Candidates 2014

[Jonathan Bryant]

Also another lower division evening league hack in Topalov-Kramnik. Really, this tournament has something for everyone.

And now Lev 'five queen moves from my first eight' Aronian. How much lower do we have to go for appropriate comparisons? Mike Basman’s u-10s?

[John McKenna]

LawrenceCooper>Anand-Aronian has started in original fashion 1 c4 c6 2 Nf3 d5 3 Qb3 d4...<
Isn't it 3... d4 here that is the 'original' move, instead 3... Nf6 4.d4 would transpose to normal lines.

Of course, it could be said that Anand's game is just an Old Indian with a move and a pawn in hand!?

I hope Karjakin can still draw today, Barry.

Just realised - after reading the post above - that I did get the the players names the wrong way round.
So it was Aronian-Anand that makes sense now - despite Anand being an older Indian it was Aronian who played the 'funny' stuff. Anand did, however, contribute with 3... d4.

I see two games already drawn, which leaves the four Russians to divide the spoils any way they can.

[Colin S Crouch]

Yes, fair enough, I did not predict both of the two critical results today. Usually I do not enjoy doing such things, as it leads nto the implication that if a game is lost, a top grandmaster will make a clear miswtake. However, after Jonathan's predictions, and after the large numbrts of losses, I have to admit that I was tempted to try a punt. And, I have to admit, I did not predict that Carlsen will score two losses and a draw in last year's Candidates.

The two clear predictions I have made, by implication at least, is, is that Aronian was probably going to beat Anand, and that Kramnik was not going to win. Looking at the current position, Andreikin is a pawn up against Kramnik. Naybe Andreikin will not be able to win, or maybe not. It would however take a massive blunder if he was going to olose.

If Kramnik were draw, and if (of course it didn't happen) Aronian were to win, Kramnik would have been a full point down.

Casachi's sense of irony is misplaced. He is only a 180 player, trying to comment on top grandmasters. The idea that it was a "soft draw" is disrespectful for both players. There is a difference between soneone making a big mistake, and someone equalising, after a lot of initial preparation, finding a clear enough way to equalise as black - which includes giving away a pawn. Aronian in round 8, did not blunder, Anand equalised after a lot of prepared homework.

The interesting question is how deeply or otherwise Aronian prepared. Looking at Chessarena, and granted this was only a 15 second summary, Houdini gave the line as a clear advantage to White. Komodo and Stockfish gave it as equal throughout.

Then on Svidler - Karjakin, Svidler's very reasonable pawn sacrifice on g6 is given as a clear advantage for Black, while the other two engines give approxinate equality, as I would suspect myself. Maybe in the end Houdini tends to overestimate the pawn too often?

Anyway, I am getting distracted. Time control, and the likelihood of four draws.

[Roger de Coverly]

[
And now Lev 'five queen moves from my first eight' Aronian. How much lower do we have to go for appropriate comparisons? Mike Basman’s u-10s?

The supposed rules of chess as to how to play are really just recommendations. So the really top players just ignore them when it suits, whilst under-tens and lower board club players don't know what they are supposed to say anyway. Hence the convergence of ideas, if not the quality of execution.

[Colin S Crouch]

Perhaps I wrote too quickly. Karjakin is putting pressue on Svidler in the endgame.

[John McKenna]

When Svidler went 64.Rg7, I thought either confident or over confident, did he miss Karjakin's reply?

[Barry Sandercock]

A good win by Karjakin. Even if Svidler hadn't played 64.Rg7, I think Karjakin was still winning. Stockfish gave that as the best alternative.

[John McKenna]

Barry, thanks for the info above.

I have not got Stockfish and, anyway, prefer to watch without engine feeds.
Colin's input here is always welcome as far as I am concerned.
Watching the games with live commentary as well as engine analyses is great, but overload for me.

Nice to know, though, that Svidler was already in trouble by move 64(!)
Your predicted win for Karjakin shows faith in the younger generation.

I tend to think that Karjakin and Mamedyarov smiling and laughing about other matters is not quite so simple.

[Paolo Casaschi]

Casachi's sense of irony is misplaced. He is only a 180 player, trying to comment on top grandmasters.

Seriously?

[John McKenna]

Casachi's sense of irony is misplaced. He is only a 180 player, trying to comment on top grandmasters.

Seriously?

I'd like to make clear that input from players like Paolo is welcome to me as being intermediate between myself and Colin.
My comment along the same lines about Colin's input was not done with any ulterior motive.
We all have our view of the proceedings and they complement each other even if they seem diametrically opposed.

[MartinCarpenter]

Some fine post game interviews for explaning this sort of thing - Aronian seemingly felt he was more or less lost after he went Qb3 (Qa4 better) after a6 if black went Nf6 (instead of Bc5) and its obviously never remotely easy to recover from that sort of thing and keep playing. Anand couldn't see what to do at the end. Seemingly hadn't seen Qb3 before though.

[Colin S Crouch]

I wrote:
Casachi's sense of irony is misplaced. He is only a 180 player, trying to comment on top grandmasters.

Caschi replied:
Seriously?

Yes, of course. I have checked up your grading list, only 180. You have never beaten a player graded over 200 during the recent rating periods, and presumably you have never beaten an FM, an IM, or let alone a GM
What are your credentials for trying to suggest that you have a better knowledge than me of chess? Have you ever written a published chess book?

I see that I beat you a few years ago, something which I had completely forgotten. These days, I try to avoid playing opponents graded substantially below 200. I have better things to do in the evening.

A far, far interesting post is when Martin Carpenter noted, based on the game interviews that Aronian had gone seriously wrong in the opening, and that he was worried that Anand was quite probably winning.
Could Anand indeed have been winning? If so, that would have been an interesting narrative - Aronian careless and over-optimistic, Anand far too cautious, and missing possible opportunities. Thanks for pointing this out, Martin. Something to analyse more closely later on.

[Paolo Casaschi]

Yes, of course. I have checked up your grading list, only 180. You have never beaten a player graded over 200 during the recent rating periods, and presumably you have never beaten an FM, an IM, or let alone a GM
What are your credentials for trying to suggest that you have a better knowledge than me of chess? Have you ever written a published chess book?

I see that I beat you a few years ago, something which I had completely forgotten. These days, I try to avoid playing opponents graded substantially below 200. I have better things to do in the evening.

Well, the fact that I'm a lousy patzer is not under discussion: there's overwhelming evidence about that. However, if you checked me out you must have noticed that your current FIDE rating is certainly closer to mine than to the rating of the players at the candidates you pontificate about.

Also, repeatedly belittling in such a way probably more than 95% of your potential readers did not seem very smart to me, hence the wonder of "seriously?".

Said that, since you claim having better things to do than dealing with sub 200 players, I guess we should better stop this discussion.

[John McKenna]

Sorry to throw this in media res but is there really that much of a problem?
What is 'soft'(er) for Colin is 'hard'(er) for Paolo - with the help of engines they may be able to settle it objectively. However, who can compare the 'hard'(er) roads - to and in - the Fischer-Spassky & Kasparov-Karpov encounters with the 'soft'(er) ways of chess in the more recent Candidates tournaments and WC matches? Anyway, that's just my impression - make of it what you will.

[MartinCarpenter]

Anand seemed to think that Aronian could actually ditch a piece with 8.. Nf6 9 Be2 d3 10 Bxd3 e4 11 Be2 etc and probably be OK, but you can easily see why being potentially forced into that sort of thing unplanned would rattle someone! Not sure if Aronian had consider it actually, it didn't really look like it from the press conference but I guess he might well have found/tried it at need rather than the seemingly abject groveling after 9 d3 instead.