Sorry for the delay getting the Corus 2007 party started. I had to catch a 6am train to DC to tag along to meeting after meeting with Garry Kasparov, who took the American capital by storm this week. More important than the fate of Russian democracy is that on the way back I wheedled his Corus favorites out of him. Pairings and schedule here.
The message boards have spoken on the matter as well. Anand has a remarkable 52% of the votes. Kramnik has 17% and Topalov 13%. No one else garners more than 6%. Winning is usually going to require some luck in such a tough and balanced field, unless Topalov reverts to superman form. So how about your top three? I always have a suicidal urge to pick a dark horse and this way I can toss one in. How about Anand, Kramnik, Radjabov? Garry laughed at me about that one, pointing out how the Baby Beast of Baku was outclassed by Ivanchuk in rapids last week. But I feel the kid has been making real progress and might be ready for a breakout performance, or at least a plus score.
Garry thinks the pressure will take its toll on Topalov and that he won't finish top three. He said he couldn't pick against Anand, perhaps because he's the oldest player in the field. At 37 he's three years older than Shirov and van Wely. I'm not convinced that the sheer force of global contempt will make Topalov play worse chess, however. The junior squad is out in force with Radjabov, Navara, Carlsen, and Karjakin there. Ponomariov has been playing interesting chess lately and always fights hard. The big wildcard is the big world champion, Vladimir Kramnik. His seemingly effortless +2 won't win first place here and Corus is always a challenge for him to keep up with the likes of Anand and Topalov. But if Big Vlad is on form and the field slows he could win first with, say, +4.
I'll be doing live internet radio coverage during the games just about every round on Chess.fm at the Internet Chess Club. The full broadcast schedule is there. Games start at 7:30am EST (groan). I'll be accompanied by a rotating coterie of Grandmaster commentators, including Joel Benjamin and Larry Christiansen. For round two I'll have Spanish GM Miguel Illescas and we'll certainly spend a lot of time talking about the Kramnik-Topalov WCh match, where Illescas was on the Kramnik team. We'll try to stick to English for you gringos. You can also sign up for a free one-week trial to check it out. ChessBase also has the games live with Yasser Seirawan doing commentary. Post links to coverage and analysis.
We should also have our own game of the round vote, I say. Pick your favorite effort or start an actual poll in the message boards and link to it. Karjakin-Kramnik is one to watch on the first day. Navara might be looking for payback for the way Aronian posterized him at the Olympiad in 25 moves. Before you look, Topalov-Kramnik doesn't come until round 12. Let's hope it means something on the crosstable, as it should. And let's double hope there isn't any honky punnky.
I can remember times when Ivanchuk outclassed Kasparov, and I doubt Garry found himself laughing about it. I think picking Radjabov as one of three choices is a good selection. Garry's still smarting over that loss with white to the kid. Not to worry though, time heals all wounds. Apparently, it just takes more time with Garry.
I don't see how anyone can be excited for anything other than pro football tomorrow and Sunday. These are some of the best dream matchups in recent history. But since this is a chess board, maybe a few parallels:
Baltimore Ravens = Kramnik - plodding, risk-free offense, dominating defense that preys on opponents' turnovers. Disciplined and quick to punish mistakes.
Indianapolis Colts = Alexi Shirov - go for the throat, all-out offense makes up for a very questionable defense. When the offense is on a roll, spectacular ass whippings can occur.
New Orleans Saints = Anand - fast playing, hurry-up offense with weapons all over the place (Brees, Bush, Colston) makes for a very difficult matchup for anyone. Underrated defense. "The People's Choice" since Katrina, "The People's Choice" in chess.
Philly Eagles = Ponomariov - people wrote them off as dead when they lost McNabb / "Danilov-ed" his match with Kasparov and pissed everyone off. Both were expected to quickly drop out of championship contention. But both have emerged stronger and well above expectations since, capable of beating anyone on any given day. Balanced attack and defense.
Seattle Seahawks = Loek Van Wely - just lucky to be there at all.
Chicago Bears = Topalov - capable of crushing opponents thoroughly and winning by 30+ points - but also capable of throwing 3 interceptions and posting a 0.0 quarterback rating, losing in a real stinker. Which Topalov / Grossman will show up for the game? The fate of each depends on it.
New England Patriots = Svidler - once a giant with an aura to be feared just a few short years ago, but now a bit depleted (roster has no names except Brady, Dillon is a bust), a bit complacent (Belichick), and a bit disrespected by the rest of the field. But in the back of everyone's mind is the fact that if he can pull it all together at the right time and get motivated, can emerge as the surprise champion.
