(UTC)
Latest Updates:
  ChessPub Forum › General › General Chess › Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
(Moderators: trw, proustiskeen, RoleyPoley)
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Poll
Poll closed Question: Who will win Nanjing 2009?
bars   pie
*** This poll has now closed ***


Veselin Topalov    
  5 (16.7%)
Magnus Carlsen    
  23 (76.7%)
Dmitry Jakovenko    
  0 (0.0%)
Teimour Radjabov    
  1 (3.3%)
Peter Leko    
  1 (3.3%)
Wang Yue    
  0 (0.0%)




Total votes: 30
« Created by: TN on: 09/27/09 at 22:19:57 »
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21) (Read 35251 times)
Uruk
Senior Member
****
Offline



Posts: 351
Joined: 02/03/09
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #92 - 10/19/09 at 00:42:07
Post Tools
kylemeister wrote on 10/06/09 at 23:30:37:

There is supposed to be a WC match in 2011

Uruk wrote on 10/06/09 at 23:58:30:

I thought 2011 was rather the Candidates tournament


There was truth to both according to Chessbase, Candidates "will take place at the end of 2010 and the beginning of 2011".

The WC seems set for late 2011 so that 2010 champ can at least rule one year and a half.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10777
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #91 - 10/17/09 at 20:58:26
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 10/17/09 at 00:19:27:
Could it be that a Category 21 Tnmt isn't as strong as Cat. XVIII tnmts were a decade ago?


That might very well be the case. I would add "and isn't as strong as Cat 16 more than two decades ago".
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #90 - 10/17/09 at 00:19:27
Post Tools
MNb wrote on 10/16/09 at 20:57:34:
That something is this line up:

1. Anand 2788
2. Carlsen 2772
3. Kramnik 2772
4. Leko 2762
5. Ivanchuk 2756
6. Nakamura 2735
7. Shirov 2730
8. Karjakin 2722
9. Dominguez 2719
10. Short 2706
11. Tiviakov 2670
12. Caruana 2662
13. Van Wely 2650
14. Smeets 2642

We will know more in January 2010.



If this line-up is correct, then where are the players who showed up at Nanjing?  I only see Carlsen and Leko.
 

Could it be that a Category 21 Tnmt isn't as strong as Cat. XVIII tnmts were a decade ago?

(I'm not casting aspersions on Carlsen's victory, I am merely pointing out that it wasn't exactly Linares.)
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10777
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #89 - 10/16/09 at 20:57:34
Post Tools
That something is this line up:

1. Anand 2788
2. Carlsen 2772
3. Kramnik 2772
4. Leko 2762
5. Ivanchuk 2756
6. Nakamura 2735
7. Shirov 2730
8. Karjakin 2722
9. Dominguez 2719
10. Short 2706
11. Tiviakov 2670
12. Caruana 2662
13. Van Wely 2650
14. Smeets 2642

We will know more in January 2010.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Offline


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10777
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #88 - 10/09/09 at 16:07:31
Post Tools
Isn't that exactly the definition of domination - that there is not much worthy opposition? Chess history teaches that there are always pretenders to challenge that domination. Steinitz had to meet Zukertort and Tsjigorin. Lasker avoided Pillsbury and later Rubinstein. Even in Karpov's best days not only Korchnoi but also Timman and Larsen thought they had a chance.
Concerning the Carlsen-hype: Kasparov was already hyped before Bugojno 1982. Karpov's rating at that moment was still 100 points higher. The expectations are justified imo. The big question is if Carlsen will make it indeed. We have something to look forward again.
  
The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #87 - 10/09/09 at 15:52:58
Post Tools
Quote:
I guess it will be the same with chess. Did you find chess borign during Karpov or Kasparovs reign?


Well, Karpov had Kortchnoi and Kasparov had Karpov, actually Kasparov didn't really dominate until Karpov was replaced by Anand and Short...

As for Steinitz & Lasker I'm not sure I'd say they dominated, as there was simply not much worthy opposition - or probably there was, but those unknown players who might have challenged chose real life careers instead. Chess back then was probably a bit like these "World's Strongest Man" events, today...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Schaakhamster
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 650
Joined: 05/13/08
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #86 - 10/09/09 at 14:00:10
Post Tools
TalJechin wrote on 10/09/09 at 13:29:51:
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 10/09/09 at 12:04:00:
Taljechin, 

You're almost certainly right about how had it is to "dominate" the chess scene.  I used the word earlier without any specific definition in mind.  I figure we will know domination when we see it.

However, before Kasparov came along the same argument was made that we would never see a dominant player the way Lasker and Steinitz dominated chess. Kasparov didn't rule the chess scene in the same way but he did rule.

I am certain that somebody will be head and shoulders above the crowd at some point in the next decade or so regardless of what that crowd's rating is.

