Chess

[DarthFed]

Good summary though there is one big omission and that's Lasker. Out of everyone it's Lasker that has the best case over Kasparov. He held the title significantly longer and was also the only one other than Kasparov to successfully defend the title 5 times before losing it. But it has to be said that a big part of the reason he held it so long is that he didn't have to defend it for many years due to World War 1 and other reasons. Also I think Capablanca was the best player in the world for many years before he beat Lasker for the title and he really destroyed Lasker big time.

I agree that the big issue with Capa is that he never defended the title. Alekhine was tremendous but it was a huge upset and he never got the chance again. So from an accomplishment standpoint he falls way below Kasparov, Lasker, and even Karpov IMO.

Fischer has no case, he had an incredibly high peak but he simply quit before he could even begin to be part of the discussion. He was too terrified of losing. He wasn't necessarily afraid of Karpov, but he was afraid of what he represented. The next Soviet star who was younger, hungrier and already better than the ones Fischer worked long and hard to vanquish. Fischer nuts will tell you he was going to quit no matter what, but if he was facing Spassky or even Korchnoi I think he'd have played. Karpov was the unknown and a great unknown. Everything may have looked different in this debate if Fischer stayed. Matches with Fischer would've made Karpov even stronger and tougher to beat in the 80's. Kasparov may have taken a lot longer to overtake Karpov/Fischer.

Carlsen may very well end up #1 but he has a long ways to go. I disagree with people thinking it's close to being a done deal. I don't even think it's likely.

 

[Federberg]

Interesting stuff. I know why you say Lasker, but a big problem with all those guys is that they picked their opponents. In Lasker's case, it's easier to argue that the guys he played against were generally the strongest opposition, but someone like Alekhine surely ducked some rivals. But for me, just for the fact that Lasker was probably the first truly modern player he still gets a nod. Totally agree about Fischer, Alekhine having Nazi sympathies puts him down in my estimation too. But for me it comes down to the two K's. They really were ridiculously close in strength for quite a while. Karpov in the 70s was an absolute beast, and is probably the most successful tournament player ever. He was utterly prolific as a winner. But Kasparov had the edge on him. I personally think that what Carlsen is doing now is extremely impressive. He has to negotiate an environment where his opposition is coming at him with preparation like we've never seen before. He does what he can to avoid prep and just get playable positions. From there he has a huge advantage. He is just simply a better player. I don't know whether this new computer age lends itself to the sort of dominance that we've seen before. I think that what he's doing now is a close match to the dominance the 2 K's exhibited at their respective peaks. The clincher for me is that the guy is not just the best at classical, but rapid and blitz. It's ridiculous really, and he's probably not even at his absolute peak yet. I'm not saying he's better than Kasparov yet, but I suspect that we'll end up thinking about him in that way in the end. Garry was able to get a huge edge over the competition with vastly superior preparation, when it wasn't easy to do. Couple that with his unrivalled tactical and calculation ability and it's no surprise that he achieved what he did. What I'm trying to say that it's very hard for anyone to get that preparation edge now, so what Carlsen does is the logical strategy. Just take people out of prep and force them to demonstrate their strength on the board. Carlsen is clearly not the greatest ever, but he may be the strongest ever when it comes to understanding.

 

[Federberg]

I was seriously unimpressed with Caruana and Giri in Shamkir. One of them had to show their class and win the whole thing. Ok Shak is a strong player, but I really didn't see him winning the tournament. There really is no one out there quite like Magnus. You can be sure that if he'd turned up he would have been the winner. For Faby to be considered a genuine rival surely he has to step up?

 

[DarthFed]

Well +3 is a decent result for Caruana though this wasn't as strong of a field as normal. With Giri we know that while he is tough to beat he also doesn't win a high % of games yet. Mamedyarov has always been dangerous but he lacks consistency. He took out both Caruana and Giri in the tournament and yet it still went to tiebreak between him and Caruana (kind of stupid IMO when there is a decisive game in the game between them). Thankfully Mamedyarov won that as he clearly deserved 1st place.

 

[Federberg]

Well +3 is a decent result for Caruana though this wasn't as strong of a field as normal. With Giri we know that while he is tough to beat he also doesn't win a high % of games yet. Mamedyarov has always been dangerous but he lacks consistency. He took out both Caruana and Giri in the tournament and yet it still went to tiebreak between him and Caruana (kind of stupid IMO when there is a decisive game in the game between them). Thankfully Mamedyarov won that as he clearly deserved 1st place.

I agree Shak deserved the title, I like his games. I'm just disappointed with the lack of killer in Fabi. It's almost Murray-esque

 

[DarthFed]

I agree Shak deserved the title, I like his games. I'm just disappointed with the lack of killer in Fabi. It's almost Murray-esque

Lol, yes by all accounts he seems like maybe too nice of a guy which is not great for the game he is playing. But then Anand, Spassky and several other tremendous players have been considered similar in that respect. Giri on the otherhand comes off as kind of a jerk but he plays scared chess often.

 

[Federberg]

^Yes agreed about Giri. It's what irritates me about him. If you're going to talk the talk, walk the walk! Is Carlsen considered a not nice guy? Seems fairly level headed to me. He can trash talk if he wants to, but it's fairly clear most of it is tongue in cheek.

 

[DarthFed]

I did not hear this until just now but Victor Korchnoi died yesterday at the age of 85.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/viktor-korchnoi-dies-at-85

I do think he is by far the strongest player never to be world champion and it can also be said that no one has ever enjoyed the battle and torture of chess as much as Victor the Terrible. A true legend of the game. RIP

 

[Federberg]

^Yes agreed. RIP Victor. Just shows how strong Karpov was in the 70s

 

[DarthFed]

^ Yep and unfortunately for Victor he didn't really peak early because the title was often up for grabs in the 60's when he would have been age 29-39. You had 4 different champs in that decade I think (Botvinnik, Tal, Petrosian, and Spassky). I'd say in terms of playing strength he was definitely in their class. I looked it up and he had a positive H2H with all of them except he was equal with Botvinnik with just 4 games played. Though in the big matches against Spassky and Petrosian he lost (candidate finals vs. Spassky and Petrosian in 1968 and 1971). A true shame he was never world champ.

 

[Federberg]

Interesting Queen sac from Kramnik there. He's trying to exploit the time pressure Buhman is facing. How Carlsenesque

 

[DarthFed]

One thing I really admire about Kramnik is he has tried to change and adapt his game as he's aged. He is still great positionally but he can't compete with Carlsen in that regard, at least not over the course of a match if they ever were to play for the title. The truth is he also isn't a good enough attacker to force the issue consistently against Carlsen or the rest of the elite but he's still making an attempt. I still am shocked he is #2 right now, I know I was badly wrong before and accept it, but for the life of me he hasn't had many great results in the past couple years that I can think of.

Unfortunately my website isn't carrying coverage of Dortmund for some reason. I will just have to find it elsewhere. I have seen the game today, not a good result for Kramnik even though he drew it as the guy he faced is 150 points lower than him and only is there because it is the hometown tournament. MVL figures to have a good chance to win this as he is in the early lead.

 

[Federberg]

^MVL as a 2800'er! Who would have thought it a few years ago. He used to be so shaky.

I think Kramnik's rating exposes one of the flaws of the rating system. He doesn't play that much so a few strong performances can give you a boost. He's still a top 10 player though

 

[Federberg]

Well well well... looks like Magnus has got himself into a spot of bother with Hikaru. He can still draw this, but he was squeezing then made a bad move. This is always entertaining

 

[Federberg]

Carlsen is toast. Hikaru will have to blunder worse than in Zurich this time! Wow! It finally happened

 

[DarthFed]

Well done by Hikaru. It looked like Carlsen simply overextended his position without much of an attack and Naka made him pay. I don't think it will bring a big change to the dynamic in that "rivalry" but that's got to be a big monkey off his back.

 

[Federberg]

Well done by Hikaru. It looked like Carlsen simply overextended his position without much of an attack and Naka made him pay. I don't think it will bring a big change to the dynamic in that "rivalry" but that's got to be a big monkey off his back.

Yes agreed. But I must say... g5?? voluntarily pushing the pawn into a pin? Particularly against an tactics monster? When I saw that, my first thought was wow.. that's deep. And then the engines told me it wasn't deep at all!

 

[Federberg]

check out the sequence of moves in the Wei Yi - Carlsen game from about move 23. There must be some deep tactics that stopped Magnus from taking hanging rooks. Any ideas? Engines disagree, but do you have any thoughts on what he was afraid of? Seems like he could have won right there

 

[DarthFed]

It looks to me like Wei should've played 24. Bxc7 which leaves it pretty equal. Maybe he feared Bxc7, Ne3 as that threatens to win the g pawn, but then White simply takes the rook on h8 and plays Bg3. If black plays Nxg2 then Kd2 causes all sorts of trouble. I'm probably missing something but it was a great win for Carlsen anyways. Nice response to a bad one yesterday. That position for black after move 16 does not look pleasant to play at all but he still comes away with the win.

 

[DarthFed]

Carlsen trashed Karjakin today. Hopefully the WC will be a bit more competitive than what played out today.