San Diego Chargers - Carlsen - Young team with superstar potential all over the place. Thrilling offense. Capable, even great defense that has improved. Fun to watch no matter who he is playing. On paper, should be dominating for years to come. BUT... has little experience in big playoff games. Rookie quarterback. Has always underperformed a bit in the biggest spotlight. Everyone thinks a team like this has to lose a big one before winning the BIG one. Can an experienced team spank junior one last time? Or is he too talented regardless of greenness?
Picks (football, not chess):
RAVENS -4 over Colts
SAINTS -5 over Eagles
Seahawks +9.5 over BEARS (Seattle will lose, but not by that much).
Patriots +5 over CHARGERS in a close thriller.
So HOME teams on Saturday, AWAY teams on Sunday. Have a great football (and chess) weekend.
Corus:
Anand, Kramnik, and Svidler are top three.
Kramnik, Anand, Radjabov, Ravens, Eagles, Bears and Chargers.
Great post Stearn!
1. Fritz10/Topalov 2. Anand 3. Kramnik
Ravens/Eagles/Bears/Chargers
Great post Stearn!
1. Fritz10/Topalov 2. Anand 3. Kramnik
Ravens/Eagles/Bears/Chargers
Pro football?
Ninety percent of the world's population won't even know what you're talking about...
any link for *free* live coverage?
I'm not even shure that "the sheer force of global contempt" have reached Topalov. He seems to be in a plastic bubble. The alternative would be sheer and utter stupidity, which I dont believe.
Pro football? If it only were FOOTball...Carry-the-ball is more what it is. American 'football' comes across as intelligent as two bulls bashing against each other when fighting over the leadership of the herd. If your choices are chess and American 'football' you are really picking sport from the extreme ends of the spectrum... at least intelligence-wise. I would refrain myself from any comparisons between the two. But I guess it is a free world...supposedly.
And finally about Corus:
Go Anand! Go Kramnik! And Topalov? Go...away!
Surely free live coverage (ok, just the moves) will be at www.coruschess.com?
Well, it is time to see again if Mr. Drawnik will make draw after draw, or he will get mated by Navara or Carlsen in 1.
Qh7#
Long live king Topalov!
Also in The Netherlands, Anand won the poll with a high percentage. We put his reaction to this, together with Shirov's and others, online at http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=466&lp_lang_view=en
Oops, that one is for endgame lovers. It should be http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=485&lp_lang_view=en
Looking at the drawing-of-lots "show" in Peters link above and thinking about the lack of attention to chess in general in the media, they really should have replaced those kids with some of those hot busty dutch blondes !
It also shows the lack of attention of the world champion Mr. Drawnik to the audience. He is quiet in the corner, no press conference, no additional events.
Veselin Topalov on the other hand keeps behaving like a champion. He is in the center of the show, he is smiling. He will give a radio chess show, for sure will talk to everybody at Corus, no matter professionals or chess fans.
Qh7#
Mr. X: "If your choices are chess and American 'football' you are really picking sport from the extreme ends of the spectrum... at least intelligence-wise. I would refrain myself from any comparisons between the two. But I guess it is a free world...supposedly."
I heartily disagree, and really doubt you have any understanding of football for you to be making such dumb statements. You are only showing your own lack of understanding and closed-mindedness.
Of all the North American sports, football is the closest to chess strategically, because it occurs in discrete "moves" (plays) as opposed to a continuous motion game like basketball or hockey (or soccer). This lends itself to a high degree of control and strategy on both sides. Baseball is close, but a good football team, like a good chess position, requires all the pieces on the board to work in unison to achieve even the simplest goals. In baseball, the quality of the pitcher alone has a disproportionate say on if his team wins or not, much more so than a just a QB or any single position in football. A better team on paper can easily lose to a better coached football team with a better strategy, as might occur in the Pats vs Chargers game.
Perhaps PLAYING football might be seen as something lacking intelligence - those guys really are brutal out there and are sacrificing a lot of health to play. But coaching football, or analyzing it enough to bet on it and beat it long term laying 11-10, is reserved for the truly intelligent. And guess what? I don't have to sit through 8-14 completely predictable and played-to-death moves for the 'real game' to start, I don't have to wait 20 minutes or more between moves, and best of all, I can guarantee there will be no short draws today in football. Can chess say the same?
I'll still look at the games from Corus. After football.
Thanks for the videos Peter. It's nice to see the opening ceremony - great fun & your website/blog is terrific. I'm really looking forward to your coverage during the tournament. Many thanks!