To use a sports analogy, there will never be another Jesse Owens, Carl Lewis (blech) or Michael Johnson, but there is an Usain Bolt.  

Yes, the future is uncertain as another poster reminded us.  All predictions are subject to the whim of fate.  If I was writing in the early 1960s I may have talked about Leonid Stein as a probable future world champion.  

I would certainly have thought that Fischer would be a future world champion, perhaps as early as 1966.  I would have thought that he could be the dominant player for a decade.  I wouldn't have guessed in 1963 that Fischer would retire from chess 2-3 times, and I almost certainly would not have been aware of just how insane he really was.

Having said all that, Carlsen's trajectory leads me to believe that he is that rare once-in-a-generation talent who is capable of raising the game in the same way that Fischer, Kasparov and Bolt have done.  There have been and will continue to be many bright young stars including Lautier, Ponomariov, Aronian, Wang Yue,  Radjabov, but Carlsen seems to have the most potential of that lot.  I look forward to finding out whether I'm right about Carlsen!

PS: I don't say this because of one tournament in China in which only one of the top three players was present.  I say this based on the whole body of work Carlsen has created to this point.  Wow.



Actually, when thinking about it, I hope Magnus won't dominate the chess scene. Since then chess might become uninteresting. 

Look at tennis, it was most interesting when there was a good challenge in every match, and some finals will stick in your memory if you saw them, I'll always remember matches like Borg vs McEnroe in Wimbledon and Wilander vs Lendl US Open '88 or recently the clashes Federer-Nadal in the French Open and Wimbledon. 

But when Federer was dominating alone, it was simply no fun to watch tennis anymore...


For me, Federer even made it fun to watch when he was dominating because his playing style. Federer-Nadal adds to his legacy but for instance seeing Nadal vs other players doesn't really do it for me because of his rather onesided playingstyle. 

Sampras also dominated in his time but I found his style rather dry. 

I guess it will be the same with chess. Did you find chess borign during Karpov or Kasparovs reign?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alias
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1512
Location: East of the river Svartån
Joined: 11/19/04
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #85 - 10/09/09 at 13:32:46
Post Tools
Is Carlsen really a once-in-a-generation talent? Karyakin is born the same year and had the higher rating of the two for a long time. He has won big tournaments but has't had this type of result, but Carlsen didn't have it before this tournament.

And besides talent there is hard work, and the psychological effect of having the K-man as your coach.
  
Don't check me with no lightweight stuff.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #84 - 10/09/09 at 13:29:51
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 10/09/09 at 12:04:00:
Taljechin, 

You're almost certainly right about how had it is to "dominate" the chess scene.  I used the word earlier without any specific definition in mind.  I figure we will know domination when we see it.

However, before Kasparov came along the same argument was made that we would never see a dominant player the way Lasker and Steinitz dominated chess. Kasparov didn't rule the chess scene in the same way but he did rule.

I am certain that somebody will be head and shoulders above the crowd at some point in the next decade or so regardless of what that crowd's rating is.

To use a sports analogy, there will never be another Jesse Owens, Carl Lewis (blech) or Michael Johnson, but there is an Usain Bolt.  

Yes, the future is uncertain as another poster reminded us.  All predictions are subject to the whim of fate.  If I was writing in the early 1960s I may have talked about Leonid Stein as a probable future world champion.  

I would certainly have thought that Fischer would be a future world champion, perhaps as early as 1966.  I would have thought that he could be the dominant player for a decade.  I wouldn't have guessed in 1963 that Fischer would retire from chess 2-3 times, and I almost certainly would not have been aware of just how insane he really was.

Having said all that, Carlsen's trajectory leads me to believe that he is that rare once-in-a-generation talent who is capable of raising the game in the same way that Fischer, Kasparov and Bolt have done.  There have been and will continue to be many bright young stars including Lautier, Ponomariov, Aronian, Wang Yue,  Radjabov, but Carlsen seems to have the most potential of that lot.  I look forward to finding out whether I'm right about Carlsen!

PS: I don't say this because of one tournament in China in which only one of the top three players was present.  I say this based on the whole body of work Carlsen has created to this point.  Wow.



Actually, when thinking about it, I hope Magnus won't dominate the chess scene. Since then chess might become uninteresting. 

Look at tennis, it was most interesting when there was a good challenge in every match, and some finals will stick in your memory if you saw them, I'll always remember matches like Borg vs McEnroe in Wimbledon and Wilander vs Lendl US Open '88 or recently the clashes Federer-Nadal in the French Open and Wimbledon. 

But when Federer was dominating alone, it was simply no fun to watch tennis anymore...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
God Member
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #83 - 10/09/09 at 12:04:00
Post Tools
Taljechin, 

You're almost certainly right about how had it is to "dominate" the chess scene.  I used the word earlier without any specific definition in mind.  I figure we will know domination when we see it.

