bean_Fischer wrote:
Anand is terribly weak that he always places his knights on the 1st rank.
I agree with Scottrf that these idiocies are just a waste of bandwidth. If you're going to troll, at least try to entertain us.
World Chess Championship: Carlsen beats Anand in Game 6 to take 4-2 lead
Sort:
I am with debistro (#8). Carlson was two pawns up at one point (but K and R very passively placed) and he sacked two pawns to activate K & R and then the third pawn to clear the path for the f -pawn. I am not a good enough player to know if this works, if Carlson even keeps the draw in hand after 60) b4. The computers seem to think so though but it takes another 10 moves or so to settle. Meanwhile your opponent has two passed pawns on the Q-side. Gutsy play over the board IMHO.
The Australian writer CJ Purdy emphasized that you win rook endings by activating the rook and king and counting material later. I guess this game supports that.
Interesting to know what Anand was thinking with Ra4. Did he think he was lost already and that b4 was hopeless?
sapientdust wrote:
bean_Fischer wrote:
Anand is terribly weak that he always places his knights on the 1st rank.
I agree with Scottrf that these idiocies are just a waste of bandwidth. If you're going to troll, at least try to entertain us.
You can show me where Anand's strength is instead of calling me a troll. Those 2 losses already shows how weak Anand is. What are you gonna say?
2772
tjl60 wrote:
Interesting to know what Anand was thinking with Ra4. Did he think he was lost already and that b4 was hopeless?
This shows Anand doesn't know how to calculate the end game.
Scottrf wrote:
2772
Yep, there is no such thing as a weak chess player who is WC and in the top-10 on the ratings list.
Anand is a great player, he has proved it with some great wins AND HE IS THE WORLD CHAMPION ! Don't forget it !! 
Maybe Carlsen is better at endgames, but this doesn't make Anand weak, it makes Carlsen strong !! Alson, because he blundere 1,2...5 times it doesn't mean that he isn't a strong GM ! See this article in which GM blunder checkmate in 1 !!!! Does it mean that they aren't great players ? I don't think that so !!
http://www.chess.com/article/view/checkmate-in-one
Nov 16, 2013
0
#29
anybody have a link to press confernece game 6 I can't find it anywhere. thanks
Nov 16, 2013
0
#32
bean_Fischer wrote:
tjl60 wrote:
Interesting to know what Anand was thinking with Ra4. Did he think he was lost already and that b4 was hopeless?
This shows Anand doesn't know how to calculate the end game.
Who made you the judge of that? The champ is evidently having a really bad time now and you can taunt him for being ineffective at taking on Carlsen ... cos that appears to be a fact. No arguments there.
Though show these professionals a little respect ... they've excelled at something more than anything you're probably ever going to excel at in life (including taking a dump, which is what you typically do in most of these threads) You're just coming off as a schoolyard bully in every bloody thread you appear in .
Debistro wrote:
Not really, Anand just played really bad and probably underestimated the f pawn pushing down.
I just do not see the point of Ra4 (the blunder).
ANY patzer would play b4 to push those pawns as fast as possible. Certainly in a blitz game.....
And ANY patzer can declare himself being a chess authority when sitting at his couch and watching Houdini output.
At the post mortem both players said that they evaluated b4 as losing for white. Quite obviously, any patzer is stronger and faster than those two, right?
bean_Fischer wrote:
This shows Anand doesn't know how to calculate the end game.
Maybe you should ring him up and offer some help. You could start together by analysing this one:
http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=77791806#
McHeath wrote:
bean_Fischer wrote:
This shows Anand doesn't know how to calculate the end game.
Maybe you should ring him up and offer some help. You could start together by analysing this one:
At least in that game I resigned. Not to continue with lousy 60 Ra4?? Thanks for posting my game.
Wow ARBSpamSystem, that was clever.
sekenre wrote:
Carlsen is a nightmare opponent to have. GMs have become accustomed to short draws over the last century of chess. Carlsen will play out every position until it is obviously and clearly resolved. That means very long games and hours of torture. He keeps on probing and probing to the point where most humans will crack and make an error. It has got to be horrible for a player to be in an endgame position against Carlsen, where only exact moves can bring about a draw at best. One slip and its over. Anand is also crumbling from that kind of pressure, though he had draws with exact play. I believed Anands best winning chances were to play out to seven straight draws, signaling to Carlsen that all his long endgame pressure is not working. That would force Carlsen to have to get very bold in the last 5 games in order to win, thus giving Vishy a chance to score a win. But being down 2 games at the halfway point is forcing Anand to get creative, but the inexhaustable patience of Carlsen will be able to refute this and possibly score more wins. Carlsen is using his trademark plays that made him #1 rated succesfully in this championship. I fear this could become the, " Massacre at Chennai".
*Note, I did not create this image
Finally, some interesting chess!
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.
pfren wrote:
Debistro wrote:
Not really, Anand just played really bad and probably underestimated the f pawn pushing down.
I just do not see the point of Ra4 (the blunder).
ANY patzer would play b4 to push those pawns as fast as possible. Certainly in a blitz game.....
And ANY patzer can declare himself being a chess authority when sitting at his couch and watching Houdini output.
At the post mortem both players said that they evaluated b4 as losing for white. Quite obviously, any patzer is stronger and faster than those two, right?
Maybe Carlsen should play 1. e4 f5 as black to shock everyone!!!
Anand is terribly weak that he always places his knights on the 1st rank.