[Preview: Make or break time for Kramnik. If he doesn't win today his leveling the match goes from being an extreme outside chance to being only a mathematical possibility. Meran or no Meran? Sticking with the plan that got you here or adapting to the situation and playing some risk control? That is, in that Meran it might be 45% chance of a win for White, 40% chance of a win for Black, with almost no chance of a draw. Even if you want to give more credit to Anand's deeper prep in that line and flip those numbers, or more, it's still a very risky line. And Kramnik and his team have now had a week to work on it. If you can play something more solid with, say, a 15% chance of white win, and a 1% chance of black win, in this match situation that probably makes more sense. That is, draws are almost as good as wins for Anand at this point so reducing losing chances is the key. On the other hand, he's had success by taking Kramnik out of his comfort zone of squeeze play, so good cases for both methods. Kasparov kept playing the Sicilian despite a big lead over Short, for example.
Theories abounding that Anand missed a win in game 7. Scary. Certainly he could have played on with chances at several moments. I assume he saw that but decided there was no reason to risk at all if he couldn't be 100% sure. 33.Rc2 was basically a draw offer. Kd1 or Kd3 would have continued the game with better chances for White. Kasparov looked at 30.Kd2 with chances as well, though it seems to boil down to a draw after some difficult moves by Black. What percentage of this result so far is Anand good vs Kramnik bad? 70-30?]
Kramnik finally got some pressure on Anand, but it wasn't nearly enough. Kramnik's methodical patience went beyond the point of virtue in this one, it seemed. Instead of the Meran from games 3 and 5 (told ya), we got a line of the QG that Kramnik and Anand have battled in several times before. Just about every top player of the past 20 years has played these 4..dxc4 5.e4 Bb4 6.Bg5 c5 Ragozin lines, often with both colors. Kramnik declined to head into the wild 7.e5 lines, which have been doing well for Black lately. There's even a game from this year by one of Anand's seconds, Wojtaszek. Kramnik went for 9.Bb5+ instead of Bb2 or Bxf6. This gave Anand the chance to bust out yet another novelty, 10..Bxb5, played immediately, which sank Kramnik into a 30 minute think on his next two moves.
Interestingly, Kramnik eschewed what GM Christiansen on Chess.FM thought was the natural reply, 11.Nb3. Perhaps Kramnik simply wanted to avoid the heart of Anand's prep. Someone on the ICC suggested the remarkable 11..Ba4 as a possible reply. Kramnik didn't get much with what he did play, however. As in the Meran games, Anand got the open g-file for his rook and his king stuck in the center. Kramnik looked to be building up patiently with moves like Kh1 and g3 and we expected him to swap off and play in the center while Anand's rook was out of the picture on g6. Instead of Rf3-d3 White dawdled with Nc3 and Kg2, giving Black time to get his rook back into the game. Larry showed us some interesting lines in which White tries to play for mate by pushing his h-pawn or even walking his king up to h6, but it was always too slow. Lunging with g4 wouldn't have changed much either. The white king is more vulnerable than Black's. If Black has a moment he plays ..Rd3 and ..Nd4 with a check on c6 coming.
The score is 5.5-2.5 and Anand can end the match with a white win on Sunday. I rather expect he'll play for a tiny edge and offer a draw the moment it looks at all dangerous for him. For Kramnik's part, he obviously has to throw the sink, the fridge, and the coffeepot at Anand from here on out if he has any hope at all. But I don't really expect him to go crazy. He did play the Benoni against Leko with his back against the wall in 2004, but losing Sunday to finish -4 would surely feel worse than drawing out peacefully.
Kramnik's second in London and Brissago, Evgeny Bareev, is in Bonn this week to work on an article for New In Chess. He came on Chess.FM to talk with us and Macauley Peterson, who is there for the ICC. Interesting stuff. He said it was over in no uncertain terms, adding that Kramnik's prep looked inferior and agreeing with me that it was foolhardy to go back into the Meran in game 5 without a killer blow up his sleeve. I believe ICC members will be able to listen to the replay of it. Is nobody slapping up same day raw press conference audio anymore? I know ChessVibes puts up video later, which is handy, and Macauley has all sorts of good video stuff at the ICC site. But for a while you could get the audio right after the presser.
