19420 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Anand really seemed dejected and its hard not to feel sorry for him. He must channel this emotion in a positive way to increase his stamina and determination if he wants to prevent a blow out. I'm not saying he needs to get angry but a little bit might be good.
Kramnik was down 3 games after the first six games with Anand. However Kramnik was able to pull himself together and push Anand and even make it somewhat of an interesting match. (Although it still ended early.)
I hope Anand can do the same here.
I really like Carlsen and chess is lucky to have him. I am also generally glad for any hype chess can get. But the Carlsen hype that will follow a blow out will likely sicken me.
Anand must be remembered as one of the great champions. He beat Kramnik, Topalov, and Gelfand in title matches, and had given Kasparov a run in the early part of their 1995 match as well. Only Carlsen and Kasparov have achieved higher ratings.
But Carlsen is a special player. Now, with his 10 ...Be6, I know who he reminds me of. I can feel his thinking, he knew 10 Bg5 was an improvement and Anand must have analyzed the main replies in great depth at home. So after a long think, Magnus chose the slightly inferior ...Be6, which Anand probably didn't spend much time on in preparation.
Now I recall another player who intentionally chose slightly inferior moves to entice the opponent to play for a win. A player who was described by Capablanca as "the greatest endgame player I have ever seen." A player described by Euwe as having "founded no school and espoused no style. His style was simply that of the strongest player."
Of course, it was Lasker. It is he who Carlsen emulates.
Carlsen is end game genius he is about to dethrone anand
Had to check McHeath's post (#40). It shows you that rook endings are just not simple. I thought Mr. Bean had done OK up to move 35): pawn up, better pawn structure, active rooks; what's not to like. How could he lose so fast I wondered.
Seems to me 35) ... h5 is an error by black - he is just making it easier for white. He has to sit tight and try to salvage a draw. White should have played 36) Kf3 in my opinion, with the idea of h3, g4 and getting his k-side majority rolling. If black persisted with h4 then gXh4 (play like Carlson!) could work or just Kg4. I think Black will have to play Kg6 to prevent the w king coming to g5 when Rc6 looks nasty (threat of f5).
In the game I think a critical error by White was 39) Rc7 when 39) Kg4 was much stronger again threatening to penetrate to g5. It takes a bit of calculation because of 39) ... Rdd4 but 40) Kg5 seems to win outright since black cannot check on g4 after capturing the f-pawn (and Rc7+ followed by Kg6). If 39) ... Kg6 then 40) Rc6 Rdd4 41) Rf2 Kf7) 42 Kg5.
Thanks for your good analysis. It's a completed rook ending game. I have prepared 41. Kg4. But I forgot due to many games I played. After 41 .... Rxa2 42 Ra7 Rg2+, Black had a slight advantage for the pass pawn.
Well, the game was a non consequence in the tournament, and I concentrated on other games that were more important. I will show some others rook end games. I have lots of them.
Why don't we just admit that Anand is terribly weak?
you are a moron
Are we talking abt Carlsen - Anand WC Match? Or do you want to talk abt me? There is no good of talks abt me.
SHit happens with all persons
For the period of their own title rivalry from 1984-1990, Kasparov and Karpov were clearly the world's top two players, and both exceptional endgame players. Yet over their series, both committed errors of varying degrees in the endings.
That is the problem in playing Carlsen. He's not perfect at all, but most of his errors are relatively slight, and nearly all of them occur fairly early in games. In the endgame, he makes fewer errors than anyone.
So if you don't take advantage of his early errors, which will require great precision, he will be waiting for your late errors with the patience of a coiled snake. Of course he's not perfect even there, but he is close enough for it to be evident, and to lurk in the back of the opponents' thoughts as they enter an ending. If it's not a dead or theoretical drawn position, Carlsen will just play chess and try to gradually improve the position of his pieces. Until you slip.
The pressure is enormous. And it is an strength that can't really be avoided. You can steer away from positions that favor an opponent who likes to attack or who likes to play closed pawn centers. You can avoid exchanges down to an endgame for only so long in an evenly contested game, though, and then you are in his den.
Black Dubrovnik II on eBay
by Ben_Fischer a few minutes ago
by ChessOfPlayer a few minutes ago
Chess legends. Where would be Carlson's position in a list?
by Boris_McQueen a few minutes ago
Don't english me!
by alexm2310 4 minutes ago
Why Knowing Your Openings is Important at Higher Levels!
by Ashvapathi 5 minutes ago
by whirling_dervish 6 minutes ago
8/27/2016 - Alexander Hildebrand, Springaren, 1951
by xray 7 minutes ago
by pranay_p 13 minutes ago
A game with the Nimzovitsch defense
by misterbasic 15 minutes ago
Epic Danish Gambit game!
by xman720 15 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2016 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!