June 19, 2014 0:51

Carlsen Wins World Rapid Championship Ahead of Caruana & Anand

Magnus Carlsen won the FIDE World Rapid Championship in Dubai on Wednesday, finishing on 11.0/15. Fabiano Caruana had the best tiebreak of four players who finished on 10.5; Vishy Anand came third, Levon Aronian fourth and Alexander Morozevich fifth. On Thursday and Friday the FIDE World Blitz Championship will be played.

Carlsen ended the day playing football - as number one | All other photos © Anastasiya Karlovich courtesy of FIDE

The third and final day of the rapid tournament started with an absolute cracker: Aronian vs Carlsen; number 1 and 2 of in the world classical chess and in the standings after 10 rounds. It was a great game that started as Ragozin and became a middlegame with White having an isolated queen's pawn. Carlsen's 18th move spiced up the game, and for another ten moves the game was played at a very high level. 

Carlsen was the first to make a big mistake, and using much time on the clock he made another one. He played 31...g5 with 4 seconds on the clock - Aronian had more than two minutes there but soon he used three quarters of that. Around move 34 the Armenian GM was winning, but it wasn't easy and he made the practical choice of going for a line that provided at least a perpetual. As it turned out, there was not more than that either.

PGN string

Aronian missed the win against Carlsen

Aronian-Carlsen was a nice pairing, but what about Jobava-Morozevich? Two of the most creative players around facing each other, that could really only produce a nice game. And it did.

In an IQP position Jobava maneuvered his rook to g4, and two moves later he sacrificed it on g7. Like Mikhail Tal, the Georgian is capable of seeing tactics in the position that nobody else has seen yet! But Morozevich found the small path through the complications, and won the ending.

PGN string

Fabiano Caruana won a good game against Peter Svidler, who has been returning to one of his favorite weapons as Black against 1.e4: the Sicilian with 2...e6. This time he went for a Taimanov.

PGN string

Nepomniachtchi had no chance against Anand, who completely outplayed his opponent in a 6.h3 Najdorf. It's not exactly clear where it went wrong for Black, but around move 20 he's completely busted positionally.

PGN string

After he went down against Aronian, Nakamura also lost to Radjabov. In a Sämisch Nimzo-Indian, White's attack looked dangerous but in fact Black could grab material and defend his monarch easily.

PGN string

Round 12 saw the big game between Vishy Anand and Magnus Carlsen - most probably the last but one (they will surely meet in the blitz tournament as well) before their return match for the world title. The Exchange Slav didn't surprise Anand at all, althoug the Indian said he needed some thought “to find the right move order”. He had a tiny edge out of the opening, which quickly became an endgame. 

White managed to find some counterplay and at some point Anand gave two pieces for a rook, but he won White's a-pawn. It was probably still a draw because Black's own pawns were weak, but suddenly Carlsen blundered a piece and Anand could keep his a-pawn. White had a few pawns, but it just wasn't enough for a fortress. Another nice boost for Anand for the match, after winning the Candidates?

PGN string

Anand beat Carlsen, for the first time since September 2011

Caruana still must have been “having fun” as he moved back to shared first place with Anand. The Italian GM beat Tomashevsky in one of the most topical lines of the Closed Ruy Lopez these days (although the novelty was a deviation from a 1978 game!). White got a strong knight on f5, won a pawn and quickly won the ending.

PGN string

Yu Yangyi has been the surprise of the tournament so far. He had Aronian on the ropes, but let it slip away and even had to be careful himself at the end:

PGN string

Yu Yangyi made a very good impression in the rapid

Then, as the two leaders with three rounds to go, Anand and Caruana met on top board. The opening was a Classical French where both castled kingside and Black seemed to be equalizing quickly. Caruana even got a slight initiative on the kingside, but Anand held things together and as soon as an opposite-colored bishop ending appeared on the board, they asked one of the arbiters, and agreed to a draw. 

