We had another quick repetition game that shows you can't legislate blood on the board. Polgar-Anand was amazing. She was on the attack but Vishy's exchange sac novelty created some miracle counterplay with queen and knight and he ended up better when Polgar continued to sacrifice. Topalov tried 5.Nc3 against Kramnik's Petroff and didn't get much. It seems to me like he played h6 around eight moves too late. ChessBase.com report here.
Strange description of Polgar-Anand. Seems she was the one who was in most trouble after Anand's excellent and no doubt prepared exchange sac. I like the fact that she managed to save the game though.
I was wondering when Judit was finally going to get something going. :) Shame she couldn't quite cash the full point.
As for the chessbase report.. "21.Kg2 was the safe move" Nope, Fritz does not agree and humbly suggests the lethal ...Rxf4.
22.gxf4 Nh4+ 23.Kg3 Qf3+ 24.Kxh4 Qxf4+ 25.Kh3 Qf3+ 26.Kh4 Qf2+ 27.Kg5 f6+ 28.Kxg6 Qg2+ picking up the queen might have turned this into a minor classic.
Yah, I found that later too and deleted it from the CB report. Hard to go through such positions so quickly. I had 21.Re3 in my notes originally and then thought Kg2 looked even safer.
In the Polgar-Anand game Boris Alterman and Chessfm(Larry C and John Fed) were saying that 39 ..Rc3 was winning for Anand.
Not that it was an easy endgame, but if Anand has a weakness it's playing too quickly in technical positions and occasionally turning wins into draws. He was well over an hour ahead on the clock against Polgar and kept playing the endgame very quickly.
Yeah Titu, Larry also thought 35. g4, gave Judith a safe draw at the time.
"If Anand has a weakness it's playing too quickly in technical positions and occasionally turning wins into draws."
I believe the main reason Anand does that is that he does not want his opponent to think on his (Anand's) time. Put it another way, Anand is hoping for a zeitnot blunder (I think he even admitted to this once). Not a bad strategy, but occasionally backfires.
Is it strange that everyone seems to be playing against Polgar for the win? Ponomariov of all people trying hard to beat her, and in a tournament that's seemingly featured nothing but Petroffs and Berlin Defences, Anand plays a Sicilian against her.
Three novelties in four games and two of them top of the line. Anand, it looks like, has decided to serve his home cooked delicacies. Timing is funny. Did he wait for the gorilla to depart?
Dunno. Topalov and Anand were both better against her with reason to push. And Anand had his spiffy Paulsen novelty to try out. Ponomariov plays just about any tiny plus to the death.
We're still waiting for the first 1.d4 game, or anything other than 1.e4! We've had six 1...e5, four 1...c5 and two 1...c6.
hmmm, if it's a 1.d4, I bet it'll be a boring queen's indian or reti, it'll highly be unlikely to be a king's indian, maybe Judit may play it, who knows? ;)
No 1.e4 today.
Apparently everyone has simultaneously reached the conclusion that they arent going to be breaching the Petroffs and Berlins this time round.I am puzzled by Anands choice most of all as I would have percieved white agaist the sole leader as a must win.Kramnik-Polgar looks the most interesting of the bunch.
Pleae don't press the "Post" button more than once. Just wait. Thanks.
Oops sorry Mig did my post duplicate itself? If so I apologize nothing happened so I thought I hadnt clicked properly.
I wouldn't rush to pass judgment on the "no draw" rule. You'd need to have a string of tournaments with this rule in place, to see how players ultimately adjust to it.
Based on rounds 1-4, we're certainly not seeing a higher percentage of decisive games. But what we ARE seeing, is a lower percentage of perfunctory draws. I don't think anyone can complain about Polgar-Anand or Topalov-Kramnik in r4, even though both were draws. It's the agreed draw on move 15, when there is still plenty of life in the position, that irks chess fans.
Perhaps what these results are showing us, is that a decisive chess game usually requires a mistake, and players at this level simply don't make a lot of mistakes.
Lets see how it plays out but for the moment nobody can complain about Rad Vlad, having participated in 3/4 decisive games of the tournament.
Or is it 3/3 ?
I have no problem rushing to judge the "no draw" rule a complete success. It seems most hardened grandmasters are saying it doesn't make a difference, and as Marc pointed out, it has not made a difference with regard to percentage of decisive outcomes. This completely ignores or belittles the differences it has made.
I am a beginner, and with the no draw rule, I am much more interested in the tournament and in clicking through the drawn games and their analysis move by move than I would be without the rule. I know there will be lessons in it for me, in contrast to looking at a Leko draw from Linares where all the pieces are still on the board and I have no idea how the position is balanced. If you don't care about the interest and education of a beginner, then you severely limit the possibilities for chess popularity.
Also, even when grandmasters are "reduced" to playing out tablebases, there is added drama. It is the same kind of drama that the popularity and even fanaticism of (other) sports thrive on. Even when the result is all but guaranteed (e.g. a football team just has to down the ball to win or get to overtime), you play it out. That's sportsmanship, and it's respect for the fans. Plus there's always that slim possibility of a blunder. Even if there were one a year, it would be one more story to talk about and interest fans for that year, and it would be worth the rule.
I take the opposite side of the rule. The reason players take draws is to conserve energy. In the second cycle we will simply see players who are dead tired and making alot of mistakes. I am glad you are enjoying and learning from it though, as that is what the rule was put in place for.
And now we see Rad Vlad starting to kick ass and take names, closing the first round with a full point over Polgar. But hey DP, don't be so quick to say "nobody can complain" because his legion of bashers on this forum will surely find a way.
"don't be so quick to say "nobody can complain" because his legion of bashers on this forum will surely find a way."
Nah, as long as Kramnik delivers we will do no more than cheer for him. 3 decisive results in 5 games! Playing for a win with Black against (his now nemesis) Adams! Hardly a loss to be ashamed of.
I hope with this tournament Kramnik finally shows what he stands for. I also hope he does not win the next game, in which case he will most likely shift to 4 dull and lifeless draws in his final games.
"I hope with this tournament Kramnik finally shows what he stands for. I also hope he does not win the next game, in which case he will most likely shift to 4 dull and lifeless draws in his final games."
My point proven within minutes.