Svidler-Kramnik today. Not usually an exciting match-up but they have played some odd blunders against each in the past year or so. Aronian-Topalov and Carlsen-Radjabov for the leaders. Anand will try to bounce back against van Wely. I'm back live on Chess.fm all week, today with GM Joel Benjamin.
UPDATE: The leaderboard was frozen today as all the leaders' games were drawn with varying levels of tedium. Aronian tried the 1.c4 English against Topalov and didn't get very far. I didn't really understand 12.e3 at the time and I don't think I ever will. It covers d4 but is just weakening and slow and hard to like. Svidler-Kramnik never really got going, in Joel's words. Svidler started a swapfest that ended on the popular move number 21. In his favorite Kalashnikov Radjabov gave up a pawn for activity against Carlsen and it was enough to draw in, you guessed it, 21 moves. (Is that their idea of a move minimum or something?) The extra pawn can't be saved in the final position.
It was amusing to watch Anand-van Wely repeat the first 20 moves of the ultra-sharp triple pawn sac from Motylev-Anand in the second round. Apparently van Wely didn't do his homework and he used 40 minutes to repeat those same moves while Anand used around eight seconds while playing left handed and dictating a letter. The Dutchman deviated with 20..Nc6, giving up the exchange, and the position was dynamically balanced for quite a while. But Black's time trouble eventually caught up with him and he erroneously offered the exchange of queens on move 29. Macauley Peterson, who writes for uschess.org, was in the press center and watched the post mortem and talked to Anand a bit about the game. Vishy said he was considering just repeating moves if Black played 29..Qb7 (suggested at the time by Benjamin, to hand out props) instead of 29..Qb6? Not often you see a player win from both sides of a 20-move tabiya during the same tournament. I think I remember Shirov doing it in a Meran once.
Despite his +1 score, Sergey Karjakin is really playing some bad chess at Corus, or at least for spurts. He was busted early against Navara yesterday and was gifted a win. Today his handling of the black side of the Najdorf against Ponomariov earned the derision of Najdorf supremo Garry Kasparov with "how can you castle here? If you are going to play this you must play [9..] Ng4." As it was, White soon had a massive attack and Black was nowhere to be seen on the queenside. Ponomariov finished crisply with a pretty exchange sac combo.
Shirov Lives! He crawled out of his winless primordial ooze onto dry land by beating Navara with black. He was already fine when David Navara, who seems to be fading fast, pulled a David Copperfield and made his own e4 pawn disappear. Oops. It was downhill pretty fast after that, if enjoyably sharp and interesting. This time Shirov kept the handle to win.
Bologan moved up in the B to join the pack of three players a full point behind Vachier-Lagrave. Speaking of 16-year-old leaders, Ian Nepomniachtchi was held to a draw at last, and with white by a 12-year-old. Girl. Nyah nyah. Kidding! Hou Yifan is playing tough and is in clear fourth place on +2. From the look of her game I'm betting she'll be the second highest rated female chessplayer in the world in a year or so. That is, if she keeps being fed a steady diet of strong international events instead of being relegated to facing fields of women she outrates already and will soon outclass entirely. Keep tossing her to the lions and she'll soon have them jumping through hoops. Join the fan club now, she's headed to the top 50 if they let her play strong competition instead of winning women's events for years.
Goo Topi!
Big test for Topalov and Aronian today. Aronian must really try hard to win if he has any ambitions. I'd give him a good chance.........
I am rooting for Aronian as true Armenian :)), but I have to admit that Topalov has played the best chess so far in Corus, so if Levon doesn't manage to win today and Topalov finishes in first place, that will not be an upset at all. But if Levon wins I'm going to get drunk.
I am rooting for Aronian too because even though Topalov plays great chess, he is an absolute jerk. Kramnik has come through the whole process with great dignity despite continued goading/provocation
Go Levon! ;)
I am rooting for Topalov because not only does he play great Chess, he does so with passion and commitment, never taking impromptu "rest" days. He also appears to be a very nice guy, and carries himself with great dignity, in spite of constant unfounded cheating provocations and goading.
ok, not knowing any Najdorf theory, Anand's move 13 Ne4 looks like one of my lightning moves, which leads to a White loss in a few moves. I'm looking forward very much to being enlightened by the great Vishy Anand..
Maybe we'll see my earlier suggestion 24.Bh5 Qf5 25.Bxg7 in Motylev-Anand tested. I spent quite a lot of time with Fritz on it and it looks very good for White.
