Chess World Championship: Carlsen-Caruana

[Federberg]

As down as I’ve been on Giri I wouldn’t write him off

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I have not read the recent messages in this thread. So, pardon me if I am repeating something already said or asking something already asked.

So, basically in view of the format if you know how not to lose in regular games and how to win in fast paced games, you can win championships; Is my assessment correct?

This is probably why Carlsen offered to draw the match at much early stages in at least one, probably more than one, regular match(es).

If so, I don't like this format at all.

But, it is reasonable to switch to fast paced games when there is no decision on regular games. The real question is how do we incentivize players to play for a win in the regular games. I don't have a solution and I don't even know whether one exists even in principle. But, I wish there was one.

 

[tennisville]

I have not read the recent messages in this thread. So, pardon me if I am repeating something already said or asking something already asked.

So, basically in view of the format if you know how not to lose in regular games and how to win in fast-paced games, you can win championships; Is my assessment correct?

This is probably why Carlsen offered to draw the match at many early stages in at least one, probably more than one, regular match(es).

If so, I don't like this format at all.

But, it is reasonable to switch to fast-paced games when there is no decision on regular games. The real question is how do we incentivize players to play for a win in the regular games. I don't have a solution and I don't even know whether one exists even in principle. But, I wish there was one.

It might sound simple like that but "how not to lose in regular games" is a really tough statement to actually execute. Carlson only offered a draw in the final game of the regular series. He was trying really hard in the other games but neither player broke under the pressure. Caruana had winning chances in Game 8 which he blundered by h3. Similarly Carlson had a winning game in Game 1 which he blundered by playing Bxc3.

They both had chances but could not capitalize.

 

[DarthFed]

I have not read the recent messages in this thread. So, pardon me if I am repeating something already said or asking something already asked.

So, basically in view of the format if you know how not to lose in regular games and how to win in fast paced games, you can win championships; Is my assessment correct?

This is probably why Carlsen offered to draw the match at much early stages in at least one, probably more than one, regular match(es).

If so, I don't like this format at all.

But, it is reasonable to switch to fast paced games when there is no decision on regular games. The real question is how do we incentivize players to play for a win in the regular games. I don't have a solution and I don't even know whether one exists even in principle. But, I wish there was one.

With computers and advances in opening theory the players are getting closer and closer to "perfection" in these longer games. I actually thought they both played fairly aggressive for their usual standard and almost all the games were lively. The only untimely draw offer was the last game when Carlsen clearly had the edge. But there was the obvious strategy behind that as we saw today.

I think the format would actually be worse if there were more games. You'd have seen a lot more quiet and boring games early on in this match. Caruana knew he had to win in the classical portion and he pushed for the initiative. The last game of the match I guarantee you he doesn't castle queenside or play f4 if he thought he had a decent chance at the tiebreak. And that's part of what made this match unique. The tiebreak was a factor from the beginning because it was an enormous mismatch.

It is only a matter of time before they decide to change the emphasis of chess tournaments and possibly the WC matches. One interesting idea would be to not add the extra hour at move 40. Have them play the game with 2 hours each and change the increment to 10 seconds as I think it is usually 30. Of course this would hurt the "comparativeness" in chess going forward but I'd say programs have done that already. It is extremely hard for one player to dominate right now when everyone trains with computers. And we are seeing it now, Carlsen is the best player in the world, but by a minuscule amount in classical.

 

[Federberg]

 

[britbox]

Darth - Do the grandmasters practice play against computers/AI a lot?

 

[Federberg]

https://www.newyorker.com/sports/sp...-championship-again-but-something-has-changed

 

[Federberg]

Darth - Do the grandmasters practice play against computers/AI a lot?

they use computers to analyse positions. There's not much value in GMs playing against todays computers. Carlsen and Caruana are an elite breed of 2800 players. Most modern computers are rated in the 3300+ range. That's a 500+ gap which is monstrous. It means that the computer can play with a piece missing and still expect to win

 

[Federberg]

 

[DarthFed]

Darth - Do the grandmasters practice play against computers/AI a lot?