PGN string

This allowed Carlsen to catch the leaders in first place; the Norwegian quickly won a pawn against Yu to reach a technical win, then allowed too much complications but in the end he won anyway.

PGN string

Aronian and Radjabov drew their game, and so they dropped back half a point to go into shared fourth with Karjakin (who beat Tomashevsky), Grischuk (who beat Naiditsch) and Bacrot. The Frenchman beat beat Movsesian, who blundered a mate in one in a drawn position:

PGN string

And so the situation with two rounds to go was Anand, Carlsen and Caruana leading with 9.5/13; Aronian, Radjabov, Karjakin, Grischuk & Bacrot on 9. 

Caruana played Aronian on board one, and played 4.d3 against the Berlin. White seemed to be doing well with a good knight versus bad bishop, but Black won a pawn and kept it. The ending was perhaps draw, but Aronian found a lot of tricky moves and eventually his h-pawn was too strong.

PGN string

Having bad memories about Astana two years ago, where things went wrong starting with Grischuk, Carlsen didn't get a good position out of the opening. He got into serious trouble and was just lost (e.g. 30...f5) but somehow survived and then even won.

PGN string

Karjakin fought himself to the top by grinding down Bacrot from an ending that looked like a dead draw (and probably was). 

PGN string

And so Carlsen went into the last round with a half-point lead over Anand, Aronian and Karjakin. The first tiebreak was “ARCO” (Average Rating of Opponents Cut 1), and Carlsen and Peter Heine Nielsen (and the arbiter) had calculated that he only needed a draw in the last round against Radjabov. That last game did end in a draw, but the tiebreak wasn't relevant anymore when Anand and Aronian drew their game and Karjakin even lost:

PGN string



Four players finished half a point behind Carlsen and it was Caruana who earned the silver medal on the aforementioned tiebreaker - thanks to this win:

PGN string


In an excellent press conference after the tournament  (which add to this article later), Carlsen said:

“It means a great deal. Of course the extremely strong playing field gave me extra motivation. It's clearly the strongest Swiss tournament ever held and I'm absolutely thrilled to have won it.”

Full press conference:

Carlsen had “no idea how [he] would be ready for the blitz tomorrow” and that he would follow his father's advice to take some exercise, and so later in the evening he joined in an indoor football match with a group of players!

Carlsen... playing as #1



World Rapid Championship 2014 | Final Standings (Top 40)

Rk. SNo Name FED Rtg Pts. TB1 TB2 Rp
1 4 Carlsen Magnus NOR 2827 11 2730 131 2899
2 2 Caruana Fabiano ITA 2840 10,5 2741 131 2884
3 9 Anand Viswanathan IND 2770 10,5 2723 127,5 2866
4 7 Aronian Levon ARM 2785 10,5 2717 128 2852
5 15 Morozevich Alexander RUS 2732 10,5 2696 117,5 2831
6 31 Tomashevsky Evgeny RUS 2693 10 2728 128,5 2840
7 8 Karjakin Sergey RUS 2781 10 2727 133 2845
8 3 Grischuk Alexander RUS 2828 10 2708 128 2825
9 13 Radjabov Teimour AZE 2750 10 2705 123 2816
10 6 Svidler Peter RUS 2787 10 2685 123 2804
11 32 Bacrot Etienne FRA 2692 10 2680 113,5 2790
12 45 Yu Yangyi CHN 2668 9,5 2717 128,5 2790
13 25 Mamedov Rauf AZE 2705 9,5 2619 106 2706
14 33 Jobava Baadur GEO 2688 9 2725 122 2782
15 49 Nguyen Ngoc Truong Son VIE 2660 9 2719 124 2764
16 57 Iturrizaga Bonelli Eduardo VEN 2652 9 2717 116 2766
17 28 Movsesian Sergei ARM 2696 9 2711 124 2762
18 44 Guseinov Gadir AZE 2671 9 2709 119 2760
19 18 Le Quang Liem VIE 2724 9 2688 120,5 2750
20 40 Efimenko Zahar UKR 2677 9 2672 112,5 2727
21 20 Wang Hao CHN 2716 9 2654 109,5 2721
22 19 Eljanov Pavel UKR 2716 9 2643 111,5 2708
23 80 Antipov Mikhail Al. RUS 2576 9 2642 106 2687
24 11 Nepomniachtchi Ian RUS 2768 8,5 2735 124 2778
25 36 Fressinet Laurent FRA 2681 8,5 2733 122,5 2743
26 68 Yudin Sergei RUS 2626 8,5 2712 112,5 2748
27 65 Salgado Lopez Ivan ESP 2630 8,5 2701 117,5 2736
28 73 Riazantsev Alexander RUS 2597 8,5 2698 116,5 2720
29 1 Nakamura Hikaru USA 2841 8,5 2697 124 2736
30 75 Bartel Mateusz POL 2593 8,5 2682 113,5 2710
31 34 Naiditsch Arkadij GER 2687 8,5 2678 115 2711
32 41 Meier Georg GER 2677 8,5 2665 116 2699
33 23 Vallejo Pons Francisco ESP 2709 8,5 2660 114 2704
34 59 Matlakov Maxim RUS 2649 8,5 2659 112,5 2674
35 27 Moiseenko Alexander UKR 2699 8,5 2652 117,5 2691
36 24 Vitiugov Nikita RUS 2708 8,5 2637 112 2681
37 54 Fedoseev Vladimir RUS 2656 8,5 2634 106,5 2658
38 39 Zhigalko Sergei BLR 2679 8,5 2624 108,5 2662
39 16 Cheparinov Ivan BUL 2727 8,5 2616 109 2655
40 43 Van Wely Loek NED 2674 8 2713 119,5 2713

(Full standings here)

The World Blitz starts on Thursday at 3pm local time (GMT +4) which is 1pm CET, 7am New York and 4am Los Angeles. The championship will be broadcast live on the tournament’s official website with online games and commentary.


Share |
Peter Doggers's picture
Author: Peter Doggers


Bronkenstein's picture

Talking about blitz and rapid ratings, IMO we will need some time for the relatively new lists to cool down, it´s still somewhat chaotic, some players are barely playing it or simply don´t care while others even specialize etc. Maybe even a year or two for the list(s) to become more reliable, depending on how often the elite will play rated rapid/blitz.

On Nakamura - I didn´t even mention him, because I neither expected too much of him (yes, I know, the rating...but check the upper half of the text =) nor am I exactly a fan. I typed about players that I was rooting for, or medalists (or both OFC), prolly dropping quite a few of the former (say, Lev).

Naka will certainly score better in blitz, one of the reasons being that he simply can´t do much worse =) It´s all up to his nervous system, if he manages to ˝forget˝ rapid part, he can easily take a medal.

RG13's picture

@ Bronkenstein

re: "depending on how often the elite will play rated rapid/blitz"

Well FIDE made it a lot more convenient for them since they have announced that they plan to merge the online rapid & blitz ratings with the over the board rapid & blitz ratings. Since Carlsen has announced that the rapid & blitz ratings are now important to him then perhaps more top GM's will (out of a sense of competitiveness) follow suit.

chess dude's picture

Do you guys read?! Or just project upon Naka what you want him to think therefore allowing yourself to continue your backward intimate love hate relationship with Naka...He clearly stated in an interview that he did not see himself as a favorite going into this tournament but did say he would be a contender. Those were his words nothing more, nothing less. Sure he under-preformed in Rapid but it doesn't negate the fact that he placed second in both rapid and blitz in this event just a couple of years ago AND won the strong London Chess Rapid event just this past year. Those are the facts, the stuff the haters say on these boards about Naka is just fiction.

Anonymous's picture

I guess you could say that was a rare moment of humility from him. He has, on other occasions, touted his rapid play. On one occasion he even basically said he was the best bullet player who ever lived.

Leo's picture

Well, basically, I guess he is.