No Meran. Too risky. I predict a Budapest Gambit.
I would argue that the result is 99% Anand good and 1% Kramnik bad.
I think the reason Kramnik made errors was because he was caught completely unprepared in every game that he lost. The pattern is unmistakable: (1) Anand surprises Kramnik; (2) Kramink spends a lot of energy and time to find the correct responses; (3) Kramnik makes a bad move as a result of being tired and of being short on time. These three stages are causally connected. If Kramnik was making bad moves from the get go, then I would have given more weight to the "Kramnik bad" side. But that didn't happen. Kramnik found some fantastic moves in the beginning, so he is clearly playing well. The problem is that he just doesn't seem to be able to keep up with Anand past move 35. And I think the reason Kramnik hasn't been able to keep up with Anand is a direct result of (1) Anand's very clever match strategy, (2) Anand's excellent preparation, and (2) Anand's ability to keep the pressure on Kramnik by continuously finding strong moves once he is out of preparation.
I am shocked that Kramnik's team has utterly failed in the match preparation department - it is as if he studied for the wrong exam. I hope the Kramnik team reveals what went wrong after the match.
I think it is 80AnandGood/20KramnikBad. Kramnik, if you just look at his side of things, is not playing unusually bad. In previous matches we've seen lately, players like Topalov, Leko and Kramnik have all played bad moves with great frequency. In fact, what separates this match from the others is not that Kramnik is playing bad moves, it is just that Anand is not (so far) reciprocating in any way.
Anand is playing great. Unusually great from the standards we have seen lately. Not flawless since he may have missed one win (but only at a point which he didn't need anyway).
If Kaspy really is better than all these young whippersnappers, as he clearly wants us to believe, why doesn't he contribute some analysis to demonstrate conclusively whether Anand had a win in G7?
Congratulations, Mr. Kramnik, that was a very fine draw yesterday. You did it, like only you can do it.
Today we'll use a different approach.
Imagine, you are the champion of the world.
Imagine, you have to defend your title, against a strong challenger.
Imagine, you gain, by means of good play and also a good measure luck, a big lead early on.
All the world is at your doorsteps, shaking your hand, padding your back, telling you you are best player on the planet.
But the match is not over yet. All the odds are with you, but there is one possibility that worries you.
You are confidant you won't lose a single game with white.
And you are quite confidant he won't win three consecutive whites in a row. Quite. He won't, won't he?
Imagine, what will happen if he wins just this one game today.
You know, you can never be sure about the outcome of one game.
And in all your black victories so far, there were moments where he could have got an edge.
What if he manages to get his edge this time, what if today is his turn to be lucky?
Imagine, how all the handshakers and backpadders will react. They will realize, that he just needs to do two more times what he did today.
They will see that he just needs to win with white, and that he can do it. They will be worried. They will fear for you.
The tone of their voices will change. You will have to defend yourself. You will have to explain what you were thinking. How you could have lost.
There will be doubts. You will be the one cornered and frightened.
Now, Mr Kramnik, comes the good part: You don't need to be this guy.
Instead, you can be the other one. The challenger, the rebel, the rogue attacker, the one who defies all odds, who steals the fire from the gods, and the crown from the king.
Now go out and fight!
Sokolov should play 1.e4 today.
Sokolov who? Kramnik's grandfather?? :)
I would say, Anand good 95% : Kramnik bad 5%.
Here is my reasoning.
Game 6. Even GMs (with computer's help??) were suggesting Ne5 was not that good after Rfd8.
Game 2. The end game calculation is so complicated not much analysis is coming out. Game 3. Some GM's concluded it was a win or draw for white.
Game 5. Anand entering the same variation previously judged by GMs as a draw or lost position for black.
Game 7. Declining draw offer and pressing for win in equal position while being on the driver seat.
Incredible precision moves from Anand as never seen before in WCh??
Tactical Anand plus Positional Anand is indeed a mighty, mighty force to reckon with!!
Kramnik did his best. As for Anand, the best is yet to come!!!
Sorry for a diversion! And for bringing up one of my pet subjects, i.e., the privileges of a World Champion and Draw Odds in a World Championship Match.
Whoever wins the current WC match, there is no doubt that he will be the Absolute world match Champion. And as a World Match Champion, he would be absolutely deserving one very huge privilege, i.e., he would be spared the rigors of qualifying through a grueling and uncertain Cycle. This is indeed a great privilege, but thoroughly deserved.
But, I still hanker for one very minute privilege for the World Champion. In the future World Championship Matches, and I am really afraid that there may be none, the World Champion should be given the "DRAW ODDS' in the ARMAGEDDON Blitz Game.
The reason I say so, is - imagine if in a future match two Draw Specialists (such as Kramnik and Leko) meet, and all the twelve regular games at Classical time control, all four Rapid games and the two Blitz games end in DRAW, and the Challenger thereafter draws the Black Colour for the Armageddon game, draws that game and thus wrests the title. Wouldn't it be a travesty of justice if a Challenger defeats a World champion in a Title Match, without actually beating him in a single game. As if the Champion forfeited the match.
I agree, that such a possibility is remote, but it is indeed theoretically possible. We can only pray and wish that we may be spared such a monstrosity.
I would say its a disaster for Kramnik simply because he has been unable to put any pressure on Anand at all. It must be unprecedented that a player goes through an entire match without being =+. I sincerely hope he plays for a win today.
Btw- Chessbase's coverage is going from bad to worse. They have IM Malcolm Pein annotating! Is Pein trying to replace Kevin Bacon in the Six Degrees of Separation? I see him on Chesscube, on TWIC and Chessbase, all with the same commentary. And Chessbase continues its sad obsession with females - the g/6 report bolstering Ovdiu's theory.
Chessbase serves the needs of the great majority of chess fans who like game scores and analysis, and also like pictures of girls, but do not like pictures of Anand and Kramnik.
There havent been analysis on Chessfluff.com since Marin.
Mig, about Vishy missing a win: What is the line, and was it cooked by a GM or a bot ?
On chessvibes.com GM Erwin l'Ami gave:
"L'Ami thinks he has found a win for White: 33. Kd1 Kf7 (33... Rc4 34. Kc2 Kf7 (34... Rxa4 35. Kxc3 and 36.Kd3 is bad) 35. Kd3 Rc8 36. Rxc3 Rxc3+ 37. Kxc3) 34. Kc2 Nc5 35. Rf1+! Kg6 (35... Kg8) 36. Rf8! Rxf8 37. Bxf8 Nxa4 38. Be7!"
In Capablance-Lasker match Lasker never was +=
After this match, we're going to have to call a black pawn formation f7/e6/f6 "The Anand." Add a Rook on g8 and bishop on b7 and you get "The Full Anand."
>After this match, we're going to have to call a >black pawn formation f7/e6/f6 "The Anand."
if with anyone, it is associated with Rubinstein and his variation in the French-D.
Kramnik bad 80%
Anand good 20%
The essential is that Anand is superior to the Kramnik of 2008.
Despite Anand's better opening prep he hasn't sprung any winning TNs, or even TNs that create large advantage.
The move h3!? in game six, or Bb7 in game two and four didn't change the usual opening evaluation of +=.
Strange move 17...Rd3
Kramnik has some pull. It's nothing major, but IMO the score would have been very different if he managed to steer the game to such positions right from the start.
Poor Kramnik probably had to use one hand to grasp the other, Dr. Strangelove style, and force it to play 17. Rf2, so antithetical to his being is such a move, when Qf2 is legal.
And now, 20.Kh1 or 20.Nd5, which move?
Will be another draw soon. Poooor Kramnik.
