Linares 2007 r11

yeah yeah, whenever anand wins Mig is nowhere to be seen :(

Just kiddin' get well soon Mig!

Ivanchuk's position is bad ass.

Yep, Carlsen smokes Ivanchuk inside two hours. Cue see-what-he-can-do-when-he-tries on the one hand, and on the other see-how-much-good-a-rest-did-him on the other.

Magnus did to Chucky what Anand did to him. 'Twas merciless.

Go Magnus!!!

Massacre.

Magnus Carlsen is a quiet fellow, on the radio interview he barely spoke and spoke very soft when he did.

is there a website for the radio interview, Matt? I also get the feeling Magnus is a shy guy...but then he is a 16-year old in a lion's den of GMs.

Can someone please post a summary of the other games? I already know that Carlsen beat Ivanchuk.

I once met a strong amateur who'd played Magnus when the latter was a preteen. Magnus annihilated him while reading a newspaper, then shouted: "Mommy, I want ice cream!" Demoralizing.

Chesspro's analysis: Topalov is more active than Svidler, looks like fairly good midgame, Topalov about to get a pawn back. Devyatkin thinks Aronian missed Leko's combination. Moro was ahead out of opening but the game is now over in a DRAW.

Magnus was a pre-teen GM.

In reply to Evening Wolf: the reply 'then what's the magic word, young man?' must surely have leaped to your friend's lips.

I lost to Stuart Conquest when he was 12. He offered me a cup of coffee.

Yuriy, the Magnus Carlsen audio interview was on ICCWebcast for Chess.FM

hansie: no, he was a 13 years old, 5 months and 27 days GM.

E Wolf: You caught my bluff. Ok, not GM, nor even an IM. But he was already rated 2300 in 2002 before his 13th Birth Anniversary. Below is the link:
http://www.fide.com/ratings/trarc.phtml?event16=0538&codt=5

Aronian didn't see 19.- Qa6! I guess.

Unbelievable… This tournament is all Carlsen. All the fireworks came from his corner… This kid reminds me of the young pitchers in the MLB – they get the old guys swinging wild cause you never know what you're going to get out of them…

Which begs the obvious question – how does such youth prowess translate into a likelihood of total success later on. Well, he is successful as one can get already, but does that make him the absolute #1 prospect in the field of chess or it's too premature to say…?

D.

Dimi, I certainly hope he is the number 1 prospect. Of course Karyakin and Radjabov are very good too, but as far as my personal preferences go, it's all Carlsen. I think it'll be great to have a world champion from that part of Europe.
The way Carlsen destroyed Chuck today was awesome. I'm sure his loss to Anand the round before showed him that trying to draw is not the way to go.

Way to go Miguel! It took an hour and a half, but we got there.

rdh I wasn't answering to your post. You have nothing good to say anyway so why even bother?

Indeed you weren't answering my post. You were merely conforming to my prediction. I was afraid for a moment I might have turned out to be wrong, but you drawmoaners never let me down.

You're right that I shouldn't bother telling you anything, but there you are, I'm a sucker.

You know, of course, that Ivanchuk recently played this same line as Black against Carlsen's second Peter Heine Nielsen? So there's a very fair chance this game was mostly preparation. That's the difference between playing when you have ideas ready and when you don't.

But hey, you know better than Carlsen what to do to try and win this event and in the longer term become world champion, I'm sure.

With Vishy on 7, Magnus on 6.5 and the third guy a point behind with three rounds to go, this has virtually become a two-horse race..

However, what I am more interested is to see if Vishy can snatch the no.1 ranking from Topalov. My calculations suggest that if Vishy finishes Linares 2.5 or more points ahead of Topalov, he will be no.1 come April 1 (no silly jokes on the chessbase site that day, I hope..). What that translates to is that assuming that Vishy draws the rest of his games, Topalov should NOT get more than 2/3...

Hmm, it took you less than an hour and a half to say something in turn didn't it? Talk about trolls.

You must know really well what it takes to become world champion. Kudos to you.

No, I didn't know about Ivanchuk's game against Carlsen's second. Poor Carlsen, when he wins it's not because he tried fighting but he simply outfoxed the sly Chuck?..

