FIDE World Chess Championship thread

[duncan]

Is this the first time that number one has lost to a female?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judit_Polg%C3%A1r

In September 2002, in the Russia versus the Rest of the World Match, Polgár finally defeated Garry Kasparov in a game. The tournament was played under rapid rules with 25 minutes per game and a 10 second bonus per move. She won the game with exceptional positional play. Kasparov with black chose the Berlin Defence instead of his usual Sicilian and Polgár proceeded with a line which Kasparov has used himself. Polgár was able to attack with her rooks on Kasparov's king which was still in the centre of the board and when he was two pawns down, Kasparov resigned.[128] The game helped the World team win the match 52–48.[129] Upon resigning, Kasparov immediately left by a passageway barred to journalists and photographers. Kasparov had once described Polgár as a "circus puppet" and asserted that women chess players should stick to having children. Polgár called the game, "One of the most remarkable moments of my career."[87] The game was historic as it was the first time in chess history that a female player beat the world's No. 1 player in competitive play.[130]

[kgburcham]

Is this the first time that number one has lost to a female?

your video of carlsen throwing a fit reminded me of this video, GM stomping off mad from the loss.

[kgburcham]

Its incredible your pedantic level.

I followed almost all games in livestream and when GM where asking "What does that move does? What is the purpose?" they where thinking loud. Most of those cases are the initial comment after Anand/Carlsen move. And then they start thinking and answering those normal questions we all have to do when we play chess without computer help.

You are writing as those questions where their final conclusions, As they were clueless after long thinking. And was not. Yes there where times they "blunder" but they had not much time to think and had to concentrate with comments and other TV show related things.

And in game 9, when carlsen played c2, FM comentators explored a line where Nf1 would be game over. And later happened!

You, with all that hardware + 4 programs and yada yada yada yada failed to determine a blunder in game 5, pointing a "two point blunder" with 46...Rg1 and the true was a forcing line where later Anand had 51...Re2 with a TB draw.

So, you with all your hardware also blundered. And you had several days, several programs, several CPU, maybe tablebases?, custom settings and you cant figure out it was not a blunder 46..Rg1

Actually that game (5) showed how much we have to respect those GM and how much caution we have to had when we use a computer to draw conclusions.

Ignacio you are being pedantic again
The GM could not see 51...Re2

there are several 2800 blunders, here is another example,

[d] 8/8/7p/8/2R2p1p/2P1k1r1/1P4PK/8 w - -

Program sees 60.b4 for 0.00 score
2800 human plays 60.Ra4
2800 human did not understand the position again.


39/65 0:41 -14.75++ 60...h3 61.gxh3 Rg6 62.Ra7 f3 63.b4 Rg2+ 64.Kh1 Re2
39/66 0:43 -15.16++ 60...h3 61.gxh3 Rg6 62.Ra7 f3 63.b4 Rg2+ 64.Kh1 Re2
39/66 0:44 -15.77++ 60...h3 61.gxh3 Rg6 62.Ra7 f3 63.b4 Rg2+ 64.Kh1 Re2
39/66 0:48 -16.69++ 60...h3 61.gxh3 Rg6 62.Ra7 f3 63.b4 Rg2+ 64.Kh1 Re2
39/66 0:52 -18.06++ 60...h3 61.gxh3 Rg6 62.Ra7 f3 63.b4 Rg2+ 64.Kh1 Re2

[IGarcia]

Its incredible your pedantic level.

I followed almost all games in livestream and when GM where asking "What does that move does? What is the purpose?" they where thinking loud. Most of those cases are the initial comment after Anand/Carlsen move. And then they start thinking and answering those normal questions we all have to do when we play chess without computer help.

You are writing as those questions where their final conclusions, As they were clueless after long thinking. And was not. Yes there where times they "blunder" but they had not much time to think and had to concentrate with comments and other TV show related things.

And in game 9, when carlsen played c2, FM comentators explored a line where Nf1 would be game over. And later happened!

You, with all that hardware + 4 programs and yada yada yada yada failed to determine a blunder in game 5, pointing a "two point blunder" with 46...Rg1 and the true was a forcing line where later Anand had 51...Re2 with a TB draw.

