03 Oct 07
Originally posted by wormwoodI don't believe I've twisted any facts. I don't agree that there were parallel WC titles after 1993; there was a legitimate title held by Kasparov and later Kramnik and a bogus FIDE title held by other, weaker players. Until someone defeats Kramnik in a match, I don't think anyone else deserves to be called World Champion.
because like I said, the situation wasn't as clear as you're trying to force it to be. you can't force reality into your naive fantasy of 'traditional WC true, FIDE WC false'. you're trying to cut an unsortable knot open with a sword, and instead of ending up with two neat intact pieces of the rope, you're ending up with a pile of useless bits and pieces.
...[text shortened]... arallel WC titles, which were unified when kramnik won topalov in the WC match.
If you have time, look over the blog discussion which I gave a link to; it's quite good on both sides (apparently a surprising - to Korch and Mephisto2 - number of people agree with me).
03 Oct 07
Originally posted by no1marauderOh please dont cry and better answer to statement which you did ignore:
You deliberately twist what I say and then complain about my "morality"?????? That's takes a lot of gall, but it's what I would expect from an egotistical, dishonest blowhard like yourself.
"You did misunderstand again - if these 2 stronger players play in tournament they will be able to create higher quality games, because they wont make so many silly mistakes as in match."
03 Oct 07
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderYou and Korch are both either afraid to or incapable of making any arguments. You're both just "holding your breath till you turn blue". Grow up; the purpose of this, or any, forum is discussion.
You and Korch are both either afraid to or incapable of making any arguments. You're both just "holding your breath till you turn blue". Grow up; the purpose of this, or any, forum is discussion.
So answer the question, so I can understand what you mean when you say that Anand being World Champion is a "reality". Is it a reality in the same way as the others I mentioned were World Champions? Or some other way?
Your immature convulsions wont make your claims more believable 😉
So answer the question, so I can understand what you mean when you say that Anand being World Champion is a "reality". Is it a reality in the same way as the others I mentioned were World Champions? Or some other way?
Its reality accepted by majority, except some sickly fanats of Kramnik like you. I like Kramnik too, but I`m not so fanatic.
03 Oct 07
Originally posted by KorchI say that you are wrong.
Oh please dont cry and better answer to statement which you did ignore:
"You did misunderstand again - if these 2 stronger players play in tournament they will be able to create higher quality games, because they wont make so many silly mistakes as in match."
The strongest players have months of preparation to hone their games against the specific styles of their opponents. That produces stronger, more focused chess than preparing for just another strong tournament (as stated previously, there were several in 2007 with fields as strong, or even stronger, than Mexico City).
Everybody remembers the few blunders in World Championship matches. Why? Because they are unexpected and rare by these great players. But people like you forget the great innovations made in these matches. Too bad for you.
03 Oct 07
2 edits
Originally posted by KorchAre you ever going to present an argument backed by ANY facts? And talk about immature - I've never seen someone so in love with idiotic smileys.
Your immature convulsions wont make your claims more believable 😉
EDIT: I'm not even that much of a fan of Kramnik - I've already said I find Anand's style more interesting and exciting (though of them all in Mexico, I like Gelfand best and use some of his Sicilian Najdorf lines). I assume you couldn't be bothered to go to the link I gave, but the debate there was quite lively with about equal numbers of each side. So keep pretending almost everybody agrees with you if it makes you feel better; it isn't true.
03 Oct 07
Originally posted by no1marauderShow me some blunders in Mexico - like weak moves in 2nd game of Kramnik-Topalov match.
I say that you are wrong.
The strongest players have months of preparation to hone their games against the specific styles of their opponents. That produces stronger, more focused chess than preparing for just another strong tournament (as stated previously, there were several in 2007 with fields as strong, or even stronger, than Mexico Cit ...[text shortened]... layers. But people like you forget the great innovations made in these matches. Too bad for you.
03 Oct 07
Originally posted by Red NightWho are 'the three of you'? As far as I can count, there are more than three people that posted several times in this thread. Are you planning to give an on-topic comment as well, or would that spoil the drama? So, here goes: is Anand WC at the moment?
Watching the three of you go at it in this thread blurs the lines between comedy and tragedy.
03 Oct 07
Originally posted by KorchGee, why don't you play Topalov and/or Kramnik and we'd get to see all these blunders they make.
Show me some blunders in Mexico - like weak moves in 2nd game of Kramnik-Topalov match.
I haven't looked at all the games in Mexico City by the weaker players and have no desire to. Many of the "mistakes" in Game 2 were in critical time pressure. It's easy for any 12 year old (which you act like) with a Fritz to say "OHHHHH!!! Kramnik blundered!" when he punches the position into his engine; but quite another to find the right move in difficult positions against one of the best players in the world.
03 Oct 07
Originally posted by Mephisto2Actually I`m just laughing about no1marauder now 😉
Who are 'the three of you'? As far as I can count, there are more than three people that posted several times in this thread. Are you planning to give an on-topic comment as well, or would that spoil the drama? So, here goes: is Anand WC at the moment?
03 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderSo you cant find so weak games in Mexico.
Gee, why don't you play Topalov and/or Kramnik and we'd get to see all these blunders they make.
I haven't looked at all the games in Mexico City by the weaker players and have no desire to. Many of the "mistakes" in Game 2 were in critical time pressure. It's easy for any 12 year old (which you act like) with a Fritz to say "OHHHHH!!! Kra find the right move in difficult positions against one of the best players in the world.
Your arrogant attitude to so called "weaker players" are really funny - your chess skills are miserable to compare with their skills, so you can learn from each their game.
03 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Korch"Weaker" compared to the Kramnik and Anand. You've already tried this dishonest game before; when will you stop?
So you cant find so weak games in Mexico.
Your arrogant attitude to so called "weaker players" are really funny - your chess skills are miserable to compare with their skills, so you can learn from each their game.
No s**t I could learn from their games, as could you (or don't you think so?). I could learn from every Grandmaster game played last year and the year before, etc. etc. etc. So could you. But I don't have time to parse through every Grandmaster game; do you?
On the other hand, I, like many players, did study all the games played in the Kramnik-Topalov match. Why? Because it was a World Championship match. The games at Mexico City will be forgotten when people are still studying the WC games.