Does Anand look entirely comfortable?Christopher Kreuzer wrote:The computers give White a slight edge, should their opinion be respected here? Or are they simply saying that Black has sufficient compensation for the pawn?
Anand v Gelfand
-
Paul McKeown
- Posts: 3828
- Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
- Location: Hayes (Middx)
Re: Anand v Gelfand
-
James Coleman
- Posts: 384
- Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:11 pm
Re: Anand v Gelfand
I'd be amazed if it doesn't end up as another draw to be honest...
-
Paul Cooksey
Re: Anand v Gelfand
In my opinion, in a position where there is not much tactical going on, a computer opinion is "only" worth about the same as an IM opinion. I think that is the level their programing is at. Which isn't to say you would back a computer from here even against a GM, it is hard to prove anything against a computer over the board without making a tactical slip.Christopher Kreuzer wrote:The computers give White a slight edge, should their opinion be respected here?
I'm an unashamed Kramnik fan, so I'm really enjoying gettng his opinon. Of course he is good enough to know his own prejudices. "I am really big fan of the bishop pair" "For me it is a crime to give up a bishop for a knight and no other reason"
-
Matthew Turner
- Posts: 3617
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: Anand v Gelfand
I like Kramnik too, but I don't think his analysis here has been very good. He likes White now, but after Rhd8 surely Black must be absolutely fine.
-
Matthew Turner
- Posts: 3617
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: Anand v Gelfand
I should have said that I don't think Kramnik's analysis has been very accurate, I have found it good, because he has been very open about his analysis and given interesting opinions.
-
Paul McKeown
- Posts: 3828
- Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
- Location: Hayes (Middx)
Re: Anand v Gelfand
Shame - shaped up to be an interesting game for a while, but the very high standards of defensive play displayed thwarted the spectators yet again.
- Matt Mackenzie
- Posts: 6323
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Anand v Gelfand
So, the play offs.......
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
Roger de Coverly
- Posts: 22607
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Anand v Gelfand
wiki has the tie break rules, presumably correctly transcribed
As in effect you only have to reach move 60 with a level position, I think the tie break favours Black rather more than the same initial time without the increment. With the increment, will they not continue to agree draws at around the 20 to 30 move mark after the sharp opening has been neutralised?Tie Break rules wrote:In case of a tie at the end of 12 games, there will be a series of tie breaks.
Colors will be drawn and four rapid games will be played. The time control for these games will be 25 minutes plus 10 seconds per move.
If the score is tied after the four rapid tie break games, colors will be drawn and two blitz games (5 minutes plus 10 seconds increment per move) will be played. If the score is tied after two blitz games, another two-game blitz match will be played, under the same terms. The process will repeat, if necessary, until five blitz matches have been played.
If the score is tied after ten blitz games, a single sudden-death "Armageddon game" will determine the champion. The winner of a draw of lots gets to choose the colour to play, with white given 5 minutes and Black 4 minutes. Beginning with move 61, a three-second increment will be added following each move. If the game is drawn then the player of the Black pieces is declared champion.
-
Paul McKeown
- Posts: 3828
- Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
- Location: Hayes (Middx)
Re: Anand v Gelfand
Perhaps the point to remember from this game was that activating the bishops was worth not only an extra pawn, but a second (debit) pawn, too. At the end, Anand had no chance to win with his extra pawn.
- Mats Winther
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 5:27 pm
- Location: Stockholm, Sweden
- Contact:
Re: Anand v Gelfand
Are you guys still enthusiastic, after this inferior game? Personally, I think I will pass on to Ludo. It is more exciting than modern chess.
M. Winther
M. Winther
-
Paul McKeown
- Posts: 3828
- Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
- Location: Hayes (Middx)
Re: Anand v Gelfand
The game was interesting enough, Mats, your comment less so.
- Carl Hibbard
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Evesham
Re: Anand v Gelfand
Anand is far too strong at blitz for Gelfand and a botty smack is expected in the play off!
Cheers
Carl Hibbard
Carl Hibbard
-
Matthew Turner
- Posts: 3617
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am
Re: Anand v Gelfand
Whilst this seems to be a very widely held viewpoint, it seem incredibly naive to me. They are both very strong players and the first 4 games are 25min + 10sec. Is this really going to be so different from the full length games? I doubt itCarl Hibbard wrote:Anand is far too strong at blitz for Gelfand and a botty smack is expected in the play off!
- Carl Hibbard
- Posts: 6134
- Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
- Location: Evesham
Re: Anand v Gelfand
I stand corrected that is quite a decent time hardly even blitzMatthew Turner wrote:Whilst this seems to be a very widely held viewpoint, it seem incredibly naive to me. They are both very strong players and the first 4 games are 25min + 10sec. Is this really going to be so different from the full length games? I doubt it
Cheers
Carl Hibbard
Carl Hibbard