Chess World Championship

[David Ottosen]

In case anyone feels like a random gamble that I like.

On Pinnacle:

V.Topalov -0.5game +135
V.Kramnik +0.5game -145

I think Kramnik is excellent value here. His rating has gone down quite a bit in the past few years due to some health problems which appear to be resolved now (he's had some excellent recent results and his rating is recovering). Topalov is a very streaky player who has had up and down results since winning the FIDE world championship.

The "draw odds" from the 0.5 game are very large in this; Kramnik often goes many many games without a loss so a drawn match is a distinct possibility. As well, Kramnik has always done well against Kasparov, and Topalov has a very similar style to Kasparov in terms of aggression.

In the end, I'm going with Kramnik as Kramnik has always (since his mid teens) been considered a World Champion level talent. Topalov has always been considered a strong grandmaster but not necessarily an obvious future world champ.

[almostbusto]

i those are your thoughts then you kind of missed the boat. a few weeks ago that line was K -108 T -108 or there abouts. not to say its not a good bet now, if its +EV then its +EV, just thought i'd share the lines history.

i am starting to think topalov has value. but i am not as up on chess as i used to be.

[David Ottosen]

Was it really -108 with the +0.5game? I hadn't been following pinnacle lately.

[almostbusto]

[ QUOTE ]
Was it really -108 with the +0.5game? I hadn't been following pinnacle lately.

[/ QUOTE ]i can't remember the number exactly but i distinctly remember both sides being negative with kramnik having draw odds. so it had to be pretty close to it.

here is google cache from 9 days ago. http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:MXpK...lient=firefox-a

Kramnik was only -126 then so it supports my memory.

[vanwely]

Topalov isn't the most talented World Champ or the most exciting but the guy may be the most TENACIOUS. I see these tournament games he plays with the smallest of edges and he drags them out for a million moves still trying to break his opponent down. In a long match, to me, this is the worst kind of player you want to face.

[youtalkfunny]

If you know anything about the top players, isn't betting on this stuff almost impossible to lose? The ball doesn't take funny bounces in this game. I see nothing to randomize the outcome. Shouldn't the favorite win just about every single time?

[WaimanaloSlim]

They're humans, so they get tired and make the occasional mistake. I recently watched a documentary, Game Over, which was about the Kasparov-Deep Blue matches. It was an interesting case study in tilt.

In the match in which the computer first beats him, it makes a very un-computer-like move - Kasparov offers up a material sacrifice in exchange for positional advantages - a typical sucker play computers used to always fall for - and the computer actually turns it down.

Kasparov can't let this go, implies that the computer isn't playing on its own, and plays distracted for the rest of the competition and loses another game.

[checkmate36]

[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't the favorite win just about every single time?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have to agree. Since playing poker I have completely ignored chess. I would say take the higher rated player. The problem is I don't understand how its bet. What does the .05 mean??

[BobJoeJim]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Shouldn't the favorite win just about every single time?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would have to agree. Since playing poker I have completely ignored chess. I would say take the higher rated player. The problem is I don't understand how its bet. What does the .05 mean??

[/ QUOTE ]
+0.5 games, so if the match is a draw, he wins for betting purposes.

[checkmate36]

The outcome of the match should provide a winner and a loser. That is unless health reasons or some other act of God put a stop to the match.

If that is correct, how is betting on the higher rated not +EV??

(Thanks for the info. Stupid betting noob here [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img])