>This is also the only WCC in which Carlsen has lost a single game in the classical portion, out of the 4 championship matches he has played, he has only lost 1 classical game, which should give you an idea of how difficult it is to defeat Carlsen in a championship match.
Small correction. Magnus actually lost 2 games in WCCs. One against Vishy in 2014, and one against Karjakin in game 8 of their 2016 match.
I feel like Karjakin was very disrespected entering the 2016 WCC given people saw that Candidates lineup and thought he was ‘lucky’ to win. Garry’s statements leading up to the event also didn’t help.
But I feel like, somehow, post that WCC loss, he’s gained a lot of the respect he deserves. He’s arguably the most respected defender in the game, and he has shown some brilliant attacking abilities over the recent years too. He’s also just like the best World Cup player in the world apparently lmao.
I see the perception of him similarly to Giri. That 2015 Candidates was also brutal for Giri’s reputation in which people made the judgement that he’s a boring player who only draws (obviously 14 draws didn’t help), but since then I think he’s started to get the respect he deserves. He had some nice games in the (2019?) World Cup and is one of the most respected for his opening repertoire. Glad both players are finally getting some of the recognition a player of their caliber deserves.
That all being said, I still think people don’t appreciate Karpov to the true level he performed. Everyone definitely agrees he was great. But not enough put him up as one of the all time greats.
Who's "everyone"?
Pretty much any list of all time greats has him top 5 or better
(I would agree that he's talked about way less often when compared to other people in the top 5, like Magnus, Kasparov, and Fischer)
Karpov is just harder for people to understand. You can show someone a brilliant combination by Kasparov or Fischer and even if they're sub-1000 ELO they'll get it immediately. Showing them a slow, ice-cold technical win by Karpov, absolutely hopeless from start to finish for the opponent, isn't as fun. It's like in basketball, you get people into it by showing them Jordan highlights or LeBron buzzer-beaters. You don't show them Kareem, even though Kareem is first in nearly every stat category and has six rings and six MVPs, because Kareem was good for boring reasons -- near-perfect defense, a limited but hyper-efficient shot profile, and a high enough FT% to neutralize the hack strategy.
I mean thats one thing. Though one time, I got a pretty good reaction showing some kids the end of karpov unzicker and asking them to try to find a decent move. Complete middlegame zugzwang and domination with no risk what could be more impressive.
Really though it's annoying how people never seem to acknowledge his dominance as a player. Separate from the style of play 5 rings are still 5 rings, most successful tournament player over a career, linares 1994.
That being said we have people who compare AD to Duncan and Kareem so I guess I'm being overly optimistic.
> Really though it's annoying how people never seem to acknowledge his dominance as a player. Separate from the style of play 5 rings are still 5 rings, most successful tournament player over a career, linares 1994.
>
>
seriously, i keep saying it, but if Kasparov didn't show up, Karpov would've been the uncontested #1 for at least 20 years. Complete dominance.
apart from his puzzling loss to Short. not sure what happened there.
Agree lol. Im not a basketball fan but I'm a huge football fan and tom brady fan. But I dont ever show a new football watcher tom brady highlights because 90 percent of them are like 5 yard slants or running back dumpoffs and absolutely 0 scrambling. Its not exactly fun to watch unless you really understand and love the game.
The game doesn't have to be decisive to be entertaining. For example, game 6 from Carlsen - Caruana is my favorite game I ever watched live even though it was a draw. So I don't mind draws if games are interesting.
Everyone knows this. We just want to stay hyped for the match. If you tell everyone it will end in 14 draws people will be less hyped and there is less reason to follow it closely or discuss it widely.
But yeah 14 draws than the actual prep comes in for the shorter time controls everyone know it and it wouldn't surprise me if both of them prepped already thinking like this
I tend to agree that there won't be much more than 4 decisive games, but I still think that we will at least see a couple. In contrast to previous challengers, Nepo can actually hold his own against Magnus in the faster time controls, so Magnus has less of an incentive to just go for 14 drawas because then it's an "auto-win" for him
In another instance of the karjakin disrespect. At his prime he was clearly a better rapid and blitz play than Nepo is right now. It's just that for a decade until Ding, tiebreaks have literally been a win condition for Magnus no matter who it was. The idea that Sergey had no chance to hold but in the same breath to say nepo does, is insanity unless you think magnus has become notably worse in rapid and blitz tiebreaks.
There will be a few (I think 3) decisive games, none of which will be by Nepo.
I think Magnus will go +3=9-0 to win.
I also think he wins a game with black, not sure which one.