They practice a lot with a computer but I doubt they even play practice games with computers. It does no good confidence-wise to just get destroyed and since humans are so far off from computers now I don't think playing computers helps you play humans. But they certainly spend lots of time analyzing opening moves as well as the games they play and games others play.

 

[DarthFed]

Very interesting. What exactly is "c pawn loss"? Also, I wonder how they are defining inaccuracies here? I'd certainly think Caruana had more than 1 in game 12. I barely count that game against him because he was clearly playing a little more reckless in an attempt to win before TB. Castling queenside and f4 certainly seemed like inaccuracies.

Also goes to show you how much worse game 1 was quality wise!! 40% of inaccuracies and 80% of mistakes in 1 of 12 games. Also of note is game 6 which Caruana almost won (also easily the best game of the match IMO) shows no inaccuracies for Carlsen! Man that shows how strong Fabi was that game.

 

[Federberg]

Very interesting. What exactly is "c pawn loss"? Also, I wonder how they are defining inaccuracies here? I'd certainly think Caruana had more than 1 in game 12. I barely count that game against him because he was clearly playing a little more reckless in an attempt to win before TB. Castling queenside and f4 certainly seemed like inaccuracies.

Also goes to show you how much worse game 1 was quality wise!! 40% of inaccuracies and 80% of mistakes in 1 of 12 games. Also of note is game 6 which Caruana almost won (also easily the best game of the match IMO) shows no inaccuracies for Carlsen! Man that shows how strong Fabi was that game.

yup I wasn't sure what C pawn loss meant either. Something to do with having a majority of central pawns which wouldn't make much sense? But agreed overall an interesting analysis. A bit more colour would be helpful obviously

 

[GameSetAndMath]

In "Go" are humans still better than computers?

 

[tennisville]

In "Go" are humans still better than computers?

No, AlphaGo through Reinforcement learning has beaten the best Go players in the world

 

[Federberg]

A really excellent article...

https://www.chess.com/article/view/2018-world-chess-championship-the-end

 

[DarthFed]

A really excellent article...

https://www.chess.com/article/view/2018-world-chess-championship-the-end

Very good insight. I love the part where it mentions that he would reach his hand out to make a move and then pull it back. I've done that too many times to count! I never really thought of it as lack of confidence but more just extreme caution during the bigger moments. Time of course is always a factor. If you have more of it then you can question yourself more on certain moves. I guess it begs the question of whether you can play very cautiously yet still be confident and strong overall. I thought both players took some chances throughout but they were still well on guard because of who they were playing.

The one thing I disagree with is that Carlsen was more cautious because he wasn't in good form. I think it was a calculated strategy from the get go because the tiebreaks were a slam dunk. Apparently Kramnik thought the ending position of game 12 gave Carlsen a higher chance for victory than TB's would and with all due respect I think that's way off. I get the sense people forget just how strong Magnus is at faster time controls and they may not realize that Fabi is simply not elite in the faster time controls.

I also think there is a bit of nostalgia regarding Carlsen's play overall. Like his arrogant reply (which I don't mind) regarding his favorite player being himself a few years ago). He's still playing great but he isn't playing at his very peak. Like any game or sport it is called a peak for a reason. This would be like us Fed fans complaining that he couldn't play like 2006 for his entire career. Or even Caruana saying his level wasn't like it was a couple years ago when he had a couple crazy tournaments. I think it should be expected that players have caught up to Magnus more in classical chess. Computers makes it very, very difficult to dominate top level chess these days.

 

[Federberg]

Apparently Kramnik thought the ending position of game 12 gave Carlsen a higher chance for victory than TB's would and with all due respect I think that's way off. I get the sense people forget just how strong Magnus is at faster time controls and they may not realize that Fabi is simply not elite in the faster time controls.

agreed. The guy hasn't lost a tie break for a decade ffs. Why on earth should that change in a World Championship final. The onus would have had to be on Fabi. Hoping for Magnus to be lesser was always stupid

 

[Federberg]

I also think there is a bit of nostalgia regarding Carlsen's play overall. Like his arrogant reply (which I don't mind) regarding his favorite player being himself a few years ago). He's still playing great but he isn't playing at his very peak. Like any game or sport it is called a peak for a reason. This would be like us Fed fans complaining that he couldn't play like 2006 for his entire career. Or even Caruana saying his level wasn't like it was a couple years ago when he had a couple crazy tournaments. I think it should be expected that players have caught up to Magnus more in classical chess. Computers makes it very, very difficult to dominate top level chess these days.