So, you with all your hardware also blundered. And you had several days, several programs, several CPU, maybe tablebases?, custom settings and you cant figure out it was not a blunder 46..Rg1

Actually that game (5) showed how much we have to respect those GM and how much caution we have to had when we use a computer to draw conclusions.

Ignacio you are being pedantic again
The GM could not see 51...Re2

there are several 2800 blunders, here is another example,

Program sees 60.b4 for 0.00 score
2800 human plays 60.Ra4
2800 human did not understand the position again.

The point is what YOU incorrectly called a blunder with all the hardware, software and time at your disposition. No matter if later Anand didn't play Re2.

Anand blunders, many other 2800 players blunders, operators like you blunders. You can't be attacking humans, where its incomparable the ELO, the conditions, etc

I will give you a favor: You look like a moron every time you treat with scorn GM (or humans player in general )

[kgburcham]

Its incredible your pedantic level.

I followed almost all games in livestream and when GM where asking "What does that move does? What is the purpose?" they where thinking loud. Most of those cases are the initial comment after Anand/Carlsen move. And then they start thinking and answering those normal questions we all have to do when we play chess without computer help.

You are writing as those questions where their final conclusions, As they were clueless after long thinking. And was not. Yes there where times they "blunder" but they had not much time to think and had to concentrate with comments and other TV show related things.

And in game 9, when carlsen played c2, FM comentators explored a line where Nf1 would be game over. And later happened!

You, with all that hardware + 4 programs and yada yada yada yada failed to determine a blunder in game 5, pointing a "two point blunder" with 46...Rg1 and the true was a forcing line where later Anand had 51...Re2 with a TB draw.

So, you with all your hardware also blundered. And you had several days, several programs, several CPU, maybe tablebases?, custom settings and you cant figure out it was not a blunder 46..Rg1

Actually that game (5) showed how much we have to respect those GM and how much caution we have to had when we use a computer to draw conclusions.

Ignacio you are being pedantic again
The GM could not see 51...Re2

there are several 2800 blunders, here is another example,

Program sees 60.b4 for 0.00 score
2800 human plays 60.Ra4
2800 human did not understand the position again.

The point is what YOU incorrectly called a blunder with all the hardware, software and time at your disposition. No matter if later Anand didn't play Re2.

Anand blunders, many other 2800 players blunders, operators like you blunders. You can't be attacking humans, where its incomparable the ELO, the conditions, etc

I will give you a favor: You look like a moron every time you treat with scorn GM (or humans player in general )

frustrating isn't it, dealing with these GM blunders
yes now you have no choice but to name call, calling me a moron.
No scorn for the GM.
The GM is the one that said he is 2800, I do not deny or cover up GM blunders. It is what it is. I am not offended by GM blunders.

Tell you what.
I will give you a favor:
Since you call me a moron, then that means I am easy to beat.
How about you play me chess until one of us loses, 3 days per move. we can play at this site so plenty of witnesses.
When I beat you, you must apologize in front of everyone for calling me a moron, and from then on you must call me master for one month.
If I lose then I will sign my name as moron, as you called me, for one month.
kgburcham

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Its incredible your pedantic level.

I followed almost all games in livestream and when GM where asking "What does that move does? What is the purpose?" they where thinking loud. Most of those cases are the initial comment after Anand/Carlsen move. And then they start thinking and answering those normal questions we all have to do when we play chess without computer help.

You are writing as those questions where their final conclusions, As they were clueless after long thinking. And was not. Yes there where times they "blunder" but they had not much time to think and had to concentrate with comments and other TV show related things.

And in game 9, when carlsen played c2, FM comentators explored a line where Nf1 would be game over. And later happened!

You, with all that hardware + 4 programs and yada yada yada yada failed to determine a blunder in game 5, pointing a "two point blunder" with 46...Rg1 and the true was a forcing line where later Anand had 51...Re2 with a TB draw.