Maybe it goes against your style, but many chess players actually play on even without having prepared the game move by move the night before. And one of them may have been the best ever. Do you remember GK?

Russian friends....

Is the composer's name pronounced

Shah-stah-KOH-vich or

Shah-STAH-kovich?

There are a lot of similarities between todays' Carlsen - Chucky game and sunday's Anand - Carlsen game (but with Carlsen's role reversed).

Some pressure and opening of a file on the queen side, the exchange of rooks initiated by black to relieve tension, the awkwardly placed black knight, the switch of focus to the king side. Additionally both games contained a nice novelty/homeprep by white (Bd3 sunday/h4 today).

It is interesting to note that Magnus won both games against Ivanchuk at Linares 2007 using , i.e., against pieces that cannot move along the line that they are .

In the first game with Magnus playing Black, the White d1-bishop was to the a1-promotion square by the Black f1-rook along the first rank.

In the second game with Magnus playing White, the Black c6-knight was to the Black c7-queen by the White c1-queen along the c-file.

are such a simple tactical concept yet the great chess genius Ivanchuk lost two games because of them.

greg koster: It is Shah-stah-KOH-vich

Great game by Carlsen today. He is so good it is scary. Getting a won position after 25 moves against the world #5 at 16 years old. Imagine what may happen in a few years.

Greg: I'm not Russian but I am a Shostakovich fan, and it's definetely Shos-ta-KO-vich (though the 't' is hard). Note also that it's 'shos' not 'shas'.

Carlsen's h4 was a novelty? Strange, it's a very obvious move in this position.

It is interesting to note that Magnus won both games against Ivanchuk at Linares 2007 using WHOLE PINS, i.e., PINS against pieces that cannot move along the line that they are currently BLOCKING.

In the first game with Magnus playing Black, the White d1-bishop was WHOLLY PINNED to the LOOSE a1-promotion square by the Black f1-rook along the first rank.

In the second game with Magnus playing White, the Black c6-knight was WHOLLY PINNED to the UNDEFENDED Black c7-queen by the White c1-queen along the c-file.

PINS are such a simple tactical concept yet the great chess genius Ivanchuk lost two games because of them.

Exactly! But if we continue to say that SOMEDAY he could very well be mentioned in the same breath as Kasparov, Karpov, Fischer, Capablanca, etc. Andy's aneurysm might burst...so we won't do that.

Carlsen's h4 was a novelty? Strange, it's a very obvious move in this position.
-- Posted by: freitag at March 6, 2007 14:18

My thought exactly. Pushing the h-pawn against a fianchettoed position is a novelty in that position? I find it hard to believe that no GM has ever played that before.

Now playing: String Quartet No. 8 in C Minor Op 110 by Mr. Dmitri

I doubt that the results of this tournament will be incorporated in the elo list of 1 April. The deadline for sending results to FIDE was 28 February or 1 March. Therefore Topalov will stay nr 1 of the list for at least three more months.

In the meantime a lot can change, for instance at the M-Tel Masters. Topalov has to do very well if he wants to catch Anand, who won a lot of points in Linares and the Bundesliga.

@Oscar: What is Anand's record in the Bundesliga this year?

According to my database 17.e5 is the novelty.

He made 2/2 against 2611 (http://www.schachbund.de/SchachBL/beds.php?liga=bl&team=OSC%20Baden%20Baden&spieler=Anand,Viswanathan), which brings him 5-6 elopoints.

i am pretty sure linares will be counted in the April List. And the post by Anand above is correct except for a small typo ... Anand has to finish 1.5 points ahead of Topalov (not 2.5 points) to be #1 on the ELO list. Right now he is 2 points ahead

g, it is always possible that FIDE bends the rules. They have made a habit out of that... But the official deadline was the 28th of February:
http://fide.com/news.asp?id=1265

I am also pretty sure this tournament will be counted towards the April list. FIDE has a history of counting major tournaments into their rating lists despite it ending after the closing date.

Carlsen has stolen Radjabov's Corus thunder!

I wonder if Radja regrets withdrawing from the tournament now . . .

As I said before, FIDE has the habit of breaking their own rules...

http://fide.com/ratings/rtdarca.phtml?event=869&codt=15

Well, we'll know it soon enough ;-)

Svidler-Topalov must have been the best game of the round.

