Karjakin-Kramnik, Berlin Candidates 2018 Round 9 Recap with Peter Svidler

GM Peter Svidler analyses the game between Sergey Karjakin and Vladimir Kramnik from Round 9 of the 2018 Candidates Tournament in Berlin. Replay on an interactive board: chess24.com/en/watch/live-tou...
♜ Visit our deals page for daily deals! events.chess24.com/deals/
♜ Become a Premium member and improve your chess with hundreds of video series, advanced analysis tools and many other features : bit.ly/3fFiKRm
► Watch live and on-demand shows: chess24.com/en/live/video/
► Follow top tournaments with our state-of-the-art broadcast system: chess24.com/en/watch/live-tou...
► Play chess in our playzone: chess24.com/en/play/chess
► Improve your chess by learning from grandmasters in interactive videos: chess24.com/en/learn/videoseries
Let’s stay in touch!
► Subscribe to our channel: kzbin.info...
► Like us on Facebook: / c24live
► Follow us on Twitter: / chess24com
chess24 is a chess website for players of all levels. Play against friends, learn the secrets of top grandmasters in video lessons and watch the best chess tournaments live with our state-of-the-art broadcast system. We'll also keep you informed about everything going on in the chess world and much, much more. Come visit us at chess24.com !

[@mattiassollerman]

Peter, blink twice if you're being held hostage.

[@rtt1961]

Hostage to chess.

[@leluminent]

Thank you Peter for all the good work, you are for me the best commentator chess has ever known.

[@gerhardmehler4202]

That seems so. Excellent.

[@artemmsk701]

What a time to be alive!..This quality of review by one of the best chess commentators straight after the game and absolutely for free..Thank you Peter! This is gold!

[@zifircin1797]

These variations with the rooks and bishops flying around, pins everywhere, wow

[@yamok77]

Your analisys are superb, theses games are unbeleivable. Nice to have a super GM to comment and analyse :) thanks

[@bdydavi2644]

Mr. Svidler you do the best analysis. Thank you for this.

[@michaeloberly6129]

Great stuff, as always, Peter.

[@jimkyle8008]

The only trouble with Svidler's annotations is that he calculates so rapidly at times that it's difficult for ordinary players to follow.

[@stanleytime9193]

Slow it down then

[@johnsknows3135]

Great game, great analysis.

[@arnieus866]

Fantastic anlysis once again. When I was learning chess, games of this level were only available months later in a magazine with analysis limited by print space. I would spend hours trying to understand what Peter conveys in 30 minutes. Peter's gigahertz mind is a challenge to stay with however so I do like that PAUSE button. Takes more like an hour to watch.

Wow! Fantastic analysis!

[@mrakoplascz1729]

23:49 Sergey on the press conference said that he saw this line, but didn't want to complicate things

[@61rmd1]

Sometimes, I compare the difficulties of the games among different ages: nowadays, the play has become much harder than before

[@dhruvit2408]

I just watch this for Peter.. he's a great guy. He can beat the scrap out of any of these candidates. Don't know why he's not playing much..

[@stanleytime9193]

No he can't lol. He could compete here sure, but he wouldn't win

[@pukulu]

Kramnik has always been at his best in technical positions with only very clear tactics. He is not bad in wild positions but it takes too much energy to play that kind of chess in one crucial game after another. Kramnik also is older than all of the other players in the candidates. Resiliency is typically reduced as a player ages.

[@kiitoob]

?after be2 pinning the rook, what about rh3 complications

[@jamjest44i44]

jesus Peter, your collar!

[@boriserjavec6470]

don't take the Lord's name in vain sinner, repent!

[@heavyonthemustardplz]

Why is Rxb5 not an option for white at 7:20?

[@RickyLandazuri]

Ba6

[@edlena1223]

We can't blame the mere human Caruana for missing a win after 7 grueling hours.

[@LLorfa]

KRAMNIK, Y U NO WINNING CANDIDATES

[@perkoperkov5477]

Why Kramnik resign, he was better.

[@Ohmstrasse72]

He was much better but just one little tempi, a little bit not in time

[@strong8705]

Finally synchronization with the other top YT chess channel - PowerplayChess picked another game. It is a pity that you guys usually do the same thing with both excellent talents. Seriously, both of you should announce somewhere which game you plan to cover, and duplicating of resources will be avoided.

[@jonfeltman2314]

GO FABI

[@bentopalchemistfranklin7797]

Why are you and Jan analyzing the same game for the same network??... Pick some different games... Toss a coin if you can't decide who gets what game

[@anotherdimension7608]

Jan is analysing for german audience and in german, genius

[@bentopalchemistfranklin7797]

An intelligent person would realize that a mistake is possible even in regards to a genius... A simple mind hurls insults without a care in the world... Yes... I overlooked the fact that Jan's analysis is in German... Thanks for pointing out my mistake bud, and I own it... Maybe next time you could do it without throwing an insult in there like one of those simple minds I'm referring to??..... or maybe you can't

[@anotherdimension7608]

I will do that when you start using your own logic, unless you're speaking of yourself

[@anotherdimension7608]

" A simple mind hurls insults without a care in the world..." Sean Woody

[@bentopalchemistfranklin7797]

Sorry , but you don't get to condemn the reaction to your initiation of insulting rhetoric... You start shit, I'll strike back... I'm not a pacifist in regards to violence or rhetoric Have a good one bud...

[@Pipiopy]

hmmmm :/

[@JohnSmithEx]

If I ever met Peter, I would ask him what he means with the word "objectively". He is using this word a lot in all of his commentaries about chess positions. My guess is that he uses the word with either of the two meanings below: 1) Objectively: according to machine evaluation. Specifically according to Stockfish, running on a strong PC. 2) Objectively: mathematically, aka according to endgame tablebases (imaginary tablebases to include even middle game positions). There are obvious problems with both definitions. For example the first definition implies that objective play will most of the times lead to defeat, when playing against AlphaZero!

[@davidcapps5536]

I've noticed that too, it's a good question. Maybe he means to contrast 'objective' play with what can reasonably be found over the board, given time pressure, lack of computer assistance and so on. Sometimes I think he means the move that wins most quickly, i.e. many practical moves may win by first clarifying the position to some familiar winning endgame without being the most direct win.

[@JohnSmithEx]

As far as I understand the opposite of "objective" is "subjective". But have you ever heard Peter talking about "the subjective evaluation" of a position? Me not. Although he could use this phrase to describe Kramnik's evaluation of various positions, at the press conference after round 7 with Ding LIren. :-) Here are the general definitions of these words at dictionary.cambridge.org (out of chess context). Objective: based on real facts and not influenced by personal beliefs or feelings. Subjective: influenced by or based on personal beliefs or feelings, rather than based on facts.

[@Pikachoo197]

first?

[@slowpoke126]

No?