Getting sharper now, respect for Vishy to play the Vienna when 3 points ahead!
lol 20.Kh1 of course.
Rybka says both moves (Nd5 and Kh1) are +0,15 but the position it reaches after Nd5 shows a completely wrecked pawn structure for black.
Now what is the plan for white? While black can triple on d column after Kg7, Kh8, Rd8.
Moves 20-24 I don't see the machines predicting any of these King moves, by either side.
h4-5-6 maybe
80% Anand good
20% Kramnik bad
can Kramnik go for broke with 33.g4
Hi guys,
I was wondering on why Kramnik could not use his h pawn to support queen. I was picturing white pawn being on h6 would provide that either black is checkmated or has to move out if its confines.
Am I missing something?
SJ
Why didn't kramnik just play h4?
Looks like Dennis Monokroussos hinted at possible answer to my question and may expand on it later.
SJ
Why go for broke when you can peter out to a draw and remain 3 down? It sure was nice of Kramnik to help Anand out of his positional difficulties after Rd3. We haven't seen chess this gutless since Kasparov's 11-move draw offer in '00. Maybe he's advising Kramnik and not Anand.
I paid for the entire 12 games on Foidos. This is not going to last 12 games. I want my money back!
This was the first game in the match where Kramnik had a better attack than Anand. But it wasn't a whole lot better, and I would say he played the position a bit passively. Kramnik must know it's about over now. He would need 3 wins in 4 games, without a loss, just to force tie-breaks. One of those games would need to come as Black, and he has never beaten Anand with Black.
Another pretty easy draw. Anand again got in a novelty, and Kramnik was nowhere close to winning this game.
I'm beginning to think that Anand will win this thing.
Kramnik finally giving up the ghost. Anand may well finish with a win.
Yeah, there would be no miracle this match. Sadly Kramnik doesn't have it anymore. He had some pressure throughout the game and several opportunities to make it difficult for Anand (e.g. Na4 instead of Kh1, or f5 instead of e5, but he was too hesitant to do something until his advantage petered out. Even in final position he could have tried kh3 or something instead of a lame draw offer
excellent game by Kramnik today, he never waved in postponing (preparing) any break until Anand regrouped enough so as to become pointless to try it.
Think the other GMs have lost their fear/respect for Kramnik?
Only fools lose respect for a great player after their defeat in a single event. That attitude would be very unwise next time they meet the 'defeated one' over the board... But I understand real weak players pondering on silly and irrelevant stuff like this.
Go Anand! Great that now there will be no discussions if Anand ever was a World Champion.
"Think the other GMs have lost their fear/respect for Kramnik?"
Even with the most recent games, he's still #6 on the Live Ratings list, which means he is still a stronger player than almost everyone else. He just happens to be playing against one of the few who is better.
Remember, Kramnik beat Kasparov by +2 in 2000, but Kasparov continued to be the #1 player for several years after that. I'm not suggesting Kramnik will do that, but he isn't washed up just because he loses one match.
Kramnik just 14 points from falling out of the top ten. It's not hard these days, with the youthful competiiton.
Mr. X I am just repeating comments from a 2700 GM who said "Kramnik's aura of invincibility is gone. Players will think twice now when he offers a draw..."
You troll.
I guess that '2700' is not weak, but he is still a fool.
And which 2700 GM would that be?
Incidentally did people here GM Bareev's comments on Chess.FM? He was quite scathing in his deadpan way. "Kramnik has collapsed" was his answer. He also hinted that the team of seconds weren't up to the mark. Wonder why Bareev wasn't a second this time.
Mr. X - sorry my apology, guess I'm the troll this time. A little investigation shows me the person I quoted was not even a GM, just a chat room fool who pretends to be. My mistake. Sorry.
tja
I agree (for once, I think) with jaideepblue: Chessbase's fixation on women is pathetic. Did these nerds never grow up?
Susan Polgar, after 10.Bxf6 said: "Black can either play 10...Bxb5, 10...Bxc3+ or 10...gxf6. I think Bxb5 may surprise Kramnik the most :) It may not be the best move but the surprise element sometimes is very important as we have seen in the match so far." Practically predicting Anand's novelty.