I doubt it. Besides, Radjabov already knows that the, so-to-speak, "new kid in town" is coming for him.

Thanks g, Oscar..

Yes, I meant 1.5 but if he has made 5-6 ELO points from the bundesliga, I guess even 1 point here is good enough? And am sure Linares will be in the next list (those rules are for the lesser events). I think FIDE includes super-GM events even if they end just a couple of days before the ranking-list release...

By the way, should they evolve a bit and release the ranking every two months (if not more often) like most other major sports do?

Thanks g, Oscar..

Yes, I meant 1.5 but if he has made 5-6 ELO points from the bundesliga, I guess even 1 point here is good enough? And am sure Linares will be in the next list (those rules are for the lesser events). I think FIDE includes super-GM events even if they end just a couple of days before the ranking-list release...

By the way, should they evolve a bit and release the ranking every two months (if not more often) like most other major sports do?

Useless Anand-Carlsen statistic: Carlsen is +4 against the rest of the field, while Anand is only +1.

Yeah, Anand does have the kid's number for now. Doesn't bother me too much though since I would like to see Anand #1 in the world. Better late than never.

interesting obversation Ashish
Extending that fantasy stat, if Anand had withdrawn instead of Radjabov and, assuming that Radjabov played like Svidler and drew everything, the standings would be:

1. Carlsen: 7.5
2. Svidler/Radjabov/Ivanchuk: 5.5
3. Aronian/Topalov/Leko/Moro: 5.0

which probably translates to a 16 yr old winning a super tournament like Linares with 2 rounds to spare!! Btw, when was the last time someone one a supertourney with 2 rounds to spare?! Topalov in San Luis, I guess...but, any more?

Of course, all this is simply fantasy...had Carlsen not lost to Anand, he would've probably played less ambitiously looking for draws..

Playing ambitiously or not, going +4=5-0 against the field of Moro, Leko, Chucky, Aronian, Topalov and Svidler is fantastic. I can see Kasparov getting such a result, and not too many others.

According to http://www.teambjornsen.org/blogg.php?BlogId=16 (Norwegian), 15.h4 was played by Fritz Baumbach in 1977.

freitag, gmnotyet.
I guess I was referring to Bd3 was a novelty on sunday.

Maybe h4 wasn't that special today, but at least it came soon after they had deviated from the following two games played between P H Nielsen (Carlsen's second) and Ivanchuk on previous occations.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1360956

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1401008

It's pretty evident that something went right with respect to Carlsen's home prep in this round.

Carlsen can help Anand even more.

I'm pretty sure Topalov with white will try to teach the kid a lesson in their second game. Carlsen has already 2-0 vs Ivanchuk, why stop there? Topalov need to be very careful not to overpush vs Carlsen, unless he can surprise Carlsen in the opening. Carlsen might still have a psycological edge after their first game, where he showed Topa the drawing line.

Topalov-Carlsen is going to be a highly interesting game, I bet no short draw there!

> Playing ambitiously or not, going +4=5-0 against the field of Moro, Leko, Chucky, Aronian, Topalov and Svidler is fantastic. I can see Kasparov getting such a result, and not too many others.

Um, yes, but this is a meaningless stat given that you can make anyone's performance look better by simply removing the losses. What if he'd beaten Anand but lost to Topalov? He would look worse against the field chosen above but in fact would be doing no worse in the tournament than he is now.

I could easily put together a long string of names of people I've never lost to and claim some outrageous performance rating (for me, anyway) against that group. It would be meaningless, though, since I selected the results after the fact to skew the stats.

anand - bundesliga ends in april .. so the 5 points from that will go into anand's kitty only in the July list. so 1.5 points in Morelia / Linares is the magic number for your namesake.

to add to the math guy's post,

excluding Kasimjanov and Morozevich, Anand and Topalov had the same performance in San Luis ...
you can do a similar analysis at every tournament where Anand and Kasparov took part. If you take out Anand's result against Kasparov, the former would win a few of them.

the kid is the real deal no doubt .. but is he a greater prodigy than Kramnik, Leko or Polgar is yet to be seen. actually todays' game against Ivanchuk was his best game of the tournament.

oh ok...thx g

Math guy, again that was just for fun - a fantasy stat..but having said that, whichever way you look at it, not many would have +4 in one tournament against opponents with an avg Elo of about 2750..it is one thing getting 9/9 against a 2350 field and something totally different managing a 6.5/9 against 2750 guys..

it would be interesting if someone could post a comparasion of the performances of the great players at the age of 16..not just Elo ratings (too much of inflation there in recent years) but dominance in tournaments like these...

Didn't Topalov gain some points at Corus, while Anand may have lost some there? Don't think Anand will overtake #1 unless he does better at MTel as well.

vsb, Anand was +2 and Topalov +4 in Corus. At that time Topalov was gaining points on Anand. Now the situation is reversed to a greater degree. Anand is +3, while Topalov -1. So, it seems that Anand will have enough points to overtake the #1 Elo spot at this point. Plus he has some points apparently from some other games like the Bundesliga, whatever that would mean. It is amazing how reversals can workout when so few points separate two players. At Corus some people felt sorry for Anand, being perceived as somewhat tired. Now he's cruising while Topalov is facing guys who're playing hard against him. But then again that's like who's at the top of the Premiership this week -- on any given day the Chelsea and Man U. fans talk all about that.

D.

15.h4 was played in a number of engine-engine games where the opening moves are dictated by expert book makers. The GMs are just catching up ;-)

g

None of the names you mentioned had anywhere near the result that Carlsen is having at age sixteen. Kramnik's first major result was on Board 4 at the Olmpiad when he was 18 and the competition wasn't nearly as strong. The others were older. Even Kasparov and Fischer didn't have this type of result against this strong of competition at this age, and they went on to play some relatively decent chess.

"and they went on to play some relatively decent chess."

That's putting it mildly :)

"None of the names you mentioned had anywhere near the result that Carlsen is having at age sixteen. Kramnik's first major result was on Board 4 at the Olmpiad when he was 18 and the competition wasn't nearly as strong. The others were older. Even Kasparov and Fischer didn't have this type of result against this strong of competition at this age, and they went on to play some relatively decent chess."

This is factually wrong. Fischer was playing the world elite at 15, and Kasparov demolished a strong GM tournament also at 15. I'm also quite sure that Kramnik broke through before age 18.

I don't want to belittle Carlsen's result in this tournament, but things should be put in the right perspective.

Math guy,

It's one thing to pick out the losses from the field, to randomly select the stats. It's another to point out that aside from record against one specific opponent 16-year old kid is achieving a very impressive record against a very impressive field. Who knows, maybe Anand is a difficult opponent for Carlsen style or opening-wise.

Again, this is not putting together a random opposition list. This is all of his opponents in the tournament except one. Knowing this stat, we may wonder if perhaps the first loss to Anand contributed psychologically to Carlsen's subpar effort the second time out, since the stat also tells us he is playing so very well against everybody else.

g, if what you are saying is true, we can say that if it wasn't for his misfortune of achieving his peak in the age of Kasparov, Anand would have had one of the greatest records in the history of chess. Or that if he overcame his Kasparov complex he would have perhaps been the world's best. Or that he was undoubtedly the greatest player of that era, aside from Kasparov. (I believe though that Kasparov usually did better against the field in general and didn't just finish first because of head-to-head games with Anand)

Take stats for what they are worth and they are a very interesting and useful tool.

Alkelele --

Carlsen's 7 opponents in this double round robin are ranked 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 12 in the world.

Kasparov and Fischer came close to winning tournaments of that strength at age 16 where and when? Nowhere and never.

If Carlsen wins Linares it will the be greatest result ever by a 16-year-old, hands down.

Alkelele,

Go back to my post...take your time...and read it word for word exactly how I stated it. Let it sink in and you should be able to understand what I was expressing. You "right perspective" guys continue to put your foot in your mouths. And you know who you are.

Hi Ron,

It was tongue-in-cheek.

Zork, Garry won a supertournament in Bania Luka when he was 16,finishing 2 points ahead of all his great opponents...

geoden,

You're absolutely right about Garry. In fact, after going over his notes to his game with Polugayevsky, I had the same feeling about him then that I have about Carlsen now. It was a very strong tournament, but not at the level that Carlsen is facing in Linares.

