In your opinion, which is the best game of 2008 so far? My pick is Topalov – Kramnik at Corus. What is yours?
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
- About Us
- Chess Improvement
- Chess Puzzles
- Chess Research
- College Chess
- General News
- Home
- Major Tournaments
- News
- Polgar Events
- Privacy Policy
- Scholastic Chess
- SPICE / Webster
- Susan’s Personal Blog
- Track your order
- USA Chess
- Videos
- Women’s Chess
- Contact Us
- Daily News
- My Account
- Terms & Conditions
- Privacy Policy
Bu got checkmated in 1.
Topalov-Kramnik at Corus
topalov – kramnik game of the century
Susan, what do you think of 12.Nxf7 ?
…err, Nakamura
Er, Bob, a game played on October 19, 2007 can’t qualify as the best game of 2008. Sorry.
Quite surely this game was maybe entirly analyzed before by team Topalov. So it was maybe a really good new move at the end of the opening, but nothing more.
Overall I find it strikingly disappointing that this game is found to be a great game.
Played only 5 days after Fischer’s death, it is just a prove to Fischer’s judgement about today chess and it’s opening preparation: There is no creativeness on the board: Topalov only played this move because of the assurance from the previous analysis, not because of imagination or feeling or creativity or prue daring.
The only really critizised move made by Kramnik was Qxd4, instead of the rook move. Should public available analysis show that the rook move is losing either, then that’s just a sign that this opening move Nxf7 was fully and out analysed.
Greetings
My verdict on Topalov-Kramnik awaits more analysis of the sac. After all, Timman couldn’t find anything convincing against Ljubo and lost after the improvement suggested by Topalov.
well certainly topalov’s queen sack was something creative… tinman played poorly, i bet ljubo wouldn’t have survived against topalov.
So far, Topalov – Kramnik, by a long shot.
I don’t think that highly of the game Topalov-Kramnik at all. First of all the move 12. Nxf7 isnt really a novelty. IM Manuel (the guys that beat Kasparov with black in a 1999 Hoogovenst blitz game)Bosboom for instance has played it many times before in rapid games. Secondly, as Topalov mentioned the variation was analyzed to the bone for years, so little over the board achievements there. And third Kramnik didn’t defend very well.
If you ask me if it’s a good game by Topalov? Then yes of course a good game but nothing more than that.
No real novelty even if it is one on top level,no creativity, no really amazing over the board ideas no art just the product of 3 yrs computeraided craftsmanship. and on top of that “bad” defense.
In no way this game can be compared to truely immortals like Kasparov’s win over Topalov in Hoogovens 1999 where his rook sacrifice was found over the board and took a real amount of guts creativity and brilliancy.
some guys are really funny …
do you really think GMs (only) rely on ideas they have while playing?? all of them do home preparation! – so what’s the point of criticizing topalov because he does more at home than others?!
does a great game have to show a novelty in opening theory? did topalov ever claim to have played a novelty? – no.
btw, we don’t know exactly where his preparation ended. but there were a lot of moves topalov played “on his own” – including the queen sac.
Of course every grandmaster relies heavilly on opening preparation. However that doesnt mean that for me a brilliancy found behind the board is much more impressive than the fruit of years of computer aided craftsmanship.
I am by no means saying Topalove played a bad game here. It’s a great one. Nonetheless,I’ll never list this in one of my personal favourites, since most of the work was done away from the board. When Topalov was out of his opening preparation he was already winning. The way he chose to win from there, was just one of many.
Personally i think Topalov has played much better games and been much more creative than he has been showing in the last corus tournament.
I really hope he gets back into shape because i do love his playing style. But as his definate sub par result in Corus shows, he’s been far from top shape lately.
Kramnik-Carlsen
I would say Anand-Topalov, Wijk aan Zee, 2008
Topalov – Kramnik
I think those who are whining miss the important issue. It was still a brilliant game, whether or not it was already precomputer analysed.
How many grandmasters come out and truthfully tell us the chess fan/novices that the move they made was already preanalysed by fritz or shredder. Some Chess players may rely only on thier creativity and others rely on hard work via computer analysis both deserve our respect and not condemnation.
Please Topalov – Kramnik is still the best game of 2008.
Should Topalov not be rewarded for years of painstaking research with the computer please we now live in the computer age. The reason chess is getting more popular is because of the availability of online chess communities which would not be possible without the use of computers.
Topalov-Kramnik Corus 2008 is the best!!!
If you dont think so, then name another game.
Isn’t it simply too early in 2008 to announce such a price ????????
Although only 2300+, my goal in every game is to stay in my preparation as deeply into the game as I can, and learn by rote memorization basic endgames. In fact, the perfect game for me would be when my theory in the opening meets theory in the endgame and it is all pregame preparation. That is chess in the year 2008. That is why the fact that topalov’s 12.Nf7 was thoroughly analyzed away from the board makes me value the game more highly than if he figured it all out over the board. Any game in which I have to make more than 10 independent moves, I figure, could have been better prepared.
I have two points to make.
1) Three years ago (in 2005) chess engines were NOT as strong as today.
The whole myth about heavy computer analyses was born in somebody’s imagination.
And Topalov didn’t say he used computers in the analyses.
Is it so difficult to understand that a lot of hard work was the only way?
2) Some stubborn people will keep insisting that powerful computers were used.
My next question is only to them.
Let’s say you visit a new town and see a beautiful building or bridge.
Will your reaction be?
“No, that’s not beautiful. The designer used a lot of computers to do it.”
it’s obvious why so many play down this game and look for something to criticize … it’s the “wrong” guy who played and moreover won it.
just imagine (it’s quite hard, i know) kramnik would win a game that way and how the same people would react then …
Yes.
Topalov Kramnik.
Many are analysing with computers help, not everyone is finding sth.
Rgds
Pony
i havent seen any yet, what abhout topalov 2nd with the chinese gy, was that las t years??
jb.
who won by the way??
Many brilliancies before the computer pre area were concocted away from the board. Think about Ng5 sac unleashed by Karpov against Kortchnoi.
Does anybody think Rybka is stronger than a team of analyst led by Tal, Geller & co?