It looks like a position Kramnik would win with White - genuine pain and suffering for Black ahead, lets see if Anand can do the business....

Far prefer White in this - 2 bishops and all of Blacks pawns are weak - White can even give up pawns in various lines and still sweep up the weak Black ones. Ill put my head on the block and predict an Anand win.

IMJohnCox wrote on 10/15/08 at 11:54:37:

Not the best of times to go AWOL as they are now playing his f3-Nimzo as well

MNb wrote on 10/15/08 at 10:33:53:


I think that Kramnik wanted to test the water.  A safe opening to see if he could get Anand to take risks in order to score the full point with black. In my opinion Anand kept his composure and as the consensus here seems to be that Kramnik will push with white and draw with black I give this round to Anand on points. 

For today: if Kramnik draws the game easily I'll give him this round. A victory for Anand would make it very difficult because if it is 6-6 at the end Anand is for me the big favorite in the tiebreaks. 

Like on the chessmind blog: "that's most likely MATCH OVER for Kramnik. Kramnik will have a chance thanks to his better nerves, but Anand is so dominant at faster time controls that Anand has de facto draw odds for the match."

The longer I think about it, the stranger I find it that Kramnik basicly has wasted one of his 6 attemps with white. In my opinion he has to score quickly.
In general I think that the longer the match stays tied how bigger the chances of Anand.

Btw, Stormcrow was closer to being right about Kramnik's choice of opening (for game one) than I was.

I'm a bit surprised he allowed Anand so much freedom to play whatever form of QGD/QGA he wanted.  We'll see if Kramnik continues with 1.d4 in the remaining games.

Oh, and which K-K matches are you talking about; Karpov-Korchnoi, Karpov-Kasparov, or Kasparov-Kramnik?  The only group of dull draws that I remember were in the 1984-85 matches.  (Sure, there were occasional dull draws in almost every match, but not so much as the sheer number would bear commenting on.)

RE: "That is correct.   I do not believe they are that motivated because it really doesn't mean all that much, actually.It is a game....last time I checked."

So you do think the world championship doesn't really matter to these guys.  I honestly didn't expect that.  
Of course its possible, but I doubt that somehow extra money would matter more.  For me, they're both highly competitive, and both have pride as well as something they want to prove.

Anyway, I cannot disagree with you since I don't know anything about their motivation (it is only our opinions here). Kramnik has said that he wants to secure his place in history and, since he is already rich, its not about the money anymore.  But, I have to concede, a lot of people say that when it really IS about the money; so...I suppose you can be skeptical of such things. However, I'd like to think better of these guys since they both seem to be such gentlemen and have given a lot to the game.

But regardless of motivation (or lack thereof) I still think not pressing for a win in the first game makes plenty of sense from a professional standpoint.. especially when both of the last two matches featured this exact scenario and both resulted in a loss for the one over-pressing.   

Anyway...game two tomorrow, and maybe some blood for all those people who simply cannot stand draws.

Cheers

RE: "How can playing not to lose be justified in the first game of such a short match?
Here's how:  They each get the same $$$ regardless of outcome.
Make it winner take all and perhaps we see some actual battling."

You think both of these men (who are millionaires) aren't motivated to win a world championship match unless it's "winner take all" or if the money is split evenly? You think neither wants to win enough?  Seriously??

And both players have to take risks in every game or else they're "pretty boys"?  Kramnik decides its not worth risking a loss in game one (as BOTH of his last opponent's did in his previous two matches) not because hey, that's just sound match strategy but because of money?  I really disagree.

Both of them have plenty of reason to play but neither want to try to win at all costs.  There is such a thing as over-reaching.  You'll remember Topalov was actually better for most of the first game but kept pressing even after Kramnik had equalized and eventually lost.  Kramnik didn't want to repeat that mistake. let's give these two great players a break and let them play.