On chessdom.com GM Dimitrov said, after 10...Bxb5 was played: "An opening surprise. 10... Bxc3+ 11.bxc3 gxf6 12.Bxd7+ Nxd7 13.O-O a6 is considered to be almost forced.)"
Did anyone follow Susan Polgar's commentary live? Given her track record in this match I'm willing to bet that she added her comments on 10.Bxf6 after 10...Bxb5 was played. Why doesn't she place her comments after the new move, explaining the reason it was made. She doesn't need to impress patzers with her predictive powers, and she is hurting her reputation this way.
Kramnik has been outprepared and outplayed( in time trouble ) in this match. Anand is also playing very efficently and accurately. Kramnik is demoralised knowing that this match is gone from his grasp. But it would be foolish to assume that Kramniks level of play will go down in future matches. Those who assume that could be in for a nasty shock.
"But it would be foolish to assume that Kramniks level of play will go down in future matches. Those who assume that could be in for a nasty shock."
what future matches? he now has to qualify from the world cup or the grand prix and i can't see him doing either given that he never managed to qualify for the world championship even when he was at his peak. Kramnik as a world championship contender is history.
"She doesn't need to impress patzers with her predictive powers, and she is hurting her reputation this way."
What reputation? She drives it further into the muck each time she logs onto her hideously self-adoring website. But at least we know that in the department of fraudulent hindsight-editing she's heavily influenced by Alekhine.
Kramnik might not be having a future match.I don't think he will be motivated to take part in any qualification cycle and even if he takes part I don't think he will be able to win it.
what was Anand's plan after 18..Qd4 if 19.Nb5 ?
[19..Qd8 20.e5 Rd7 21.Nd6+ Kf8 22.Ne4 +/-]
I was following Susan Polgar's commentary as it was happening, and I can assure you she discussed that possible move by Anand and noted that it would be the biggest surprise although not the best move before the move was played.
>> Kramnik might not be having a future match.I don't think he will be motivated to take part in any qualification cycle and even if he takes part I don't think he will be able to win it.
That would be like Botvinnik, who never qualified in any candidates. When finally forced out of WCC match/rematch by Petrosian, he never bothered playing the next interzonal/candidates cycle.
I was also following Susan Polgar's blog live, along with about 4 other sites. She made plenty of analytical comments before the actual moves were made, including the one you asked about. I realize that there are many questionable aspects of her behavior in chess politics, but that does not take away from her knowledge of the game.
Speaking of Polgars -- what's happened to Judit? I know she's had kids, but has she completely retired?
Mig just pointed out a couple of days ago that she's playing in a blitz event...
The word "eschewed" seems to come up in chess context about 100 times more often than in other contexts. I think it's because all those early Alekhine books use fancy words, and they've somehow seeped into the sub-culture.
If Anand finishes with a win he will also cross 2800..
Anyway, I guess he'll have done wonderfully well even if he finishes undefeated. Before Kramnik beat Kasparov undefeated in 2000, when was the last time a WC match was won without dropping a game? I think even Nigel Short managed a win? Must be at least 25 years ago?
Which qualification? Kramnik should have signed up for the FIDE Grand Prix, which he failed to do. Now he'll have to play and win the World Cup to qualify. The same, btw., is true for the loser of Anand vs. Topalov (or both of them, in the unlikely event that Kamsky becomes champ).
a little bit more than 25 years ago - Lasker-Capablanca 1921.
I think Lasker-Capablanca, unless it is Alekhine-Bogoljubov.
Really??!
Then, I'd rather Anand play two safe draws.. only twice in 85+ years someone wins a WC match without dropping a game! I guess this should compare to Steffi Graf's 6-0, 6-0 win at the French about two decades ago?