Aronian-Topalov game looks bizarre to me.
Well, Van Wely deviated from Motylev-Anand.
"Anand will try to bounce back against van Wely"
Unfortunately it seems there will be no bouncing for Vishy. Except if you consider a draw after to losses bouncing...
Van Wely is being toasted alive by Vishy..
I feel for Loek.. Anand is in a bad mood, and he's unleashing the full Vishy arsenal here. This looks pretty good for White..
Ted Bundy appeared to be a very nice guy and carreid himself with great dignity, in spite of his murders and rapes.
is there any possibility to watch the games without having to install anything?
im at the office and dont have adminrights (java not installed in browser...)
Yes YK, and your point? That Kramnik carries himself with dignity might mean he's a TB in disguise?
Tabin, I think your best bet might be to use winboard (or xboard depending on your OS)which doesnt reuqire admin rights, but is a standalone program to connect to freechess.org. Try reading instructions at http://www.tim-mann.org/chess.html
"Van Wely is being toasted alive by Vishy.."
"This looks pretty good for White.."
I don't see it. Vishy is ok, but clearly better ?
"Ted Bundy appeared to be a very nice guy and carreid himself with great dignity, in spite of his murders and rapes."
And the moral of the story for you, Mr. Kleyner, should be (were you a smart guy) that judging people isn't easy. So sticking to what we can ojectively judge... well, Kraminik's game is over yet again by move 21.
Allright,
now after that 29...Qb6 (?!) I am happier and willing to agree.
The moral of the story is that when judging somebody's behavior omitting one's central major fault renders the judgement pretty worthless.
thx d - but winboard wont install - but thats ok - ill watch the games when im home *g
Kramnik and the dignity of a champion - no will to fight and many many dignified trips to the toilet.
Yuriy, we watch these people play chess. I couldn't care less if Fischer is a nutcase, or Topalov needs a PR person. There are plenty of nice guys who can't play chess.
Let's see what's going on in Anand's game...
D.
Dimi,
Would you watch a chess tournament between machines with the same interest? You can't get away saying that they don't play strong enough anymore. So, in case answer to that question is no, then it does it not mean that we do care about the personality of these players?
btw, just to complete your observation based on my experience: most of these 'nice guys' (don't play rock and roll) who can't play chess are of the opinion that chess is not a game worth playing...
That's great, Dimi, but I am not starting these judgements--merely commenting on lack of logic in those made by others.
YK, you surely must be joking? I responded to an obvious troll attempt by some Brian with a comment that showed it up for what it is, an idiotic subjective personal insult. And then you come up with some bizarre OTT Ted Bundy comment which is prima facie ridiculous, and instead of acknowledging it you use it as a commentary on other people's lack of logic? Wake up son, take your morning tablet.
Shirov lives! In fact, it looked like he played pretty well, finally...maybe Navara underestimated him, due to his poor form?! Anyway, here's hoping he continues to recoup...
Danedude, I too was wondering what Vishy had in mind when he sac'ed 3 pawns out of the blue, but gradually I began to see that Black had a very difficult defense. The compensation was a mix of positional and tactical themes, and I guess Vishy had it covered all the way through. I would love to see some analysis though.
Ponomariov's rook sac is obviously the combo of the tournament. Very well played.
"The moral of the story is that when judging somebody's behavior omitting one's central major fault renders the judgement pretty worthless."
This is a rather trivial point. Nobody would ignore what he or she perceives as a major fault. Ignoring the difficulty in judging correctly one’s character is where people usually err.
"Danedude, I too was wondering what Vishy had in mind when he sac'ed 3 pawns out of the blue, but gradually I began to see that Black had a very difficult defense."
I am familiar with the pawn-sacking in this line of the Najdorf poisoned pawn. I just wasn't feeling comfortable after he took the rook. I think in most examples with this line eg. Motylev-Anand, white gets a strong attack on the kingside. I too would love some analysis because I am not convinced Vishy was more than a little better before van Wely started making bad moves.
After the game Vishy said that he would have been tempted to just repeat moves had van Wely played his queen to b7 instead of b6. You can also see plenty of analysis on this line in the thread for round two. So Vishy wins on both sides of this line, pretty impressive even considering the major rating gap between him and his two opponents.
"Ted Bundy appeared to be a very nice guy and carreid himself with great dignity, in spite of his murders and rapes."
Wow. This doesn't _literally_ satisfy Godwin's Law but it's the next best thing. All we need now is a gun control thread.
