No, the tournament's not over, but the race for first is. By winning his seventh (!) game of the tournament the amazing Russian sealed his third Biel victory in three attempts. He lost twice to Carlsen but won every other game, including today's pretty demolition of Pelletier. Radjabov failed to keep pace, accepting a 16 move draw offer from Bruzon, who is already in the cellar and you'd think would play with nothing to lose. Maybe he's in mourning for Fidel? It's a turgid opening to be sure, but I'm a little surprised Radja didn't play to win with black. He'll have white against Morozevich tomorrow
Meanwhile, Volokitin completed a sweep of Magnus Carlsen, who is in third place with five points, a half-point behind Radjabov. I always thought 6..g6 was simply wrong here because of 7.Bxf6 and never knew it had actually been played by a few GMs before. This game isn't going to change my mind. Looks horrible. Carlsen scrambled about for compensation but never got it and lost rather humbly. He has white against Bruzon in tomorrow's final round.
COMMENTS
Moro in Biel is perhaps a bit like Fischer in US championships.. only instead of 7/9, the score would have been 9/9
Posted by: stringTheory at August 3, 2006 03:28
Waiting now for the critics of Moro for taking a 10 move draw in the last round. Maybe I'll be waiting some time.
Maybe because there will be none? Isn't it White (Radj)'s responsibility to play for the win if he wants the points and there is nothing at stake?
Carlsen beats Bruzon in the final game. Folks on ICC were saying this will bring his rating up to 2694.
Morozevich produced a string of nine exceptionally combative and interesting games in Biel. Most of his efforts contained more fighting spirit then a whole Dortmund round. After that, I don't think anyone can criticize him for taking one measly draw.
When was the last time Kramnik or Leko played 9 combative games in a row? Or 4, or 3, for that matter?
This 6...g6 is a pet of Nisipeanu's and I think was played in Topalov-Nisipeanu in their match, though I might be wrong.
I still predict the present brief burst of fashion followed by a return to the doghouse, though.
Being a Dragon fan meself, I thought I'd give the database a roll. This execrable line is the fault of one Oleg Chernikov, who will probably carry his love for it to his grave... Nisi DID play it, once, against Nataf - and won!
Bruzon "mournaing for Fidel" is another balls out political comment by our fearless host.
I can't wait for a Gelfand - Sharon joke....
Yermo doesn't like brazen comments?
Moro is a clear cheater. He uses Rybka. Examine his Biel games with Rybka if you need confirmation.
I need confirmation but don't have Rybka. Pedro, can you tell me why this is so? Any why he didn't "use Rybka" while playing against Carlsen?
Yermo wrote: "I can't wait for a Gelfand-Sharon joke"
Your wish is my command! Here goes:
-------------------------------------------
The Secretary General of the UN came up with a brilliant peaceful solution to the conflict in the Middle East - a match of chess! Boris Gelfand was chosen to represent Israel, and the Hezbollah was represented by their local champion, Ahmed Najad.
The board was ready, the pieces, made in the shapes of UN soldiers, were set, and the Impartial European Referee started White's clock.
Gelfand got the white pieces, and made his first move: the blue-helmeted pawn stepped from e2 to e4. The response from Ahmed was swift -screaming "What the f*** is this, are you moving your soldiers on me!?", he grabbed the pawn and threw it into the trashcan. Surprised by such turn of event, Gelfand asked the Impartial European Referee for advice.
"One is not allowed to remove pieces from the board at whim." the IER rolled his eyes, "Such behavior only damages Black's interests, and does not bring him any closer to victory in the match. Your move, Boris."
Satisfied, Gelfand was about to take the pawn from the trash, when the Referee exclaimed, "Wait, what it is that you intend to do?"
"I intend to put the pawn back in its place, of course" Gelfand replied.
"Mr. Gelfand!" said the referee sternly, "Surely, you of all people must know that the rules do not allow for placing pieces from outside the board onto the board."
"But the pawn was on the board a moment ago!" Gelfand protested. "He removed it!"
"Even if your opponent violated the rules of engagement, it doesn't give you the right to do the same. One can only fight within the rules."
Gelfand sighed deeply, and moved another pawn, from d2 to d4. But, even before he had a chance to press the clock, Ahmed grabbed the pawn and threw it - this time straight in Gelfand's face, while screaming "Move a soldier once more and I will stick it up your ***!"
