World Championship 2010

[Carl Hibbard]

It's clear that 12 games isn't sufficient to decide something this important!

[TomChivers]

We shouldn't despair too much. Kramnik and Anand were both worthy Champs, if he wins so will Topalov.

[Alex Holowczak]

It's clear that 12 games isn't sufficient to decide something this important!

With the rise of other super-GM tournaments though, including their own time-cluttering Grand Prix series, where do FIDE find the time to organise a 18-game match.

[Alan Walton]

There has been 4 decisive results, and a few of the draws have been very competitive with chances on both sides

Therefore 12 games seem to have been a fair representation, it is just unfortunate that it could finish 6-6

I agree with Alex, that FIDE struggled to get this match played, trying to make it 18/24 matches will be nearly impossible to organise

[Jonathan Bryant]

Not sure I agree. Topalov's specialty is vicious novelties, especially with white. Anand's black opening strategy is now clear to all (vary first, earlier rather than later); plus, it hasn't worked - two losses. Anand doesn't seem on form, Betfair now has Topalov as favourite. I wouldn't be surprised by a Topalov victory under 35 moves today.

I would - they're not playing til tomorrow!

[Jonathan Bryant]

It's clear that 12 games isn't sufficient to decide something this important!

With the rise of other super-GM tournaments though, including their own time-cluttering Grand Prix series, where do FIDE find the time to organise a 18-game match.

I'm not at all sure that that there are more top level tournaments now than in the past. And the Grand Prix is hardly more time consuming than the old system of zonals, interzonals and candidates matches. The problem is not time but money. No cash for longer matches unfortunately.

[LozCooper]

Not sure I agree. Topalov's specialty is vicious novelties, especially with white. Anand doesn't seem on form, Betfair now has Topalov as favourite. I wouldn't be surprised by a Topalov victory under 35 moves today.

"Anand's black opening strategy is now clear to all (vary first, earlier rather than later); plus, it hasn't worked - two losses."

He lost the first game mixing up his move order in a highly theoretical position and then blundered in an ending which was probably drawn. I think he can be happy with the positions he's got with black.

"Anand doesn't seem on form, Betfair now has Topalov as favourite."

I've actually been more impressed with Anand, although he failed to take his chances in game 9, that could be pressure as much as form. I think whichever player was white in the last game would be favourite and rightly so.

"I wouldn't be surprised by a Topalov victory under 35 moves today."

It'll be interesting to see Anand's choice of opening. Playing the Slav is likely to show he's happy to try and hold or the Grunfeld will keep all three results possible but with more risk and the possibility of being caught in some Topolov preparation.

[Joey Stewart]

Hopefully Topalov will play 1.e4 and surprise everybody - it would suit his style more too.

[TomChivers]

My hunch about the Grunfeld lines Anand's been playing is that they're very hard to prepare big surprises against - black has too many reasonable moves each turn - and this is why Anand chose them to play against Topalov.

[Jonathan Rogers]

No (to Joey), he has too little information on Anand's first line of defence to 1 e4. And he does have +2 with White, doing what he's been doing!

I'm not sure I agree with Lawrence about Anand choosing the Grunfeld to keep all three results open. Black rarely seems to win with this at the top level. Kasparov underperformed with it against Karpov, winning only one game when Karpov blundered in a much better position. Kamsky used it to great effect v Topalov but still we were talking about draws with no significant winning chances.

I think you have to go back to the days of smyslov to see Black playing the Grunfeld with genuine expectations of a win. It was the one opening Fischer did not try in 1972, even.

I would say that Anand should pick the grunfeld if he is happy that he can get a forcing line leading to a draw, and the Slav if he wants a game with a bit more over the board play in it.

[TomChivers]

I doubt we'll see 1.e4 either - too many drawing lines against it at elite level (Berlin, Marshall, Petroff).

[LozCooper]

No (to Joey), he has too little information on Anand's first line of defence to 1 e4. And he does have +2 with White, doing what he's been doing!

I'm not sure I agree with Lawrence about Anand choosing the Grunfeld to keep all three results open. Black rarely seems to win with this at the top level. Kasparov underperformed with it against Karpov, winning only one game when Karpov blundered in a much better position. Kamsky used it to great effect v Topalov but still we were talking about draws with no significant winning chances.

I think you have to go back to the days of smyslov to see Black playing the Grunfeld with genuine expectations of a win. It was the one opening Fischer did not try in 1972, even.

I would say that Anand should pick the grunfeld if he is happy that he can get a forcing line leading to a draw, and the Slav if he wants a game with a bit more over the board play in it.

Of course I agree that Anand will be happy as black to draw but bear in mind that black rarely wins with any opening at their level, especially in a match. Given tomorrow will be a very tense game Anand may prefer a Grunfeld to the lines of the Slav that have been seen. The Grunfeld positions have been more open which may suit Topolov but equally I'm sure Anand would like to have some chances himself rather than carefully defending knowing Topolov is risking nothing as in games 3, 5 and 8. Maybe he'll suprise us with something else but i doubt it.

[Joey Stewart]

I think Anand would try a sicillian against 1.e4. I think you lot just dont want to see it because you are all d4 players and dont want to see your favourite opening spurned for something a bit more lively and open ended.

[LozCooper]

I think Anand would try a sicillian against 1.e4. I think you lot just dont want to see it because you are all d4 players and dont want to see your favourite opening spurned for something a bit more lively and open ended.

I would love to see a battle in a sharp Sicilian with kings castled on opposite sides but I don't think it's likely to happen. What makes you think we are all d4 players? I think the difficulty in Topolov switching in game 12 is he has no idea what Anand will play and so he has to prepare for multiple openings. He has actually been relatively solid with white and I expect he'd be happy to play a position with some edge and no risk.

[Joey Stewart]

What makes you think we are all d4 players? I think the difficulty in Topolov switching in game 12 is he has no idea what Anand will play and so he has to prepare for multiple openings. He has actually been relatively solid with white and I expect he'd be happy to play a position with some edge and no risk.

Well cause d4 players are usually quick to rubbish any other opening, whereas an e4 player is more likely to see the merit in any system as he is going to have a more diverse repatoire.

I guess Topalov would have a bit more of a lottery in regards to Anands response, but at least he knows that he will not likely be facing any really heavily prepared lines so can try to make some magic of his own over the board.