2800 sounds nothing compared to winning without dropping a game.. Anyway with all the Elo inflation of our times.. Almost like the 10k in test cricket.. where even the Pontings are reaching these days :P
Nice to know (and impressive) that she guessed the novelty before it was played, and seemed almost to be rooting for it. The issue is not her knowledge of chess but her honesty. I've seen her retroactive edits several times in earlier games, all aimed at making certain moves look inevitable. They are accompanied by her recommendation to the players to play them, long after they have done so. I don't think she sets out to lie. But she obviously doesn't care if parts of her "LIVE" commentary, are actually non-live, and happen to be somewhat self-serving. That meets Harry Frankfurt's definition of bullsh*t.
I think "to eschew" is particularly relevant to chess thinking. There is no common substitute that doesn't seem to imply reason or cause. Decline, avoid, reject, rebuff, shun, snub, etc. all seem to flavor the choice of one thing over another. I'll go for "abstain" on occasion for similar reasons.
We talked about the undefeated WCh match a couple of times this week on Chess.FM. Kramnik-Kasparov, Capablanca-Lasker, Lasker-Marshall. Cute that two people who shut out someone then had it happen to them, at least if Anand finishes cleanly. But this match is so short that it's hard to make comparisons. Kramnik's style is such that not losing to him over four whites doesn't really blow me away. (Though beating him twice with black must merit special attention.) Surviving eight straight blacks against Kasparov undefeated is one of the greatest achievements in chess history.
Garry will probably have a short piece on the match for the next New In Chess. He joked, "what do I have in common with Leonid Yudasin?"
IMO this is not the same player - Kramnik - who contested the match with Topalov. It's not about novelties or preperation there seems to be a problem with his chess judgement. In retrospect maybe there were indications back when he lost to Carlsen with the white pieces.
For example Anand stated himself that his h3 move was not prepared it was an idea he had OTB during the game!! Yet it seemed to have a significant effect leading to a an unecessary pawn sacrifice bt Kramnik which lost the game. It would be quite unsurprising if 2 draws and the end of the match followed. While Anand, the World Champion, deserves every credit for retaining his title. somehow it seems a poor match almost a mismatch. I cannot imagine Anand Toplaov (if it ever happens) being anything like this. I hope it does happen as I am sure that would be a great match. Perhaps I am wrong but this is the first WC match I have followed where the winner has never been in any trouble or looked like he might lose a game.
"Surviving eight straight blacks against Kasparov undefeated is one of the greatest achievements in chess history." i bet Karpov survived many more blacks in the first match.
"Surviving eight straight blacks against Kasparov undefeated is one of the greatest achievements in chess history." What about Kasparov's own achievement in making this such a difficult thing to do.
Now that Anand has cemented his place in history as
the 15th World Chess Champion, a rematch between
him and Kasparov would be epic.
"I cannot imagine Anand Toplaov (if it ever happens) being anything like this. I hope it does happen as I am sure that would be a great match. Perhaps I am wrong but this is the first WC match I have followed where the winner has never been in any trouble or looked like he might lose a game."
When one dominates another in a match like this, it does not mean that Kramnik has played very badly and Anand has done nothing. In a evenly contested match, both players make mistake. In Kramnik vs Topalov, both of them made blunders and returned favors and Kramnik ended up the stronger amidst all other chaos. Anand along with his fine preparation is playing some great chess with very little or any mistakes. When anyone plays like that, all matches are going to be one sided. If Anand plays the same in a match against Topalov, you might call it again boring. Only difference might be Topalov with do a lot of sac sac move go for mate and end up losing against a solid defense, where as Kramnik is much more intelligent than that.
To your comment "I cannot imagine Anand Topalov beind anything like this", its funny, it was a similar statement people (need not have been from you) were saying earlier about Anand Kramnik and that no one can ever think of a more evenly contested match. The fact is that Anand has lifted his game of chess to a very high level of precision, that any opponent who is a currently active chess player will be any match to him.
i bet Karpov survived many more blacks in the first match.