The Impartial European Referee was about to comment negatively on this move, when Gelfand retaliated by catching the piece and throwing it back at Ahmed.
"What are you doing?" the Referee yelled. "You are a Grandmaster, a chess professional, can you not defeat your opponent without violating the International Laws of Chess constantly? Do the Laws of Chess allow you to throw pieces? They most certainly do not! I could have expected something like this from your opponent, but not from you, Boris! As a sign of good will, I implore you to offer a draw at once."
Gelfand shook his head and took another piece in his hand. He was intent on finally making at least one move, but this was not meant to be. Ahmed Najad kicked him under the table rather painfully, and Gelfand, groaning, let go of the piece.
"If you touched the piece, you must move it." said the Impartial Referee, "Have you not heard of this rule? Violate it again, and I will be forced to sanction you. Violations of International Laws will not be tolerated in this UN-sponsored game."
And so, the game still continues by this day. All over the world, people are glued to their TV screens, eagerly awaiting the outcome. Will the Grandmaster ever be able to defeat his opponent honestly, without resorting to dirty tricks?
Actually, game analysis provides fairly substantial evidence that Moro was cheating using a bootleg copy of Chessmaster 2000.
A most thorough analysis, Shternshain! Of course, you forgot to skew the numbers in Ahmed's favor: "Ahmed threw eight pawns" or even "Ahmed was only left with a single pawn after Boris' 'massacre' but managed to survive." And, of course, Ahmed is a retard confined to a wheelchair while Gelfand eventually gets help from Sutovski and Michaeleveski.
Alex,
is your real name by any chance Yuriy Vasiliev?
gaud! what a load of crap! shternshain, man did you forgot ur medication today?
gaud! what a load of crap! shternshain, man did you forgot ur medication today?
yes abdulla alex is sane yes and israel sane too yes? world is tired of terrorist group attacking countries for no reason yes? israel taking care of terrorists yes? how we say in inglish bombing back to stone age?
Chop,
stick to your kitchen...
yes chop yes. yes sane yes. or maybe. yes. excuse yes my inglish yes. My remarks were entirely dedicated to mr. shternshain considerable novelist talent. which is none. yes? but if i have to rate his political ramblings on a sanity scale that would be labelled as completely and utterly idiotic.
maybe we should edit out the entire thread and start all over.
I'm with Frank.
Alex, you forgot the part where an Israeli tank enters the room, Ahmed throws a few more pawns at Gelfand, a few more at the tank, and then doesn't get to throw any more pawns. Gelfand collects the forfeit.
Gelfand wins because Ahmed wasted all his funds to build missile launchers instead of a chess school. Then, when he had nobody to blame but himself, he blew up the board and went to complain about "The Zionist Entity" to Coffee Anus.
Eventually Gelfand mated his opponent, even being three pawns down, but then Mr. Nejad went back home, a Syrian hero, since he had stood up to the mighty apparatus of the Gelfand war machine and still managed to hang on for 35 moves (pawn-snatchery notwithstanding).
(Brilliant post, BTW, Alex).
Outstanding, Alex!
THANKS!!!
The story by Alex Shternshain might be "brilliant" and "outstanding". I have even copied it to my journal. Almost immediately I was given the following reference:
http://dvasserman.livejournal.com/30813.html
This was actually the same story (in Russian, though) by Dmitry Vasserman. Just a few changes: Gelfand instead Kasparov, "local champion, Ahmed Najad" instead "mafia boss Ahmed"...
It would be interesting to hear from Alex how he can explain that.
It seems that my post is once again resting in a "spam queue" - because it included a reference (as Mig explained last time). So I am writing it again without that reference.
Alex Shternshain's story might be "brilliant" and "outstanding". I have copied it to my livejournal and was immediately given the reference (perhaps, Mig will recover it later) to actually the same story (in Russian, though). It was written almost two years ago by Dmitry Vasserman living in Sweden. The changes are minor: Gelfand instead of Kasparov, "local champion, Ahmed Najad" instead of "mafia boss Ahmed"...
It would be interesting to hear from Alex how he can explain that.
Interesting observation, Valchess.
I think Shternshain's parody (well, I guess I should modify that in view of the question just raised about its authorship) is the best commentary on the Mideast conflict I have ever seen published anywhere.
It's certainly worthy of publication in a "real", widely-read (i.e. non-chess venue) -- though of course only with the proper participation from the real author and/or copyright owner, if someone other than Alex.
