Author: Charles Milton Ling
Date: 21:17:00 10/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 07, 2000 at 23:00:40, Albert Silver wrote: >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 Just a gut feeling. If Kramnik buckles under the pressure Kasparov will surely be able to apply on the board and off (he has experience in this respect), we will see a rout similar to what happened to Anand. If not, Kramnik - and this is my deeply considered - will win. This would be a completely new situation for Kasparov, and I doubt he will be able to cope with it. But the first case is far more probable. Still, Kramnik is one of the very few players in the world who is able to play GK as if he were just one of the other super-GMs, so we could perhaps (15 % would be my estimate) have a situation with one more World Champion. Charley
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.