Round 13 – March 6th
Vassily Ivanchuk 1/2 Vishy Anand
Levon Aronian 1/2 Magnus Carlsen
Veselin Topalov 1-0 Peter Leko (my prediction – game still on going)
Teimour Radjabov 1-0 Alexei Shirov
Standings after 13 rounds:
1. Anand 8.0
2. Carlsen 7.5
3-4. Aronian, Topalov 7.0
5.Radjabov 6.5
6. Ivanchuk 6.0
7-8. Shirov, Leko 5.0
What is your impression of this event going into the final round? Who has been the most exciting player so far?
Anand: 4 wins 1 loss 8 draws
Carlsen: 5 wins 3 losses 5 draws
Topalov: 5 wins, 4 losses, 4 draws
Aronian: 3 wins 2 losses 8 draws
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
And the ‘Mr Draw’ title goes to: Anand!!!
i hope topalov kicks anand’s drawing butt tomorrow
If losing more games makes a player exciting then the award definitely goes to Topalov and Carlsen.
For all great things that are written about the “EXCITING” players, they have managed to win only one more game than the “BORING” Anand.
Would rather draw more games and win the cup than lose. For most of us commenting here we have nothing to lose, so we call the ones losing more games as the “EXCITING” ones.
People hate Anand so much that they can’t understand that Anand has won only one games less than Topa, but Topa has lost 3 more games than Anand. I think that says all. Anand is difficult to beat and wins almost all others. He is world champion and winning his nth Linares now. People want more mistakes in chess. This is not a sound expectation. I will say Anand is the best player in the tournament. Carsen had his share of luck to reach close to Anand!
1. Anand
2. Carlsen
3. Topalov
4. Aronian…
You can’t argue with winning.
I’d like to have another statistic.
How many moves did the players do in the whole tournament?
Anyone wants to count for me?
Another one would be: how many of their thinking time did they use?
My guess would be Anand about 320 moves, Topalov and Carlsen about 560.
Thinking time: Anand less than the half op Topalov.
“If losing more games makes a player exciting”
Still understood nothing…
not drawing or winning or losing makes a player eciting but FIGHTING.
A hardfought draw, win or even loss gives excitement, even a hardfought positional(!) endgame win/loss/draw gives excitement, interesting sacrifizes give excitement whether they are correct or not, even a hardfought game that was blundered away in time trouble can give excitement…..
The result (and if it was earned) doesn’t count so much….
Why just blame Anand for the draws? There are 7 other players who played against him and settled for a draw.
Is that because the players realize they are better off taking a draw and getting 0.5 point?
Chess is not a single player game. If Anand is blamed for boring draws then the other 7 are equally responsible.
Jochen why don’t you subtract the number of moves Topalov and Carlsen made in the games they lost and then compare. It’d be a more fair comparison, as I’m guessing that they tried very hard to avoid losing the games they lost and made a lot of moves in those games.
Subtract the number of moves in the games everyone lost and count only the number of moves in Wins and Draws. Also if a player wins a game with few moves having been played out, don’t you think this statistic would go against that player according to your argument?
A draw is decided by 2 persons. Carlsen was not only happy to draw with Anand, he said in the interview after the match that he was afraid to be defeated. I think it is a honour if a draw is offered by Anand and people judge their position and only then they accept it.
The most exciting player has been Carlsen, by far.
The kid is showing his class in this tournament. This will be back-to-back excellent results against the best in the world, correct?
If Vishy were to lose more games but played exciting chess, people would be cribbing he does not deserve to be the world champion. The same was said about Kramnik (People calling him Drawnik etc…).
I’m sure anyone who has played in a chess tournament would agree that if you were in a position to win the tournament by just drawing your remaining games you would do so. At that point the onus is on your opponents to catch up with you. (It is of course easier said than done.)
It is a testament to Vishy’s strength that he can draw games so easily and maintain his lead without any trouble.
Blunders in time trouble or unsound sacrifices may be exciting for us, but not all chess players are entertainers playing to the gallery, they are there to try and do whats best for them.
There are also so many differences in attitude due to age, personality and style that each player brings to the board. I would guess someone like morozevich would prefer to play wild tactical games because he lacks the patience for positional play whereas some one like Kramnik gathers all the positional advantages he can get and goes in for the kill as the game progresses.
And I want to point out the apparent increase in disdain across the chess public for the dislike of the World Champion (Anand, now: Kramnik, before) taking/offering draws in tournaments.
It proves that it makes no difference who it is, but more the position one holds in the chess world.
1. Anand loses
2. Carlsen wins
P.S. i do not dislike Anand. I respect all chess players. I just happen to like carlsen’s style.
A.Munoz
womancandidatemaster.blogspot.com
Anand is the ‘World Champion’…and as such, he should be playing exciting games and make his opponents fight hard for those draws. But what is really happening is that Anand is just simply drawing. 8 Draws no less!!! Come on people, this is the same issue as with politicians….we do not demand more from the people we admire, follow, or select to lead us. Why should we be comtempt with seeing the #1 of the game we love so much just drawing enough to win a tournament. Where is the fighting spirit of the World Champion!!! Alekhine and Tal must be turning in their graves!!
“Also if a player wins a game with few moves having been played out, don’t you think this statistic would go against that player according to your argument?”
You’re particularly right but I can’t remember many excellent short wins here (there were some but no comparison with the numbers of the short draws).
If a player has a long fight for victory or a long fight against a loss doesn’t matter while I do not want this statitic for showing anything (excitingsness of a player, success, playing strength, show size…) but the numbers of the move.
