The answer is plain simple: Carlsen is the better player. That said, the last decisive game between them in classical was won by Anand.
Why is Vishwanathan Anand so bad?
And what you're trying to say is...
But I'm sure you knew this, and this is another troll thread :P
...and hardly an original one, at that...
But I'm sure you knew this, and this is another troll thread :P
...and hardly an original one, at that...
trolls are going green - reduce, reuse, recycle.
Even at 35 yrs I am not performing the way I used to be . Vishy is 47 and if he plays at 2750 that should be appreciated .It is unfair to simply underrate vishy at 47 with Magnus at 26 .Magnus is an amazing talent no doubt but there is no one out there who could beat Magnus ..
Anand is absolutely brilliant when he plays boldly (i.e. tactically), but unfortunately, he only seems to do that when he's playing Rapid or Blitz. He excels in kill-or-be-killed tactical positions, but he doesn't invite the complications when playing regular tournament or match games.
He's still great, and not just for his age, but he, like everyone else near the top, plays not to lose, rather than playing to win. If he decided to play like Richard Reti (who forced opponents into decisive, high-tension positions which simply couldn't result in many draws), at least against the super-GMs, I think he'd see better results. Carlsen takes people out of book on purpose, that's how he plays to his strength. Anand could to the same, if he simply took the time to realize what his strengths really are.
The age issue is imagined more than it is real. I knew a former (and now once-again) Expert who told me "your brain turns to mush after age 60", but the fact was he wasn't playing to his strengths. It took a battery of games for him to realize that classical positions don't play to his strengths - gambits and tactical openings do. Once he got enough confidence to play the "weird" stuff in tournaments, he went from struggling against A/B players to being on the level with 2100-2200 players.
Aging players fall into the same trap as young players - complacency. Anand has been world champion already, and seems to have accepted that he has been surpassed, which is easy to understand, considering the circumstances. If he played without fear, as he does in Rapid/Blitz, Anand could go toe-to-toe with anyone, Carlsen included.
Even Kramnik and Topalov have faded a lot. Ivanchuk also. In chess, age matters a lot. Newer younger players like Magnus, Karjakin, Caruana, Wesley So, Liren etc have fresh ideas with modern approaches. Chess evolved over time, and this is these guys' era. Anand's and Kramnik's era was 2000-12. Chess 2012-24 will be dominated by these younger guys.
Troll threads always get the most activity. If someone asks a legit question, it sinks to the bottom of the pile...haha.
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Troll threads always get the most activity. If someone asks a legit question, it sinks to the bottom of the pile...haha.
What are you talking about? The quality of all the threads on chess.com are top-notch especially in off-topic.
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
going back to the topic title, so how bad is vishy actually?
https://ratings.fide.com/top.phtml?list=men
#8 in the world, ahead of Karjakin, Topalov. must be devastating.