So, you with all your hardware also blundered. And you had several days, several programs, several CPU, maybe tablebases?, custom settings and you cant figure out it was not a blunder 46..Rg1

Actually that game (5) showed how much we have to respect those GM and how much caution we have to had when we use a computer to draw conclusions.

Ignacio you are being pedantic again
The GM could not see 51...Re2

there are several 2800 blunders, here is another example,

Program sees 60.b4 for 0.00 score
2800 human plays 60.Ra4
2800 human did not understand the position again.

The point is what YOU incorrectly called a blunder with all the hardware, software and time at your disposition. No matter if later Anand didn't play Re2.

Anand blunders, many other 2800 players blunders, operators like you blunders. You can't be attacking humans, where its incomparable the ELO, the conditions, etc

I will give you a favor: You look like a moron every time you treat with scorn GM (or humans player in general )

That's a little bit too harsh on Kim my friend calling him a moron....

Kim with all his mighty hardware & chess experience also blunders occasionally,the human GM's blunder,the top chess engines blunder,etc.

It's all related to the specific position in question....
Dr.D

[IGarcia]

Its incredible your pedantic level.

I followed almost all games in livestream and when GM where asking "What does that move does? What is the purpose?" they where thinking loud. Most of those cases are the initial comment after Anand/Carlsen move. And then they start thinking and answering those normal questions we all have to do when we play chess without computer help.

You are writing as those questions where their final conclusions, As they were clueless after long thinking. And was not. Yes there where times they "blunder" but they had not much time to think and had to concentrate with comments and other TV show related things.

And in game 9, when carlsen played c2, FM comentators explored a line where Nf1 would be game over. And later happened!

You, with all that hardware + 4 programs and yada yada yada yada failed to determine a blunder in game 5, pointing a "two point blunder" with 46...Rg1 and the true was a forcing line where later Anand had 51...Re2 with a TB draw.

So, you with all your hardware also blundered. And you had several days, several programs, several CPU, maybe tablebases?, custom settings and you cant figure out it was not a blunder 46..Rg1

Actually that game (5) showed how much we have to respect those GM and how much caution we have to had when we use a computer to draw conclusions.

Ignacio you are being pedantic again
The GM could not see 51...Re2

there are several 2800 blunders, here is another example,

Program sees 60.b4 for 0.00 score
2800 human plays 60.Ra4
2800 human did not understand the position again.

The point is what YOU incorrectly called a blunder with all the hardware, software and time at your disposition. No matter if later Anand didn't play Re2.

Anand blunders, many other 2800 players blunders, operators like you blunders. You can't be attacking humans, where its incomparable the ELO, the conditions, etc

I will give you a favor: You look like a moron every time you treat with scorn GM (or humans player in general )

frustrating isn't it, dealing with these GM blunders
yes now you have no choice but to name call, calling me a moron.
No scorn for the GM.
The GM is the one that said he is 2800, I do not deny or cover up GM blunders. It is what it is. I am not offended by GM blunders.

Tell you what.
I will give you a favor:
Since you call me a moron, then that means I am easy to beat.
How about you play me chess until one of us loses, 3 days per move. we can play at this site so plenty of witnesses.
When I beat you, you must apologize in front of everyone for calling me a moron, and from then on you must call me master for one month.
If I lose then I will sign my name as moron, as you called me, for one month.
kgburcham

I already refused you invitation (thanks). Also told you sure will win 5-0.
I didn't call you names. Just told you look bad when you attack humans chess. And you also blunder!

Its not so complex the message.

[kgburcham]

Its incredible your pedantic level.

I followed almost all games in livestream and when GM where asking "What does that move does? What is the purpose?" they where thinking loud. Most of those cases are the initial comment after Anand/Carlsen move. And then they start thinking and answering those normal questions we all have to do when we play chess without computer help.

You are writing as those questions where their final conclusions, As they were clueless after long thinking. And was not. Yes there where times they "blunder" but they had not much time to think and had to concentrate with comments and other TV show related things.

And in game 9, when carlsen played c2, FM comentators explored a line where Nf1 would be game over. And later happened!

