Anand v Gelfand

[Mats Winther]

Alekhine rotates in his grave.

Mats

[Matt Mackenzie]

Strangely enough Mats, people were saying "classical" chess was dying back then too.......

Especially after AAA and Capa served up about 300 near-identical Queens Gambit Declineds

[Mick Norris]

Anand is far too strong at blitz for Gelfand and a botty smack is expected in the play off!

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

I don't think Anand is in top form, if he somehow rediscovered it, he would win

The likelihood is that they will continue in the same form, it will be close, but I think Gelfand has stronger nerves and will win

Let's hope it doesn't go to blitz, and certainly not to an Armageddon game

[Roger de Coverly]

I stand corrected that is quite a decent time hardly even blitz

If they manage to draw the 25 minute match, they move on to 5 minute blitz. But there's an increment of 10 seconds on that as well, so it won't be possible to win by sheer speed of play.

The old rules would stipulate that a drawn match leaves the title with the Champion. (Fischer even wanted the challenger to score +2)

Would the match have been livelier if Anand had draw odds?

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Would the match have been livelier if Anand had draw odds?

I think so, and I think this is a good reason to have such draw odds. Or at least to hold the tie-break before the main event (though that would lose the drama).

[Paolo Casaschi]

Would the match have been livelier if Anand had draw odds?

It could have been livelier (in the sense we would probably have seen Gelfand taking risks and getting trashed) but it would not have been fair.

A chessboxing match could have been more entertaining as well, the point though is that entertaining the public is NOT the main goal of the players for such a match and it should not be.

I have been following the match from the FICS server, where I noticed every day three or four different events are shown live. At this instant, the "ENCI Limburg Open" or the "Lublin Union Memorial" are shown live. If you are looking for more "entertaining" chess, you could watch those events, plenty of entertaining wild games with GMs trashing FMs or similar. Then leave the world championship to the chess players that want to watch a world championship, dull moments included.

[Paul McKeown]

Agree with Paolo: it's a world championship match. The players have no responsibility apart from to play well.

[David Robertson]

I think FIDE will draw one of two conclusions in the light of this match:

either the format is wrong, and we must develop something more credible for a WC match

or the boring stuff in the front half is wrong, and we should cut straight to the chase

I'm absolutely confident FIDE will draw the right conclusion. Absolutely.

[Mick Norris]

I think FIDE will draw one of two conclusions in the light of this match:

either the format is wrong, and we must develop something more credible for a WC match

or the boring stuff in the front half is wrong, and we should cut straight to the chase

I'm absolutely confident FIDE will draw the right conclusion. Absolutely.

[Adam Ashton]

Would the match have been livelier if Anand had draw odds?

It could have been livelier (in the sense we would probably have seen Gelfand taking risks and getting trashed) but it would not have been fair.

A chessboxing match could have been more entertaining as well, the point though is that entertaining the public is NOT the main goal of the players for such a match and it should not be.

I have been following the match from the FICS server, where I noticed every day three or four different events are shown live. At this instant, the "ENCI Limburg Open" or the "Lublin Union Memorial" are shown live. If you are looking for more "entertaining" chess, you could watch those events, plenty of entertaining wild games with GMs trashing FMs or similar. Then leave the world championship to the chess players that want to watch a world championship, dull moments included.

Whilst I agree with your sentiment I don't think it's unreasonable to put the onus on the challenger to win the title. It's surely preferable to rapidplay play offs.

[Ray Sayers]

I was interested to see how this match compared with other recent title matches. I went back as far as 1995 (I'm easily bored - by all means someone can go back further) and looked to see how long on average the games were and what win and win % there was. I got (and I haven't double checked the maths):

Anand – Gelfand 2012 – 12 games, average 29.25 moves, 2 decisive, 10 draws (16.7%)
Anand – Topalov 2010 - 12 games, average 52.5 moves, 5 decisive, 7 draws (41.7%)
Anand-Kramnik, 2008 – 11 games, average 35.5 moves, 4 decisive, 7 draws (36.4%)
2007 – Tournament
Kramnik – Topalov, 2006 – 12 games, average 51.6 moves (11 games), 6 decisive (1 default), 6 draws (50%). Kramnik won rapidplay play off.
2005 – Tournament
Kramnik – Leko, 2004 – 14 games, average 35.6 moves, 4 decisive, 10 draws (28.6%)
2004 – Tournament
2001 – Tournament
Kasparov – Kramnik, 2000 – 15 games, average 37.9 moves, 2 decisive, 13 draws (13.3%)
2000 – Tournament
1999 – Tournament
Karpov – Anand, 1998 – 8 games, average 51.25 moves, 6 decisive, 2 draws (75%)
Karpov – Kamsky 1996 – 18 games, average 55.6 moves, 9 decisive, 9 draws (50%)
Kasparov – Anand 1995 – 18 games, average 29.9 moves, 5 decisive, 13 draws (27.8%)

[Mick Norris]

From http://www.thechessmind.net/

"It's not the first world championship match to finish (or at least finish the "classical" portion) in a draw. This already happened in Lasker-Schlechter (1910), Botvinnik-Bronstein (1951), Botvinnik-Smyslov (1954), Kasparov-Karpov (1987), Karpov-Anand (1997; though I won't object to those who don't want to call that a real world championship), Kramnik-Leko (2004) and Kramnik-Topalov + Danailov + FIDE arbiters (2006). And now, it has happened for an eighth time."

[Paul McKeown]

Interesting blog, Mick. I see mention of the paper by Kenneth Regan, Bartholomiej Macieja and Guy Haworth measuring Intrinsic Performance Rating. The suggestion is that Anand has played at 2985 in this match and Gelfand at 2915, basically the mean of 3200 (big computer) and their human ratings.

[Paul McKeown]

Fascinating. According to that paper, perfect play - relative to Rybka 3 - has an IPR of 3600. "Kramnik draws one game in fifty."

[Paul Cooksey]

Jodit Polgar has been posting brief summaries on her official facebook. They've usually been interesting, particularly today.

Classical games did not bring WC to an end! Anand, the world’s best rapid player wanted to go to tie breaks! Let’s see what happened:
Gelfand made the move 10...c4 which I consider a fantastic move for a few reasons.
1. Good move in itself
2. After this move Anand was out of his home preparation
3. Psychologically it was good that Anand now had to decide how to take the sacrificed pawn on c4.
c4 is a move very much in my spirit gives up material to get activity in the position.
Then up to move 18 thinks went perfectly for black but Bb7 was a mistake I would much prefer to play Rhd8 and I think the game would stay open for 3 results!
Move 20...a5 was definitely a mistake then the move Bc5 made things turn around , because it became clear that only white can play for win. I was really shocked to see that Anand offered a draw because he could still press at least for some time. This means that Anand was already focusing on the tie- breaks. Anand is practically the best rapid player in the world but I have experienced Gelfands strength, too.
I can absolutely hardly wait the tie breaks!!!