2013 Tata Steel Chess Tournament - Page 5 - Chess and Board Game Strategy

That includes 13 games vs the reigning WC, or ~32% of the games.

Do I think Magnus could play 41 games vs the Anands, Kramniks, Nakas, Caruanas of the world and only lose 3? Probably. Could he win 30 of 41 with 13 coming v Anand alone? Nope.

At least half this forum loves to say 'OMG players today are sooooo much better than 35 years ago LOL not even close WTF' and if that's the case, it would be infinitely *harder* to win 30 out of 41 with only 3 losses.

Last edited by NajdorfDefense; 02-18-2013 at 06:16 PM.

Quote

02-18-2013 , 07:17 PM

#102

leofric

grinder

Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 470

Quote:

Originally Posted by NajdorfDefense

I'm not hedging at all - you must have not read the very first sentence. I'll repaste it for you here:

That includes 13 games vs the reigning WC, or ~32% of the games.

Do I think Magnus could play 41 games vs the Anands, Kramniks, Nakas, Caruanas of the world and only lose 3? Probably. Could he win 30 of 41 with 13 coming v Anand alone? Nope.

At least half this forum loves to say 'OMG players today are sooooo much better than 35 years ago LOL not even close WTF' and if that's the case, it would be infinitely *harder* to win 30 out of 41 with only 3 losses.

Ok - put it another way - would you be willing to lay odd of 1000/1 that he wont?

Quote

02-18-2013 , 10:47 PM

#103

Do it Right

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 3,890

Quote:

Originally Posted by Army Eye

They are amazing numbers, but I would never characterize Carlsen's style as risky.

Hahah. Carlsen is almost certainly has the riskiest style of the top 10 by a fairly wide margin. He makes his style look fairly safe simply because he's so much better than the rest of the players right now. He voluntarily plays into completely unclear and sometimes even arguably inferior positions just to create winning chances. The reason his opponents aren't doing similar things isn't because they don't like winning but because they'd also end up posting a whole lot more 0s on the cross tables!

Quote

02-19-2013 , 01:16 AM

#104

Army Eye

veteran

Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 2,534

Quote:

Originally Posted by Do it Right

wat

Quote

02-23-2013 , 06:23 AM

#105

EGarrett

old hand

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,562

Quote:

Originally Posted by NajdorfDefense

I'm not hedging at all - you must have not read the very first sentence. I'll repaste it for you here:

I did read the very first sentence, and then I read the sentences that followed...which I will repaste for you.

"What odds would you put on Magnus doing it in March and vs Anand? He gets 14 games in March and then certainly more than 6 vs Vishy - I believe the match is set for 12 classical games.

What are the odds that he goes on a 20-0-0 run during those 26 games as a starting point for discussion? {obvs longer odds than if he ever does it}."

You requested odds on a 20-0 run that includes a World Championship match. Which Fischer never did.

Quote:

Do I think Magnus could play 41 games vs the Anands, Kramniks, Nakas, Caruanas of the world and only lose 3? Probably. Could he win 30 of 41 with 13 coming v Anand alone? Nope.

See what I posted previously about him reaching 2900 and how unlikely people were saying it was even 2 years ago, whereas now it's considered to be more likely than not.

Quote:

At least half this forum loves to say 'OMG players today are sooooo much better than 35 years ago LOL not even close WTF' and if that's the case, it would be infinitely *harder* to win 30 out of 41 with only 3 losses.

Only if Magnus is not also much better. That only matters if it's an older player in a hypothetical match against a newer one. Not players all of the same era, in which case relative increases in overall strength don't matter as much.