World Chess Championship 2013 - Page 73

On November 21 2013 15:45 IgnE wrote:
Just play Go instead.

A beginner should strive to lose their first 100 games as soon as possible

On November 21 2013 14:31 jacevedo wrote:
It really baffles me that so many people still think memorizing countless opening moves and staying ahead of theory is still critical when the current best player in the world is known for playing relatively weak openings and focusing solely on middle and late game play to derive his advantages and win games. And if you aren't playing at a grandmaster or super GM level the openings mean even less for you than they do for Carlsen.

I think it is more likely that players want to blame their failure to advance as a player on their refusal to study opening theory. It is the chess equivalent of imbalance whine.

On November 21 2013 15:10 Yurie wrote:


I am of the opposite opinion regarding this. Carlsen knowingly plays weaker openings to get out of the areas his opponent has prepared. It is his way of countering preparation chess which is played at the top level.

On November 21 2013 15:24 jacevedo wrote:
Yes, that's exactly right. And he knows he might be slightly worse in the opening theoretically, but it doesn't matter unless his opponent can force their theoretical advantage into being, and that's what people who exaggerate the importance of openings do not understand. You can watch countless grandmasters games where the evaluation changes from one side to the other several times during a match, which illustrates how much more important the moves in the middle and late game actually are.

On November 21 2013 15:51 FatChicksUnited wrote:



Both of you agree that Carlsen plays weaker openings just to avoid his opponents' opening preparations, and then you still downplay the importance of openings? I think his behavior proves just how important openings and preparation can be, in that Carlsen feels enough of his skill advantage negated by established theory to force him into unique lines that are suboptimal at face.

Then just imagine two mechanically equivalent mid-level players, one who has studied a particular opening thoroughly and another other who hasn't. The one without the study experience would be at a significant disadvantage for the first part of the game, as (like someone else mentioned) he'd be playing not against his opponent but against machine-verified grandmaster experience (if executed well).

On November 21 2013 16:10 jacevedo wrote:
It doesn't make sense to compare two players who are mechanically equal, but one studied an opening more. You are giving one player more study time than the other.

Suppose instead we compare two players with equal amounts of time to study, one player studies mainly strategy/tactics and the other studies mainly the opening. Which do you see winning more often?

Obviously some opening theory is very useful, I just think it's importance is exaggerated, mostly by people looking for excuses.

On November 21 2013 16:46 FatChicksUnited wrote:

Well, mechanical ability is somewhat innate. For most players, after a certain threshold of ability, it would take months of dedicated study and play, and probably outside instruction, to achieve any significant improvement. The time taken to thoroughly learn an opening could probably be measured in weeks, again depending upon individual factors.


I don't know if its importance is exaggerated or not, but I do believe it can be a significant advantage or disadvantage for someone learning the game. As an excuse though, I agree with you that it's fairly weak for anyone serious about learning chess.

On November 21 2013 18:07 Elroi wrote:
No it wouldn't be over. He can even lose the next game if he wins three times in a row afterwards...

I really hope he wins thought, for the competition.

On November 21 2013 18:10 Maenander wrote:

I was just talking about the whole final, it's easy for us to say he can go out "all guns blazing" or whatever in the last few games, because he has nothing to lose. That's probably not how he feels about it.

On November 21 2013 17:24 urboss wrote:
If Anand doesn't win today, it's over.

On November 21 2013 18:51 Arevall wrote:
Maybe he has to take a shit. I really prefer Trent

Context: Polgar goes on and on about Carlsen's jacket and Anand standing up.

On November 21 2013 18:53 Elroi wrote:
So what about sacking the knight on g4?

On November 21 2013 18:53 Elroi wrote:
So what about sacking the knight on g4?

On November 21 2013 19:04 ThePhan2m wrote:
According to Norwegian TV, the norwegian national team has actually prepared and discussed this scenario for a long time.