I think Anand tops the voting because people WANT him to win - he's Mr.Nice Guy after all. I'd love him to win as well, but just to be different I'll stick my neck out and say Ponomariov to be different. He can produce some great chess and is due a good result.
As usual the pairing is not so favorable for VISHY with 7 Blacks and also having Black against both VLADY and err... VESLI (?)
VINI VIDI VICI
VENI VIDI VICI
VESELI VLADI VISHI
Stern - I bow to your apparent knowledge of American Football and Baseball, of which I know little. However, I don't think it's useful to compare other sports to chess - it's always a stretch to find analogies that work and the whole concept is artificial.
I hope you enjoy the football. But as a Brit it doesn't mean anything to me. I think your first post on this thread applies to Americans only!
I'll be dipping in and out of the chess games today when I have time and my friend Fritz will be helping me find out what's going on.
Stern - I bow to your apparent knowledge of American Football and Baseball, of which I know little. However, I don't think it's useful to compare other sports to chess - it's always a stretch to find analogies that work and the whole concept is artificial.
I hope you enjoy the football. But as a Brit it doesn't mean anything to me. I think your first post on this thread applies to Americans only!
I'll be dipping in and out of the chess games today when I have time and my friend Fritz will be helping me find out what's going on.
I find the low 13% for Topalov on your message boards rather unbelievable and think that because of the near universal condemnation of Topalov's behaviour at Elista, many people are unwilling to give Topalov the 'praise' of first even though they think he might be (those votes going instead to Anand).
I pick Topalov to have best chances of first, with Anand close behind. Third could be Aronian (or possibly Radjabov or Svidler).
Kramnik showed in game 6 against Deep Fritz that he is weak when a complicated position appears on the board; but if he goes with his drawing openings he cannot expect better than +2, which should not be good for more than about 4th=.
Well, Topa has a nice schedule. I think he will do well and before the game with Kramnik he will have advantage. Then drawing against him will be easy.
I have to agree that Ponomariov also has good chances and lately he plays well. But I would prefer a nice performance from Navara.
There are nice previews and interviews at http://www.veselintopalov.net/article/corus-2007
Well, as far as I understand from the same page, the Corus 2007 is the first tournament of the Grand Slam?? It is not officially announced, but seems like this from Danailov's words. Corus director also said something about it. No word from Morelia Linares though.....
Nice analogy Stern, but questionable specifics. Svidler = New England, that's hillarious. New England are multiple champs and heavy favorites Perhaps not against San Diego, but if they win, they will be everybody's pick to win it all. Svidler on the other hand...
If anything, New England = Anand: been there, done that, good attack, good defense. San Diego = Aronian - rising star, can win it all, also good all around. With all due respect Carlsen has about 0% chance to win (unlike San Diego).
PS. To all Europeans who bash American Football. As a European myself (and former basher too), i can tell that all your contempt stems from ignorance. To appreciate the american football you have to learn the rules first, then watch some games and pick up on the basic game playing ideas. In fact, presently American football in many aspects superior to European, both intellectually (more complex and elaborate strategy) and in the level of excitement (closer games, thrilling comebacks etc).
Well, as a person of Brit origin, I must say I respect the complexity and toughness of American football.
It is certainly a higher level sport than soccer, at least European style, which consists of run, dive, feign agony, get penalty. The only interesting bits are the head butts and they are all too rare.
This is an easy tournament to predict - Kramnik will win. Why, you may ask? Because he does very well against younger players when he has to show these younger players why they do not understand chess on his level. That's where his +4 will come from.
"It is certainly a higher level sport than soccer, at least European style, which consists of run, dive, feign agony, get penalty."
Mourinho, my brother, you have created a monster and the only team that can stop it is Man bloody U. Look at what you've done.
Radjobov or Aronian will win
RIDIRON FOOTBALL: if a week is a long time in politics, it's at least a quarter and a half in football. Does this make for an exciting sport? I'd answer yes, except that it's a trick question - football is not a sport. Football is business, and that's all it is. The fans don't understand that.- Seattle linebacker, January 1996. The NFL is the ideal to which all the other biz corps aspire.
A quick structuralist analysis of the typical traits of football and other American sports is interesting:
- the abrupt start-stop action resembles a commercial/video/news flash mentality
- players are controlled by an authoritarian, centralized regime
- uniformity, conformity, sacrifice and other military virtues are stressed
- spectators are willingly manipulated
- the franchise owner is the natural recipient of the trophy (awarded for top market position)
- words, once sacred, are reduced to meaningless entities (eg the "New Orleans Mormons")
- media acquiescence: TV as vertically integrated
marketing unit, tabloid dope-pushers selling suffixes, etc
From http://www.rsssf.com/rssbest/bullfighting.html
Kramnik-Carlsen-Radjabov the juniors emerge!!