I got the story by email in a chain email from a friend-of-a-friend that originated god-knows-where and god-knows-when, and when Yermo asked for a Gelfand joke, it simply fit the bill so well, so I could not avoid posting it. Too bad some people here took it too seriously.
Valchess, thanks for the detective work you put in allowing us to identify the source of the story. That is, if he indeed is the source, maybe he got it in a chail email from a friend-of-a-friend as well.
Your insinuation that I may have something to "explain" is most unappreciated, btw, but that's beside the point. Keep up the good work spreading the story further (in either language).
Nothing new there. Plagiarism. Plain and simple. Not the first time this guy did it. Anyways the story in garbage. In English, Russian or Hebrew. A louse mix of tautologies, trivialities and macho-ism innuendo. The only element of artistic value is when the tank enters the room! Mahmud’s skull (the younger brother of Ahmed) is crushed by modern technology. The 7 years old terrorist is not a threat anymore… oops not part of the original... blah blah blah.
The world of politics is miserable enough without you carrying it onto this blog that should be about chess??! Right? Mig would be right to delete your worthless input.
Morozevich was truly impressive. Without one oversight his 'deserved' score would have been 8.5/10 and his PR ~2900 making it one of the most outstanding tournament victories ever if it had happened. Too bad he played that Bg7??
I feel he is adding more venom to his chess now when he is playing 'mainlines' and only later differing to his own untried and muddy paths. Now the basis for his 'brutal chess' will be positionally more solid than e.g. in the Philidor which he tried a year-two ago.
Morozevich hasn't failed against the top guys by the way. He has victories with black against both Anand and Kramnik. The brilliances have been followed by over-confident harakiris.. and in the end a typical score for him has been something like 5/11.
Yet.. no-one can beat him in calculation of complex variations or in attacking instinct.
It's been his opening repertoire that has failed him more than anything. I remember when he played the King's Gambit against the top guys.
I don't think it would damage his chess if he would put serious dedication and effort into building an opening repertoire that compares to the best of them and then from the prepared evenly balanced, yet complex positions proceeded to beat them over the board.
To me his chess is the brightest light in the world of chess at the moment.
Alex,
There was no detective work on my part - my readers already knew that story.
All you had to do was just point out that that story was someone else's, not yours. As you are yourself a writer who occasionally publishes your stories (at ChessBase, etc.) then everybody here thought that you did invent it. As a result you have provided unnecessary amunition to abdulla and his like-minded.
As far as I understand you have already visited my journal and saw the reference to the original source. If not, you can find it above by clicking my name.
Alex,
There was no detective work on part – my readers already knew that story. That’s always like that in the Internet!
All you had to do was just point out that that story was someone else's, not yours. As you are yourself a writer who occasionally publishes your stories (at ChessBase, etc.) then everybody here thought that you did invent it. As a result you have provided an unnecessary ammunition to abdulla and his like-mindeds.
As far as I understand you have already visited my journal and saw the reference to the original source.
Valchess,
I didn't realize my reputation precedes me... Wow, people actually see my name on the net and REMEMBER IT FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE...
Anyway, sarcasm aside, next time I forward a story or a joke this way, I will specificically mention the fact it's forwarded, just to be on the safe side. Thanks again.
Oh please abdulla you so stupid! if big sand monkey no recreation in chess with little sand monkey then little sand monkey no get crushed, yes? Besides little sand monkey grow and become big sand monkey suicide bomber who kill himself then get money from Iran. Much easier kill little sand monkey now and get money from Iran right now so family no waste money on school! little sand monkey not do nothing in life but kill himself anyway, so Gelfand do little sand monkey family favor, yes? family save money on little head rag and katyusha rocket toy, yes?
Totally agree that the world of politics is miserable enough and should stay were it belongs. And that is not in a chess related blog. That guy who brought it up should be censored. And all his worthless input deleted.
Your analysis of Morozevich’s play and place in the chess world is superficial and quite bended (judging by your pretentious nick you should know better).
Statistics (probably) do not lie about Moro bad score against the top. A big minus there (Kasparov in particular completely dominated him). Occasional wins against some of the very best (2750+ or at least 2700+) only demonstrates that Moro is in the next group of players waiting to jump into the ‘very top’. He never played KG against the ‘very top’. You are dreaming. And with checkered success against players lower rated then himself. Morozevich problem is prolong periods of bad moods that to a large degree lead to bad form. Moro and bad form it’s an ugly mix. Bg7 all over the place and as a result -4-5 even being one of the top seeds. But not the openings. Thank goodness that he stays with various degrees of weirdness in his openings. Seldom you’ll see topical lines. And even there he will normally be first who deviates. That is very good. We already have many systems named after Morozevich. Stick with your guns, Moro. We love you for that. You’ll never be part of the very top… and that does not bother me much.
