[lang_nl]Ronde 13 met commentaar[/lang_nl][lang_en]Round 13 with comments[/lang_en]
6 March 2008, 22.13 CET | Last modified: 13:18 | By Peter Doggers | Filed under: Reports | Tags:
[lang_nl]Voor we het wisten het Radjabov al gewonnen. Hij had Shirov in een eindspel weten te lokken dat bekendstaat als goed voor wit. Shirovs nieuwtje op zet 20 kon dat oordeel niet veranderen - sterker nog, het was een verliezende fout volgens Radjabov. Topalov zegevierde tegen een vermoeide Leko, die in lichte tijdnood onnauwkeurig begon te spelen. Ivanchuk-Anand en Aronian-Carlsen waren snelle remises.[/lang_nl][lang_en]Before we knew it, Radjabov had already won. He had managed to lure Shirov into an ending that’s known to be better for White. Shirov’s novelty on move 20 couldn’t change that verdict - in fact, according to Radjabov it was a losing mistake. Topalov beat a tired Leko, who started to play inaccurately in timetrouble. Ivanchuk-Anand and en Aronian-Carlsen were quick draws.[/lang_en]
Topalov - Leko 1-0
Ivanchuk - Anand ½-½
Aronian - Carlsen ½-½
[lang_nl]
Links:
- Indeling, uitslagen, stand, alle info
- Toernooiwebsite
- Partijen in PGN
[/lang_nl][lang_en]
Links:
- Pairings, results, standings, all info
- Tournament website
- Games in PGN
[/lang_en]
Aronian-Carlsen was a bit disappointing. Imbalanced material, imbalanced and dynamic position, a chance for both to gain ground in the ranking. I don’t understand why they agreed on a draw so quickly. Maybe Aronian felt uncomfortable in the position and Carlsen didn’t want to “force luck” again?
Ciao
acepoint
according to chessdom comments it is an equal position, where black has control but no real winning chances.
I guess it is sort of a bad position for a game where they play it all out, since black has a pretty good position but is down material for it, and because a draw with black isnt such a bad achievment, there is no reason to push unless the point is really really needed. and white, well I guess white doesnt really have much to play for, having a hard time to find any plans on what to do…
in short, a typical position where it would be interesting to see what would happen with a sofia-ish rule in place.
Demasiadas tablas en las últimas rondas sin lucha.
parece que hay mucho miedo a perder posiciones en un torneo, poco comprensible.
Aronian offer tables. Carlsen, with blacks against one of the best in his best form and with a position not clear and half a point of the leader who just drew his game, had to accept. Aronian, a whole point behind leader in an inbalanced position had to play, and offer tables.
3rd win in a row agains Leko, not bad
peter, this is a great pick of you and Levon
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4492
Did you beat him to the soccer ball?
Where are the days of the great players who didnt do anything else than chess.
Kan iemand mij vertellen of slaan verplicht is bij schaken? Of geldt dat alleen bij dammen?
I sometimes see comments to the effect that there are “too many blunders” in this - or another - tournament. Well, we can all be clever when Fritz is sitting on our machines, and when the moves are analysed by GMs + computers as the games are being played.
But I have been following international chess for over 40 years, and I’m sure that the standard is higher now. 40 years ago, inaccuracies were often found only after painstaking analysis; nowadays, the slightest slip from perfection is called a “blunder” - mainly by people who are only repeating what Fritz has told them.
Be fair, guys. If we put the games of Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal… into the machine, we might discover many, many “blunders”. But so what? It’s not perfection we want in chess, but exciting games and new ideas - and Morelia-Linares has provided plenty of that.
True, Dave Bee, but there is probably also another aspect in all this. It could be that in fact now the level is higher AND there are more ‘blunders’. This could be explained by the fact that now chess is simply much tougher, much more ‘cutting edge’, much more driven by sharp computer analysis where one lapse of memory or a sloppy analysis can turn a win into a loss on a single move. Surely in the quiet positional games of Botvinnik and Petrosian, not so many ‘blunders’ will be found, but what does this mean really? Such games are simply not possible anymore on this level, because all the top players avoid these quiet positions where one side has a small, but very annoying edge.
Did Anand draw every game at Linares? Makes me think of the Fischer’s worry about drawing endlessly or the first K-K match. What exactly are the Sofia rules? No draws before 40 moves, is that right? How bout 3 points for a win and 1 point for a draw? Don’t they do that at some tourney somewhere?
Anand didn’t draw all his games, only at the end, to keep it safe. That’s normal, and a drawn game can be better than a decided one. It depends on the moves. “How bout 3 points for a win and 1 point for a draw?” That would lead to more agressive play, but lower quality. I actually like the old system.