Who do you want to win and why?
And also Taplovs been here longer, beat the best there is too offer, and won many more tournaments (I think. I may be wrong). So due to this I believe he deserves the title more.
So your basing your opinion on unsubstantiated facts you invented YOURSELF? Hmm.
Anand has been around for a long time. He became a Grandmaster at the age of 18 way back in 1988!!(4 years before Topalov became a GM)
So he has proven himself plenty.
I want Topalov(not Taplov) to win also.
I'm not sure who "deserves" to win more, but I do know that this is going to be one hell of a fight! Imagine: two of the best modern attackers slugging it out for Wolrd Champion; those are going to be some awesome games.
Who is "Taplov" ??
"animals" has invented a small world for him that bears no resemblence of place called our planet.
Anand has done tremendous in last decade and half and is the only player that has come up triumph against the best in all format of game. he is popular not because of some fad; but his decent ways and sublime game.
He has to his distinction being one of the most prolific novelty introducer in the game. Check these lines and draw your own conclusion.
Who do you want to win and why?
For me I want Taplov to win because he is kind of like an origanl (to me because I'm just getting into chess and the players) as for Anand is like the new guy that just comes into a school and becomes instently popular. I hate the popular stuff. And also Taplovs been here longer, beat the best there is too offer, and won many more tournaments (I think. I may be wrong). So due to this I believe he deserves the title more. Also when he did hold the title it was for a short while which I think was a load of crap. I dont know I just feel like Anand just came here and one it like Fischer did. Alough Fischer was diffrent. He deserved it more. But that a diffrent subject.
Anand is the new guy ?? he has been in top 5 since early 90's of last century :)
Hey guys I told you up there I was new to this. And I made this fourm to talk about these two not make fun of me. Not everyone knows about all the chess guys. All I know is that this guy seem to just rise to fame. thats why I thaught he was a new guy.
Anand, ftw.
Both Anand and Topalov are great players, with lots of history behind them, and both deserve to be named World Chess Champion.
It's interesting how they have different styles. Anand and Kramnik played 1. d4 in almost all their games this past championship match, while Topalov edged out Kamsky with 1. e4. I think it will be a great match if both players try out different openings every game. It was a little boring to see the same openings over and over when watching the Anand vs. Kramnik and Topalov vs. Kamsky.
I think Anand is the definite favorite because of the way he destroyed Kramnik in their recent match. Kamsky kind of made it close, but clearly, you could tell that Topalov was the better player and that Kamsky needed to play his 100% absolute best to earn wins against Topalov, whereas Topalov scored some wins by simply playing a solid game while Kamsky blundered.
However, I'm expecting this one to be pretty close. A lot can happen in a couple of years. And I wouldn't be surprised if either one won.
Hey ,who is that "Taplov"? I bet Anand will be able to defeat him blindfolded!
It's not hard to find out about facts concerning certain players. Just go to wikipedia or just do a search on them. Then maybe you can make a better informed opinion on a person. Are you old enough to vote yet? Anand became a GM in 1988 and in 1991 won a tournament called Reggio Emilia ahead of Karpov and Kasparov. Mostly liked by players around him because he carries himself with dignity and not to create conflicts with others. Generally a nice guy. Topalov became a GM in 1992 at the age of 20 years old I think. His first major "super tournament " success happened in 2005. He came second to Kasparov. He's got an aggressvie style of play where he usually makes comebacks in the latter part of a tournament. He's accused Kramnik of cheating during their world championship competition. It was never proven that Kramnik cheated though but some suspect it was to distract Kramnik's concentration. Topalov himself was accused of cheating when someone in his camp allegedly was giving him signals during a few games. It should be an interesting match between these two, which I would to fire and water. And I'm rooting for Anand cause I want nice guys to finish first. And cause he's been around and put in his dues. If you're concerned about someone coming out of no where and winning "everything" then the closes one to that would probably be Kramnik or Carlsen.
I'm rooting for Anand. I met him briefly during his 1995 World Championship match with Kasparov. But, aside from that, I kind of like living in an era when the World Chess Champion is neither Russian nor Jewish. The last time this happened was with Capablanca. I'm hoping for a good match with a lot of dynamic play, but I think Anand wins.
What's wrong with Russians or Jews?
what about a russian jew??
Since you still don't get it: you spelled Topalov's name wrong in your original post.
Whatever Taplov is, I'm sure Anand will beat it.
I am a fan of Vishy Anand, just because he does bring a good amount of diversity to the field and has worked hard to get where he is today. The same can be said about Topalov's working for greatness, but Anand seems like the heavy favorite. I just really think we need a Kasprov V. Anand match for the title.
Who do you want to win and why?
For me I want Taplov to win because he is kind of like an origanl (to me because I'm just getting into chess and the players) as for Anand is like the new guy that just comes into a school and becomes instently popular. I hate the popular stuff. And also Taplovs been here longer, beat the best there is too offer, and won many more tournaments (I think. I may be wrong). So due to this I believe he deserves the title more. Also when he did hold the title it was for a short while which I think was a load of crap. I dont know I just feel like Anand just came here and one it like Fischer did. Alough Fischer was diffrent. He deserved it more. But that a diffrent subject.