Astute comparison for a chimp, except that Karpov blew a 5-game lead and couldn't finish off his opponent after nearly 50 games, whereas Kramnik brought home the title and held it for eight years. Plus Kasparov's chess had evolved a wee bit between '83 and '00 when he faced Kramnik. But hey Jean, don't let me interrupt your drive to convince yourself that Kramnik never existed.
h3 was not an OTB novelty. check the press conference. anand clearly says that he prepared it at home.
"Astute comparison for a chimp, except that Karpov blew a 5-game lead and couldn't finish off his opponent after nearly 50 games, whereas Kramnik brought home the title and held it for eight years. Plus Kasparov's chess had evolved a wee bit between '83 and '00 when he faced Kramnik."
first of all thanks for the insult. Mig's forum is one of the nicest places to discuss chess and its sad to see people polluting it like that but i guess thats internet. as for your comparision Kasparov-Kramnik was 16 games match while Kasparov-Karpov 1 was "unlimited" so Karpov had a much, much harder job and he even managed to get to 5:0 so..
Ah, the ritualistic flinging of the monkey poo. Must be a WC or high-level tournament taking place... alway brings out the primates. : )
mig wrote:
"Surviving eight straight blacks against Kasparov undefeated is one of the greatest achievements in chess history."
bah. duh. weren't many (if not all) of these were games in which Kaspy allowed Kramnik to play the Berlin and knocked his head against it?
It's a question of form: I believe that anybody above 2750 is capable of destroying anyone else over 2750 in a 12-game match.
Having said that, I'm glad that Anand is the one in good form.
Would be nice to see Anand - Topalov (Kamsky) as at least a 16-game match.
Btw what was the answer for the previous round's GOTD question? the one on which WC wrote a book...?
Given Anand's form since 2006 I don't see how he cannot be the favorite in any match. Topalov, in particular, would likely be crushed; he's a tournament fiend, whose results against the top 4-6 are not comparable to his results against the next 20 in the rankings.
Anand seems to have developed Kasparov-like superiority to the rest of the top 20:
Corus 2007-8 missed first by a total of a point and a half.
Linares 07-08: Tournament wins.
Mexico City 2007: Tournament win.
Kramnik Match: currently scoring above 65%.
Bilbao is an exception, but an explainable one.
That's about the results you'd have expected from Kasparov if he had stayed.
I doubt that the rating makes any difference. (I.e. anyone above Elo x is capable of destroying anyone else over Elo x in a 12-game match.)
Not that it's probable, of course, and you would have to define "destroy".
The longer the match, the less the possibility of destruction, naturally.
But maybe Kramnik is quite happy that the match is only for 12 games.
I think its too soon to talk about Anand playing on a higher level and being way above the rest. The Live ratings for Anand and Topalov are very close so lets see what happens. Anand deserves all the credit for winning this match but comparisons with Kasparov are premature (and give Anands age probably impossible) Kasparov never had a tournament performance as poor as Bilbao and he demonstrated a sustained dominence over many years. Anand is the best chess player in the world right now - period. Its too early to say how big the gap is and the brutal truth is that no one has managed to stay ahead of the pack for long. It doesnt matter too much for Anand - he has made his mark on chess and confirmed his legacy in chess history even if he never won another game in his life! (provided he draws the next 2 of course!)
"as for your comparision Kasparov-Kramnik was 16 games match while Kasparov-Karpov 1 was "unlimited" so Karpov had a much, much harder job and he even managed to get to 5:0 so.."
Karpov got to 5-0 at game 27, followed by 21 straight games without a match-ending victory. THAT is an astonishing achievement in reverse. Kramnik won in '00 against the greatest player who ever lived without dropping a single game with Black; Karpov could not convert in 21 games against a young challenger fading at 5-0. No comparison and no trouble at all for the insult, which is yours for free as long as you attempt to dismiss or negate the achievements of a world chess champion.
Its surprising that the stellar team Kramnik assembled is not able to churn any useful novelties till now. Atleast in the white side they should have able to find some new ideas. I assume that most of the time was probably spent before the match preparing for 1.E4. The strategy for white was to go for slow grind positions, apperently that did not work out.
