English Chess Forum

Notable among other things for the unprecedented gap in rating between its strongest and weakest participants, the tournament sees them meet in the first round. And as I write (move 28) it is not going to form.

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:10 pm

And as I write (move 28) it is not going to form.

Maybe rather more so now......

I think it's reckless, even cynical, to pitch Keymer into this tournament. If he holds his ground, fair enough; I'll be wrong then. But I'm not expecting to be wrong. What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger? Not in chess, it doesn't. It kills you

Play the rest of the tournament like he has today (despite the result) and he could yet do better "than expected".

Of course an example of what you suggest was Nigel Short, London 1980.

In the long term, did that help or hinder him?

David Robertson wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:30 pm

I think it's reckless, even cynical, to pitch Keymer into this tournament. If he holds his ground, fair enough; I'll be wrong then. But I'm not expecting to be wrong. What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger? Not in chess, it doesn't. It kills you

Who are you accusing of being reckless/cynical though? He qualified as of right, not by invitation. So if it’s a mistake it’s his own mistake (or whoever manages what he plays in if he is “managed”)

Richard Bates wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:00 am

Who are you accusing of being reckless/cynical though? He qualified as of right, not by invitation. So if it’s a mistake it’s his own mistake (or whoever manages what he plays in if he is “managed”)

Fair point. I'd forgotten he won last year's Open, a remarkable achievement in itself.

Still, my apprehension holds. He faces a tougher challenge than Short (1980), given he meets the reigning WC, a former WC, a WC finalist, and two/three other outstanding players of their generation. Hope he holds it together

Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:24 pm

Play the rest of the tournament like he has today (despite the result) and he could yet do better "than expected".

Of course an example of what you suggest was Nigel Short, London 1980.

In the long term, did that help or hinder him?

Hinder. Without a doubt.

I suspected as much, but interesting to hear it from the horse's mouth as it were!

Carlsen in his vintage 2011-4 style today. Who else wins like that?! Or has ever won like that at the top level, with any semblance of frequency?

Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:00 pm

Carlsen in his vintage 2011-4 style today. Who else wins like that?! Or has ever won like that at the top level, with any semblance of frequency?

Simply remarkable. Close to inimitable. I can imagine how Vallejo Pons feels tonight - why carry on? go do something else with your life, something you're better at!

Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:00 pm

Carlsen in his vintage 2011-4 style today. Who else wins like that?! Or has ever won like that at the top level, with any semblance of frequency?

Fischer in his "invincible" period was capable of it, maybe Alekhine in his equally insultingly dominant period circa 1930-31.

But yeah, its a bit of a struggle to come up with parallels.

David Robertson wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:13 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:00 pm

Carlsen in his vintage 2011-4 style today. Who else wins like that?! Or has ever won like that at the top level, with any semblance of frequency?

Simply remarkable. Close to inimitable. I can imagine how Vallejo Pons feels tonight - why carry on? go do something else with your life, something you're better at!

A nice stalemate trick in a line that could have happened is included in the following report: https://www.chess.com/news/view/2019-gr ... kDpfUtM3l8

LawrenceCooper wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:00 am

David Robertson wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:13 pm

Jonathan Rogers wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:00 pm

Carlsen in his vintage 2011-4 style today. Who else wins like that?! Or has ever won like that at the top level, with any semblance of frequency?

Simply remarkable. Close to inimitable. I can imagine how Vallejo Pons feels tonight - why carry on? go do something else with your life, something you're better at!

A nice stalemate trick in a line that could have happened is included in the following report: https://www.chess.com/news/view/2019-gr ... kDpfUtM3l8

Another bit from that report says:

"White should have gone for the endgame 48. Rxg3 Bxg3 49. Kxg3 which is a theoretical draw."

Wonder why Vallejo Pons didn't go down that line - is the theory of these very rare endgames too obscure even for top GMs?

I think the relevant material balances are:

RNvNB
RNvNN
RNvBB
RBvNB (same colour bishops)
RBvNB (opposite colour bishops)
RBvNN
RBvBB

Has anyone dug up the tablebase results and how often these sort of endgames occur?

[It has been a while since I looked up a tablebase position online - has that become more difficult now? Some sites that previously allowed you to enter a position don't seem to be around any more, and I saw some references to 'Nalimov probing code' and lots of sites require registration, such as this one for the admittedly large Lomonosov tablebases: http://tb7.chessok.com/]

Christopher Kreuzer wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 22, 2019 3:05 pm

It has been a while since I looked up a tablebase position online - has that become more difficult now?

There's an App for Android phones. It's called Lomonosov Tablebases and has the 7 man positions.

A tragedy for Keymer today.

The computers (after White's 46th) reckon Carlsen has just a small advantage against Anand. I will be amazed if he doesn't win, as the position is practically designed for Carlsen (and although Anand has played very well, not quite so designed for an older player to defend for hours).