Tata Steel 2013...

It looks like Magnus Calsen has done his endgame homework. This above posted game should have been a draw, but Calsen does not settle for the draw and guides the game into a endgame position that his opponent can not handle.

Originally posted by mathmo
edit: hashed pgn of Carlsen's game was here, it was fixed and is displayed below by the next poster (thanks).

The opposite coloured bishops ending looked like a certain draw. Very impressive from Carlsen.

Apparently black should have played 68... gxh5.

(http://www.tatasteelchess.com/tournament/report/year/2013/round/8)

I think we're really starting to get to the stage where an entire end game book could be comprised solely of Carlsens games. The thing that surprises me is that i consider Karjakin (along with Kramnik) to be one of the best end game players on the circuit. I think it was probably a blunder that lost this position for him, watching the game on chessbomb houdini clearly shows 77..Rc3 to be a game losing blunder, but it's so hard to see why without seeing the conclusion of the game. I try not to look at it's suggestions while the game is in progress (it ruins the suspense) but i must admit, when i saw the evaluation jump to +4 i couldn't help myself. I can think of no other player, after having played for 5 or 6 hours in a totally level position (and when i say that i mean computer evaluated 0.*) can still remain so optimistic. Carlsens ability to play on and on with the slightest of edges is quite awe inspiring. After the lst Candidates tournament i did wonder how Magnus would have faired in that event. With the Candidates tournament just a few months away, i really struggle to see who can stop him winning that event. The shear number of games that they will all play and the strength of the tournament can only be won by the most consistent tenacious player. Carlsen just doesn't seem to let a position go unless it's absolutely dead drawn. Magnificent player!

Agreed!

Originally posted by ketchuplover
Agreed!

It's interesting to note that he only really has players from the bottom of the table yet to face (excluding Nakamura). Wonder if he'll get a 3000 performance? 🙂

I was watching a discussion about this very game on another site.

This position after Black 59th move.


The feeling is the only winning attempt for White is g4 and h5 and Karjakin
should have spotted this and prevented it. (though don't ask me how) 😉

We should look at computer evaluations about games in progress as guidlines.
It may have seen the g4 & h5 idea but dismissed it as a draw with best play.
It never tires and is not being put through the mill by a strong player.

"Carlsen just doesn't seem to let a position go unless it's absolutely dead drawn."

The same trait as Fischer and Kasparov at their peaks.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
I was watching a discussion about this very game on another site.

This position after Black 59th move.

[fen]4Rb2/5pk1/6p1/2p1P2p/2Bp1P1P/3P2P1/5K2/1r6 w - - 0 60[/fen]
The feeling is the only winning attempt for White is g4 and h5 and Karjakin
should have spotted this and prevented it. (though don't ask me how) 😉

We should look at computer ev ...[text shortened]... less it's absolutely dead drawn."

The same trait as Fischer and Kasparov at their peaks.

Yes i read that the mistake was earlier than move 77, but i just didn't understand the analysis/reasoning.

The same trait as Fischer and Kasparov at their peaks.

Definitely! I get the feeling that breaking Kasparovs record has really given him a belief in his game. Not that he was a shrinking violet before, but he hasn't dominated many events yet. Nanjing 2009 (with Kasparovs assistance), LCC 2012, apart from these two, a lot of his other tournament wins have been pretty close. It's so easy to forget, he's only 22! Kasparov dominated a lot of tournaments at that age, but i feel his style at the time (early 80's) was no were near as complete as Carlsens appears today. I really do feel that Carlsens end game technique is second to none. It would be really interesting to see how different his results would be if he actually played for an advantage out of the opening. 🙄

hey are you the same ketchuplover that's @ chessgames.com?

Naiditsch

Carlsen destroyed Nakamura in round 12 to win comfortably. Nakamura resigned on move 31 with mate and/or the loss of the black queen looming.

[Round "12.4"]
[White "Carlsen, Magnus"]
[Black "Nakamura, Hikaru"]
[Result "1-0"]




This gives him a score of 9.5/12 with one game to play threatening Kasparov's record 10/13 in 1999. Great result.


Van Wely beat Caruana with an interesting race to mate to finish (see below).

[Round "12.7"]
[White "van Wely, Loek"]
[Black "Caruana, Fabiano"]
[Result "1-0"]

Originally posted by mathmo
Carlsen destroyed Nakamura in round 12 to win comfortably. Nakamura resigned on move 31 with mate and/or the loss of the black queen looming.

[Round "12.4"]
[White "Carlsen, Magnus"]
[Black "Nakamura, Hikaru"]
[Result "1-0"]

[pgn]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 e5 5. Nb5 d6 6. g3 h5 7. N1c3 a6 8. Na3
b5 9. Nd5 Nge7 10. Bg2 Bg4 11. f3 Be6 1 ...[text shortened]... g2 Qe4+
46. f3 Rc2+ 47. Kg3 Qe5+ 48. f4 Qxe3+ 49. Kh4 g5+ 50. Kxg5 1-0
[/pgn]

I imagine for a grandmaster to lose in 31 moves like that would make him feel like a patzer.

...why should it, especially against the highest-rated player of all time? And if you 'destroy' someone, isn't it always a 'comfortable' win?
😉

Originally posted by woodypusher
hey are you the same ketchuplover that's @ chessgames.com?

si

Originally posted by woodypusher
...why should it, especially against the highest-rated player of all time? And if you 'destroy' someone, isn't it always a 'comfortable' win?
😉

comfort is a matter of viewpoint 🙂

Carlsen was Magnusifent