However, before Kasparov came along the same argument was made that we would never see a dominant player the way Lasker and Steinitz dominated chess. Kasparov didn't rule the chess scene in the same way but he did rule.

I am certain that somebody will be head and shoulders above the crowd at some point in the next decade or so regardless of what that crowd's rating is.

To use a sports analogy, there will never be another Jesse Owens, Carl Lewis (blech) or Michael Johnson, but there is an Usain Bolt.  

Yes, the future is uncertain as another poster reminded us.  All predictions are subject to the whim of fate.  If I was writing in the early 1960s I may have talked about Leonid Stein as a probable future world champion.  

I would certainly have thought that Fischer would be a future world champion, perhaps as early as 1966.  I would have thought that he could be the dominant player for a decade.  I wouldn't have guessed in 1963 that Fischer would retire from chess 2-3 times, and I almost certainly would not have been aware of just how insane he really was.

Having said all that, Carlsen's trajectory leads me to believe that he is that rare once-in-a-generation talent who is capable of raising the game in the same way that Fischer, Kasparov and Bolt have done.  There have been and will continue to be many bright young stars including Lautier, Ponomariov, Aronian, Wang Yue,  Radjabov, but Carlsen seems to have the most potential of that lot.  I look forward to finding out whether I'm right about Carlsen!

PS: I don't say this because of one tournament in China in which only one of the top three players was present.  I say this based on the whole body of work Carlsen has created to this point.  Wow.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
battleangel
Ex Member
*
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #82 - 10/09/09 at 09:54:38
Post Tools
I think there is some famous guy who made portaits of people who said he will not portray anyone under 35, because there wouldn't be any personality. But well, I think we can already say carlsen will not be a fischer, so far he didn't say anything like he could play knight odds against the women wch Smiley. Also this is only one tournament, we don't know if carlsen can steadily play like this or not.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TalJechin
God Member
*****
Offline


There is no secret ingredient.

Posts: 2892
Location: Malmö
Joined: 08/12/04
Gender: Male
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #81 - 10/09/09 at 09:12:21
Post Tools
I doubt anyone would be able to 'dominate' the chess scene for any longer period nowadays or in the future - at the moment there are 35 players over 2700.

But anyway, it will be nice if MC manages to become the first Norwegian Number 1 on the Elo list. The gap has closed considerably: 2809,6 vs 2800,8 with MC gaining 28,8 and topa losing 3,4.

So, I'm looking forward to watching MC's next tournament appearance Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
pioleiva
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Those who dont move dont
feel their freedom...

Posts: 29
Joined: 09/27/07
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #80 - 10/09/09 at 08:04:10
Post Tools
That was a great performance by Carlsen.


What I don`t understand, though, is all this Carlsen hype about dominating the chess scene and the claim that he will surely be the next worldchampion.

Hey guys, it`s the future, nobody knows.
And while he is certainly a great player with the capability to improve further, there are so many uncertainties...

Don`t forget please, that in the last two years Carlsen was anything but dominating. He was playing on a high level, but if I am not mistaken, this was only his third elite tournament win after Wik an Zee 2008 (together with Aronian) and Aerosvit 2008 (which is not bad though). And the first one where he was really dominating his rivals in all aspects...

I am not the youngest any more, and in my favourite sports (tennis, athletics and chess) I have seen so many stars came and go (each star of course was said "to dominate the scene for years"  Cheesy)...Frankly, I can`t bear this future-related media hype any more!!

So let`s just sit back, take a breath, enjoy the chess he`s playing at the moment....and wait with our conclusions on his career some more years (he will turn 19 this year, a little bit early to give a final verdict, isn`t it?).

In one aspect, one the other hand, I have to defend Carlsen against unfair accuses. His character is often described as autistic (but not in the charming Ivanchuk style), boring and a little bit dull.

But again - he is 18 years old...give him some time, maybe he will last as a somewhat (or very) boring person who can only express itself intelligently through the means of chess.... or maybe he will become a second Hort, Portisch (if you remember these guys Wink) or Tal...

Ok, have to stop now, my terribly boring wisdom of the elders is taking command of me ("Altersweisheit" for the German-speaking guys on this forum, don`t konow how to say that in English) Embarrassed

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
gewgaw
God Member
*****
Offline


I love ChessPublishing.com!

Posts: 687
Location: europe
Joined: 09/09/04
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #79 - 10/09/09 at 07:22:27
Post Tools
MC tournament rating: 3002!! hallelujah!!!
  
The older, the better - over 2200 and still rising.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Alias
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1512
Location: East of the river Svartån
Joined: 11/19/04
Re: Nanjing 2009 (Cat. 21)
Reply #78 - 10/09/09 at 06:24:47
Post Tools
+6 in 10 rounds. Quite decent.
  
Don't check me with no lightweight stuff.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Topic Tools
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board Top  

ChessPub Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2026. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge