Author: Albert Silver
Date: 20:00:40 10/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 07, 2000 at 16:04:48, Daniel Chancey wrote:
>GM Ron Henley, President - SmartChess.com
>Kasparov by +2
>"Kramnik is a talented young strategical player who has yet to prove himself in
>match play. However, Garry is an experienced match player who rises to meet each
>challenge. One on one match play is largely about opening preparation and
>inflicting your will on the opponent. In neither of these areas has Garry yet
>met his match in human form!"
>
>GM Ilya Gurevich
>Kasparov by +3
>"Kramnik doesn't do well in matches"
>
>IM Irina Krush
>Kasparov by +2
>"Kramnik has been playing well this year, but Kasparov is stronger"
>
>Paul Hodges, CEO - SmartChess.com
>Kasparov by +3
>"Kramnik may be stronger than when he lost the qualification match to Shirov,
>but Garry is still Garry"
>
>NM David Koval, Asst. Editor - SmartChess Online
>Kasparov by +3
>"Kramnik didn't beat Shirov, so I don't expect him to beat Kasparov"
>
>What is your vote?
>
>Castle2000
>
>P.S. I apologize for posting this, which is off-topic (does little or nothing
>to do with computer chess).
Not quite. As far as chess is concerned, it is by far the biggest event in
years, and is thus bound to have reverberations in anything related to chess. As
for computers, I'll be ready tomorrow with my CA and the trusty databases, plus
my friendly Tiger, and Century to help me understand what the heck Kasparov (or
Kramnik) had in mind with that last move. Isn't that why all this great software
was conceived in the first place? :-)
As for my prediction, well, anything can happen of course, and if we see a
Kasparov as the one that showed up for his Seville match versus Karpov, he may
very well lose, but I'd be surprised. Kasparov knows he is already in the
history books, and I'm sure he is savouring every minute of it. plus, contrary
to the great World Champions of the past, Kasparov did NOT slacken off afetr
becoming Champion. Sure, neither did Karpov, but Karpov was in a uniquely
different position: when players reached the title, they had proved all that
needed proving. With Karpov, it was the opposite (poor guy - scarred for life it
seems). I'd have given Shirov, whose lifetime score with Kasparov is MANY times
worst than Kramnik, a much better chance. Why? Because contrary to Kramnik, when
it came time to rise to the occasion, Shirov rose and Kramnik didn't. The
matches (results and games) speak for themselves. Still, Kramnik should put in a
little scare so I predict +2.
Albert
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.