I have a dream… a dream that one day we’ll see an unlimited match (a-la KK’ 85) between Morozevich and Shirov. Though sometimes I think such a match could be over in 6 games… but hey they can play another one (probably with completely opposite outcome)… that would be a bloodfest.
"A louse mix of tautologies, trivialties, and macho-ism innuendo":
Probably the vaguest analysis I've seen all week. You just made Fox News look a whole lot better. Thanks!
Ah.. but your condescending and arrogant tone isn't any better.
Weird opening choices aren't what makes Morozevich special. There have been countless players to apply this approach, especially in the 'English school' Miles, Speelmann, Hodgson...
In fact, there is little Morozevich about getting crushed on the black side of the Philidor or playing some weird off beat line with white only to end up lot worse.
His chess is defined by his imagination, inventiveness and ability of out calculating his opponents in complex positions.
The 'opening basis' for this ability can just as well come from main stream theory and deviating on move 14.
His score against both Anand and Kramnik is approximately equal. Against Topalov it's bit negative. Against Kasparov it was awful.
If you go thru these games how often was he worse from the opening? Of course it's not the whole story. Kasparov totally had his number, because like it was with Shirov, neither could out calculate Kasparov. Look at the game Morozevich - Kasparov, Astana 2001.
But Kasparov is gone now and if Morozevich had an mainstream opening repertoire of equal standard to compare to their preparation, who says he couldn't challenge them?
Morozevich has played the KG against Anand (albeit rapid chess. The famous game from 1995 in which he destroyed Anand.), Kasparov (rapid), Piket (rapid), Leko (rapid), Sokolov (standard time control), Aleksandrov (standard time control), Almasi (Amber blind)
abdulla wrote: "He never played KG against the ‘very top’. You are dreaming."
How about this:
Morozevich - Anand (Intel GP, 1995)
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bb3 d5 6. exd5 cxd5 7. d4 Bb4 8. Nf3 O-O 9. O-O Bxc3 10. bxc3 Qc7 11. Qe1 Nc6 12. Qh4 Ne7 13. Bxf4 Qxc3 14. Bd2 Qc7 15. Ne5 Nf5 16. Qf4 Be6 17. Bb4 Rfc8 18. g4 Nd6 19. Rae1 Nfe4 20. c4 dxc4 21. Bc2 Nf6 22. g5 Nh5 23. Qf3 g6 24. Nxg6 hxg6 25. Bxg6 fxg6 26. Rxe6 Qf7 27. Qd5 Nf5 28. Rxf5 Rd8 1-0
Yes it is rapid but Anand plays classical with the same speed as rapid anyway.
Morozevich,Alexander (2630) - Kasparov,Garry (2795) [C34]
PCA/Intel-GP Paris (1.8), 10.11.1995
1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.¤f3 d6 4.d4 g5 5.h4 g4 6.¤g5 h6 7.¤xf7 ¢xf7 8.¥xf4 ¥g7 9.¥c4+ ¢e8 10.0-0 ¤c6 11.¥e3 £xh4 12.¦f7 ¦h7 13.e5 ¤a5 14.¥d3 ¢xf7 15.£f1+ ¢e7 16.¥xh7 ¥e6 17.¤d2 ¦f8 18.exd6+ cxd6 19.£e2 ¢d8 20.c3 ¤e7 21.¦e1 ¥c4 22.¥f2 ¦xf2 23.£xf2 g3 0-1
Chop… I love you... macuga … you are welcome… fox news (chills)… you are welcome to kick my liberal butt… Richard… the tone was unfortunate… reaction to an extremely controversial and touchy subject… after all we do (or should do IMHO) things because of who we are not because who they are.
I share with you the fascination with Moro’s play. For a long time I am waiting for him to brake through (I thought in 98 for Sarajevo he was already ready to challenge). Still waiting… I am not arguing that he often gets the worse from the openings. As Rashkowsky (sp?) put it – Moro if you’ll come out of the opening with a slightly worse position you’ll beat anyone and with an equal one you’ll be World Champion. But can’t imagine Moro playing Sveshnikov main line for 35 moves. Nor should he. Will have another strong Gm but not Moro anymore. The slav systems he plays for many years are certainly sound (mainly because of him showing the way) as are his frenchs. I would actually like Morozevich playing more sicilians with black and not trying to reanimate the petrov. But that is basically it.
