Norway Chess 2014

[Chris Rice]

I still predict Magnus to win, if he can find his usual form of grinding out wins from drawn positions.

Interestingly in the American online magazine Business Insider, a journalist, Randal Olson has charted all of Carlsen's win, loss and draw rates since 2001. What has been the key to Carlsen’s success? Well surprisingly, according to the stats at least, its not so much that Carlsen grinds out wins from drawn positions. Instead, it appears the key to his success is taking games that he used to consistently lose, especially games as Black and instead forcing them into a draw and he produces some graphs to demonstrate his point.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-key- ... ess-2014-6

[Barry Sandercock]

Interesting. I wish I could do that in my games.

[Chris Rice]

Interesting. I wish I could do that in my games.

Taking up the Berlin as Black seems to be a huge step towards that goal.

[Mick Norris]

Interesting. I wish I could do that in my games.

Taking up the Berlin as Black seems to be a huge step towards that goal.

See
http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... wasnt.html
and
http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... prise.html

[Barry Sandercock]

Today's game Carlsen-Grischuk will definately be a win for Carlsen.

[Graham Borrowdale]

Today's game Carlsen-Grischuk will definately be a win for Carlsen.

Barry, if you say it often enough (Carlsen will win today...) it will eventually happen

[Barry Sandercock]

The Carlsen game is beginning to look like a draw now,move 50.

[Jonathan Rogers]

A tournament that was already rather forgettable just produced even less interesting chess. Only two of those draws (Kramnik v Aronian and Caruana v Topalov) had anything of interest. Kudos to Giri who appears to be winning but even this game, one could be forgiven for thinking, seemed to start three hours later than the others.

I am sure the players are doing their best. I think the problem is that no one has brought their A-game to the event, and advantages have tended not to be converted because the accuracy has not been there. The only decisive game played between any of the leaders (Kramnik v Caruana) was settled by a blunder, not by Kramink accurately converting his earlier advantage. Topalov has perhaps played the best openings but his problems in converting good positions are well known by now: Agdestein is playing above his level but the timid draw with Svidler, instead of chancing his arm with ...f5, might suggest that (understandably) he is focused on not messing up his good tournament to date. I mean really, one could have added Anand to this event without making it any worse.

Hopefully something will happen after the rest day, but whether it will be anyone suddenly finding top form seems unlikely to me.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Kudos to Giri who appears to be winning but even this game, one could be forgiven for thinking, seemed to start three hours later than the others.

Now at move 113!

(Can't see how White makes progress)

EDIT: Are they both on increment now (move 118). Pity if so, as they are unlikely to play an accurate endgame. (Yes, they are: "The time control is 120 min for 40 moves + 60 min for 20 moves + 15 min for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move, starting from move 61.")

Hopefully something will happen after the rest day, but whether it will be anyone suddenly finding top form seems unlikely to me.

I'm still on tenterhooks as to whether Agdestein will draw out the tournament or whether his former pupil will overpress in an attempt to win in the final round... It seems the odds on a Norwegian winning the event may go up.

[Lewis Martin]

Turns out Giri slipped by letting Karjakin back in to a forced mate routine!

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Turns out Giri slipped by letting Karjakin back in to a forced mate routine!

Yeah, that was, um, unfortunate. I hope this prompts a debate about the use of increments at this level.

The twitter feed for the tournament was the culprit!

"I'm sorry to leave you for a couple of minutes now, but I think a draw might come quick."

Saying that guaranteed a result. Tempting fate.

[David Sedgwick]

Yeah, that was, um, unfortunate. I hope this prompts a debate about the use of increments at this level

I don't follow. Are you saying that you think it would have been better if there had not been an increment? How would that have been fairer or otherwise preferable?

[Matt Mackenzie]

A loss like that is the sort that takes a while getting over

[Roger de Coverly]

[quote="David Sedgwick" ]How would that have been fairer or otherwise preferable?[/quote]

It demonstrates the dangers of playing for a win when short of time. By reference to the other thread about repetitions, the player not wishing to draw would have to check for these.

Had there not been an increment, the player with less time might presumably have steered for a draw, either directly with a repetition or indirectly by invoking arbiter intervention under 10.2.

Many of us may have experienced this, at the end of a long game, your calculation powers disappear and you struggle to see even one move ahead.

Whilst annoying to be the exchange up and have to concede a draw, I would suspect that Black had done enough to draw by about move 100.

[Jonathan Bryant]

A tournament that was already rather forgettable ... Kudos to Giri ....

I bet it takes Giri a while to forget this game.