Carlsen – Anand

I personally do not think Anand has a real chance against Carlsen. What does this mean? I voted for 10%. People overall voted for 32.7%. Generally the masses are quite clever, so I shall not second guess.


70 thoughts on “Carlsen – Anand”

  1. I would say 20%. What’s interesting (to me) is that it’s a lot higher than I would have predicted for the last match.

    As for the overall vote, I think you might throw out the 50% voters as jokers, fan boys, or excessive imbibers. That will bring down the weighted average.

  2. Carlsen wins with +2. Anand wins at least one game.

    Vishy doesn’t allow the Berlin Wall endgame once, choosing 4.d3 or 1.d4.

    Those are my predictions.

  3. Its too bad they dont play 24 games. People who invented rapid and blitz tie break are ignorants and dont respect two best players in teh world.

  4. it all goes into chess history :o)

    still a shame from my side, a win from Anand would have ratcheted the tension up, but now the result feels like a foregone conclusion.

  5. Well there’s a new dynamic in the match. Carlsen has to fight off the feeling of “Running out the clock” and Anand did not seem destroyed by any means in the press conference. Only annoyed.

    You don’t work months and months for a match, lose in game two, and say “Oops. Oh well. I’ll pack my bags and go home.” We’re still in for some interesting next few games IMO.

  6. Perhaps too simplistic but what are the other options available – excluding the sicilian for a moment all the options give White options of choosing the sort of set up Carlsen excels in.

    If he were to choose the sicilian, I doubt Carlsen would go into the mainlines and go for 3 Bb5 of some similar sideline, again getting the sort of position he wants.

    It seems to me that the Ruy is as good an option as any

  7. @Thomas
    Yeah, you’re probably right. But it seems hard to force the position Anand likes with black. Maybe indeed the Modern or Pirc, or otherwise the French (though Carlsen would probably play the Exchange variation 🙂 ).

  8. Next game will be interesting. I doubt we will have another Grunfeld. Will we see another scary f3-nimzo experience!? My bet will be on some sort of a solid QGD.

  9. It seems to me Anand’s bigget problem is how to get a game with White, rather than what to do with Black.

    Grunfeld prep didn’t seem to get much for Anand

  10. @ Ray – would have thought being Black against Carlsen with the French would not be much fun.

    Whats happened to the petroff – was all the rage a while ago (at least for the players if not spectators), was there something that got white a plus??

  11. Gilchrist is a Legend

    Why not Winawer with Berg 13…b5? It is fresh and both positional but sharp at the same time. I would avoid the Steinitz however, against Carlsen.

  12. Wasn’t suggesting anand should play the petrify

    Was simply reflecting on options and it occurred me that I haven’t seen the petroff as much recently

  13. Gilchrist is a Legend

    I failed to consider that. In any case, the Pirc/Modern seems appropriate. Regardless about “classical” openings, it would be quite interesting to see either of them play it. If one wants to win from move 1, this is a good choice. I prefer 5…0-0 to 5…c5, especially as the latter has a forced draw with the queen sacrifice that was played by Seirawan, but it probably is just a question of preference. If I play the Pirc/Modern I generally am not very scared about how dangerous the position can get, as long as it is not completely busted or plain lost. Unclear positions should be the goal if the win is needed. 6…Nc6 is perhaps the safest of the three, although all three are sharp, but if I wanted chaos on the board, I would choose 6…Na6. White simply cannot play slow and positionally against this option–he is basically forced to throw all of the pieces into an attack.

  14. The Pirc/Modern? Hum, as with the Alekhine, I am sure Carlsen would be very happy to see this on the chessboard… Really. 🙂

    I don’t think these are good openings choices for Anand. And I fear he doesn’t know and play it well enough…

  15. Positive start for Anand. Crazy position on the board and clearly Carlsen has not looked at 17.Ng5 too deeply. Magnus is taking a huge think…30 minutes and still going.

  16. Good on Vishy for fighting back immediately after losing teh first decisive game. He has done that in matches vs Topalov, Gelfand and now Carlsen.

    Carlsen still strong favourite but lets see how he responds to losing a WC game for the first time. His losses have tended to come in groups, so lets see what happens tomorrow.

  17. I was watching tv show (aprox) one hour lenght on Croatian TV, where Stevic, V.Kovacevic and Kuljasevic were commenting games. In second game, Stevic said that black should play c5 instead Qc7 and try to put pressure on e4 via Nc5 and Bb7. Its probably that those positions dont suite to Anand.

  18. I like both players, but delighted that Anand won – adds a lot more drama to the contest.

    Interesting game today – have to say didn’t really understand Carlsens last few moves, had thought that it was looking like a Black should be ok after 22…bxa3 (largely based on what I was listening to from Svidler on the main site). Then went way for a little bit, and come back to find its all over.