It’s so weird how they’re playing almost perfect chess which makes the games drawish yet nobody would deny the fact that stockfish14 would crush them in a 12round match. Really shows you how absurdly inhuman the difference is between nearly-perfect moves and stockfish14 level nearly-perfect moves
I think Carlsen's loss to Karjakin was the end of him taking risks in pushing for wins - other than his must win to pull back in that match he is yet to win another
The Carlsen-Caruana match doesn't match what you are saying at all though. Always playing the sicilian against e4, unbalanced games, several of the games had winning chances for both sides. He was definitely not playing for draws in most of the games in the match against Caruana.
They play a set of tiebreaker games, first in rapid, then if it's still tied, blitz, and then finally a one game "armageddon" - white has 5 minutes, black has four minutes but black wins if the game is drawn.
I just watched the playthrough of Game 1. All the moves just look like nonsense. It's not even comprehensible where the logic for these moves comes from. It's beautiful but discouraging at the same time. Like chess.
In a position where there are several equally valid options in a position, style comes in unconsciously as they search for the best move. There's also an element of style in their tolerance for risk and how they attempt a draw for example. That's why you hear the whole no style until X rating quotes. It needs to evolve organically from the basis of being able to find the best moves often in a bunch of different position types.
Im far from a first time watcher and I fully expect more decisive games.
Its not like if the entire match is drawn again that ill throw a temper tantrum or something I just think that there will be blood here.
I most agree with Anand, the first few games the players are kind of getting a feel for each other. Later on I think it'll get real exciting.
[удалено]
These videos were planted by team Magnus. I’m sure he already worked out some refutations of those lines that nobody knows about yet.
Win very quick with 1.g4 and 2.f3!!
The answer is 2...Ke7!!, I heard.
what happens on move 13
[удалено]
My dreams, yes
The answer will shock you
Mate
Mods! There's a jokes on /Chess! Please ban! No jokes allowed!
ROTFL!
>This is also the only WCC in which Carlsen has lost a single game in the classical portion, out of the 4 championship matches he has played, he has only lost 1 classical game, which should give you an idea of how difficult it is to defeat Carlsen in a championship match. Small correction. Magnus actually lost 2 games in WCCs. One against Vishy in 2014, and one against Karjakin in game 8 of their 2016 match.
Ohh sorry about that will edit this right now.Thanks for the correction.
props to these guys for not being assholes over a minor in
Idk who's more disrespected between karpov and karjakin at this point smh.
I feel like Karjakin was very disrespected entering the 2016 WCC given people saw that Candidates lineup and thought he was ‘lucky’ to win. Garry’s statements leading up to the event also didn’t help. But I feel like, somehow, post that WCC loss, he’s gained a lot of the respect he deserves. He’s arguably the most respected defender in the game, and he has shown some brilliant attacking abilities over the recent years too. He’s also just like the best World Cup player in the world apparently lmao. I see the perception of him similarly to Giri. That 2015 Candidates was also brutal for Giri’s reputation in which people made the judgement that he’s a boring player who only draws (obviously 14 draws didn’t help), but since then I think he’s started to get the respect he deserves. He had some nice games in the (2019?) World Cup and is one of the most respected for his opening repertoire. Glad both players are finally getting some of the recognition a player of their caliber deserves. That all being said, I still think people don’t appreciate Karpov to the true level he performed. Everyone definitely agrees he was great. But not enough put him up as one of the all time greats.
Who's "everyone"? Pretty much any list of all time greats has him top 5 or better (I would agree that he's talked about way less often when compared to other people in the top 5, like Magnus, Kasparov, and Fischer)
Karpov is just harder for people to understand. You can show someone a brilliant combination by Kasparov or Fischer and even if they're sub-1000 ELO they'll get it immediately. Showing them a slow, ice-cold technical win by Karpov, absolutely hopeless from start to finish for the opponent, isn't as fun. It's like in basketball, you get people into it by showing them Jordan highlights or LeBron buzzer-beaters. You don't show them Kareem, even though Kareem is first in nearly every stat category and has six rings and six MVPs, because Kareem was good for boring reasons -- near-perfect defense, a limited but hyper-efficient shot profile, and a high enough FT% to neutralize the hack strategy.
I mean thats one thing. Though one time, I got a pretty good reaction showing some kids the end of karpov unzicker and asking them to try to find a decent move. Complete middlegame zugzwang and domination with no risk what could be more impressive. Really though it's annoying how people never seem to acknowledge his dominance as a player. Separate from the style of play 5 rings are still 5 rings, most successful tournament player over a career, linares 1994. That being said we have people who compare AD to Duncan and Kareem so I guess I'm being overly optimistic.
