2016 Candidates Moscow 10-29 March

[JustinHorton]

The computer seems to think that Karjakin would have drawn straightforwardly with 69...g5. Karjakin obviously doesn't want to play that move, and Gustafsson and Van Kampen were saying it would probably be a mistake when analysing similar positions about an hour ago...

[Mick Norris]

Caruana has a minute but only a move to play to get to the time control. Aronian is down to four minutes and presumably is on just that and increments, yes?

Thanks

[JustinHorton]

Caruana is now two pawns up against Svidler. The commentators are surprised Black's allowed this, though they think Svidler might be aiming for the trying-to-draw side of the Arkell Ending.

[JustinHorton]

I hope it doesn't go on this long tomorrow, I have a social engagement...

[JustinHorton]

Specifically, they were looking at 63. c5 Kb7 64. Rh6 and then Black sacrifices his bishop for the two pawns. But Caruana's not interested!

[Mick Norris]

Wowser. Well if them’s the rules, them’s the rules and it’s what should happen. In the interests of full disclosure I should also say, I’m quite happy for 'anything that doesn’t lead to Karjakin qualifying' to happen.

However, this is a pretty good example of why (some) folk believe that determining a qualifier by a single tournament is not satisfactory. As would be Caruana botching his chance against the several-country-miles-behind-everybody-else back marker while Karjakin took his having a decisive influence on first place.

Agree with that, but you need to come up with a better system to replace it

Them’s the rules but it’s not altogether cool bananas. Not quite in the same territory as determining world cup qualification based on who gives San Marino the biggest kicking, but it’s on the way.

Football has changed that rule, results against the last place team normally don't count now as a tiebreak

3 rounds of matches simply not a practical solution right now though. Perhaps they wouldn’t be desirable even if they were.

There isn't the money for it, or at least not for long enough matches - we don't want a repeat of Kazan's short match format (although it did give Boris a title shot he nearly took)

[JustinHorton]

I'm all in favour of these tournaments. Obviously I'd like 28 rounds but I'm not going to get that either....

[Mick Norris]

Caruana is now two pawns up against Svidler. The commentators are surprised Black's allowed this, though they think Svidler might be aiming for the trying-to-draw side of the Arkell Ending.

Peter probably reckons Fabiano isn't as good as Keith

[JustinHorton]

Actually, there's a tiebreak idea in there somewhere. Instead of playing against one another, players would have to hold various endings against a computer equipped with Nalimov...

[JustinHorton]

ARKELL ENDING KLAXON

[Mick Norris]

I hope it doesn't go on this long tomorrow, I have a social engagement...

Given round 14 starts in less than 18 hours, I did wonder if anyone was going to go for a draw and save their energy for 1 last push tomorrow

I'm hospital visiting tomorrow afternoon, so won't be watching the games

[Jonathan Bryant]

Wowser. Well if them’s the rules, them’s the rules and it’s what should happen. In the interests of full disclosure I should also say, I’m quite happy for 'anything that doesn’t lead to Karjakin qualifying' to happen.

However, this is a pretty good example of why (some) folk believe that determining a qualifier by a single tournament is not satisfactory. As would be Caruana botching his chance against the several-country-miles-behind-everybody-else back marker while Karjakin took his having a decisive influence on first place.

Agree with that, but you need to come up with a better system to replace it

Well, discounting results against the last place finisher might be a good start.


New in Chess are disputing the 'Anand could decide who wins the whole thing' thesis.

https://twitter.com/ChessVibes/status/7 ... 5798394881


Needless to say, regardless of who is right, it’s some way short of satisfactory that there can be any confusion at all. Perhaps it’s inevitable, though.

Any tie-break in a all-play-all is going to be absurd, in some sense, I suppose.

[Mick Norris]

New in Chess are disputing the 'Anand could decide who wins the whole thing' thesis

Results between the players involved in the tie seems clear to me you do a mini league for the 3 tied players, whereupon Caruana has +1, Vishy -1, and Kajakin in between

I don't think you eliminate Vishy, then say Karjakin & Caruana are still tied, then give it to Karjakin on more wins

[Mick Norris]

Any tie-break in a all-play-all is going to be absurd, in some sense, I suppose.

Short of a later match between 2 tied players, or another double round APA limited to those in the tie, then yes you are right

[Barry Sandercock]

Can Caruana win the Arkell ending ? I believe it should be drawn with best play ?