Karjakin leads

After Karjakin managed to escape from some inferior positions (the type of positions where Magnus excels) he got a psychological edge. But the match was still drawn...

You cannot win by just not losing. It could be a first step though, but not in such a ridiculous short match. Magnus should continue testing Karjakin's defensive skills, but his nerves failed badly.

I think these last 4 games will be very tense. Great for the audience. Hope it will be a test for Karjakin show if he's a minimally worthy WC.

I think comparing this to Kramnik-Kasparov is a great insult to Kramnik. For that manner I think calling this "Karjakin's style" is also an insult to Karjakin. Karjakin is intentionally trying to kill off each and every single game.

This is not how he normally plays and is clearly a psychological decision more than a chess decision. It's bad chess, but has had an unsettling effect on Carlsen and led to him impaling himself for no reason other than to make a good show of the game. There was no clever defense or amazing counter attack by Karjakin. Carlsen just intentionally played ridiculous moves desperately trying to create a game that's not over in 30 moves and eventually killed himself doing so. Kasparov lost against Kramnik not because Kramnik somehow got him to impale himself, but because Kramnik played better chess.

Would it be more accurate to compare this to Petrosian-Spassky? Make the aggressor agitated and overstep the boundaries

Karjakin is stronger psychologically, Magnus' ego will cost him the match. The strategy is the same for Karja so far, keep playing solid and objectively, wait for Magnus to go crazy...

Amusing... a two player activity where one human is to win. One human wins one game. "His lead is not valid, for he is not playing as I wish him to play, as I envision all chessplayers have to play, he aims for draws, his opponent is not on top form etc. etc. "

The player still leads. From my perspective, Karjakin has constructed a castle. Now and then he let Magnus get a siege ladder up the walls, but Carlsen did not charge, he missed some chances. And when Carlsen did charge once more, charged and blundered, people blame Karjakin for a style that clearly pressures Magnus on a psychological level, rather than congratulate him on the victory.

Perhaps this is merely the emergent zeitgeist, with technology having brought such a vast myriad of entertaining realms into our homes and hands, everything must be exciting, a golden egg must be around every corner. Do we then lose the ability to find, or create, subtle wonders? Eh, sidetracked.

Good point @Pangolinknave.

I think the most appropriate analogy here would be if in a mixed martial arts match one opponent simply kept running away every round content to see a draw at the end. He was still a good enough fighter that charging him headfirst was not a great idea, so the champion is left to partake in this mockery of the sport or expose himself to unequal risk.

This sort of angling of the rules is the reason that in MMA it's generally illegal and considered "stalling." In chess it's the reason we've seen the emergence of things like the Sofia Rules. I'm sure FIDE would just love something like instant-playoff games. Each time a classical game is a drawn the players play 2 15 minute games to award the point for the reward. If that minimatch is drawn it goes to a time odds armageddon game to award the point. It'd be a bit of a bastardization of chess, but perhaps no more than we're already seeing. And from FIDE's perspective a guaranteed decisive result in every single round would ostensibly increase interest/sponsorships/etc while maintaining more skill than pure knockout systems like such that led to Kasimdzhanov becoming world champion.

i just replayed these games again and i must relativize my statement. (Its not Karjakins fault, except maybe that he plays a bit passive with the white pieces, as Karpov noted) but the fault of both players. There are a few weak strategical decisions by both, especially in the later phase of the game, which do not allow them to transform their advantage to wins. An example is Game 4 where Carlsen missed 42...Bd5 43.g3 g4!! (suggested by Caruana) or Game 5 where Karjakin missed 43..Rh8 and 44..Qh6. In the old times players had the tool of Adjournment which allowed them to find out the truth about a position. Unfortunately this feature is gone today, even in world championship matches.

Karpov is said to have said it here: http://www.sovsport.ru/news/text-item/939950
but i can not speak this language.

@SelfmateMan

1. The first game that won Kramnik -with whites- was using a a normal variation of a normal and common opening: no theory innovation nor asymmetrical positions.
2. The second game won by Kramnik was not decided in the opening but in the late middlegame. It is interesting you say "He played openings which did not fit Kaspys style" because he had very interesting games -against the same Kramnik- with simillar openings and ideas.

"Karjakin is simply exchanging all pieces and goes for a draw" No, he is just playing in a solid and objective way, proper in his style and evident in 99% of the games he played against every strong GM he played. No player with less than 2600+ will draw "easily" (as you say) against Karjakin. So please, just avoid this "generalist" analysis when you are talking about 2750+ games and possibly, about the 17th World Chess Champion.

" i want an interesting player who tries to win, not just not to lose." For sure a WCC is not to entertain you or the masses -but the masses usually are entertained by World Chess Championships, like me, as a GM-, it is about confront ideas, training, and mental capacity.

"On the other hand its true that Carlsen does not play his usual chess currently. Hopefully he relaxes and starts doing the Carlsen thing." That's the problem with the nowadays chess amateurish followers. Carlsen is not an engine, he is a human, with feelings, mistakes, and, with internal psychology. This is a WCC, and it is a clash between the challenger and the champion. He arrived to NY happy, confident and the only things he could find are draws, and a harsh defeat.

No one is going to deny that everything can happen in the last four games, but we have to be objectives after all.

@LM OhNoMyPants

Hello there, Lichess "Master.

"I think comparing this to Kramnik-Kasparov is a great insult to Kramnik. For that manner I think calling this "Karjakin's style" is also an insult to Karjakin. Karjakin is intentionally trying to kill off each and every single game. "

The insult is when, and sometimes, ethnocentrism matches with chess history ignorance, appears and concieves chess from a superficial or idealistic viewpoint. Saying that comparing Karjakin and Kramnik's playing style and seeing similarities is an insult the only thing that shows is the full ignorance about playing style of both players.

As I said many times, Karjakin did not change his style because WCC match against Carlsen. In fact, thinking this is giving too much attention to a World Chess Champion that has been defeated because his "clueless aggresive moves". Just let me to give you an example: 1978, Karpov vs. Korchnoi. The first win was made by Karpov in the 8th game -like happened in this World Chess Championship-. Did Karpov tried to "kill off" every position? No he did not because both players played very well on the last 7 games until Karpov could defeat Korchnoi. Something maybe you did not see is that Karjakin started to take little advantages even when he started to play very fast and with the idea to disconcert Magnus playing openings he (Karjakin) would not play.

Chess is chess and humans are humans. Carlsen blundered and Karjakin resisted. Karjakin is winning and Carlsen is losing. Just be objective, this is not Game of Thrones.

I do not know how's/what's your FIDE rating, but, surely you would not do anything against a solid Karjakin. It is easy to criticize the youngest the GM on chess history while you are not even a FM. He is 6th best classical chess player in the world. So, please, take it easy.