hmmm... actually I think Magnus does have a point. I actually think Magnus remains just as strong in the middle game and his openings are better now than they used to be. In fact I believe he retains a slight edge over even Fabi in the middle game. What's changed is Magnus's ability to massage a slight advantage (say... +0.70 to + 1.50) into a win now. There was a time a few years back where he was money doing that. For some reason now you just don't feel sure he'll be able to do it. What I've noticed is that he invariably spends so much time with prophylactic moves that by the time he starts trying to close it out, he's already let the edge slip. This is particularly the case against the really strong players who've cottoned on that mounting an active defence against Magnus in those situations gives them the best chance to steal a draw from the jaws of defeat. No one has done that more to Magnus in recent years than Fabi actually. Except maybe Svidler

 

[DarthFed]

hmmm... actually I think Magnus does have a point. I actually think Magnus remains just as strong in the middle game and his openings are better now than they used to be. In fact I believe he retains a slight edge over even Fabi in the middle game. What's changed is Magnus's ability to massage a slight advantage (say... +0.70 to + 1.50) into a win now. There was a time a few years back where he was money doing that. For some reason now you just don't feel sure he'll be able to do it. What I've noticed is that he invariably spends so much time with prophylactic moves that by the time he starts trying to close it out, he's already let the edge slip. This is particularly the case against the really strong players who've cottoned on that mounting an active defence against Magnus in those situations gives them the best chance to steal a draw from the jaws of defeat. No one has done that more to Magnus in recent years than Fabi actually. Except maybe Svidler

I don't think we are really disagreeing here. Certainly Magnus is off his best level from a few years ago but that's why I call it a peak. He's not really playing worse than he did before that or even a couple years after it. Overall it was hardly a surprise that Caruana was giving him a lot of problems in the classical portion of the match, that was the expectation I had anyways.

He is about to be 28 so he may get it back and then some, or this may be how he plays going forward. If anything a match like this will make him stronger, same with Caruana.

But the other factor is that the others were bound to catch up quickly given how strong computers have become. The type of positions Carlsen failed to grind into a win vs Caruana are ones he succeeded in against lesser players a few years ago.

The one Carlsen would kick himself over is the game 1 miss, a really bad game from both players. The only real sign of nerves we saw from Caruana. I will say Magnus has definitely had more bad misses in the last few years. But grinding out small positional advantages is going to become an increasingly tall order as players just defend better and better.

 

[Federberg]

https://www.arctic.com/secno/en/magnus-carlsens-blog/the-world-championship-match-in-london-no-4

The World Championship match in London. No 4!


Prior to the match in London I was optimistic. Admittedly Fabiano Caruana has had a great year, winning the Candidates and several top level tournaments, and nearly overtaking me on the rating list, but I had significant match experience, and my score against him has been good over the last few years. A few additional near-wins this year were also part of the picture.

As planned I pushed quite hard as Black already in game 1, and generally throughout most of the first half of the match I remained very optimistic. His impressive play in game 6, outplaying me with Black, changed the psychology significantly, despite the boost I got from finding a far from obvious fortress to hold the game. The trend continued for a few more games. Putting the title on the line in game 12 was never a tempting option. The margin of error is smaller in a single game, and with Black, and Caruana had already shown impressive preparation in several games. To avoid this scenario, I was both very eager and optimistic about game 9 and managed to out-prepare him as planned. Not surprisingly, he took a disciplined decision with Bxf3 to simplify the position. I could play for two results, but as he had a clear defensive plan I didn’t find a way to make progress except the h5-challenge in his time trouble before the first time control. Caruana was up to the challenge, and combined with the subsequent f5 and h4 he defused the position. The opposite-colored bishop ending is not that simple, but he seemingly held it with ease. If, for instance, he had moved the h-pawn, I would have had something to target and play for. With three games to go, I prepared myself mentally for both a possibly decisive game 12 and a likely play-off. Caruana showed impressive composure throughout most of the match, while in round 12 the huge stakes involved showed in his middlegame play. White is a little better after h4 h5!, but Black has lots of counterplay. His Rh2-plan was interesting, but not fully sound, as long as I resist the temptation to go for a quick b5, which would only weaken my queenside and bring his pieces to life, and instead focus on getting f5 in. After which the pride of his position, the knight on e4, is pushed back, and I become active. I somewhat underestimated the strength of my position, and never saw a clear path where I could play for a win without much risk. I thought his plan Bd4 would equalize. Accordingly, I offered a draw after move 30 as planned, to reach a four game play-off. Had I seen the Nd3-threat, preventing Bd4, maybe I would have played on. He was getting low on time, and after a long think he accepted. The classical portion ended 6-6 after 12 draws, and we could prepare for the Rapid Play-Off, just as in the New York match in 2016, and also seen both in the 2006 (Kramnik - Topalov) and 2012 (Anand-Gelfand) matches.