I guess van Wely threw it away because he was in time pressure. He thought things would be easier for him after the queen exchange - on the contrary it nailed his coffin.
It seems that Anand's better command of the English language and more structured approach makes it easier following his analysis than Kramnik, Topalov and Radjabov. I'm very glad for him winning today.
D.
I didn't find Kramnik too difficult to follow, but I had a heck of a time with the videos of Radjabov. The audio could have been a bit better, though.
Ernest,
Would a statement like "Saying that Topalov is a nice guy except for his baseless accusations of cheating and other provocations is like saying that Nazis were a good government except for the genocide" qualify for Godwin's law? Seems like it wouldn't apply when you are trying to compare it to a ridiculous argument to begin with...
It sure would, Yuriy. Thanks; the spirit of Godwin is pleased now, satisfied again that his prediction was entirely correct. That probability of the mention of Nazis has not merely approached one, it has reached it.
Now, something about gun control, please.
Quirk's exception:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
"It is considered poor form to arbitrarily raise such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's Law (in the above sense) will be unsuccessful."
Just like Hitler.
"Just like Hitler."
Or like another failure, Topalov! Thus bringing the whole ridiculous chain of insults back to the beginning. Anyhoo...
I've been watching the video of Anand's analysis. It is fascinating to watch, even if I'm three steps behind Anand the whole way. It would be nice if they set up a microphone, however; the look of all of these post-mortem videos has been of someone with a videocamera who just happens to be nearby when the players are demonstrating their analyses.
Here is rybka line for Motylev - Anad:
1. = (0.00): 24.Be2-h5 Qg6-f5 25.Be5xg7 Nd7-c5 26.Ne4xc5 Kg8xg7 27.Rh1-f1 Qf5-e5+ 28.Nc5-e4 Qe5-a1+ 29.Rd2-d1 Rd8xd1+ 30.Bh5xd1 Qa1-e5
line for position few moves later
(24.Be2-h5 Qg6-f5 25.Be5xg7 ):
1. = (0.00): 25...Nd7-c5 26.Ne4xc5 Kg8xg7 27.Rh1-f1 Qf5-e5+ 28.Nc5-e4 Qe5-a1+ 29.Rd2-d1 Rd8xd1+ 30.Bh5xd1 Qa1-e5 31.Rf1-f6 Bc8-d7 32.Qh4xh6+
line for position few moves later
(25...Nd7-c5 26.Ne4xc5 Kg8xg7 ):
1. = (0.07): 27.Rh1-f1 Qf5-e5+ 28.Nc5-e4 Qe5-a1+ 29.Rd2-d1 Rd8xd1+ 30.Bh5xd1 Qa1-e5 31.Rf1-f6 Bc8-d7 32.Qh4xh6+ Kg7-g8 33.Bd1-e2 Qe5xe4
line for position few moves later
(27.Rh1–f1 Qf5-e5+ 28.Nc5-e4 Qe5-a1+ 29.Rd2-d1 Rd8xd1+ 30.Bh5xd1 Qa1–e5 31.Rf1–f6):
1. ² (0.58): 31...Nc6-e7 32.Bd1-h5 Ne7-g6 33.Qh4-g4 Qe5-a1+ 34.Ke1-e2 Qa1xf6 35.Ne4xf6 Kg7xf6 36.Bh5xg6 e6-e5 37.Qg4-h5 f7xg6 38.Qh5-h4+
In that game white has +0.58 advantage after move 27. (speculative move) and attack is quite strong.
Here is a (relatively) new press release about Chess Grand Slam that I haven't seen on English language pages. Did I miss it somewhere?
"The Grand Slam Chess Association (GSCA) has been established today in Wijk aan Zee. The Corus tournament (in Wijk aan Zee), Linares, M-tel Masters Sofia and Bilbao will set up this great classical chess circuit, from 2008. The winners of Wijk aan Zee, Linares and Sofia 2008, and a fourth player to be determined, will play the Masters in Bilbao (autumn 2008)."
http://www.chessbase.de/nachrichten.asp?newsid=6228
The Grand Slam news will be on the English page soon.
R9 review posted to the main item.
Mig: I didn't really understand 12.e3 at the time and I don't think I ever will.
That's why Aronian is playing at Corus and you ain't.
"The winners of Wijk aan Zee, Linares and Sofia 2008, and a fourth player to be determined..."
What if the same player wins, say, two of those three tournaments? Do you take the guy who came in second? If so, from which of those two tournaments?
"The winners of Wijk aan Zee, Linares and Sofia 2008, and a fourth player to be determined..."