Anyways there is no players in the world right now who deserves crown other than Anand. A truly universal style player. I think he is the pioneer in using the Computer in the most useful manner to prepare novelties and analyze. I am sure the current and future players have something to learn from him in this area.
Untill Carlsen is ready, let Anand bask in the glory!
Fans tend to bounce off the walls and make vastly exaggerated
statements when excited. A couple of disconnected points, reflections
on the previous posting.
Kramnik is a hugely talented player, but has reached a certain "modus
operandi" that might have worked wonders in the past, but has become
somewhat stale and predictable.
The most impressive thing that I heard in the pre-match interviews was
the complete analysis of Kramnik's style that Anand performed. I think
this is paying handsome dividends in this match and makes it look
almost too easy.
Anand and Topalov have a fairly comparable score in "classic" Chess
format.
Topalov's history-making blunders in Elista 2006 probably have the
same effect on him as Anand's previous failures -- nothing but to
mobilize him.
The huge issue for Topalov in Elista 2006 was that he underestimated
Kramnik. Quite arrogantly so. Also, his relative lack of experience in
match format made him too unsteady at the critical junctures. This was
the "margin" then. And the last time Kramnik won with Black was more
Topalov's self-annihilation than anything else.
Anand being threatened to be "walked over" by Kramnik and the endless
line that Kramnik is unbeatable in match format, therefore only he can
be the true Champion" -- you know all the standard lines
from the Kramnik clan. That and the relative arrogance
of Volodya in so many interviews must have motivated Vishi to truly
sit on his butt and prepare for a huge fight. Which he seems to be
winning in an undisputed manner.
So, what will happen in the future, -- who knows -- by Q2 Magnus may
be at the top and this match long forgotten...
But I am truly glad for Chess that the Kramnik distraction will be
over. This was huge. Having Kramnik again at center stage, "owner of
the title" was unthinkable. Anyone else, but him...
D.
Kramnik said in his press conference after game 2 that he was prepared for Anand to open 1.d4 after Leko had surprised him.
However I think he and his team completely underestimated the extent of Anand's and his team's preparation. Many have already voiced the opinion that Kramnik may have primarily focused on Anand opening 1.e4. I think that is true.
As a response to Kramnik's 1.d4 I think they may have focused more on Queen's Indian and Slav (not necessarily the supper sharp variations).
Today's game is another illustration of the depth of Anand's opening preparation. It is in this phase of the game that Anand got the advantage in a big way and made it work for him by playing accurately and aggresively.
I have watched him play Kasparov in NY. I thought that he was not ready temperament wise to battle Kasparov. Over the years he has learnt to improve himself in all aspects of his game. Kudos to him.
Warren
Dimi:
"I am truly glad for Chess that the Kramnik distraction will be over. This was huge. Having Kramnik again at center stage, "owner of the title" was unthinkable. Anyone else, but him..."
Hear, Hear.
Exactly my sentiments, Dimi, WELL SAID
>The huge issue for Topalov in Elista 2006 was >that he underestimated Kramnik. Quite arrogantly >so.
He estimated Kramnik quite well but he never estimated himself.
Kramnik did not play at Elista much better than here at Bonn, he played the same kind of lacking incisiveness and energy games, but Topalov was so overdriven that he simply destroy himself, Kramnik was needed only for making some normal moves and collect the results.
Had Topa had more calmer nerves, had he been more self controlled and objective about himself, the score at Elista would have been something as 4-0 in his favour.
We are witnessing amazing turn-arounds from die-hard Kramnik supporters, aren't we? !!!
One thing I noticed in Anand's games is he can play both sharp and slow positions well. He can play like Kasparov or he can play like Kramnik (or Karpov) also. Universal style!!
My questions now:
1. Will Kramnik complain that a 12-game match isn't long enough to determine the true champion (in the line of Steinitz)?
2. Do people think he was simply unprepared across the board, or he might have just targeted different areas (i.e. 1.e4)
3. Where is Russianbear?