anand is going to need to show that opening preparation for WC matches matter and Carlsen might show that while the game starts in the opening, it rarely ends there. I hope both bring their best to the table for the match. I'm rooting for Anand mostly because I think Carlsen needs a few more years before claiming the title personally and who doesn't want to see an old tiger pounce again. It would also be nice to see that Anand, while not dominating his peers at tournaments as WC, keeps his best for when it matters. We'll see, looking forward to the match!
Carlsen will win om rapid tiebreaks.
Chess needs an infusion of youth and charisma badly to market itself. Magnus may not have it, but we know Anand doesn't. Total stiff.
I rather imagine the outcome has been predetermined, and Anand will be receiving a nice backroom bonus in addition to his official payday to take one for the team, here.
I think he means he doesn't expect one to be more likely to win over the other.
I'll predict Carlsen to win comfortably, but not outright crush Anand. Maybe he'll win by a margin of about 1.5.
Ohhh ok nevermind then
Is this really as clear-cut as people are making it out to be? Sure, in terms of both rating strength and recent tournament results, Carlsen simply outclasses Anand, but this is not a tournament. Carlsen has very little to no experience of match play, whilst Anand has played plenty of them. Is a difference of approx. 100 rating points really enough to compensate for this deficiency in experience to the point of leading people to believe he'll win convincingly?
Anand will win - Carlsen doesn't have the experience of a long match. Carlsen will probably win one very early, I'd say his first game as White, whether that's round 1 or 2, and then won't win again, Anand will adjust, and wax him. I'd say Anand outscores Carlsen 3 to 1 with the rest being draws.
"Is a difference of approx. 100 rating points really enough to compensate for this deficiency in experience to the point of leading people to believe he'll win convincingly?"
I think it truly is, yes.