Well , well....
Karjakin is back! The quiet power...
Even though Karjakin is fairly down my list of people I would like to see as a challenger his results speak for themselves.
Also, the venue/FIDE-stuff asides, I think this years candidates has been excellent and the quality of online coverage (non-official) has markedly improved compared to 2016!.
1.the move is Qxh2#
Go Mamedyarov! two rounds left!
I have calculated, and regularly updated the probabilities of each player to win candidates before each round. These are based on 100,000 simulations before round 13 - these include the tie-break scenarios.
Coverage is indeed very good, but analysis is almost nowhere to be seen... Live comments and press conferences are nice, don't misunderstand my point. I was just hoping for a more serious analytical approach to the games afterwards. Most reports (with a couple of exceptions that I won't advertise) are simply replays with a few words and the most obvious computer-based improvements.
Very few reporters now quote (or know) how many opportunities were missed by a given player during the tournament, how many half-points were "served on a plate" (not really, but not far from it) by an opponent, etc.
Also, I would expect to read somewhere that Kramnik has played his worst games against fellow Russians. Even if I don't think that there is a nation-based team spirit (Wesley So is openly joking about "team US"), the tournament format was supposed to prevent that, and on the contrary it made it possible !
I don't miss the laughable drama that sometimes plagues chess (Karpov-Korchnoi psychics, Topalov-Kramnik Toilet Gate), but bringing up some in-depth analyses and controversial issues is the journalists' job.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.