2026 chess season tracker

[rangeelaraja]

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

 

I don't agree here. They were 80-90% as good as Aussies, but with two exceptions who swung the edge in favor of Aussies drastically. Warne and Gilchrist, they often would be the difference between the 2 sides. Warne vs Boje/Adams/Symcox, Gilchrist vs Richardson/Boucher. Huge difference in ability/mindset there, and if you notice their rivalry back then, these two Aussies were often the difference. Gilchrist in a series in RSA in 99 or 00, the way he used to kill them coming at 5 down. Warne throughout his career, Saffers had no answer. India fared much better because of the way we used to handle Warne. 

 

In ODIs, there is also the choking factor, which continues to this day. Maybe things would have been different if Cronje had remained honest, who knows? 

 

South Africa were a much stronger team in the 90s man for man - they had the best W/L record. 2-3 World class allrounders and peak Allan Donald, along with a very long batting line up.

 

They had huge mental issues against Aus. They were not 80 % - 90 % as good as Aussies -they were better than Aussies.

 

Yes, Warne was the difference - but that does not make Aus of the 90s a better than than South Africa.

 

If we extrapolate your logic - India was a better than Aus in the 90s in ODIs because of Tendulkar ( just like you are saying Aus was better than SA due to warn )

 

Just like Warne gave Aus the edge and dominated SA ( a better team than Aus ) ...likewise...

Tendulkar in 96-98 gave India the edge and dominated Australia ( a better than India ).

[Gollum]

13 minutes ago, rangeelaraja said:

Anand won the candidates in 2014 after losing to Carlsen in 2013, only to lose to him again in a one-sided match in 2014.

He had chances in 2014, game 6 will haunt Anand fans forever, that was the chance to take the lead, and he missed a knight move. 

13 minutes ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

He had won the candidates in 2014 with a +1 in a very strong pool that included - Kramnik, Topalov ( both siginificantly younger than him ) and also Levon Aronian.

+3. And he drew from winning positions a couple of time, one I remember well against Andrekein. 

[rangeelaraja]

4 minutes ago, Gollum said:

He had chances in 2014, game 6 will haunt Anand fans forever, that was the chance to take the lead, and he missed a knight move. 

+3. And he drew from winning positions a couple of time, one I remember well against Andrekein. 

 

 

What i meant was +1 in the leaderboard.  He won with 8.5, no.2 was 7.5.

[Gollum]

4 minutes ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

South Africa were a much stronger team in the 90s man for man - they had the best W/L record. 2-3 World class allrounders and peak Allan Donald, along with a very long batting line up.

 

They had huge mental issues against Aus. They were not 80 % - 90 % as good as Aussies -they were better than Aussies.

 

Yes, Warne was the difference - but that does not make Aus of the 90s a better than than South Africa.

 

If we extrapolate your logic - India was a better than Aus in the 90s in ODIs because of Tendulkar ( just like you are saying Aus was better than SA due to warn )

 

Just like Warne gave Aus the edge and dominated SA ( a better team than Aus ) ...likewise...

Tendulkar in 96-98 gave India the edge and dominated Australia ( a better than India ).

I don't agree. Overall W/L anyway doesn't mean much because Aus often experimented in bilaterals. They were probably the only side who used to use bilaterals even in 90s and 00s to build their bench strength. Anyway I was talking about test cricket, in ODIs RSA anyway had choking problem, futile to discuss them. 

 

Not just Warne, Gilchrist....Aussies had Waugh bros, McGrath, Bevan and rising talent like Ponting. very strong bench with guys like Symonds, Hayden, Hussey unable to break in. 

 

Your India example is wrong. We had Sachin, then Ganguly, Kumble, Srinath and rest were duds/fixers. Aus had a very strong group of players. I remember a VB tri-series that time where Aus fielded 2 teams and final was contested between Aus and Aus-A. 

[Gollum]

Why aren't we discussing the women's event?

 

Both Divya and Vaishali have chances to win the whole thing. Pity Humpy isn't playing. 

[rangeelaraja]

2 minutes ago, Gollum said:

I don't agree. Overall W/L anyway doesn't mean much because Aus often experimented in bilaterals. They were probably the only side who used to use bilaterals even in 90s and 00s to build their bench strength. Anyway I was talking about test cricket, in ODIs RSA anyway had choking problem, futile to discuss them. 

 

Not just Warne, Gilchrist....Aussies had Waugh bros, McGrath, Bevan and rising talent like Ponting. very strong bench with guys like Symonds, Hayden, Hussey unable to break in. 

 

Your India example is wrong. We had Sachin, then Ganguly, Kumble, Srinath and rest were duds/fixers. Aus had a very strong group of players. I remember a VB tri-series that time where Aus fielded 2 teams and final was contested between Aus and Aus-A. 

 

 

During the peak of their rivalry in the mid-to-late 90s, South Africa's numbers significantly outpaced Australia's. 

