Chess

Kibitzer said:
I don't know who will be doing the strangling. Carlsen isn't an aggressive, swashbuckling player himself. He likes to play for small, riskless advantages and constrict his opponents. But he admits that sometimes he underestimates his opponents' positions and the potential for counter-attacks, so we'll see.
More...
Agreed.

What I find interesting is that these guys play more or less the same way regardless of opponent, from the point of view of risk. In other words, I always feel that you want to steer positions that are not to your opponents liking (almost impossible to do against Magnus but possible), but if you are the higher rated player, also be just slightly above their playing style in risk taking and complexity.

That's why your are better - because you can evaluate complex positions better, and navigate the complexities better on average, imo.
 
The top players often play this kind of solid style, avoiding much risk while trying to capitalize on their opponents' missteps. Many times this will end up as drawn games.

One thing that separates Carlsen apart from the other elites is his ability to win a fair number of these games. I think part of the reason for this is his intimidation factor. His opponents somtimes spend so much time analyzing his moves (even harmless ones) over the board that they get into time trouble and then Carlsen tries to complicate the position before reaching time control. Anand was intimidated by Carlsen. I don't think Karjakin is - I hope that's true so that this will just be a battle of chess skill.
 
Kibitzer said:
The top players often play this kind of solid style, avoiding much risk while trying to capitalize on their opponents' missteps. Many times this will end up as drawn games.
More...
Right.

One thing that separates Carlsen apart from the other elites is his ability to win a fair number of these games.
More...
I think when most players are thinking about going back to the hotel room and ordering room service, Magnus is just warming up. Being in terrific physical condition, this favors him. Of course, he also pulls it off because he has a terrific sense of how to apply pressure in endgames where the danger is not always so obvious. I don't know if anyone trained him that way, and it is probably where tries to steer most games for this reason.

I have noticed a slight weakness in Magnus when the queens are on the board.

I think part of the reason for this is his intimidation factor. His opponents somtimes spend so much time analyzing his moves (even harmless ones) over the board that they get into time trouble and then Carlsen tries to complicate the position before reaching time control. Anand was intimidated by Carlsen. I don't think Karjakin is - I hope that's true so that this will just be a battle of chess skill.
More...
I agree that Anand is intimidated by Magnus. Maybe that is the wrong word, overly respectful of his play is maybe more accurate.

In any event, none of the younger players fear Magnus. They just see him as someone who stands in their way. From here on in, assuming Magnus holds this title, it is going to be war with Karjakin, Caruana, Giri, Yi, So, Rapport, Nepomniatchi, Lagrave, etc to hold his title. Nakamura an outside chance.

Maybe one of the older players will sneak in there somewhere, but I doubt it.
 
I didn't know this event was going on. This is probably the best way to bet the general public to get interested in chess. Classical time control chess is painful to watch since a typical game between two strong players in the World Championship is going to require intense concentration for several hours.

At one time, they had 30,000 people watching! They had three parts. This the bullet part, which is probably the craziest from a spectator point of view.

 
I love watching bullet chess because we see a players intuition in the raw. Unfortunately, these games rarely get annotated. But I don't want annotation in the traditional sense. What I wawnt is, "this was my intuition when I played this." I would probably gain 300 rating points from this sort of analysis of Magnus bullet games.

I don't understand Magnus' intuition of taking the knight on b3 on move 19. I put it through Houdini, and it agrees with me that my move (the natural Ra-d1) was .50 better. Probably Magnus is thinking that the pawn on b3 is lost. To me, the knight looks stupid there.

[Event "chess.com Blitz Final 1m+1spm 2016"]
[Site "chess.com INT"]
[Date "2016.10.27"]
[Round "20"]
[White "Carlsen, Magnus"]
[Black "Nakamura, Hikaru"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B06"]
[WhiteElo "2853"]
[BlackElo "2787"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "2016.10.27"]

1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. Nf3 d6 4. Bc4 Nf6 5. Qe2 c6 6. Bb3 O-O 7. O-O a5 8. a3
Bg4 9. Nbd2 Nbd7 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Nxf3 e5 12. dxe5 dxe5 13. c3 Nc5 14. Bc2 a4
15. Nxe5 Re8 16. f4 Nh5 17. Qf2 Qe7 18. Be3 Nb3 19. Bxb3 axb3 20. Rad1 f6 21.
Bc5 Qe6 22. Nd7 Rad8 23. Rd6 Qxe4 24. g4 b6 25. Bxb6 Qe7 26. Rfd1 Nxf4 27. Qxf4
1-0
 
Last edited:
nitro said:
I love watching bullet chess because we see a players intuition in the raw. Unfortunately, these games rarely get annotated. But I don't want annotation in the traditional sense. What I wawnt is, "this was my intuition when I played this." I would probably gain 300 rating points from this sort of analysis of Magnus bullet games.

I don't understand Magnus' intuition of taking the knight on b3 on move 19. I put it through Houdini, and it agrees with me that my move (the natural Ra-d1) was .50 better. Probably Magnus is thinking that the pawn on b3 is lost. To me, the knight looks stupid there.

[Event "chess.com Blitz Final 1m+1spm 2016"]
[Site "chess.com INT"]
[Date "2016.10.27"]
[Round "20"]
[White "Carlsen, Magnus"]
[Black "Nakamura, Hikaru"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B06"]
[WhiteElo "2853"]
[BlackElo "2787"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "2016.10.27"]

1. d4 g6 2. e4 Bg7 3. Nf3 d6 4. Bc4 Nf6 5. Qe2 c6 6. Bb3 O-O 7. O-O a5 8. a3
Bg4 9. Nbd2 Nbd7 10. h3 Bxf3 11. Nxf3 e5 12. dxe5 dxe5 13. c3 Nc5 14. Bc2 a4
15. Nxe5 Re8 16. f4 Nh5 17. Qf2 Qe7 18. Be3 Nb3 19. Bxb3 axb3 20. Rad1 f6 21.
Bc5 Qe6 22. Nd7 Rad8 23. Rd6 Qxe4 24. g4 b6 25. Bxb6 Qe7 26. Rfd1 Nxf4 27. Qxf4
1-0
More...
Carlsen probably took the knight so he can continue with the idea in the game starting with Bc5, which the knight is hindering.

If this were classical or rapid chess and he had time to calculate, he would probably have played the more sensible Rad1 - after all, white is a solid pawn up and he can slowly convert his advantage. But since this is bullet, he may have decided to go with the plan already in his mind, and which Nakamura cooperated with kindly.
 
Kibitzer said:
Carlsen probably took the knight so he can continue with the idea in the game starting with Bc5, which the knight is hindering.

If this were classical or rapid chess and he had time to calculate, he would probably have played the more sensible Rad1 - after all, white is a solid pawn up and he can slowly convert his advantage. But since this is bullet, he may have decided to go with the plan already in his mind, and which Nakamura cooperated with kindly.
More...
That could be. But that whole idea was made feasible by 20...f6. Why not just contest the file with 20...Ra-d8. I understand that B-b6 and Magnus would force the control the d-file, but f6 traps his own knight.

In any event, the knight was covering c5 and not b6. Maybe Magnus wanted all the dark square weaknesses as outposts of operation, and that is the instinct. I need to be more dynamic in my play, I would not have been particularly keen to give up my light square bishop for that stupid knight.

I was shocked when I saw the move. I think that is a meme that should be studied. Capablanca might have made similar exchanges.
 
Last edited:
I am forming a theory that all of chess is a kind of Zugzwang. Players beat themselves through the improper understanding of pawns as the most important positional piece [pawns are not pieces, I mean "piece" at the meta-chess level].
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top