"What if the same player wins, say, two of those three tournaments? Do you take the guy who came in second? If so, from which of those two tournaments?"
Yeah, pretty silly. Moreover, I'm not crazy that a single winner for each event would be used, since in the event of a tie for 1st Place, there would be a need to resort to either Tie-breaks or a Blitz Playoff.
They should emulate the World Cup, from the early '90s, where the same pool of players competed in 3 of the 4 events. Then, you couls simply select the Top 4 players with the highest overall winning percentage. Of course, for this to work, all 3 events should have the same type format, with the same # of players.
Hi all!
I translated GM Khalifman's review of rounds 5-8 here:
http://www.chessninja.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=001439
Thanks, Russianbear!
Your provision of interesting translations and links is much appreciated.
Ditto for those others who provide links.
Mig, 21 is the year of coming of age.
Perhaps those players were scared to indulge in under-age draws...
RussianBear, thx for the translation.
Mig, what Kasparov thinks about Aronian?
Gary's opinions are interesting because he doesn't shy away too often from speaking what he feels for fear of being rude or arrogant.. for instance his comment on what he thought of Kasimjonov after Kasim became won the FIDE WCC... was something to the effect: he is number 25 in the world rankings and that's where he belongs..
addendum: Kasim is currently 2682 and #28 in the world..
Great translation again, Russianbear. Thank you so much.
That little remark from Khalifman about Topalov taking "substances", and just at a time when the chess world is full of accusations, doesn't seem a good idea. I don't even think he's joking.
But it gave me a good laugh that a Russian would be talking about this stuff, sipping from his bottle of vodka while writing the article.
I agree about Kasim. It's absurd to consider any of the FIDE Champions from Karpov in 1993 to Kasim in 2004 as proper World Champions or anything like it.
Topalov is, however. San Luis was a proper World Championship Tournament recognised by nearly everybody, with Kramnik by his own volition refusing to participate.
Mexico, unfortunately is not, because of some idiot rule excluding Topalov, and is basically a waste of time in this respect unless Topalov is included, and Kramnik also there.
I think when history looks back on who was the real World Champion from 1993, it is going to be pretty convoluted!
"San Luis was a proper World Championship Tournament recognised by nearly everybody"
Nearly everybody? That's not exactly how I remember it...
Kasparov said several good things about Aronian when he started making a splash over a year ago. Probably in his NIC columns. He tends to quickly divide successful and/or up and coming players into real deal and pretender. He's been a pretty good evaluator of talent since working with Botvinnik but hardly has a 100% record.
Garry has certainly said his share of rude and arrogant things, but probably less than a tenth of what people credit to him. A few days of watching online kibitzers still full of "Kasparov said" and "Kasparov did" is enough to show that.
Well, acirce, all the top players except Kramnik agreed to play in this tournament (including Kramnik's former match opponent, Leko [whose manager was also Kramnik's manager...]); and Kramnik's position became isolated and weak.
This is why he was so desperate to arrange a match with Topalov last year - so desperate indeed that he signed on to play in Mexico if he became World Champion, a commitment he is now doing his best to wriggle out of.
"all the top players except Kramnik agreed to play in this tournament"
Yes, but that's not what you said. A lot of people - very likely a majority - did not consider it a proper World Championship, since it was just a tournament, not a match against the reigning champion.
The rest is just typical baseless propaganda.
"A lot of people - very likely a majority - did not consider it a proper World Championship, since it was just a tournament, not a match against the reigning champion."
That's just a load of baseless propaganda, the majority did recognise it to be a proper WC.
How many who thought what is impossible to say for sure. But that VERY far from "nearly everybody" recognized it as a World Championship is demonstrably true - in case your memory is short, just go back and review the discussions. Similarly, I'm a Kramnik supporter but I'm not going to say that nearly everybody recognized his title at this point, it's simply a matter of intellectual honesty here.
acirce,
Fair enough, perhaps I should have been a little clearer. I had thought the context of "nearly everybody" was enough to indicate that I meant the top players more particularly.
Nevertheless, from what I read at the time, I understood that it was also generally accepted as being a legitimate event to decide the World Championship, even if the format was not to many people's liking (It is not my preferred format, either, but given the lack of anything else, I considered it good enough to be able to recognise the winner to be World Champion at the time).
Baseless propaganda? Can you explain, then, why Kramnik signed onto what must have been to him a highly unwelcome provision (plus the one that he would be excluded altogether if he lost)? If he had been in a strong position, he simply wouldn't have signed onto this, would he?