Tomorrow's games should be really interesting.

I've been wondering what Mig is up to regarding Magnus - somehow it seems like he isn't comfortable with Magnus current success. If it's due to his negative pre-tournament comments about Magnus or something else, I do not know.

While I see no problem in the casual debater here expressing his/her views on Magnus-Aronian, I think Mig puts himself in a weird light the way he attacks Magnus' decision over a complete paragraph on his blog after round 9, using words as "horrible" twice and saying Magnus has "sinned" against Caissa. Especially in view of his pre-tournament comments about not wanting Magnus here.

After his initial rant, it got weirder: He obviously needed to repeat his attacks with a louder voice when somebody thought he was being a bit too harsh in the first place. Then he went on to using sarcasms with condescending and ironic characteristics about Magnus like the following:

Mig: "We all love the kid and want to pinch his rosy von Trapp cheeks, okay? Love him, all ready to adopt him tomorrow. He's great, wonderful, the most exciting thing to happen to chess since the promotion rule."

Pinch his rosy von Trapp cheeks? Haha. Very funny. Indeed respectful. Let's hear it for your friend Kasparov - how would you describe him in an equally disrespectful manner? Or what about Svidler? I guess you can sneak in some juicy characteristics there too.

Also, there is an evident lack of symmetry when Magnus wins and when Magnus loses. Mig has gone on and on (on the ICC WebCast) about how Magnus was _outplayed_ by Anand in their first encounter in Morelia, even if until Magnus blundered with Be4?? it still was a draw (after gxf gxf exf Rd2 Bg6), despite 2 or 3 clearly weak moves by Magnus. I think Mig must have referred to this (great, by all means) win by Anand using the word "outplayed" at least 10 times on the radio.

What word does he choose when Ivanchuk chose a dubious opening today and later was outplayed by Magnus, move for move? Note that in terms of big, immediate changes in computer evaluation, Magnus did two (2) blunders in his first loss against Anand (= Anand outplayed Magnus) greater than any of Ivanchuk's weak moves today. In Mig's world this translates to "Magnus really got a freebie today" ...

So when Magnus blunders badly and loses, his opponent outplays him, and when Magnus garners an opening advantage to quickly grind down Ivanchuk, then he gets a "freebie"? Go figure...

I think Mig shows total lack of respect for Magnus and his abilities, and this looks very odd to me. Very odd. He's got an influential position in the net chess world - I think he should use it more wisely.

Miguel:

"many chess players actually play on even without having prepared the game move by move the night before. And one of them may have been the best ever. Do you remember GK?"

You're kidding, right? Kasparov revolutionized the entire concept of opening preparations - there has never been a better prepared chess player than Kasparov at his peek.

Why didn't Magnus want to follows Kasparov's recommended "program" for training? Because it involved far too much work (with openings and such) and too little actual chess playing. The internet is a funny place...

Magnus, even at that age, was smart enough to know that by following Kasparov's training regime, it would most likley hurt and not help his chess development. I don't know of too many people that have the energy of Kasparov and can focus it like he does.

Gladiator
u r an obvious Magnus fan..... and Mig hater. By attacking Mig when he is down sick, u r diverting attention from the great play of Magnus.
Let us for a moment charish and admire the 'coming of age' of an exciting new talent in the Chess horizon.... and just wish Mig a 'speedy recovery'.
Ajit-Sydney

If we want to compare Fischer and Carlsen at 16 then how about Fischer in the Candidates tournament in 1959. There Fischer was -3 overall in a 28 round tournament.

So perhaps if we add Carlsen's results in Corus and Morelia/Linares together - here Carlsen is currently -2 on these combined events - but clearly improving as he goes along (as is typical of 16 year olds).

Fischer by comparison was -3 in the first half, and flat in the second half of the Candidates - also improving as he goes along. This particular Candidates tournament (apart from Fischer) had one past and two future world champions.

So probably about a draw at present. Well we can't have that can we? I think I would agree that if Carlsen wins it from here, then it would surpass anything achieved by Fischer at 16.

