|
Home > Archive > Chess politics > October 2005 > Predictions for FIDE WC Tournament in San Luis, Argentina?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Predictions for FIDE WC Tournament in San Luis, Argentina?
|
|
| Gunsberg 2005-09-25, 2:31 am |
|
It used to be that rgc had people interested enough in top-level
chess to venture an opinion about the most important International
chess event of the year.
My prediction:
=1 Leko +4 -1 =9 8.5/14
=1 Polgar +5 -2 =7 8.5
3 Topalov +5 -3 =6 8.0
4 Adams +3 -2 =9 7.5
=5 Anand +2 -2 =10 7.0
=5 Svidler +3 -3 =8 7.0
7 Kasimdzhanov +1 -4 =9 5.5
8 Morozevich +2 -8 =4 4.0
Kasimdzhanov will be predictably outclassed, but Moro is the prime
Candidate to freak out.
If Anand loses an early game, his play is apt to be moribund.
Polgar greatly benefits from the absence of Kramnik. Lately, she has
been about holding her own against the other big names.
She probably has the best nerves of the bunch.
It would be interesting to see the lifetime scores between the 8
Candidates, if one of you database jockeys wants to do the research.
| |
| jamesrynd@aol.com 2005-09-25, 2:31 am |
| Interesting. I am both disenchanted with the WC process (I attended an
Interzonal once and saw *really good chess* being played) and more
interested in chess problems these days.
Of the players I know, I wonder why Anand's chances are rated so low?
Has his performance of late not been so good? I really thought 10 years
ago he might become world champ.
But it would also be great to see Polgar make WC.
| |
| politikalhack@gmail.com 2005-09-25, 2:31 am |
| Any of the eight can win, but I'd like to see Topalov.
I'd really like to see a unification match between the winner and
Kramnik.
| |
| Gunsberg 2005-09-25, 7:32 pm |
| I would agree that Kramnik is not entitled to a Unification Match with
FIDE's Champion. However, such a match might still be in the best
interest of chess.
At this stage, I do not think that it is justifiable to give
Kramnik--or any Champion-- the "Draw Odds". If a Match is played, it
should be played even up.
I also believe that before Kramnik is granted a match with the FIDE
World Champion, he must first play a match of length vs. Shirov. Only
if Kramnik prevails against Shirov, ought he to be given the privilige
of playing for a Unified Chess title.
It should never be forgotten, when assessing Kramnik's legitimacy
as World Chamion, that he played a Candidate's match against Shirov,
for the right to play against Kasparov.
Kramnik lost to Shirov, yet had no scruples about shunting Shirov
aside, when Kasparov offered him a direct match for the "Classical"
Title.
| |
| Larry Tapper 2005-09-26, 7:33 pm |
|
jamesrynd@aol.com wrote:
quote:
> Interesting. I am both disenchanted with the WC process (I attended an
> Interzonal once and saw *really good chess* being played) and more
> interested in chess problems these days.
>
> Of the players I know, I wonder why Anand's chances are rated so low?
> Has his performance of late not been so good? I really thought 10 years
> ago he might become world champ.
Actually that was just Gunsberg speculating that Anand might disappoint
this time. His comments are always interesting to read.
According to The Week in Chess, the Betsson bookmakers make Anand the
favorite at 2.8, followed by Topalov and Leko, with everyone else far
behind. They have Polgar at 20-1, which may be a bargain at the price.
I like Topalov's chances myself: he's both hungry and confident.
Larry T.
quote:
>
> But it would also be great to see Polgar make WC.
| |
| Angelo DePalma 2005-09-27, 2:33 am |
| My prediction is that all the players will be bunched around +2/-2, and
there will be a tie at the end of the double round robin. Topalov-Anand will
be +2, Kasim/Polgar -2.
Mark these words.
"Gunsberg" <gunsberg@kasparovchess.com> wrote in message
news:1127617246.936063.171840@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> It used to be that rgc had people interested enough in top-level
> chess to venture an opinion about the most important International
> chess event of the year.
>
> My prediction:
>
> =1 Leko +4 -1 =9 8.5/14
> =1 Polgar +5 -2 =7 8.5
>
> 3 Topalov +5 -3 =6 8.0
>
> 4 Adams +3 -2 =9 7.5
>
> =5 Anand +2 -2 =10 7.0
> =5 Svidler +3 -3 =8 7.0
>
> 7 Kasimdzhanov +1 -4 =9 5.5
>
> 8 Morozevich +2 -8 =4 4.0
>
> Kasimdzhanov will be predictably outclassed, but Moro is the prime
> Candidate to freak out.
>
> If Anand loses an early game, his play is apt to be moribund.
>
> Polgar greatly benefits from the absence of Kramnik. Lately, she has
> been about holding her own against the other big names.
> She probably has the best nerves of the bunch.
>
> It would be interesting to see the lifetime scores between the 8
> Candidates, if one of you database jockeys wants to do the research.
>
| |
| Chess One 2005-10-15, 7:31 pm |
|
"Gunsberg" <gunsberg@kasparovchess.com> wrote in message
news:1129343628.865969.265000@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Well, it looks like I'm a pretty pathetic prognosticator:
Want company? I was worse.
quote:
> I had Leko and Polgar finishing =1st, at +3 Instead, Leko finishes in
> 5th, and Polgar last.
She is obviously not in good form, even after that interesting start. Having
a baby might have something to do with it. I also thought Leko would do
better.
Do you know Isador, if anyone, (Andras?) has analysed white/black results? I
expected strong results with black from both Leko and Svidler.
quote:
> I had Topalov in 3rd, at + 2. I predicted 5 wins for him...only a
> slight underestimation. However, I slated him for 3 losses.
Everything came right for him - its one thing having great potential,
another thing to actualise it against a 2700 field of players, and maintain
it. He got high marks for doing so from most GM commentators. The test for
chessic genius is not just brilliancies in games, but consistentcy too.
quote:
> Adams clear 4th, at +1 He lost 3 games, rather than 2. Alas, he was
> winless for the event.
Yes - very strange and somewhat anomalous - even if he achieved a low score
I would have thought it would have been comprised of 1's and 0's
quote:
> I DID have Svidler and Anand tied, but for =5th, finishing at even.
> Anand was beaten twice, but scored 5 wins. Svidler was more solid than
> expected.
>
> I pretty much nailed Kasimdhzanov, at -3, finishing in 7th. As it was,
> he finished =6th, with Adams.
Kasim seems to have justified his 2670 rating completely. I am sure this
match experience will further encourage his play and improve his rating to
the 2700 level.
quote:
> Finally, I had Morozevich collapsing, and finishing at -6. He finished
> even
He did collapse some, then got his 2nd wind, and came back. He actually
finished higher than I thought.
quote:
> My Polgar prediction was the cause of much of my other erroneous
> assumptions. Imagine if she had scored the 1.5/2 against Anand that I
> was banking on. As it was, she pulled the "Morozevich collapse".
Yes. She has a previous v. good score against Anand.
quote:
> On the other hand, who could have predicted that Leko would lose 4
> games?? The early losses which broke the spirit of Adams, Leko and
> Polgar really defined the event for them.
Yes. But of those players who were 'on' I feel great credit must go to Toppy
for properly taking advantage of the situation better than either Svidler or
Anand could.
For the first time in what seems like an age I do not feel embarrassed by
the current Fide world champion being the demonstrably strongest chess
player in the world who cared to compete. I was reflecting an hour ago that
if GK had taken part... : )
But I think Topalov would have won anyway! <-- Completely idle speculation
Cordially, Phil Innes
|
| |
|
|