 

Win-Loss Ratio: Between 1995 and 1999, South Africa had a win-loss ratio of 3.56, winning 82 games and losing only 23.

 

Australian Comparison: In the same period, Australia’s win-loss ratio was 1.36 (68 wins, 50 losses).

 

This difference is too big to call it not meaningful. SA winning record from mid to late 90s was more than 2.5x Aus

 

They had peak Klusener, Pollock and Kallis.

[Gollum]

15 minutes ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

 

During the peak of their rivalry in the mid-to-late 90s, South Africa's numbers significantly outpaced Australia's. 

 

Win-Loss Ratio: Between 1995 and 1999, South Africa had a win-loss ratio of 3.56, winning 82 games and losing only 23.

 

Australian Comparison: In the same period, Australia’s win-loss ratio was 1.36 (68 wins, 50 losses).

 

This difference is too big to call it not meaningful. SA winning record from mid to late 90s was more than 2.5x Aus

 

They had peak Klusener, Pollock and Kallis.

I was talking mainly about test cricket. Rivalry exists in that format for a purist, not white ball. 

 

RSA was a beast unit in ODIs in 90s (still are if you look at the stats). Fair point. But to me, Aus was a side which reserved its best only in big events. The ODIs they played against us for instance, I remember meme bowlers like Adam Dale and Reiffel sharing the new ball...later some guy called Brad Williams. The Sharjah tournament (desert storm), ODI series in 98 India, tri series with Ind/Zim, 98 mini WC, McGrath was rested, and that guy was their biggest weapon against us. 

Edited April 8 by Gollum

[Gollum]

Sindarov after a winning position from opening, now looks like draw. 

[randomGuy]

9 hours ago, Gollum said:

Sindarov after a winning position from opening, now looks like draw. 

Anish 5.5/9 having a very good candidates also. 1.5 points behind the leader with 5 games to go.

[Gollum]

Watch out for the women's section. Vaishali is the lowest ranked player there, in poor form coming to this event, but in the lead. Fingers crossed. 

 

Divya unfortunately collapsed in the last 2 rounds, she too was on fire before that. 

 

 

[Gollum]

Humpy should have played here, unnecessarily pulled out because Cyprus was never going to be in the line of fire. Candidates qualification is tough as it is, and this would have been possibly her last chance, she is already 39 and not as active as before. Big miss. 

[Mariyam]

Sant Kabir had predicted the outcome of this candidates tournament all those centuries ago.

 

Javokhir rakhein sainyaan,

maar Sakhe na koi.

Baal na baanka kar sakhe,

Jo jag bairi Hoi.

Edited April 13 by Mariyam

[Gollum]

Vaishali on the cusp of creating history. Winning vs Lagno. 

[Gollum]

Vaishali, lowest rated player in candidates wins the damn thing.

 

Both WCC matches will feature Indians, Gukesh to defend, Vaishali to challenge 5x world champ from China, Ju Wenjun. Both our players are also younger than their opponents. 

 

India could have double world champs (and double Olympiad gold) by the end of the year @deathmonger @Lone Wolf @putrevus @velu @MechEng @BacktoCricaddict and other chess fans @randomGuy @New guy @rangeelaraja @Mariyam @vvvslaxman.This last happened in 80s when Kasparov and Maia Chiburdanidze from USSR held the crowns. But Maia was and is a proud Georgian (even Nona before her, Georgians used to absolutely dominate Soviet chess), 2 Russian world champs at the same time, happened in 50s. No other country has ever come close to such a feat. 

 

Who thought Vaishali would be the first in her family to get a shot at the world championship title !!! The parents are so blessed. 

 

Edited April 15 by Gollum

[Gollum]

 

[Gollum]

Vaishali will have a killer team of seconds. 

 

Harikrishna used to second Ju Wenjun in the past, interesting to see if he will sit this one out. 

 

 

Edited April 15 by Gollum

[velu]

7 minutes ago, Gollum said:

 

 

genes/genetics @New guy

[Vickydev]

Top campaign from Vaishali, great comeback

[Gollum]

1 minute ago, Vickydev said:

Top campaign from Vaishali, great comeback

You also follow chess? Nice. 

Edited April 15 by Gollum

[Gollum]

Bibisara finished 2nd, she is Sindarov's GF. Uzbeks and Kazakhs on SM had been getting very irritating the last few days, lot of anti-India posts, full of hate/venom/racism. Thank you Vaishali for doing what you did. Last few months has been quite tough to follow Indian chess, she has healed many of those wounds with this miraculous achievement. Stacked field, and all her non-Indian opponents were rated 40-110 points above her, Divya also some 25 pts ahead of her. 

 

But one thing many failed to notice is Vaishali wins many games against 2600+ opponents in classical, her ceiling is very high which isn't captured by her rating. She had consistency issues the last year or so but David Howell frequently brought up the number of times she had beaten strong GMs in the past, where  other higher rated women fall short.