16 Nov 13
Originally posted by KareemelbadryCarlsen is so good in endgames that his opponents have resigned a K+N+N ending against their lone K.
It was pretty funny listening to a flummoxed Susan Polgar and Alejandro Ramirez muddling over Carlsen's decision to drop the c pawn with Kf4. It took them at least five minutes to figure out what Carlsen was after, by which point he was probably already in a won position.
I do wonder what inspired Anand to drop the pawn with 38.Qg3. Surely if he had kept the queens on, even Carlsen wouldn't have been able to make progress?
16 Nov 13
1 edit
Originally posted by KareemelbadryTo be fair these two were not soley concentrating on the game and
It was pretty funny listening to a flummoxed Susan Polgar and Alejandro Ramirez muddling over Carlsen's decision to drop the c pawn with Kf4.
what is more important they had no engine which is very refeshing.
They were also correct that it was drawn and they looked at positions
were no mistakes are going to be made.
Magnus sought a position where tiny mistakes are plausiible.
He went for a position that hides a snake in the grass.
Anand stood on it.
I like how Judit keeps dumbing down the analysis, if a mate or trick
is suggested then she shows it.
16 Nov 13
"Never find yourself in a pawn and rook endgame with Magnus Carlsen."
I agree, but who knows?
Maybe the Anand camp thought that if they take Carlsen on in the area he is
the strongest and hold him, then it may undermine his confidence.
The trouble was their man stumbled over hurdles Magnus set him.
So plan 2.
No more endings. Go for a win or bust attack. Anand certainly has the skill.
He has some wonderful attacking games on his CV.
Plan3.
Head for another Rook ending, Carlsen won't be expecting that!
16 Nov 13
Originally posted by SMesqHorses for course I guess. I can't stand Susan Polgar <spits to remove taste of her name from my mouth>, but really like Lawrence. He doesn't billshut at all, if he doesn't understand whats going on he will say so!
I think Susan Polgar is doing a great job, but where'd they get that Trent fella from? He does my head in!
16 Nov 13
1 edit
Originally posted by greenpawn34Time to bust out the Scotch.No more Berlin walls.
"Never find yourself in a pawn and rook endgame with Magnus Carlsen."
I agree, but who knows?
Maybe the Anand camp thought that if they take Carlsen on in the area he is
the strongest and hold him, then it may undermine his confidence.
The trouble was their man stumbled over hurdles Magnus set him.
So plan 2.
No more endings. Go for a win or ...[text shortened]... cking games on his CV.
Plan3.
Head for another Rook ending, Carlsen won't be expecting that!
16 Nov 13
Originally posted by SwissGambitIt will be very interesting what opening Anand chooses in the next game.
Time to bust out the Scotch.No more Berlin walls.
Clearly he has to go for something other than the Spanish.
The Scotch is a good call. But since he needs to get all tactical on MC's ass, is a Kings Gambit a possibility?
16 Nov 13
Originally posted by hedonistI have never seen Anand play anything except the Ruy Lopez against 1. ... e5. It's probably not the best idea in the world to suddenly start playing a completely new opening with different ideas and patterns. I remember watching Korchnoi commentate the Short vs McShane game where Short tried the Kings Gambit (and lost) - Korchnoi was scathing about how foolish Short was to try to become a Kings Gambit player without hundreds of practice games first.
It will be very interesting what opening Anand chooses in the next game.
Clearly he has to go for something other than the Spanish.
The Scotch is a good call. But since he needs to get all tactical on MC's ass, is a Kings Gambit a possibility?
16 Nov 13
Originally posted by Fat LadyI get your point but I think anything is preferable for Anand than another Berlin in this match situation.
I have never seen Anand play anything except the Ruy Lopez against 1. ... e5. It's probably not the best idea in the world to suddenly start playing a completely new opening with different ideas and patterns. I remember watching Korchnoi commentate the Short vs McShane game where Short tried the Kings Gambit (and lost) - Korchnoi was scathing about how foolish Short was to try to become a Kings Gambit player without hundreds of practice games first.
Regarding Short playing the KG. He did play it 3 times in one super tournament a few years ago, getting 2/3 if I remember correctly.
16 Nov 13
Originally posted by hedonistYou must mean this one:
Regarding Short playing the KG. He did play it 3 times in one super tournament a few years ago, getting 2/3 if I remember correctly.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=80009
Fair enough, so he did have some King's Gambit experience before he tried it out against Luke McShane: