Carlsen secures victory in Nanjing
8 October 2009, 11.02 CET | Last modified: 18:58 | By Peter Doggers | Filed under: Reports | Tags:
Drawing quickly with Teimour Radjabov in a Grünfeld, Magnus Carlsen today secured sole victory at the Pearl Spring tournament in Nanjing, with one round to go. The Norwegian thus scored his best career performance ever, finishing clear first at a Grand Slam tournament. Wang Yue-Topalov and Jakovenko-Leko ended in a draw.
The 2nd Pearl Spring tournament takes place September 27 – October 9 in Nanjing, China. It’s a 6-player, double round-robin with Topalov (2813), Carlsen (2772), Leko (2762), Radjabov (2757), Jakovenko (2742) and Wang Yue (2736) playing for a € 250,000 prize fund. The rate of play is 40 moves in 90 minutes plus 1 hour.
Round 9
The tournament has been decided in the penultimate round, in which Carlsen kept his 2-point lead once more. Half a point was enough today (trying to win would be too much to ask), and this is what he got, and quite easily. In yet another Grünfeld Defence, this time the Exchange Variation, Radjabov didn’t go for the most ambitious lines. His 12.h3 cannot be critical in the position, and although his pawn sac a few moves later was interesting, the simple 20…b5! led to an instant draw.
Leko quickly neutralized Jakovenko’s “controlled aggression”, the Latvian Gambit Semi-Slav, probably in his preparation. Right out of the opening a position with only heavy pieces appeared on the board which was dynamically balanced and also here the recipe for Black was: give back the pawn at the right moment. White’s king turned out to be less safe than his colleague and so Jakovenko went for a queen exchange which could be interpreted as a silent draw offer.
The most interesting game was clearly Wang Yue-Topalov, and mainly because of the Bulgarian’s winning attempts. And he got quite far. In fact, Topalov was outplaying his opponent from an equal ending, which was impressive enough, but then mysteriously refrained from the simplest way to end up with an extra pawn. From that moment the Chinese defended strongly and even was a pawn up himself for a while, but the game was drawn anyway.
Tomorrow the round starts five hours earlier, and Carlsen plays Jakovenko with the white pieces. He can choose between a quick draw or trying to get that performance rating over 3000 again and win even more rating points. Our guess is that he’s much less concerned with the latter than his fans, and therefore opts for the former.
Games round 9
Game viewer by ChessTempo
2nd Pearl Spring (Nanjing) 2009 | Round 9 Standings
2nd Pearl Spring (Nanjing) 2009 | Schedule & results
Nobel prize winner Robert Alexander Mundell, who also visited the 1st edition of the tournament, together with IM Silvio Danailov and GM Adrian Mikhalchishin...
...watching the games, at quite a distance, but helped by TV screens
Links
- Pearl Spring website
- Gujuan Tzu’s blog
- Ye Rongguang’s photo blog
- Pearl Spring games in PGN
- Women GP website
- Women GP games in PGN
 ShareThis
|  Print
|
That isn’t really Carlsen’s style is it? Trading off material so quick to reach a draw. But a great tournament from him.
Hopefully he tries to win the last round. I am wondering how many points he will be clear of the others at the end of the tournament.
Well……. He just needed a draw to be the sole winner. Guess that shows he`s becoming more professional. Great win of the tournement though. A win tomorrow will make his performance here 3000+, witch will be the first in history in a big tournement like this. His overall will be 2800+ as well, as the youngest one in history to reach that level.
I asked this question earlier: Concidering that Carlsen is only 18, and that everyone is still talking about future potential regarding him, I am wondering if anyone can tell me at what age a player is usually fully developed??????? At what age do they usually perform their best????
Noting that he became GM at the age of 13 and got the nickname “the mozart of chess”, he most certainly must be out of the ordinary. Can we expect him to be unbeatable when he reaches that potential like Anand or Aronian claimed after playing him last year???????
Anyway…. I think we are witnessing the start of a new era!!! In the future it will be Fischer, Kasparov and then Carlsen. (Not necessarily in that order when it comes to greatness though).
Congratulations to Magnus! Great tournament! If he win tomorrow he’ll have 3100+ performance.
Yes, congratulations Magnus. I look forward to seeing you in London in December.
My guess is that Carlsen was ready for another big fight today, but that Radjabov’s safety first approach with White (quite a contrast with his Black approach!) has rather more to do with it.
Now, after being clear first for sure, he can try to jump over the 2800 mark tomorrow!
I’ve always had the opinion that Paul Morphy was the best chess player, ever. Hopefully, Carlsen will surpass Morphy’s greatness. And contribute to the game the way he did. Will we ever see chess like in the Romantic Era again (todays chess knowledge added)? One can but dream.
Radjabov’s safety first approach? He sacrificed a pawn for the initiative, and Carlsen could have grabbed another one. (but probably was wise not to do so). Instead Carlsen gave the pawn back to convert into the double bishop ending with all the pawns on one side.
Anyway, I hope indeed that Carlsen would play for a win tomorrow, seems like a nice day to break another record or two
@Werner. Morphy’s performance was so impressive because he 1) came out of nowhere and 2) was so much better than the rest.
Nowadays, 1) is already impossible while 2) is also much harder with chess being so much more professional. Even Fischer and Kasparov weren’t that much better than the rest of the top players – just more charismatic, stable, energetic, flexible and, in Kasparov’s case, over a very long period. Carlsen has a long way too go – personally, I think his total lack of charisma makes him less appealing a player than the ones mentioned already, but I guess that’s just a personal thing. And perhaps it will change in the future.
I hope carsparov will be the number 1 for a very long time to come!!!
Wishing you best of luck…
Werner, examine Tim Krabbé’s “Chess Curiosities” and you will learn that things have never been better for chess romantics than in the modern era. So stop dreaming and take a look at that book with so many wonderful games!
@Arne Moll:
“I think his total lack of charisma makes him less appealing a player than the ones mentioned already, but I guess that’s just a personal thing. ”
Have you met Magnus Carlsen?
-”Total lack of charisma” are strong words. If Carlsen is on the totally wrong end of your charisma scala, whiche top ten players today are on the right side?
@ Arne Moll:
Did you turn it around? This ‘lack of charisma’..
If you blame something, it is most of times telling something about yourself
And what the fuck is ‘charisma’…?!
Who cares about charisma, Carlsen is already by far the most popular player in the elite of chess (exception being Chucky maybe).
@BobbyF, JustBe: I have seen Carlsen at tournaments. His chess is very impressive, but his body language is not, at least not in public appearances. Look at how he sits behind the board, how he walks around, how he looks in the camera, how he talks in interviews. It’s not exactly what I would call a ‘magnetic’ performance. This is plain for everyone to see. Anyway, I agree it’s completely irrelevant for the way we judge his chess so there’s no use pursuing this argument. I was just giving my personal opinion on what makes a true chess star. I think appearance sometimes does matter, but again, that’s just my view.
I suspect that this “lack of charisma” belongs to the same category as those accusations that Räikkönen is killing F1 with his “boring” personality. As far as I can tell (from interviews; I have never seen either of them in person), both Carlsen and Räikkönen have at least a sparkling sense of humour, but it seems that northern nations behave a little too subtly for the wacky rest of the world. That said, charisma is essentially something that others perceive on you, not something you inherently have; so the truth is that when somebody thinks you are boring, you are – for him. Chances are good that we will soon have a chess champion who is only respected north of some 56N latitude and thought of as a nuisance everywhere else
@ArneMoll: You have to keep in mind that Magnus is *still* only 18 years old, so it’s a bit early for him to develop some sort of charisma like Kasparov had. He is slowly getting used to all the attention, so give him another 5-10 years.
According to Arpad Elo “The Rating Of Chessplayers, Past & Present” 5.67 (page 93) :
“For players in continuous competition, performance at about age 63 is comparable to that at age 21. Peak performance is attained around age 36, and the average peak is about 120 points higher than the level at age 21.”
Before 21 their rating curve before 21 is like a set of steps, with rapid rises followed by plateaus (what Elo calls “serrated development”.)
My intuition is that today’s players reach their peak a couple of years earlier than 30 years ago, but I don’t have any figures to back that up.
If Elo is right, Carlsen can expect another couple of years of rapid development & his peak will over 2900 even if he makes no progress in the next 2 years. My hunch is that it will probably be well over 3000.
I want to examine Chess Curiosities. Anyone know where I can find a copy at a reasonable price ?
Does anyone remember those photographs of Kramnik as an 18 year old, all huge spectacles, spots, and mulleted hair?
Carlsen is a relative shy young man who suddenly has to answer a lot of questions in english. Not his native language, by the way.
When you place him in front of the camera with a mic in his face right after a 5 hour game, and the reporter asks him why he didn’t play Bxc5 in move 34?
-Then he gets this concentrated distante expression on his face and pulls up a 10 move variant on the spot.
————-
Susan Polgars blog has shown photos where Magnus and Ananad perform Monty Phyton sketches together. In Norway he is much more relaxed and casual, both on TV and in persona.
Magnus is not the best “Song and tap dance” man in chess, but I think he will grow and mature, and become a good ambassador for chess.
Kasparovs political career and and all the Bobby Fisher antisemitism controversy are probably something the chess comunity can do without.
-Carlsen being “just a normal guy” is perhaps not so bad, after all…
According to GM Simen Agdestein, former trainer and teatcher, Magnus is a very inteligent and clever person who learns and adopts quickly. Lets give the yong man a change!
Lol, this guy has all potential to become the best chess player every lived..
And basicly he just have to repeat this display of excellence, and he’s done. Not bad when you are 18 years old
ChessVibes has set a new standard for coverage and analysis with this tournament. I have never seen such quick good quality analysis of the game ever. Thank you very much and keep up the great work.
Agreed, Bobby F. although the context of your post suggests to me you mean chance rather than change
interesting that after the penultimate round calson is the the only one in the field with a positive performance rating! it looks to me that this will probably cease to be true after the last round but maybe not if leko beats wang yue, calson beats jakovenko and topalov and radjabov draw. But wierd huh?.. all the rating lost by all the players basically gained by one player.
Congratulations to Magnus for the great performance!
As far as charisma is concerned: Wasn’t (or isn’t) it also an aim of the Carlsen-Kasparov cooperation to “establish Carlsen as a brand name”? In other words, Kasparov can also teach him a thing or two about changing his media image. One moment from a Norwegian TV talkshow with both of them was quite typical in that respect: Carlsen hesitated to answer a question, and Kasparov immediately jumped in on his behalf.
About Bobby F.’s “Have you met him?”: Most chess fans will never get the chance to talk to Magnus Carlsen, at the most they can watch him at tournaments – like I did at Corus, and I understand what Arne Moll means. Neither will potential sponsors before they are seriously interested. So media relations do matter, and I think interviews and press conferences are more relevant than Monty Python sketches.
Yes, he is still young – but for the moment I would also put him behind Radjabov and Karjakin “on the charisma scale”. Of course this is a subjective impression, and it may have to do with the fact that Norwegians generally (that is “on average”) are more reserved.
Actually Thomas makes a good point. I’m sure everyone acts cool in a relaxed environment, the difficult thing is to do it with a camera pointed at you. Kasparov has always been good at this, even at a very young age, and so have countless of other famous people. (Michael Jackson anyone?)
I like the way Carlsen ”animatively ” moves chess pieces….there is a lot of Charisma there!
Arne Moll and Thomas is not happy with Carlsens charisma. Personally I am not bothered by this aspect at all. While you keep waiting for your ideal chess mediastar, I am perfectly happy with Magnus Carlsen. He is a big inspiraiton to me and many others. Apart from his obvious chess skills, I actually like his modesty and laid back attitude.
