Questions about Anand V. Kramnik

This is the first nat'l championship that I'll really be paying a lot of attention to and studying all their games as well as watching the games live online if possible. With that being said I just have a few questions. Do they have any particular openings or defenses that we can almost definitely expect see? What are their strengths and weaknesses (if any)?

Originally posted by stockton1984
This is the first nat'l championship that I'll really be paying a lot of attention to and studying all their games as well as watching the games live online if possible. With that being said I just have a few questions. Do they have any particular openings or defenses that we can almost definitely expect see? What are their strengths and weaknesses (if any)?

Petroff and Sicilian/RuyLopez....
too many draws...none of them is a brave player recently...and fear brings draws...

...and for any Queen pawn games, expect the Semi-slav or maybe a Catalan (though I'll be a little disappointed if neither Kramnik nor Anand don't bring a few opening surprises).

I like to pretend, like so many others, that Anand's poor showing in Bilbao was because of his want to keep his opening preparation a surprise.

Originally posted by vipiu
Petroff and Sicilian/RuyLopez....
too many draws...none of them is a brave player recently...and fear brings draws...

It's not really fear - just a different and still obviously effective style. They try to play sound and more or less clear moves, without going into complications for the sake of complications. However, both players have amazing games in extremely complicated positions and can definitely handle them extremely well when the need arises.

BTW: I was going to get tickets but I don't think the software runs on OS X or Linux since they went for Microsoft's closed and proprietary lock-in rather than a free and open source alternative.

So is Anand favored since he is the defending champion or is it pretty much 50/50?

Originally posted by stockton1984
So is Anand favored since he is the defending champion or is it pretty much 50/50?

It's more like 55-55. Both players have a slight edge.

I think now Topalov may be the favorite as he has secured #1 on the rating list and Anand has dropped to #5. Plus, we all know how Topalov seems to always bring dangerous/brilliant novelties to these matches.

I'm still rooting for Anand though; I'd like to see the chess crown stay put for a few years at least. ('til Carlsen is ready to grab it, which may be very soon of course (#3 on rating list))

Originally posted by ResigningSoon
I think now Topalov may be the favorite as he has secured #1 on the rating list and Anand has dropped to #5. Plus, we all know how Topalov seems to always bring dangerous/brilliant novelties to these matches.

I'm still rooting for Anand though; I'd like to see the chess crown stay put for a few years at least. ('til Carlsen is ready to grab it, which may be very soon of course (#3 on rating list))

Huh? If this is a joke, I'm missing it.

Originally posted by randolph
Huh? If this is a joke, I'm missing it.

no joke.

I just realized my mistake of Matching up Topalov with Anand....

Of course, Anand is playing Kramnik and Topalov is playing Kamsky.

Whoops.

That changes my evaluation of who the favorite is doesn't it?

I suppose Anand is the favorite still, and yet Kramnik is the most computer-like player of all time. It'll be a tough match either way.

As for Topalov-Kamsky... No comment.

Originally posted by sonhouse
no joke.

It should be a joke. When the differences in rating are so small at the top level, they don't mean that much and certainly shouldn't be the defining factor in who your favorite player might be. Kramnik and Anand are probably still a bit stronger overall as they have passed more important tests. Plus, it's like saying you're my new best friend because you have a salary of $100 more than my previous best friend.

Originally posted by exigentsky
It should be a joke. When the differences in rating are so small at the top level, they don't mean that much and certainly shouldn't be the defining factor in who your favorite player might be. Kramnik and Anand are probably still a bit stronger overall as they have passed more important tests. Plus, it's like saying you're my new best friend because you have a salary of $100 more than my previous best friend.

If it didn't make a big difference then all the 2750 players out there would surely make 2800 without breaking a sweat.

it is not that his rating became lower than others recently, just the process of going down compared with someone else going up(with about 10 points) means a difference in rating performance recently of more than 100 points in the last Fide period(about 2-3 monthes)...

and 100 points in performance is something, it can be the difference between the 1st place and the middle place in a tournament....

Sure, but this matters far less than the performance in key events like the WC match which Kramnik won against Topalov and the WC tournament in Mexico which Anand won. This is akin to the Grand Slams of tennis. Kramnik and Anand may be a handful of points lower but after another tournament, this might be reversed just like the blowing of the wind. Moreover, unlike the rest, they have performed their best in the key events that matter most and thus I consider them the players who have proven themselves best qualified for the WC match coming up.

Originally posted by exigentsky
Sure, but this matters far less than the performance in key events like the WC match which Kramnik won against Topalov and the WC tournament in Mexico which Anand won. This is akin to the Grand Slams of tennis. Kramnik and Anand may be a handful of points lower but after another tournament, this might be reversed just like the blowing of the wind. Moreove ...[text shortened]... consider them the players who have proven themselves best qualified for the WC match coming up.

But thats not what you said, thanks for the clarification though.