U are only saying carlsen because of his new record! But look at kasparov's variations in most annotated games the guy is a pure breathn computer! i dont see any game by carlsen that impressed me! Mayb name one.. As 4 kasparov, check out his crash against the great karpov world chapionships or against topalov 1999. I dont c carlsen surviving!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stopped reading.
Couldn't read.
If !!!!!!!!!!!!!! count Carlsen is in big trouble. Since they don't.....
Kasparov at his peak vs. Carlsen right now- Kasparov wins because Carlsen seems to be better at tournaments than matches.
Kasparov right now vs. Carlsen right now- Carlsen wins.
Lol. What about Kasparov right now vs Carlsen when he's Kasparov's age and retired from chess?
Kasparov at his peak vs. Carlsen right now- Kasparov wins because Carlsen seems to be better at tournaments than matches.
Kasparov right now vs. Carlsen right now- Carlsen wins.
Lol. What about Kasparov right now vs Carlsen when he's Kasparov's age and retired from chess?
Kaspy, no doubts!
There's a bottom half to every tournament. Take a look at San Luis, 2005. Topalov won that tournament by 1.5 points. But he didnt' beat Anand, who finished second in the tournament. When the two players finally faced each other in a match in 2010, Anand dominated him. I believe that a match in 2005 between the same two opponents would also have ended with Anand victorious.
If Carlsen wins without defeating either Aronian or Kramnik, the tournament will have produced a winner without clearly answering who the best match-play candidate would have been. And the World championship is still determined by match play.
No candidates tournament can answer every question.
GK is a history, I wouldnot say he is weaker than MC, but at the moment, Gk Last updated FIDE was below 2700 and that of MC is gonna peak around to 2900+ record of the only human to break that record!
GK is a history, I wouldnot say he is weaker than MC, but at the moment, Gk Last updated FIDE was below 2700 and that of MC is gonna peak around to 2900+ record of the only human to break that record!
Kasparov retired with a 2812 rating. If he were to play an official FIDE event tomorrow, his rating would not be below 2700, it would be 2812.
GK is a history, I wouldnot say he is weaker than MC, but at the moment, Gk Last updated FIDE was below 2700 and that of MC is gonna peak around to 2900+ record of the only human to break that record!
Kasparov retired with a 2812 rating. If he were to play an official FIDE event tomorrow, his rating would not be below 2700, it would be 2812.
Technically true, but do you believe that Kasparov would play like a 2812 tomorrow?
Estragon, I don't know if you remember the match between Anand and Topalov. The games were absolutely fantastic, but apart from an opening blunder in game one and an incomprehenisble mistake in a drawn opposite colored Bishop endgame, Anand really did completely outplay Topalov in that match. Yes, the score was only 6-5, with Anand winning the last game. But I still think he dominated Topalov. Go back over the games again. Anand's play was really impressive.
Gelfand deserved the win. The biggest problem with the format last time around was that Grischuk was able to draw the standard time control games and play for faster time controls. He was really impressive, in a depressing sort of way. Gelfand was able to beat Grischuk because his match was longer. The solution would have been to make each match that same length. It would have added about a week to the tournament schedule and almost certainly still would have been affordable. I would rather see fewer players invited and longer matches if such a decision had to be made.
Ivandh, I think if Kasparov were to return to tournament chess, he would only do so because his fierce desire had returned, and the price were right.
Kasparov would be much closer to 2800 than 2700 if he returned in the next year or two. If he were to wait 20 years, as Fischer did, then he'd be more likely to play at about 2650 strength, which is what Fischer did against Spassky in 1992.
I think match play produces the strongest player to challenge a sitting WC . If I beat you in a tournament game it doesnt necessarily mean I am better than you . If I beat you in a 12 game match it probably does mean I am better than you . I believe Carlsen is the best tournament player in the world right now , his rating and results in tournaments makes it impossible not to . However, the WC is decided in a match and I am not at all convinced he is the best match player in the world . Maybe chess should have 2 world champions ? One of match play and one of tournament play ?
Recall that Geller was also a tremendous tournament player and yet failed miserably in matches. Geller had a + record against Spassky in tournament play and yet in two matches was unable to win a single game against Spassky .
carlsen is very very good player but i don't like his style of play
Not to insult you. But its hard for a player of your skill level, and of mine as well to understand the games of Super GM. Be it a Carlsen game or whatever. From my perspective it always seems that he doesn't get an advantage out of the openning. He doesn't fall into ultra complicated computer studied lines. He just outsmarts everyone out of unusual positions.
His style is so simple and elegant, and yet is so hard to play... He actually reminds me of Capablanca. And if you check out his endgame technique is superb! Carlsen is one of the most gifted players ever.
Still to early to compare against Kasparov. Garry is a living legend...
The candidates tourney will not be a walk in the park for carlsen and neither is it for everyone competing there. The level of pay would be so high that some of us would consider some games boring. But there is a saying 'Never underestimate the heart of a champion in battle". Im seeing a Gelfand-Anand II. Anand will remain champion after the dust has cleared. And to answer the question Kasparov vs Carlsen post, Kasparov increadible ability to adapt to his opponent like he did against Karpov, wained in his match with Kramnik. Kaspy's chinks in his armour has been tested by Nigel Short and brought out in the open by Kramnik ( Queenless middlegame). If Carlsen gets a fair position out in the opening phase, he will crush kasparov 10-6. (my opinion)
Carlsen would win today.
Carlsen vs Prime Kasparov, mm very tough, but I would root for Kasp.
However no one would destroy the other. I think the games would be pretty close.
Do you think that one day Carlsen will break the 2900 ELO?
I think match play produces the strongest player to challenge a sitting WC . If I beat you in a tournament game it doesnt necessarily mean I am better than you . If I beat you in a 12 game match it probably does mean I am better than you . I believe Carlsen is the best tournament player in the world right now , his rating and results in tournaments makes it impossible not to . However, the WC is decided in a match and I am not at all convinced he is the best match player in the world . Maybe chess should have 2 world champions ? One of match play and one of tournament play ?
What would it mean if A beats B in a match, B beats C in a match, and C beats A in a match? Are we to conclude that A is better than B, B is better than C, and C is better than A? (I think so, but "better than" is not the same thing as "being stronger than".)
A match between two players gives evidence about their strengths relative to each other, but as the example above shows, that isn't sufficient to determine who is better relative to everybody else, which is what I think "who is strongest" is all about. What does give evidence about overall strength is their results against all their peers, and I think rating is the best measure we have of that at the moment.
I like your idea of two WCs. We effectively have that already, but we call the other "#1 highest rated" instead of WC. I think the highest rated is the more important one personally, as I think the results of hundreds of games against the top players in the world is much better evidence than the procedure that gave us Gelfand playing against Anand. We all know that a match between the #1 rated and #2 rated players would have featured much higher quality chess.
As Smyslov said: If the match would be in November and December AND would last 24 games (NOT 12!), then Kaspy would win! For sure. He plays (played!) more constantly than Carlsen does. But it would be interesting. Kasparov at his peak is still better than Carlsen (although we don't know what Carlsen's peak is).