There's only one possible explanation. The real Anand has been kidnapped. The one people see now is fake!
Probably an alien, but I'm not sure.
Why is Vishwanathan Anand so bad?
Sort:
kingofshedinjas wrote:
There's only one possible explanation. The real Anand has been kidnapped. The one people see now is fake!
Probably an alien, but I'm not sure.
My thoughts exactly ! But i dont think he is alien though.More like a clone..
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Sep 6, 2016
0
#5
kingofshedinjas wrote:
There's only one possible explanation. The real Anand has been kidnapped. The one people see now is fake!
Probably an alien, but I'm not sure.
Is that possible? Because we've seen Anand in live games and he looks exactly the same as the old Anand.
Sep 6, 2016
0
#6
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who's been the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
In chess, If you are older, you have more experience. But your brain can't process as well as younger people.
nimzomalaysian wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who was the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
For Anand, age is a disadvantage. Just like in other mental activities or even physical sports, once you hit your 40s it's hard to compete with the younger guys. Carlsen is younger, fresher, and more energetic. Anand isn't as good as he once was.
But I'm sure you knew this, and this is another troll thread :P
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Yes, but aging also limits certain functions needed for chess. That's one side of the story. The other is the way chess is played. Theory evolved, new lines are introduced, etc. and the new generation has the privilege of adapting the old style and the new one at the same time. And let's not forget that Carlsen also could study Anand thoroughly. Anand, while being one of the strongest players of all time, is past his prime and eventually will not be able to catch up with new theory and the new generation. Some say he should've retired by now, with which I agree with.
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who was the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
Sep 6, 2016
0
#10
Club players complaining about how one of the best chess players of all time is having a dip from age.
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who was the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
Yes, but aging also limits certain functions needed for chess. That's one side of the story. The other is the way chess is played. Theory evolved, new lines are introduced, etc. and the new generation has the privilege of adapting the old style and the new one at the same time. And let's not forget that Carlsen also could study Anand thoroughly. Anand, while being one of the strongest players of all time, is past his prime and eventually will not be able to catch up with new theory and the new generation. Some say he should've retired by now, with which I agree with.
I agree with you until the last sentence.
I have the utmost respect for Anand's decision not to retire after losing the second match to Carlsen. He wants to keep playing and competing with new generations of chessplayers because it's what he loves to do, and I don't think anyone has the right to tell him he should retire just because he isn't at the top anymore.
Sep 6, 2016
0
#12
dpnorman wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who was the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
Yes, but aging also limits certain functions needed for chess. That's one side of the story. The other is the way chess is played. Theory evolved, new lines are introduced, etc. and the new generation has the privilege of adapting the old style and the new one at the same time. And let's not forget that Carlsen also could study Anand thoroughly. Anand, while being one of the strongest players of all time, is past his prime and eventually will not be able to catch up with new theory and the new generation. Some say he should've retired by now, with which I agree with.
I agree with you until the last sentence.
I have the utmost respect for Anand's decision not to retire after losing the second match to Carlsen. He wants to keep playing and competing with new generations of chessplayers because it's what he loves to do, and I don't think anyone has the right to tell him he should retire just because he isn't at the top anymore.
Korchnoi would have agreed with you.
Sep 6, 2016
0
#13
Anand's overall record against Carlsen:
8 Wins, 10 Losses, 38 Draws
Pretty darn close record, if you ask me. Near dead-even.
Carlsen does seem to have the edge in match play, though. I'd attribute that to age, mostly. Sitting down and thinking for hours at a time is tiring. Much easier for the younger player.
Of course, it goes without saying that Carlsen is near-engine strength, with a high unpredictability factor—so that adds to it, too.
Why are you singling out Anand. Actually the whole world losses to Magnus. Is it surprising. 😋
Age does not matter. Money does matter. Someone pays him to lose against carlsen. Another probability of bad performance is having too much sex which damages brain function.