  19. Opening prediction for Game 4: Sicilian with 2…d6.

    I did think it would be a QGD yesterday (honest) but it doesn’t count as I didn’t tell anyone in advance.

  20. Ah well, I got the Sicilian right, but 2…e6 not 2…d6. Still, that must be worth a passing grade.

    And despite the time stamp, it was 11.24 when I made my prediction, not 12.24. I will change those time settings at some point…

  21. Downside – it’s not the full-blooded fight one would expect in a Sicilian

    Upside – I’ll finally know how to play against this pesky system! 😉

  22. 21…cxd5 or 21…Bxd5…maybe in a future Aagaard chapter on Comparison?

    In hindsight, 21…cxd5 is looking more and more the right decision. 23.Qd3 and Magnus has his plus-over-equals position. Anand has to be careful now.

  23. QGD, QID – close alphabetically.

    Really impressed by the way Anand is trying to press from what looked a really dull position. 20.Nd5 is the move of a confident man.

  24. @Seth

    It certainly did. I have not followed the Super-GM commentary but allowing the queenside to disappear certainly ended all chances, so something different needed on move 26 or 27 from White. Instead of the obvious 26.Rxa7 Komodo is giving 26.Rc7. No doubt it should still be a draw, but White can ask some questions.

  25. @Kieran
    I saw someone tweeting negatively about Svidler. Something along the lines that he likes to here his own voice (correct, that was the misspelling). With Nepomniachtchi there, we can see that it is not about self-centredness, but about discussing the chess passionately. I really enjoyed the 20 minutes or so I had time to follow them today.

  26. @Jacob Aagaard

    Jacob I think most of the Tweets were arguing that such a style of commentary was off-putting to anyone who wasn’t a serious player.
    In Svidler’s defence he did seem to try and rein in Nepomniachtchi as much as possible and also respond to the Twitter queries coming through (which Nepomniachtchi didn’t appear to be interested in). Given the variety of commentators, it would be interesting who everybody thinks is the best team at the moment. Although I like the style of Trent/Gustaffson, they constantly make use of the computer lines.

    I thought Vishy lost the psychological battle today. Not just because he was White but also he seemed to be affected by Carlsen rate of play in the ending. I didn’t understand why he didn’t spend more time looking for a way to keep a pair of pawns on the queenside. Makes me think the only way Anand is going to score a win against Carlsen is if the latter walks into a prepared line (as in game 3) and gets a clear edge. I just don’t see him outplaying Carlsen from’ just’ a slightly better position.

  27. @ Jacob – would be quite dull if the commentator wasn’t saying very much :o), plus he wasn’t getting a huge amount from his partner before today. His english is incredibly good, and he has a good sense of humour and seems quite down to earth.

    Re point that the commentry was too high level – i can belive this, but for me (elo 2000) it was good.

    I prefer him to Trent, largely because Svidler is on another level to Trent and i find it interesting to see how high level players approach looking at the position (and not relying on the comp).

    In Trent’s defence, i think he is much better at pitching it to lower level players and covers off much more basic elements (i.e this is a fork because the knight is hitting two pieces), whereas Svidler would show a variation as being bad by plonking a piece where it creates the fork, and then make a quick comment and move on.

    I might be confusing commentators – but i think i saw Gustaffson doing the London classic with Trent, and he was very good too.

  28. @ jacob – would be entertaining having you do it someday, chessic anecdotes, analysis and some controversial comments to add into the mix.

  29. @Kieran
    I could do it with John, with him saying “language, Jacob, language!” all the way!

    I think Svidler is fantastic. Indeed it is quite complicated, but so is the game. There are other sources of commentary out there and you could argue that FIDE should not have settled for a high level commentator, but I am enjoying it immensely.

  30. Gilchrist is a Legend

    I thought that the team Trent/Martínez was the best, on the Spanish broadcast. Especially when Paco Vallejo was on the show.

  31. Gilchrist is a Legend

    He does, I never expected it until I saw the live broadcast. He could easily be C1 on the CEFR scale. Look at the live broadcast tomorrow, he commentates with David Martínez, or «El Divis». Also Jan Gustafsson speaks Spanish, but Trent speaks much better.

  32. Svidler is great. I d like to see/hear gefands or kranik commentariesalso. Trent is full of himself and a hipster. Remember olymoiad when he was blabbing about food, clothes, cars and checking what compter has to say. Svidler way is better cause it makes me think. If id like to use comp rather go on playchess and start engine. My fyther who doesnt kniw how to castle may look expert if he could use engine and comment. More commentators as svidler are must, not desire.

  33. Only human comments can be considered comments from we can learn something. Hybrid comments dont teach us anything. Glefand was also comentating with shipov on russian. Great stuff. Too bad I didnt understand. Lol

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top