Would San Luis have really been considered "proper World Championship Tournament recognised by nearly everybody" if anyone other than Topalov or Anand had won?
Just a thought ...
"I had thought the context of "nearly everybody" was enough to indicate that I meant the top players more particularly."
OK, that is true. But of course that was the case for the KO FIDE Championships too.
"Can you explain, then, why Kramnik signed onto what must have been to him a highly unwelcome provision (plus the one that he would be excluded altogether if he lost)?"
My guess is simply because he wanted to defend his title and achieve unification. He's not generally one to hold the chess world at ransom just to serve his own interests. The money didn't hurt either, of course.
Your turn to explain how you can tell that he is now "doing his best to wriggle out of" Mexico. Mind reading? I haven't seen any sign of that.
"[...]Anand used around eight seconds while playing left handed and dictating a letter."
Who was the letter for ?? ;o)
tabin:
WinBoard works without installation too. Just install it at home, copy installed files (e.g. USB stick) and copy them to your HD at work.
acirce,
Most players participated in the KO FIDE Championships to be sure, but this was more for the money rather than a belief that they were for a real World Championship. Kramnik, for one, participated in a couple, but criticised them and also went for the real World Championship.
"because he wanted to defend his title and achieve unification". Really? Well, that was extraordinarily generous of him. Strange how he went for a match with Topalov, whom he thought he had a good chance of beating, with such alacrity, yet 2 years ago, when but one step away from said unification by playing a match with the considerably stronger Kasparov, he said he would not play the winner of Kasparov-Kasimdzhanov, thus breaking the Prague unity agreement which he had signed.
"no sign" of wriggling out of Mexico? What about several obscure, uncommittal comments from the Kramnik camp including 'negotiations behind the scenes'? But the biggest sign is that Kramnik has still after all this time not given a positive assurance that he will play. Nobody knows whether he will play or not. How come? If Topalov had won the Championship, we could be almost certain that the World Champion would be playing. They both signed the same contract. How come the difference in certainty?
"He's not generally one to hold the chess world at ransom just to serve his own interests". I bet a good portion of the chess world would have a good laugh at that one. The aforementioned Mexico is one example. Breaking the Prague agreement is another. There are several more.
You would be right about the money. But this alone does not explain it.
"I didn't really understand 12.e3 at the time and I don't think I ever will."
Was it not just so he could play 16. Qe2? Aronian does not mind a positional weakness here or there.
"Would San Luis have really been considered "proper World Championship Tournament recognised by nearly everybody" if anyone other than Topalov or Anand had won?
Just a thought ..."
Because it was a proper WCT, there was little chance for anybody else aprart from Topalov, Anand (or Leko, imho) to win it.
Just a thought...
BTW, why don't you people think a little bit more before writing?
Very good point, sab. I meant to answer this post, too, but forgot.
I agree with you about Leko.
And if Kramnik had played and won, yes, I would still have considered it a "proper World Championship Tournament".
Why so, sab? Bologan won a fairly similarly constituted tournament a while back. And Naiditsch one not so very much weaker. Of course the strongest were the favourites, but certainly Jeff Sonas, for example, considered that the outsiders had a puncher's chance.
But there were fewer rounds in these, rdh, and they were also not so strongly constituted overall.
Also, with much less at stake, some of the strong players did not try hard, unlike at San Luis.
Slightly fewer, yes. But I see no reason why Bologan would necessarily not have held on another four rounds. I forget exactly who was playing in the tournament he won, but the world champion was, for one.
I can't be bothered to refute Chris B's drivel about Prague and so on again - Mig, is it not possible technically somehow to ensure that the fellow's posts on this subject appear in green ink?
Instead, here is a link to the Prague agreement.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=296
Posters who are interested can make up their own minds whether this indeed obligated Kramnik to play the winner of Kasparov-Kasim in 2005 or so. (All Kramnik ever said, of course, was that he wasn't obliged by Prague to do so).
rdh: […] this nonsense about Kramnik being scared, or owing some duty to fans or sponsors not to play the Petroff […]
This is not necessarily true. If the great virtuoso, eagerly anticipated by many, comes to the stage, ends up pulling a short kletzmer tune for 5 minutes then walks away -- there will be a number of unhappy people.
Don't underestimate the little people. Those hopeless cases are the ones who create traffic, keep buying books and subscribing to chess newsletters. If it was left only to the cognoscenti, the field would shrink...
D.