Anand vs. Gelfand WCC 2012 started

[Houdini]

That's right, he is a little bit more daring than Anand, but he doesn't take real risks. It really looks like a home-preparation battle and it's not very exciting. I remember beautiful games by Kasparov against Karpov where he played moves not because they were the strongest or more logical moves but because he had a plan he was following, and sometimes he even had aesthetic considerations throughout the wall game. I miss those K-K matches, and since Kasparov retired the chess scene lost a lot of excitement. I hope Carlsen will be able to put some fire back on the top...

I have a K-K game in mind, right now. Give me 10-15mn to find it...

If you use Karpov-Kasparov as reference, there's no reason to cry foul after 3 draws.
In the Karpov-Kasparov 1984 WC match there was a series of 17 consecutive draws between game 9 and game 27.
There were 40 draws and only 8 conclusive games when the match was abandoned for health reasons.

Robert

[JuLieN]

That's right, he is a little bit more daring than Anand, but he doesn't take real risks. It really looks like a home-preparation battle and it's not very exciting. I remember beautiful games by Kasparov against Karpov where he played moves not because they were the strongest or more logical moves but because he had a plan he was following, and sometimes he even had aesthetic considerations throughout the wall game. I miss those K-K matches, and since Kasparov retired the chess scene lost a lot of excitement. I hope Carlsen will be able to put some fire back on the top...

I have a K-K game in mind, right now. Give me 10-15mn to find it...

If you use Karpov-Kasparov as reference, there's no reason to cry foul after 3 draws.
In the Karpov-Kasparov 1984 WC match there was a series of 17 consecutive draws between game 9 and game 27.
There were 40 draws and only 8 conclusive games when the match was abandoned for health reasons.

Robert

Right, but how long has it been since we got such an exciting game as this one?


[Event "World Chess Championship"]
[Site "Moscow"]
[Date "1985"]
[Round "16"]
[White "Karpov, Anatoly"]
[Black "Kasparov, Gary"]
[ECO "B44"]
[Result "0-1"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nb5 d6 6.c4 Nf6 7.N1c3
a6 8.Na3 d5 9.cxd5 exd5 10.exd5 Nb4 11.Be2 Bc5 12.O-O O-O 13.Bf3
Bf5 14.Bg5 Re8 15.Qd2 b5 16.Rad1 Nd3 17.Nab1 h6 18.Bh4 b4 19.Na4
Bd6 20.Bg3 Rc8 21.b3 g5 22.Bxd6 Qxd6 23.g3 Nd7 24.Bg2 Qf6 25.a3
a5 26.axb4 axb4 27.Qa2 Bg6 28.d6 g4 29.Qd2 Kg7 30.f3 Qxd6 31.fxg4
Qd4+ 32.Kh1 Nf6 33.Rf4 Ne4 34.Qxd3 Nf2+ 35.Rxf2 Bxd3 36.Rfd2
Qe3 37.Rxd3 Rc1 38.Nb2 Qf2 39.Nd2 Rxd1+ 40.Nxd1 Re1+ 0-1

Some moves played by Kasparov were extremely spectacular.

After black's 26th move, white are nearly in Zugzwang.

I also remember another Kasparov game against Karpov where he played nearly symmetrical moves with his knights and bishops and got an absolutely ravishing position: he didn't need to do that to win the game, but the impression was incredibly artistic.

So, there are certainly different publics for chess, and maybe you are happy with this championship up to now because you like accuracy and science, but if your character was more pleased with sport and art, then you'd get bored by now, just like I am. It's a cliché to say that chess is all together a science, an art and a sport, but up to now this championship is steering too much toward the scientific component. Hopefully the players will dare to take some more risk and light some fire on the board. They have the talent for that, so up to now they're probably just a bit cold feet (or is chess being killed by home preparation?)

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

They were in a good day: they played 9 more moves than yesterday until they agreed for a draw

You don't do justice to the quality of this game.
It really was an interesting fight.

You're right, they play very high level chess. But we're not here to watch two engines-like players trying to play the scientifically best moves, we're here to see them fight for the world championship title. And for that, you have to take risks. Players like Kasparov, Spassky, Alekhine, Tal and many others were able to CHOSE to play a move objectively weaker but that gave them a chance to destabilize their opponent and increase the chances to push their opponent toward a mistake, at the cost of slightly decreasing their chances of drawing if the opponent kept being accurate.

That's why I personally feel disappointed: this is not a world chess championship until now, it's two technicians emulating engines.

Totally agreed

[Jack Lad]

So nice game. Houdini is going back to +0.45 to that Gelfand was not stupid and was not playing blunders.

Anand blundered on move 35 with Rh1? instead Re7! should win for white. BG is not stupid and blunder is perhaps too strong a word to use - a poor move is perhaps more appropriate.

Despite the draw this was a better and more interesting game by both players than the first two which is a good sign.