Carlsen also has a great access to secret scientific training method which is unavailable for other players.
Sep 6, 2016
0
#17
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
what exactly is the point of retiring.. honestly. if it's what you love which being grandmaster it is obviously an obsessive hobby.. there is no point to retire from a game, if you can compete professionally why wouldn't you.. Anand is still a great player... he won the last candidates and was right there until the last round in this candidates match
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Yes, but aging also limits certain functions needed for chess. That's one side of the story. The other is the way chess is played. Theory evolved, new lines are introduced, etc. and the new generation has the privilege of adapting the old style and the new one at the same time. And let's not forget that Carlsen also could study Anand thoroughly. Anand, while being one of the strongest players of all time, is past his prime and eventually will not be able to catch up with new theory and the new generation. Some say he should've retired by now, with which I agree with.
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who was the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
Sep 6, 2016
0
#18
kingofshedinjas wrote:
he is still at the top any one saying different is crazy.. maybe he isn't as good as he was but he is still one of the best players in the world
dpnorman wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who was the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
Yes, but aging also limits certain functions needed for chess. That's one side of the story. The other is the way chess is played. Theory evolved, new lines are introduced, etc. and the new generation has the privilege of adapting the old style and the new one at the same time. And let's not forget that Carlsen also could study Anand thoroughly. Anand, while being one of the strongest players of all time, is past his prime and eventually will not be able to catch up with new theory and the new generation. Some say he should've retired by now, with which I agree with.
I agree with you until the last sentence.
I have the utmost respect for Anand's decision not to retire after losing the second match to Carlsen. He wants to keep playing and competing with new generations of chessplayers because it's what he loves to do, and I don't think anyone has the right to tell him he should retire just because he isn't at the top anymore.
Korchnoi would have agreed with you.
Sep 6, 2016
0
#19
BlunderLots wrote:
Anand's overall record against Carlsen:
8 Wins, 10 Losses, 38 Draws
Pretty darn close record, if you ask me. Near dead-even.
Carlsen does seem to have the edge in match play, though. I'd attribute that to age, mostly. Sitting down and thinking for hours at a time is tiring. Much easier for the younger player.
Of course, it goes without saying that Carlsen is near-engine strength, with a high unpredictability factor—so that adds to it, too.
Out of curiosity I looked on chessgames.com for games later than 2009 and got
4 wins 9 losses and 30 draws (although I had to count which were classical so I might be off on the draws, but I'm pretty sure I got the decisive games right).
And of course if you only look at the world chess championship games the record is 1 win, 6 losses, 14 draws.
Sep 6, 2016
0
#20
kingofshedinjas wrote:
I'll bet he will still be a force next candidates.
dpnorman wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
GnrfFrtzl wrote:
nimzomalaysian wrote:
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.
Is that a serious question? Carlsen is half his age, man.
That's exactly the point. How could an experienced chess player who was the World Champion 5 times lose to a person half his age?
Yes, but aging also limits certain functions needed for chess. That's one side of the story. The other is the way chess is played. Theory evolved, new lines are introduced, etc. and the new generation has the privilege of adapting the old style and the new one at the same time. And let's not forget that Carlsen also could study Anand thoroughly. Anand, while being one of the strongest players of all time, is past his prime and eventually will not be able to catch up with new theory and the new generation. Some say he should've retired by now, with which I agree with.
I agree with you until the last sentence.
I have the utmost respect for Anand's decision not to retire after losing the second match to Carlsen. He wants to keep playing and competing with new generations of chessplayers because it's what he loves to do, and I don't think anyone has the right to tell him he should retire just because he isn't at the top anymore.
Korchnoi would have agreed with you.
Why does Viswanathan Anand continuously lose to a new player like Magnus Carlsen, inspite of being such an experienced and proficient player?
Vishwanathan Anand has a very good record in playing chess, he's been a grandmaster for many years. But suddenly he is not able to perform well against the less experienced Magnus Carlsen.
Please explain.