KG… well… do you count the rapid, blindfold and blitz games too? Did you count those games in your statistics? I did not. As a kid Morozevich played KG a lot not gonna count those are we (you’ll not find them in databases). Thought we are talking classical chess (we want Moro to challenge for the big leagues). Sokolov and Alexandrov - yes (lower rated - mixed results).
Take care.
Shternshain is guilty of copy and paste plagiarism. My guess is that if we studied some of "his" previous work, we would find other instances of it.
Lack of attribution, coupled with the change of character names, are textbook cases of the intellectual crime.
Note that Shternshain did not identify the source of the story plagiarized, nor did he publish the original work.
"I got the story by email in a chain email from a friend-of-a-friend that originated god-knows-where and god-knows-when, and when Yermo asked for a Gelfand joke, it simply fit the bill so well, so I could not avoid posting it."
Ha ha ha! What a preposterous little fellow you are, Shternshain!
Mr. Shternshain,
You owe an apology to this audience. You definitely owe an apology to the author. Please do the honorable thing. Otherwise you risk "your reputation precedes you". Unless the damage has already been done.
Regards
Mr. korvin,
I am responding to you specifically, because unlike several other posters, you haven't shown yourself to be an idiot. Unlike abdullah or Chess Auditor, there is actually a risk of someone taking you seriously.
Fact 1: I never claimed authorship of said joke, nor implied it. If some assumed it, it's not my fault.
Fact 2: As I said before, the joke fell into my lap a while ago in a chain email with no clear source, making proper attribution impossible.
Fact 3: A group of persons who comment on a chess blog under more-or-less-creative pseudonims are not in a proper position to judge my reputation, nor do I have any reason to worry of such judgements.
Unless *you* never forwarded an emailed joke to anyone, I suggest you step off your high horse right now.
"Fact 3: A group of persons who comment on a chess blog under more-or-less-creative pseudonims are not in a proper position to judge my reputation, nor do I have any reason to worry of such judgements."
>>>>I suppose by "pseudonims" you really mean "pseudonyms" and by "judgements" you really mean "judgments," correct?>>>Unintentional plagiarism? That is pretty lame, Shternshain.>>>What a whopper of a coincidence! Is this the type of longwinded grammar one must expect from a master of the English language?<<<<
[Shternshain is probably hoping this will all go away. Liars and cheats, whenever they are caught plying their immorality, always resort to the same old ruse: They lay low for a while and wait for others to come to their defense. They live as if on the edge of a cliff. All it takes is one little push and they are gone.]
[Say, half my post seems to have gotten deleted! Let me repost without the funny characters, which seem to disrupt the blog.]
"Fact 3: A group of persons who comment on a chess blog under more-or-less-creative pseudonims are not in a proper position to judge my reputation, nor do I have any reason to worry of such judgements."
+++I suppose by "pseudonims" you really mean "pseudonyms" and by "judgements" you really mean "judgments," correct?+++
"Fact 2: As I said before, the joke fell into my lap a while ago in a chain email with no clear source, making proper attribution impossible."
+++Unintentional plagiarism? That is pretty lame, Shternshain.+++
"I got the story by email in a chain email from a friend-of-a-friend that originated god-knows-where and god-knows-when, and when Yermo asked for a Gelfand joke, it simply fit the bill so well, so I could not avoid posting it. Too bad some people here took it too seriously. "
+++What a whopper of a coincidence! Is this the type of longwinded grammar one must expect from a master of the English language?+++
[Shternshain is probably hoping this will all go away. Liars and cheats, whenever they are caught plying their immorality, always resort to the same old ruse: They lay low for a while and wait for others to come to their defense. They live as if on the edge of a cliff. All it takes is one little push and they are gone.]
*****ha ha ha! Look at what shternshain write, yes? he write "Your wish is my command! Here goes:" like he make up tale, yes? you write that in response to yermo "I can't wait for a Gelfand-Sharon joke" like you write joke! you very bad man, shternshain, and you a liar! *****
I miss the spam.
"you very bad man".......Isn't that from an old Seinfeld episode....Chess Auditor, make sure you give the proper credit for that one.