[Houdini]

Right, but how long has it been since we got such an exciting game as this one?

That was Game 16 of the second K-K match, you should give Anand-Gelfand a bit more time...

But please take a second look at today's game. Anand played 10.h4, 12.h5 and 14.O-O-O going for the opposite castling and an attacking game. Gelfand defended very actively by sacking a pawn with 16...e4!?, but then played a couple of inaccurate moves which Anand might have exploited using 34.d7 instead of 34.Rc7.

Was this a dull, uninteresting game of chess because it ended in a draw after some mistakes from both sides? I don't think so.

Robert

[jefk]

[quote="Uri Blass"][quote="Jack Lad"][quote="Uri Blass"]
both players can find great defensive moves as you would expect from the top two but they need to up their game if they want to win.[/quote]


yep, third game draw as well, surprise move against the Gruenfeld,
3.f3, i have then 3...c5 in book, but main line seems to be what
was played 3..d5. So a draw again.

Which can be expected at the highest levels.

jef

[JuLieN]

Right, but how long has it been since we got such an exciting game as this one?

That was Game 16 of the second K-K match, you should give Anand-Gelfand a bit more time...

But please take a second look at today's game. Anand played 10.h4, 12.h5 and 14.O-O-O going for the opposite castling and an attacking game. Gelfand defended very actively by sacking a pawn with 16...e4!?, but then played a couple of inaccurate moves which Anand might have exploited using 34.d7 instead of 34.Rc7.

Was this a dull, uninteresting game of chess because it ended in a draw after some mistakes from both sides? I don't think so.

Robert

They went "out of book" with black's 16th move... So despite I liked the idea of opposed castles and opening the h column, it was, again, no risk from any player...

So yes, the most exciting move of the game was 16. ..., e4. And 26. ..., Nb2 as well, so credits to Gelfand. Maybe interesting from a pure technical point of view, but that's not enough to call this game exciting.

As a chess fan I want to see a Kasparov splashing the board with testosterone, or a Tal finding out-of-this world trickeries that would lose 100% against any top 100 engine but would win 9 times out of ten against a top-10 player. I want to see Capablanca's charming moves, Alekhine's energy, Fisher's "draw is not an option". Everything but this technicians' battle: for that I have engines matches already.

[Jack Lad]

yep, third game draw as well, surprise move against the Gruenfeld,
3.f3, i have then 3...c5 in book, but main line seems to be what
was played 3..d5. So a draw again.

Which can be expected at the highest levels.

jef

BG seems to like the Grunfeld but he could have played d6 instead with a good KID game for black.
[d] rnbqkb1r/ppp1pp1p/3p1np1/8/2PP4/5P2/PP2P1PP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Indian_Defence

[Jack Lad]

Everything but this technicians' battle: for that I have engines matches already.

Perhaps you would like this game then:

[d] 2kr3r/ppp1qppp/2p2n2/2b2b2/2P1p3/1P2P3/PBQPBPPP/RN2K2R w KQ - 5 10
10. f4? was a blunder by Larsen but an easy one to make.

12. Bxg7! would have given Larsen a chance to save the game but black is still much better after Rh7.
[d] 2kr3r/ppp1qpB1/2p5/2b2b1p/2P1pPn1/1P2P1P1/P1QPB2P/RN2K2R b KQ - 0 12
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1128831

[Sven]

Right, but how long has it been since we got such an exciting game as this one?

That was Game 16 of the second K-K match, you should give Anand-Gelfand a bit more time...

But please take a second look at today's game. Anand played 10.h4, 12.h5 and 14.O-O-O going for the opposite castling and an attacking game. Gelfand defended very actively by sacking a pawn with 16...e4!?, but then played a couple of inaccurate moves which Anand might have exploited using 34.d7 instead of 34.Rc7.

Was this a dull, uninteresting game of chess because it ended in a draw after some mistakes from both sides? I don't think so.

Robert

They went "out of book" with black's 16th move... So despite I liked the idea of opposed castles and opening the h column, it was, again, no risk from any player...

So yes, the most exciting move of the game was 16. ..., e4. And 26. ..., Nb2 as well, so credits to Gelfand. Maybe interesting from a pure technical point of view, but that's not enough to call this game exciting.

As a chess fan I want to see a Kasparov splashing the board with testosterone, or a Tal finding out-of-this world trickeries that would lose 100% against any top 100 engine but would win 9 times out of ten against a top-10 player. I want to see Capablanca's charming moves, Alekhine's energy, Fisher's "draw is not an option". Everything but this technicians' battle: for that I have engines matches already.

I think that top level chess is basically "waiting for my opponent's errors". The players are well-prepared and real surprises are quite rare, so taking too much risk will most probably lose the game. That might be one explanation for today's kind of chess games at WC level.

To prefer more "exciting" games is understandable from a spectator's viewpoint. But then you might also tend to prefer games with more errors, which the players are trying to avoid.

Sven