If you were a top player, wouldn't it be an advantage to have black (and draw?) against the other tops, and to have white against the bottom-enders?
Certainly looks like it's been a good day for the juniors--Radjabov was the only winner in the A group, and Negi and Hou both won their games.
Dear Mig,
It is certainly none of my business, but my curiosity is getting the better of me, for which I beg forgiveness:
We all know that you and Garry have worked together and apparently are still doing so. What is your job these days? Writing/proofreading his speeches? Keeping track of his many appointments, making travel arrangements ("personal secretary")?
Sorry if this sounds prying, but I am - as I said - curious!
Charley
Stern on American football: "...I don't have to wait 20 minutes or more between moves..."
You don't? It sure seems like that, trying to watch the game on TV, especially at the end of a quarter. I can't remember who described American football as brief moments of violence interrupted by committee meetings but it's an accurate description.
And it's not fair, the Chargers doing well now that I live elsewhere. I remember the Chargers of the late '90s, when it was a lucky year if they won more than five games a season. I don't want San Diego sports teams to do well. I want them to be endearingly crappy.
The reason American Football is so popular (in the US, at least), is because of its pseudo-homosexual iconography. The sport incorporates elements of high and low "camp", e.g., the interaction between Center and Quarterback, the exagerated male form created by the shoulder pads, and, of course, the "huddle". Likewise, rather than a trend of video games beginning to more closely resemble Football, it turns out that Football is beginning to emulate video games--at least with respect to uber high tech swivelling, over-the-field cameras.
Note that basketball, in its heyday during the Jordan era, incorporated some similar elements. Indeed, Michael Jordan looked much like a prototype of the "Mapplethorpe Man". Whether deliberate or not, that image allowed for the crossover appeal that enabled him to pull in the Disney lucre, and bring a perverse "wholesome" quality that helped the entire NBA to prosper.
Yeah, but chess is teh ghey too. Reuben Fine said so.
Oh, good, what a gay remark. The reason why football is popular is because it's an interesting game to watch and profitable to play.
osbender: "Nice analogy Stern, but questionable specifics. Svidler = New England, that's hillarious. New England are multiple champs and heavy favorites Perhaps not against San Diego, but if they win, they will be everybody's pick to win it all. Svidler on the other hand...
If anything, New England = Anand: been there, done that, good attack, good defense. San Diego = Aronian - rising star, can win it all, also good all around. With all due respect Carlsen has about 0% chance to win (unlike San Diego). "
I obviously wasn't linking a football team's chance of winning to the corresponding player, but more of the overall style. Otherwise, one would just have to rank chess players by elo and then rank NFL teams by either seeding in the playoffs or Las Vegas power ratings, and tie the two together. I thought it would be better to do it by style similarities rather than chances to win the Superbowl / Corus.
To Ernest Tomlinson - you have any relation to LaDanian? And to your point, I actually find even halftime surprisingly short. If you ever watch games in Las Vegas, you already know that a lot of bettors get shut out trying to bet the 2nd half because they couldn't get their bets in on time. Sometimes I wish they'd purposefully make it longer! Until Al Gore invented the internet, that is.
DOug: "The reason American Football is so popular (in the US, at least), is because of its pseudo-homosexual iconography. The sport incorporates elements of high and low "camp", e.g., the interaction between Center and Quarterback, the exagerated male form created by the shoulder pads, and, of course, the "huddle". Likewise, rather than a trend of video games beginning to more closely resemble Football, it turns out that Football is beginning to emulate video games--at least with respect to uber high tech swivelling, over-the-field cameras.
Note that basketball, in its heyday during the Jordan era, incorporated some similar elements. Indeed, Michael Jordan looked much like a prototype of the "Mapplethorpe Man". Whether deliberate or not, that image allowed for the crossover appeal that enabled him to pull in the Disney lucre, and bring a perverse "wholesome" quality that helped the entire NBA to prosper."
Hey DOug, normally I think you are one of the more interesting posters on here, but this is the strangest thing I've read in a while. I hope you were kidding. If not, I suspect you are pretty deep in the closet yourself if you can find such outrageous ways to link everything to homo-erotic metaphor. Project much? Sometimes a Tight End is just a Tight End.