I was just interested in these things (especially in the time using…)
Of course I am going to compare these numbers with the fighting will I think these players have. 😉
To correct my “guessed numbers” from the post above:
I looked it up and Anand had some long fighting games (against Carlsen and Leko (which was probably Lekos ‘fault’ here) in the beginning of the tournament….. only since Linares he is going to take one short draw after the other.
So his fighting will seemed broken since the second game of Linares… why ever….
Who cares…. if Anand wins that tournament tomorrow all will say he is the greatest.
If Topalow wins tomorrow (I hope so ;)) anyone will ask where Anand has gambled away his advance (which was undeserved presented by Leko)…. and I am going to know *hehe*.
Good luck to everybody tomorrow. Give this tournament a nice ending…
By the way: who is going to win if they have the same number of points?
Is there a second valuation like “Sonnebornberger” or “direct comparison” or (at least) “numbers of victories”?
Best regards
Jochen
If Anand hadn’t drawn so many games, the tournament wouldn’t have been as exciting until the last round would it? So how can you blame Anand for not making things exciting?
Also Jochen, what difference does it make if you made a 100+ moves but ended up losing the game?
Compare the number of moves in all drawn games only.
“Compare the number of moves in all drawn games only.”
Thank you, that’s quite a good idea.
Since I did not notice these “too much early draws” in Morelia that much I just take a look at the Linares draws.
I made a small list, round, players, move numbers and some comments to the end position.
Doing this I found Radjabov is a “Schieber”, too (I don’t know the english word for ‘Schieber’ this is someone who quickdraws too much).
I’d be happy about ome comments, was a lot of work:
round 1:
Radjabov-Leko, 39 moves, fearful draw in an absolute exciting position
round 2:
Topalov-Radjabov, 54 moves, clear drawn endgame KP vs KP
Aronian-Anand, 27 moves, absolutely nothing decided yet, much material (QRRB and 6P) left
round 3:
all games drawn
Ivanchuk – Topalov, 62 moves, (drawn knight endgame with 3 vs 2 pawns)
Shirov – Leko, 38 moves, double light figure endgame with few pawns left
Radjabov – Aronian, 31 moves, too early draw, much material left
Anand – Carlsen, 22 moves, much too early, fear of losing on each side?
round 4:
Radjabov – Anand, 18 moves, too early draw
Aronian – Ivanchuk, 22 moves, very few moves but not as much material left; though should have played on for a bit
round 5:
Ivanchuk – Radjabov, 58 moves, absolutely drawn endgame B vs BP
Shirov – Aronian, 77 moves, end position is clear draw – probably this was one of the most exciting game of all (though draw) with underpromotion and real hard try by Shirov to win
Anand – Leko, 37 moves, draw okay, but could have played on a bit…
round 6:
Aronian – Carlsen, 28 moves, drawn in a fighting position with both sides chances but slight edge for white; in this tournament situation an absolute nonsense draw from Aronian
Ivanchuk – Anand, 23 moves, too early draw
I think this list speaks for itself. Just compare Topa’s two draws with those from Anand….
By the way, Susan I vote the game Shirov-Aronian for the best and most exciting game of this tournament so far. 🙂
Best regards
Jochen
Just give me a Naka, Moro and Carlsen
tourney
Great work Jochen!
I personally enjoy Topalov, Carlsen, Shirov, Ivanchuk games more but Anand is a rock solid great player I just do not enjoy his style of play as much. Kramnik is also a great player but I do not enjoy his games either. I enjoyed Kasparov’s first 10 years games, Karpov’s first 5 years, but Bobby Fischer, practically all of his games are great for he was always trying to win and had the talent and skill to handle almost anything you threw at him and unlike some of our modern players, Fischer hardly ever blundered as often as our top ten players seem to. He was a much more precise player, imagine rolling up Topalov/Kramnik/Anand into one player and that is Fischer. The only player who played more precise was Capablanca. Just play over their games with Rybka and you will see what I mean!
its not about precise playing. its about winning and no one has won more than alexander alekhine
Alekhine’s games and early Kasparov’s (first ten years) were very dense complex games! I can only take so much before my brain just cannot take these two players games. Amazing ideas they both displayed. It would take a Rybka to show the flaws in their games but no human was able to except for Euwe and Kramnik.
Anand has now twice been called “World Champion” by hollow chess fans out there, by winning round-robin tournaments to earn this “title”.
Real chess fans know that you only become the World Chess Champion by defeating the best possible opponent in match play.
This is how all of the greats (Fischer, Kasparov, Capablanca, Lasker, etc.) earned the mantle of World Chess Champion.
Anand’s claims to this title are a joke and anyone supporting this claim of him ever being “World Champion” through tournament play are also a joke.
This tournament is a perfect example; pull off a couple of early wins through questionable play by your opponents and DRAW your way to the tournament victory.
Pathetic and boring.
Kramnik will wear him down and crush him!!
Anonymous 8:53 PM:
All official sources recognise Anand as World Champion.
Kramnik himself recognised Anand as World Champion.
I guess you also do not recognise Botvinnik as World Champion until 1958.
Go back and live in your dream world.
You say Anand’s performance is ‘pathetic and boring’.
Well I remember the two times Kramnik won Linares in 2003 and 2004 (praised to the skies by Kramnik fans). Kramnik in both cases scored just TWO wins and drew the rest. How pathetic and boring is that, then??
What a hypocrite you are.
hey guys ! why don’t you go get a job if being unemployed makes you so frustrated ???
any statisticccccccccccs ?!?!?!?