Anonymous's picture

"Vishy is clear moral winner"


AngeloPardi's picture

Larsen : "I don't see any merit in being undefeated, if you don't win the tournament."

Anonymous's picture

Caruana tweets!


RS's picture

Dear TR, S3, Anonymous Carlsen haters and all CV commenters,

I won the Rapid championship and most likely will win the blitz as well.

Yes I agree that i wasn't the best player and was just plain lucky in many crucial encounters on each day of this event. But who plays a beautiful game these days? Well Jobava tries to do that and what has he won so far? Nothing right.

I commend Anand for winning his game against me. I must admit that i am a bit scared of him for the WC match. I hope i get lucky there as well.

I have his second Peter Nielsen with me after all. He was there with me last year as well. I did well not to reveal his name as one of my seconds.

Also did you all notice how extraordinarily handsome i was looking.

Magnus Narcissus Carlsen

Leo's picture

That's right, go to your happy place. Lord knows the real world is too harsh sometimes.

Grandma's picture

@RS, maybe alias S3

You should express your Magnus-hate in a more sophisticated way.

Nobody can take your comments seriously, and even Thomas, who dislikes Magnus very much, must be embarrassed by your posts.
At least I would have been if I were Thomas.
Frankly. I doubt that you are serious.

Maybe you just want to make a fool of Magnus-haters.
If that is the case, you have succeeded.

RS's picture


I have told you that i am no impersonation of S3 or TR or anyone else. I think your age makes you forget.

I will be more sophisticated if Narcissus Carlsen is more sophisticated in his tournament wins. Remember the days when Kasparov won tournaments without having to depend upon his opponents missing out winning chances? No. Well you age has caught up on you. Sorry.

As far as TR getting embarrassed, well its his problem and i am not sure how is that even being mentioned as a response to my post.

You may love Narcissus Magnus no matter what i love people who play great chess.

Zeveraar's picture

I feel yet another tournament victory from Magnus has caused serious mental damage on your part.
You sound hurt, beaten, angry, damaged all at the same time.
My advice: leave this for what it is, pick up your life. Make it count.

Leo's picture

"I will be more sophisticated if Carlsen is more sophisticated in his tournament wins." So your life, or at least your behaviour on the internet, is completely dependent on Carlsen's tournament performances? That's pretty sad, especially since you don't even like the guy. Sounds like you need to build yourself up a little. Find a positive influence and focus on that. You say you love people who play great chess; then talk about the players you like instead of spreading a bad vibe by obsessing about the one you don't.

Anonymous's picture

Blah blah blah blah..........

Leo's picture

Exactly. You've got nothing.

Grandma's picture

"Carlsen didn't get a good position out of the opening. He got into serious trouble and was just lost (e.g. 30...f5) but somehow survived and then even won."

Yes, that is the trademark of the strongest players, and indeed it's Carlsen's trademark. In the late middlegames and in endgames he is exceptional, even when he has a bad position..

And he doesn't break down after a blunder and a loss. He has very strong nerves and a healthy self- confidence when it comes to chess.

Imagine how strong he will be when he makes some more effort with his openings!

But I hope that he never will go for very deep and long computerpreparations like some other players. Just enough to keep the initiative after the opening and manage to get his opponents out of book as early as possible.

Human play over the board is much more interesting than home prepared computer moves!

Roberto's picture

KKK, Caruana made really fun comments! Very nice Caruana!!!

Roberto's picture

This is Magnus. Positional player, getting some tiny advantage to endgame and conquer his win at that stage.

He escaped of two losses thanks to his ability. He made some blunders, but every player did in these rapid games.

And now he added one more world championship to his carrer... and will add another one tomorrow, probably, since he is better at blitz than in rapid.

 Anon's picture

Mh, seems to be a good time to rephrase Gary Lineker (probably known from some dubious fringe sport?!)

"Chess is a game where two players chase 32 pieces over the board and at the end, Carlsen always wins" :-)

Grandma's picture


Germany! :-)

Ich liebe Deutschland und die Deutsche Nationalmannschaft! <3 :-)

Sorry, Peter, for some German words -
I love Germany and German football. :-)

Regarding the beautiful German anthem: The Germans don't sing the first verse anymore.


 Anon's picture

Well, there is a reason for that...

victorhdiaz's picture

Congrats to Morozevich. Nice play!

Anonymous's picture

Anand only undefeated player. In 15 games undefeated. Respect. He is twice the age of everyone except Aronian in the top 20. Respect. All time Rapid King.

observer's picture

Anand did well. But don't forget he didn't play in Norway Chess.

matu's picture

Anand, still the decent GM he is. And an intelligent World Champion. He will regain his title in November.

AAR's picture

To me the rightful winner is Anand - only undefeated player in the tournament.

Carlsen lost his encounter with Anand.

Tiger is definitely back. Eagerly awaiting November match.

Zeveraar's picture

""To me the rightful winner is Anand - only undefeated player in the tournament.""
Good reasoning!
Let's call Karjakin and have him send his prize money and trophey from the Norway Tournament to Magnus!! =D

Anonymous's picture

And the Shamkir money to Karjakin for his all draws score that was much more impressive that Carlsen's +3 since the latter wasn't undefeated.

AAR's picture

Just 0.5 difference between Carlsen and Anand and most importantly Anand won their encounter.

Did Carlsen defeat Karjakin in their encounter?
One of Carlsen victory was against fellow norwegian. Other victory, Aronian gave away the win. Overall Carlsen performance was lack lustre.

Anonymous's picture

Fellow norwegian and brother of manager.

Anonymous's picture

Thomas Olivers german news report is fun. (http://www.chess-international.de/Archive/26172)

Of course he starts it by stating how lucky Carlsen was. Then he gets into the details: Against Caruana, Magnus was lucky, because Caruana played bad. Aronians win over Nakamura was of course more impressive.

Then he goes on about Carlsens and Aronians supposed Swiss Gambit, never mentioning, that Carlsen had the second best Buchholz in the end.

About the Grischuk game: "Praising Carlsen for playing for a win, after he had to suffer earlier, seems improper to me. In the end he couldn´t lose anymore and that he was able to win was rather random, if you take the whole game into account"

Hm, when Karjakin wins because Giri lets himself get mated, he calls it "impressive resilience" and whatnot. But when Carlsen wins a lost position, with 30 seconds against 8 minutes, against one of the worlds most skilled speed chess experts, it is improper to praise him. Quite the double standard!

He doesn´t even try to hide his bias. Granted, it´s only a blog where he reports, not the New York Times, but still. Its one thing to be biased in the chessvibes comment section, but translating those comments and pass them of as legitimate albeit amateur journalism... And then he has the nerve to go on and on and on about all the biased news reporting in the western chess world in general and on chessvibes in particular!

All that being sad: The phrase "Ave Carlsen Halleluja!" ist actually quite funny IMHO. So kudos for that, if for nothing else.

Leo's picture

"All that being sad", indeed :)

Anonymous's picture

Even for Thomas that report is going into overdrive mode, you just get depressed reading his nutty hateful diatribes.

Thomas Richter's picture

Thanks for mentioning my report, and actually he seem to have sufficient command of German to understand it (at an earlier occasion, someone blamed me for a weird and wrong Google translation). Still you come up with selective quoting followed by inventing something I never wrote.

At the very beginning, you omit (after "Carlsen had the necessary luck") "But others were also lucky (needed in a strong rapid event), and it's hard to quantify". My overall impression is that Caruana was the 'least lucky' player - in the sense of that he generally lost the games he deserved to lose, and won those he deserved to win. I would say the final standings after 15 rounds are no more representative of the entire tournament than those after 12 rounds (Caruana and Anand on top) or 13 rounds (Caruana, Carlsen and Anand on top), and - hypothetically - the standings after 16 or 17 rounds might have again been different. So even if Carlsen is a logical winner, he isn't or wouldn't be the only logical winner.

The 'Swiss gambit' remark refers to the situation after day 2, not yet considering what happened on the final day. Yes, then Carlsen (and Aronian) faced strong opposition, and Carlsen escaped twice against Aronian and Grischuk. Holding or een winning a lost position is a combination of skill (stubborn resistance) and luck (it's beyond your control if the opponent misses forced wins) - in Carlsen's case, part 2 of this is for some reason largely left out.

"Hm, when Karjakin wins because Giri lets himself get mated, he calls it "impressive resilience" and whatnot." - source????? My colleague Raymund Stolze had written the second report on Norway Chess (including Giri-Karjakin), and in the final report (also summarizing the entire event) I did write "OK, against Giri Karjakin was lucky". I just don't follow the general tendency to give lots of praise for Carlsen whenever he wins, while Karjakin winning Norway Chess ahead of Carlsen was considered an aberration and purely luck - searching for a hair in the soup, and then coming up with more hairs than soup [if this German metaphor exists in English].

P.S.: Yes, I am an amateur (certainly in the sense of not being paid, also lacking specific training as a journalist - but at least some professional journalists may also be autodidacts). BTW http://www.acp-cup.com/?q=homepage#contribute

brabo's picture

Congratulations for winning that nice prize, Thomas !
I often read only your comments here on chessvibes so don't believe those anonymous people as nobody likes your comments.

hank's picture

To be fair with Thomas:
Yes, he is biased against Carlsen - as all of us may have our own favourites - but at the same time trying to support his points with valid arguments.
It should be no problem that he is acting as a devil's advocate, and I am quite sure he is opposed to the kind of writing that S3 exhibits in this forum.

jimknopf's picture

Thomas, you know that I don't care about personal taste and preference: to each his own, no problem for me.

But: the impression of some that you are claiming the luck factor for Magnus Carlsen a lot, perhaps more than for anyone else, in a VERY arbitrary and unsound way, seems to be quite justified IMO, looking at your comments here and now again in your German article on the rapid.

Thomas Mueller, the great German scorer at the football world championship, once reacted to the question, why he and some other players are again and again so lucky scoring more than others: "Luck is nice, but always luck is skill", was his dry answer.

That nails Carlsen's so called "luck" exactly. I saw the game against Grishuk live. Carlsen had to organize a lot of resistance, from a nearly losing opening, just to survive move by move under very high pressure, and Grishuk was finding a lot of the best moves to keep this pressure high. But then, in a very complicated late middlegame situation, Carlsen was able to organise some counterplay, causing Grishuk to use up his time advantage (while he was looking for the best moves to limit all white's efforts).

When in this phase, of two extraordinary strong players struggling for the best moves, one creates more and more problems for the other, and the other begins to play imprecise, that has ZERO to do with luck from my view. Instead it is a pure matter of skill, nerves and dealing with psychological factors: Grishuk was more precise in a better position and obvously had problems suddenly having to adjust himself to defence while trying to win.

In the beginning of this critical phase both players had the same conditions: the position in dynamic balance meanwhile, but really complicated with queens and light piece each, on a wide open board, and both meanwhile nearly just playing on increment. Grishuk still played skilled enough to try to exchange queens in a way which would have lead to being a knight down, but with the last pawns being liquidated to a draw. It was a real struggle between two players and the best ideas they could come up with. What the heck does "luck" have to do with that?
Literally nothing!

So while I appreciate the way you often look for facts and arguments, as you well know, from my view this kind of comment, ever and again concerning Carlsen, is simply completely inadequate and out of place. If you could rethink this attitude, some of your comments would definitely gain more credibility.

Anonymous's picture

@ Thomas

Giri-Karjakin: Here is the quote I was referring to: "For me it was some luck, but also fighting spirit, tenacity as a defender, (counter-)attacking when the opportunity arose and using his chances."

Ok, I mixed up "impressive resilience" and "tenacity", sorry. My point is, that you virtually never acknowledge those traits in Carlsens game. Of course he was somewhat lucky against Aronian and Grischuk, and indeed, I completely agree with your assesment of karjakins play in Norway. But if you write about Carlsen, it´s always luck. If he wins from a lost position it´s random, if he wins from a won position he is lucky because his opponent made mistakes (Beside the Caruana game in Dubai you mentioned the same luck in the chessvibes thread where I got the Karjakin-quote, if I remember correctly? About his wins against Aronian and Agdestein?). According to you Carlsen never shows tenacity as a defender, skillful counter-attacking etc. No, he is always lucky. To me, that´s a double standard.

About a year ago, a couple of times you tried to make the excuse that you are not biased because "[you gave] Carlsen full credit for his game against Gelfand [at the Candidates]". It ist quite telling, that the one game you actually and sincerely praise Carlsen for, is also the game which Carlsen himself describes as one of the best he ever played (Source: His blog).

Yeah, you are not a professional, but as your price suggest, you take your writing quite seriously. So I think you should hold yourself to the same "standards of unbiased chess reporting" you so vigorously demand from everyone else, maybe even praise Carlsen once in a while?!

Thomas Richter's picture

I like to swim against the stream (what hank calls "devil's advocate"): When 'everyone' says black I say white, and the other way around - and the 'truth' might be some shade of grey. This applies to the World Rapid Championship as well as Norway Chess, when many others left the impression that Karjakin was just plain lucky - your quote refers to the entire tournament, not to his game against Giri.

There are various ways to 'make sense' of the World Rapid Ch, this is Colin McGourty's take at chess24: "It involved a detour to hell and back on the final day, but Magnus Carlsen has added the Rapid World Championship to his array of achievements. After surviving by a knife edge against Levon Aronian he blundered away the long-awaited showdown with Viswanathan Anand and then found himself on the ropes against Alexander Grischuk. The Norwegian dug as deep as we’ve seen him dig to pull off a near miraculous victory, eventually enabling him to finish half a point clear of Fabiano Caruana (silver) and Anand (bronze). ... Anyone inclined to put Carlsen’s ultimate success down to luck should perhaps note that he wasn’t the only one to display incredible powers of resilience in difficult-to-lost positions on the final day in Dubai. Levon Aronian scored 1.5/2 from awful positions against Yu Yangyi and Caruana, while Anand needed all his immense experience to survive the final three rounds against Caruana, Radjabov and Aronian and finish the event as the only unbeaten player." [He doesn't mention Caruana, does he agree with me that he was the 'least lucky' among competitors for first place and eventual medal winners?]

I meant to write something similar, just putting a bit more emphasis on Carlsen. Time is often an issue in writing such reports - this one is actually "unfinished": update pending (as mentioned towards the end), but it was already past midnight when I called it a day for the time being. For some stories, including the one on the ACP Rapid Cup, I had/took a bit more time - but registering for the competition was "just for fun" and the jury verdict was obviously beyond my control. I certainly do not claim/aim to be 'better' than others, but I do strive to be 'different' [in the given case, I didn't look at any other articles before finalizing and submitting my own].

Anonymous's picture

You're an attentionseeking narcissist, we know that already.

Anonymous's picture

"many others left the impression that Karjakin was just plain lucky"

Considering how many times you used the l-word about Carlsen in these latest events, it does feel a bit selective to protest against using it about Karjakin. In Norway the latter had lost positions in three games he won after blunders by the opponents, and also wanted repetition draw against Kramnik but the latter refused and lost. If Carlsen's results are explained by luck one might think Karjakin's in Norway shouldn't be too vehemently refused to connect to said luck. But that only for people who like to call players lucky, like you so often do in one (but only one) case.

observer's picture

"I like to swim against the stream (what hank calls "devil's advocate"): When 'everyone' says black I say white, and the other way around - and the 'truth' might be some shade of grey".
Wow, we do like ourselves.
So if someone robs an old lady and 'everyone' says that's black, except Thomas who says it's white, then the 'truth' is that it's some shade of grey.
I'm sure the psychology professors will have a field day with that one.

Anonymous's picture

That combined with Thomas's tendency to take everything literally, his lack of a sense of humour, his inability to see the other person's point of view, and his obsessiveness strongly indicate Aspergers Syndrome, like with Fischer.

Anonymous's picture

That's obvious.

observer's picture

@ Anonymous:

Kudos to you for posting the gist of Thomas's German report and your excellent commentary on it.

Carlsen is first or second (more the former) in just about every event he plays in. No player since Kasparov has been able to boast this sort of record.
While Carlsen was arguably lucky in one or two of these events, to claim he was lucky in every one, as Thomas does, is just plain ridiculous. Were Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov this 'lucky' too?
Thomas's almost total lack of praise for Carlsen's extraordinary overall achievement is very telling.

Thomas should remember Capablanca's saying: "A good player is always lucky".

A GOOD reporter would not let his bias colour his reporting so seriously as Thomas does.

@ jimknopf:
An excellent comment, Jim.
Perhaps coming from a more 'Thomas-neutral' person as yourself, it might sink in more.

PortaNigra's picture

Thanks observer!

(I decided to pick a handle, too many trolls out there.)

You are preaching to the choir, I´ve been a Carlsen-Fan since 2004. But I do prefer the Müller quote provided by jimknopf. Great stuff!

Until about 2012 or so, I was never aware of the controversy Carlsen apparantly sparked. But then I stumbled upon chessvibes and The Artist formerly known as TR. To me, his obsession with Magnus is fascinating and I absolutely fail to understand how one can feel so much hatred for a chess player. Of the elite players I certainly like Nakamura the least, but I have no difficulty acknowledging that he is a great player. Credit where credit is due!

To be fair to Thomas, his articles about tournaments without Carlsen or Nakamura are usually excellent, for example the one about the ACP tournament. He just has this huge, how do you say, blind spot?, about everything Carlsen (and to a lesser degree Nakamura), to the extent that he can hardly write a single post anywhere, without getting in some dig at Carlsen, as you pointed out before. He pops up everywhere, chessvibes, chess24, thechessmind, german and english chessbase, german sites like schach-welt and schach-ticker... and more often than not its to diss Carlsen. Weird.

Well, he IS genuinely knowledgable about chess and to his credit, he never crosses the line into "trolldom". He might dip in a toe once in a while, but thats it ;-)

Exciting chess in Dubai today! Excellent performance by Georg Meier. I used to live in Trier, Germany and met Meier the first time in 2001, when he had a national rating of less than 1800. So I´m obviously looking forward to Meier-Carlsen tomorrow. Should be interesting, it´s very hard to beat Georg with black: Something Carlsen himself failed to do at the Dresden Olympiad in 2008!

observer's picture

Greetings, PortaNigra.

Your mystification at Thomas's hatred of Magnus is certainly shared by me. It's not even as if Magnus has done something seriously controversial or exhibited a lot of bad behaviour like you could conceivably say with Kasparov or Fischer. At worst, a few minor indiscretions as a teenager. Just baffling.

Thanks for confirming that Thomas carries his anti-Carlsen crusade into German websites also - I never believed his claim that he didn't know the drift of the way the majority of German chessplayers were thinking.

I agree that he does not usually (though not always) cross the line into "trolldom". Though he is so ubiquitous, it sometimes feels like he does.

Don't worry about there being lots of trolls here. It is my belief that there is only one big troll here (s3) masquerading as many. There may be a few other idiots that are here a short while.

Yes, Meier is doing very well indeed, congratulations to your countryman. I will certainly be following that game with more interest than I normally would for a pairing of that rating disparity.

Anonymous's picture

Some people are obsessive and some are delusional, but it is rare to find someone who is obsessive about his delusions.

S5's picture

Well, the way some people are kissing Anand"s ass is disgusting.


Latest articles