Final standings
| 1. | Anand, Viswanathan #2 |
IND | 2817 | * | * | ½ | ½ | 1 | 1 | ½ | 1 | 4½ |
| 2. | Kramnik, Vladimir #4 |
RUS | 2791 | ½ | ½ | * | * | ½ | 0 | ½ | 1 | 3 |
| 3. | Aronian, Levon #3 |
ARM | 2807 | 0 | 0 | ½ | 1 | * | * | ½ | 1 | 3 |
| 4. | Carlsen, Magnus #1 |
NOR | 2823 | ½ | 0 | ½ | 0 | ½ | 0 | * | * | 1½ |
Official website: http://www.russiachess.org
Trivia question: Is this the first time the top 4 players faced off against each other in a 4 person double round robin?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
Hikaru is better than all of them in rapid.
Anand demonstrates, once again, his superiority at rapid chess.
Trivia question:
Why the sponsors interrupt a game for interview the players?
eheh.
Botvinnik Memorial is done to amuse the audience and just for fun and money.
These games are meaningless, anyway.
Of course that’s just my opinion.
🙂
Best regards
Stef
Yes, hikaru is definitely better than them in all forms … but alas only in his and his fan-boys wildest dreams.
Naka stunk at Amber. He needs to work. His ego doesn’t win games.
Hi Susan Polgar,
Well,as expected “Anand” the world champion – Tops the result in Super rapid.
But Still,”Anand” never underestimates his opponents in all future games,as well exhibit his skills and win.
By
Venky [ India – Chennai ]
I think in maybe the late 1990’s Kramnik won a rapid event with Kasparov, Anand, and Ivanchuk. Not sure if they were ranked 1, 2, 3 & 4 though.
Anand is still very good at rapid chess. I still remember watching him play one game in the 1992 Chess Olympiad. He had consumed about 15 minutes in his clock while his opponent had already spent 2 hours. He used to play that fast even in games with standard time controls.
I believe Gaddafi is going to be next world champion as he is preparing heavily. That is the reason we do not know his where about.
When Carlsen wins a rapid tournament, there were all sorts of cheap comments against Anand. But when Anand wins, rapid games are meaningless and meant only to amuse crouds. We all want young champions but no reason to be biased.
To @Anon September 3, 2011 10:42:00
If you’ve followed the “Botvinnik Memorial Super Rapid” in streaming live on the internet… You know what I mean.
Best regards
Stef
Hey Stef! ‘These games are meaningless anyway etc etc’ Sure,had Carlsen won,you would be raving about his genius! But some third world Indian won and you guys can’t quite stomach that,can you?.
The format is interesting. We get an insight into the players’ minds during play. Only audience listen, not the opponent. Eventually, it brings more enthusiasts to the game.
To @Anon Sunday, September 4, 2011 7:35:00 AM CDT
Open preliminary statement.
I like how Anand plays as I like how Carlsen plays. I didn’t want to underline who won (I didn’t really care about who won because in a serious chess tournament who plays better, wins). Point.
Close preliminary statement. :-))
————————————–
To @Anon Sunday, September 4, 2011 9:26:00 AM CDT
You’re right, the format is interesting. If I was there in the public I would have fun, took photos, heard the comments of the chess players with pleasure etc etc.
But, you understand that stopping the clocks, ask the player about his actual position and so on… Well, all this cannot be defined “a Serious chess tournament”.
Of course, they’re still my opinions (My English is terrible, that’s not an opinion of mine, eheh).
Best regards
Stef