Norwegian Wins World Chess Championship

Magnus Carlsen, 22, dethrones Viswanathan Anand

  • Share
  • Read Later
Babu / Reuters

Norway's Magnus Carlsen reacts during a news conference after clinching the FIDE World Chess Championship in the southern Indian city of Chennai November 22, 2013.

Magnus Carlsen defeated Viswanathan Anand on Friday to become the new world chess champion.

(TIME100The World’s Sexiest Chess Player)

Over the course of ten games, Carlsen, a 22-year-old chess prodigy from Norway, won three times and drew seven, BBC reports. The final game — which lasted a grueling four hours and 45 minutes — ended in a draw between Anand, who has held the title since 2007, and Carlsen. But overall, the young player had earned enough points throughout the championship to snag the title.

(PHOTOSThe Superstar and the Sex Symbol: The World’s Highest Ranking Chess Champions)

The world championship is a 12-game tournament held over 20 days, and the first player to reach 6.5 points wins the series. For Anand, this is the first time he has failed to win a single game in a world championship. This year’s championship was held in Chennai, India and began on Nov. 9.  In a news conference immediately following his victory, Carlsen was asked how he enjoyed playing in Anand’s hometown. “It’s just been beyond my expectations and anything I’ve experienced anywhere else,” he said.

[BBC]

MOREChessmen: The Sport’s First Superstar Vs. Its First Sex Symbol
4 comments
chessContact
chessContact

Hey, let's be perfectly clear about what the new king actually did in this match: 

In plain tennis terms (it's easier to grasp the essence) he NEVER hit a WINNER, and with three UNFORCED ERRORS made by the old guy, plus a series of boring, utterly, utterly boring draws he took the title. We must, or at least try to, look at things from the right perspective... Remember the Grand, Grandissimo Master Mikhail TAL (with capitals, of course)? If you are not old enough like me, then you may have not been aware of what true, I mean true chess used to be. To find out, you might want to read this on my chess blog   http://wp.me/p2z5ix-2UU

Compare and contrast and you'll see what I mean. And then make conclusions on your own...

OlaOlsen
OlaOlsen

Woooooot! 

New world champion in chess, Magnus the magnificent!

Smart is the new sexy!



Damián
Damián

@chessContact it's pretty typical by people like yourself to call Magnus untrue to chess. But let's consider some things right now. Carlsen has the world's top international FIDE rating of all time (he did that by beating all the other greatest players in the world). Now-a-days all great players train with Houdini, Stockfish and software of the like. If you even analyze Tal's games with chess engines you'll notice several flaws while Magnus and most players at this level play at this hardcore level in an eeriee balanced analysis by the these top chess engines. Now, only two of Anand's mistakes were costly, the others were pretty hard to exploit and Anand himself said that his mistakes didn't come by themselves.


It's noticeable that you don't have competitive chess experience to even begin to understand that Tartakower quote that says "The winner of the game is the player who makes the next-to-last mistake." You could say the same sh*t you're saying about Carsen to Fischer as Spassky was also behaving as an already beaten giant against him in the world's 1972 championship (which also had some boring draws as EVERY chess championship.) To remain at the top you need a lot more than good attacking creativity as Tal's reign only lasted one year. If you see Carlsen's games against 2,600 rated players you'll see these kind of games too. It's just stupid to compare this to a world championship where a lot more prudence is expected.


"True chess" isn't about playing wild tactics or being creative. As Fischer would say, they just come when the position is superior. Chess theory has advanced a lot in the last 20 years and you need some really deep knowledge of openings at this level to know when you can avoid a draw. Anand played extremely conservative in the first few games as he did also (like in game 10) letting go some promising fighting chances like in the controversial queen exchange in game 2. Even more, Carlsen is one of the few players who will play for a win even if he doesn't need to as he demonstrated in the Sinquefield Cup earlier in this year.


And if you want to see crazy attacking games just go see the Morphy games, where chess was even a lot less understood and more "romantic". You need to understand that today's top level players just don't fall for this kind of play. And certainly you don't know Morozevich, which is one of the few today's top grandmasters who play wildly and has so little successes against top players in long games. That has a reason, don't you think?