I never said I wasn’t happy with it, Bobby F, all I said was he doesn’t have it (yet). That’s all.
“Yes, he is still young – but for the moment I would also put him behind Radjabov and Karjakin “on the charisma scale””
Geez.
Good point that he’s only 18, not an easy age.
By the way, did you people already check this interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCGebC6QtKc&feature=player_embedded#
Cheers!
I have always been charmed by Carlsen’s innocent, modest and friendly demeanour. If having charisma involves being an arrogant git, I’d rather have none.
@Hortensius: Thanks, that’s the interview I was referring to.
@everyone: [Disclaimer like in Arne's last post] Basically I speculated that Kasparov is not only a chess coach to Carlsen, but also a media coach. And IMO, there is supporting evidence for this in the intial press releases announcing (or disclosing) their cooperation.
BTW, I don’t think Bobby Fischer or Michael Jackson would be suitable role models, not only because they became tragic figures later on. Nor should Carlsen “copy Kasparov”. No need to adapt his arrogant character traits, just like it wouldn’t be wise to emulate Kasparov’s style of playing chess – rather than further developing and refining his own style.
Congratulations, Mr. Carlsen! It’s been a great pleasure to see him growing!
I think we don’t have to worry about his charisma r personality. He is who he is and I for one find him very nice. In sport, there has been always some kind of contrasting character. Borg vs MacKenroe, Prost vs Senna, Hakkinen vs Schumacher, and of course Karpov vs Kasparov. So it’s not really fair to put everything on him. Let’s just wait and see who will rise up to challenge him!
I think what Arne Moll is referring to can be seen in the posted interview…
Interviewer asks a simple question
Magnus Carlsen “uh um… well… I .. uh…” Kasparov steps in.
I love Magnus Carlsen but one can clearly see he needs some help with his public speaking charisma. I think alot of people are misunderstanding whats meant by charisma. Still, his chess is truly fantastic! Still its hard for 18 yearold to do well public speaking in general… now add the press, spotlights and pressure of being hypothesized as the next world champion… his lack of Charisma becomes all too acceptable.
What is all this Charisma talk?
I will put an example and then i will tell you my opinion. First at all, take a look at Anand. Does he have a “big” charisma? I’m not sure about that. I think he is fluently speaking, but does he have a “big” charisma? Of course, not. He has “low profile” (if that translation is correct). He is not like Kasparov, and of course: he is not even close to Fischer.
But what is this talk about? Why is the charisma so important? Just for being an “ambassador for chess”?
I prefer a person like Carlsen. That’s his “beauty”. He is just a quiet guy, a good guy, he play and never make an offense to his opponents. He is not Nakamura like, he is not a Fischer like. So, then? Why does he need that charisma? Why does he need to speak without those “uh” “ummm”, etc?
I prefer the way he is. I will repeat Michael Schwerteck’s comment:
“I have always been charmed by Carlsen’s innocent, modest and friendly demeanour. If having charisma involves being an arrogant git, I’d rather have none.”
Nice interview with Kasparov & Carlsen
It’s great to listen to Kasparov. I just feel his clarity of thought while he speaks allthough he says some strange things sometimes: ‘All top chess players in the world are below 25? (Kramnik, Anand, Ivanchuck are just 3 three top 10 players I know at the moment, who are older).
He always nicely expresses himself against his ‘opponents’. Putin is like Karpov now. Maybe this his way for driving his competition in himself against his opponents. It’s not ‘hate’ or something, or an attack (as is the interpretation of interviewer). It’s more to motivate himself.
That’s what I am thinking.
Work hard to get to develop your talent… they obvious live their words
@Pablo
Thank you. I am on the same page!
Carslen – Jakovenko 1-0!!!
2800+
3000+ perf.
GREAT!!!
To Labelled: You mentioned Fischer, Kasparov and then Carlsen, ok, but you shoud mention Capablanca too…The chess machine when neither computers neither advanced chess theory existed…