The decisive moment came already in the first rapid game. I got a both promising and interesting position from the opening with a clear plan of playing against his weak pawns on the queenside combined with emerging back-rank themes. When he played the active Nb5 instead of trying to defend passively with Nb7, I had two very interesting alternatives. I couldn’t make Rxd4 work, missing Kh1 next (despite looking at Kf1), and chose Bxc4 to enter a rook ending a pawn up. His counterplay (active rook, king and passed c-pawn) might be enough for a draw, but it was of course very tricky. He defended well until missing I had the intermediate check on e7 before taking on g7, after which it was a matter of technique. His play in the second game was clearly influenced by the loss of the first game, and despite an opening advantage he soon embarked on the wrong plan. I felt sufficiently confident and fresh all day and fairly quickly managed to get a winning position. In game 3, a must-win situation, he had to deviate from previous games and chose the Sicilian. I knew I was better well into the middlegame, but anyhow went for e5 to simplify the position, as I thought I had calculated far enough to see a balanced ending. He had to take risks, and after Ne6? I was compelled to play for a win. Despite playing quite well, 3-0 is maybe too flattering, and the overshadowing fact was that I defended my title against such a strong opponent. Caruana matched me in the classical part, making the final victory not only a fulfillment of personal necessity, but also an achievement for which I'm very proud. I feel deep gratitude to Peter Heine Nielsen and the rest of my team of seconds. They have worked very hard and conscientiously, and once again I take this opportunity to send my heartfelt thanks. In London I had the usual team onsite, and you all contributed to the success. A special shout-out this time to chef Magnus Forssell, who prepared excellent meals for me and my team throughout the match. As usual my whole family was present for part of, or all of, the time, and it helped create the environment I needed to perform well.

I would like to mention my previous trainers, most notably Torbjørn Ringdal Hansen, Simen Agdestein and Garry Kasparov, and my loyal long-term main sponsors financial firm Arctic Securities, Simonsen Vogt Wiig lawyers, newpaper VG and water supplier Isklar as well as my own Play Magnus.

I look forward to the next event with Arctic Securities in Oslo December 12th!

I’m told the world-wide coverage of the match was impressive. Judging from the varied geographical background and number of journalists in the final press conference, the World Championship match arguably continues to be the most important event in chess. For the players the match was reasonably well-organized and special thanks goes to FIDE Supervisor A.Vardepetyan for his steady hand throughout. Many thanks also to the media and all the chess fans in Norway and abroad following the match and engaging and contributing on social media and onsite. Last, but not least, I’d like to thank Yuri Milner for hosting the great victory party (as in New York) at Rosewood hotel (where we stayed throughout the match) on the 28th! There are encouraging signs from the new FIDE leadership elected in October. I was thrilled to hear that the Rapid & Blitz World Championship will take place this year as well, between Christmas and New Year, and I’m looking forward to travelling to St. Petersburg to fight for those titles. A four-week break from tournaments is just what I need now. I look forward to following the London Chess Classic as a spectator this time. I’m planning to play regularly (approximately four tournaments) in the first half of 2019, starting with Tata Steel Chess in January.

Magnus Carlsen, Oslo, December 4th 2018.