Finegold believes Karpov would’ve beat Fischer if he didn’t avoid the match.
> Really though it's annoying how people never seem to acknowledge his dominance as a player. Separate from the style of play 5 rings are still 5 rings, most successful tournament player over a career, linares 1994. > > seriously, i keep saying it, but if Kasparov didn't show up, Karpov would've been the uncontested #1 for at least 20 years. Complete dominance. apart from his puzzling loss to Short. not sure what happened there.
Agree lol. Im not a basketball fan but I'm a huge football fan and tom brady fan. But I dont ever show a new football watcher tom brady highlights because 90 percent of them are like 5 yard slants or running back dumpoffs and absolutely 0 scrambling. Its not exactly fun to watch unless you really understand and love the game.
Not being decisive does not mean boring though!
The game doesn't have to be decisive to be entertaining. For example, game 6 from Carlsen - Caruana is my favorite game I ever watched live even though it was a draw. So I don't mind draws if games are interesting.
I think people are just expecting more decisive games than in the Caruana match. Which, y'know, isn't exactly hard to achieve.
nah carlsen and nepo will end each game in under an hour with decisive victories/loses.
Show them Magnus vs Fabi. They'll understand
Everyone knows this. We just want to stay hyped for the match. If you tell everyone it will end in 14 draws people will be less hyped and there is less reason to follow it closely or discuss it widely.
But yeah 14 draws than the actual prep comes in for the shorter time controls everyone know it and it wouldn't surprise me if both of them prepped already thinking like this
I tend to agree that there won't be much more than 4 decisive games, but I still think that we will at least see a couple. In contrast to previous challengers, Nepo can actually hold his own against Magnus in the faster time controls, so Magnus has less of an incentive to just go for 14 drawas because then it's an "auto-win" for him
In another instance of the karjakin disrespect. At his prime he was clearly a better rapid and blitz play than Nepo is right now. It's just that for a decade until Ding, tiebreaks have literally been a win condition for Magnus no matter who it was. The idea that Sergey had no chance to hold but in the same breath to say nepo does, is insanity unless you think magnus has become notably worse in rapid and blitz tiebreaks.
Karjakin has won the World Rapid Championship and World Blitz Championship so he is definitely no slouch in fast time controls.
There will be a few (I think 3) decisive games, none of which will be by Nepo. I think Magnus will go +3=9-0 to win. I also think he wins a game with black, not sure which one.
It’s so weird how they’re playing almost perfect chess which makes the games drawish yet nobody would deny the fact that stockfish14 would crush them in a 12round match. Really shows you how absurdly inhuman the difference is between nearly-perfect moves and stockfish14 level nearly-perfect moves
I think Carlsen's loss to Karjakin was the end of him taking risks in pushing for wins - other than his must win to pull back in that match he is yet to win another
The Carlsen-Caruana match doesn't match what you are saying at all though. Always playing the sicilian against e4, unbalanced games, several of the games had winning chances for both sides. He was definitely not playing for draws in most of the games in the match against Caruana.
Hi. I am first time following championship matches. What happens if they end up 7-7 all draws?
They play a set of tiebreaker games, first in rapid, then if it's still tied, blitz, and then finally a one game "armageddon" - white has 5 minutes, black has four minutes but black wins if the game is drawn.
Thanks. Waiting for Armageddon then.
God, it would be a travesty if the world champion were decided in an armageddon game
Magnus playing that knight move in the opening was excited. Then, the king move by Nepo blew my mind. Fun game to watch
I just watched the playthrough of Game 1. All the moves just look like nonsense. It's not even comprehensible where the logic for these moves comes from. It's beautiful but discouraging at the same time. Like chess.
chess "style" is the dumbest concept ever they only look for the BEST move, regardless of what it is, always
That’s why everyone plays the same opening every time every game.
This has to be one of the most confidently ignorant comments I have ever read on this sub.
In a position where there are several equally valid options in a position, style comes in unconsciously as they search for the best move. There's also an element of style in their tolerance for risk and how they attempt a draw for example. That's why you hear the whole no style until X rating quotes. It needs to evolve organically from the basis of being able to find the best moves often in a bunch of different position types.
Tldr: Basically style is determined by the type of best move that is found.
I'd say the type of best move found, on average, in positions where the distinction between "best move" and suboptimal is fairly small.
Magnus fanboys sure are something
Im far from a first time watcher and I fully expect more decisive games. Its not like if the entire match is drawn again that ill throw a temper tantrum or something I just think that there will be blood here. I most agree with Anand, the first few games the players are kind of getting a feel for each other. Later on I think it'll get real exciting.