You, with all that hardware + 4 programs and yada yada yada yada failed to determine a blunder in game 5, pointing a "two point blunder" with 46...Rg1 and the true was a forcing line where later Anand had 51...Re2 with a TB draw.

So, you with all your hardware also blundered. And you had several days, several programs, several CPU, maybe tablebases?, custom settings and you cant figure out it was not a blunder 46..Rg1

Actually that game (5) showed how much we have to respect those GM and how much caution we have to had when we use a computer to draw conclusions.

Ignacio you are being pedantic again
The GM could not see 51...Re2

there are several 2800 blunders, here is another example,

Program sees 60.b4 for 0.00 score
2800 human plays 60.Ra4
2800 human did not understand the position again.

The point is what YOU incorrectly called a blunder with all the hardware, software and time at your disposition. No matter if later Anand didn't play Re2.

Anand blunders, many other 2800 players blunders, operators like you blunders. You can't be attacking humans, where its incomparable the ELO, the conditions, etc

I will give you a favor: You look like a moron every time you treat with scorn GM (or humans player in general )

That's a little bit too harsh on Kim my friend calling him a moron....

Kim with all his mighty hardware & chess experience also blunders occasionally,the human GM's blunder,the top chess engines blunder,etc.

It's all related to the specific position in question....
Dr.D

what I find motivating are the fans that deny how often the 2800 human blunders.

Here is another blunder played by the world champion Carlsen, he could not see it, maybe it was a bug.
http://www.thechessworld.com/learn-ches ... nent&page=

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Its incredible your pedantic level.

I followed almost all games in livestream and when GM where asking "What does that move does? What is the purpose?" they where thinking loud. Most of those cases are the initial comment after Anand/Carlsen move. And then they start thinking and answering those normal questions we all have to do when we play chess without computer help.

You are writing as those questions where their final conclusions, As they were clueless after long thinking. And was not. Yes there where times they "blunder" but they had not much time to think and had to concentrate with comments and other TV show related things.

And in game 9, when carlsen played c2, FM comentators explored a line where Nf1 would be game over. And later happened!

You, with all that hardware + 4 programs and yada yada yada yada failed to determine a blunder in game 5, pointing a "two point blunder" with 46...Rg1 and the true was a forcing line where later Anand had 51...Re2 with a TB draw.

So, you with all your hardware also blundered. And you had several days, several programs, several CPU, maybe tablebases?, custom settings and you cant figure out it was not a blunder 46..Rg1

Actually that game (5) showed how much we have to respect those GM and how much caution we have to had when we use a computer to draw conclusions.

Ignacio you are being pedantic again
The GM could not see 51...Re2

there are several 2800 blunders, here is another example,

Program sees 60.b4 for 0.00 score
2800 human plays 60.Ra4
2800 human did not understand the position again.

The point is what YOU incorrectly called a blunder with all the hardware, software and time at your disposition. No matter if later Anand didn't play Re2.

Anand blunders, many other 2800 players blunders, operators like you blunders. You can't be attacking humans, where its incomparable the ELO, the conditions, etc

I will give you a favor: You look like a moron every time you treat with scorn GM (or humans player in general )

That's a little bit too harsh on Kim my friend calling him a moron....

Kim with all his mighty hardware & chess experience also blunders occasionally,the human GM's blunder,the top chess engines blunder,etc.

It's all related to the specific position in question....
Dr.D

what I find motivating are the fans that deny how often the 2800 human blunders.

Here is another blunder played by the world champion Carlsen, he could not see it, maybe it was a bug.
http://www.thechessworld.com/learn-ches ... nent&page=

There is no chess entity on mother earth that doesn't blunder when playing chess,yet if ever....
Dr.D

[gordonr]

the fans that deny how often the 2800 human blunders

That is partly because you regard all inaccuracies, such as Nd6 in the last Carlsen-Anand game, as a blunder. You denote everything with "??" - and not "?" or "?!" - which is not standard for chess literature. This may be your own definition - fair enough - but accept that it is not the common usage.

Here is another blunder played by the world champion Carlsen, he could not see it

This was the 65th move of a blitz game.