Regarding Kasparov - he had some great results as a 16-year-old but wasn't allowed to play in a super tournament until he was about 18. He did of course play in a few Soviet championships - but these had a number of relatively weak players. Difficult to compare his results with Carlsen on that basis. With respect the Banja Luka tournament does not really compare to a Morelia/Linares - the average rating was less than 2500 which even allowing for rating inflation could not be called a super tournament. One would imagine that Carlsen would also storm to a win in an average 2600 tournament today.

Both Fischer and Kasparov had reached the world top 5 by the age of 18 - although Carlsen's result is great here I don't think he has managed that yet, but I suspect that he probably will.

there is just no comparing pre-Fritz, pre-internet days with today's crop. Fischer had seen how much world-class opposition before 1959 IZ? It's a silly debate.

Yepperdoodle, censorship is one way! How sad.

GK's win in Banja Luka was indeed a sensation at that time. But according to the Jan '79 rating list the partipiciants (besides GK with no international rating) were world number 9, 26, 37, 46, 64, 79, 92, 97, 104, 109, 116, 128, 147, 94, 856 (Petrosian, Andersson, Smejkal, Browne, Adorjan, Kurajica, Marjanovic, Knezevic, Matanovic, Bukic, Garcia Gonzales, Vukic, Marovic, Hernandez, Sibarevic), not comparable to Linares/Morelia. According to "The Test of Time" the Moscow International GM Tournament two years later in 1981 was "the first serious test in big-time chess". I cannot provide a source but if I remember correctly it was the philosophy of the Botvinnik School not to play too much too early in the chess career.

chesstraveler, Polugaevski wasn't playing, do mean Petrosian (ironically it was a short draw) ? What source do you have ?

Ajit-Sydney:
-- "u r an obvious Magnus fan..... and Mig hater."

Right and wrong. I'm not at all any "Mig hater" - I've read and enjoyed his blog for years, and I've enjoyed his ICC WebCasts until Linares. Mig, on the other hand has just called me an "idiot", "whacko" and "clown" and invented lots of things I never said in any thread. (See the comments after round 8.)

-- "By attacking Mig when he is down sick,"

Mig being sick is completely irrelevant, the way I see it. My comments won't go anywhere, neither will Mig's comments about Magnus. He can explain the stuff I mentioned above whenever he likes - I won't go anywhere, either. [But it doesn't seem like he thinks he's got anything to explain.]

And about being sick and using steroids - I've been using cortisone steroids for 10 years straight now (and I have to, for medical reasons), but it's hardly got anything to do with online discussions, has it? [Not implying that Mig has used this as an argument for anything, since he hasn't - it was you who mentioned the sickness.]

Conclusion: I'm in no business of attacking Mig per se, I just think his reporting on Magnus in Linares has been more than just a little "strange".

As a longtime Anand fan, I am sure he will find some way to screw up the next 3 games and remain 2nd in the April ratings list. I recall a few years back he was 2797 or 2798, on the verge of crossing 2800 for the first time, and he lost something like 4 games in his very next tournament, finishing dead last. I think that was when he had newly split up with his trainer Ubilava. Does anyone know if Anand has a trainer/second with him these days?

poisoned pawn,

My bad! The notes to Polug's game that I had in mind were actually from the Moscow International 1981. So Garry was actually 17 or 18 at the time and that tournament was a formidable one where Garry tied for second with Polug and Smyslov. Karpov won.

As of about 4 months ago (the last time I ran my ratings), here are the best event performances ever by a player younger than 17 years old:

#1. Kamsky, Gata at Tilburg 1990, 2771 performance: 8.5/14 (61%) vs avg. 2729 opposition
#2. Karjakin, Sergey at 10th Petr Izmailov Mem Tomsk RUS 2006, 2770 performance: 7/10 (70%) vs avg. 2697 opposition
#3. Kasparov, Garry at Banja Luka 1979, 2748 performance: 10.5/14 (75%) vs avg. 2607 opposition
#4. Polgar, Sofia at Rome (Open) 1989, 2735 performance: 5.5/6 (92%) vs avg. 2597 opposition
#5. Polgar, Judit at Dos Hermanas 1993, 2728 performance: 6.5/9 (72%) vs avg. 2643 opposition
#6. Kamsky, Gata at Palma de Mallorca (Open) 1989, 2728 performance: 7/9 (78%) vs avg. 2610 opposition
#7. Fischer, Robert J at Zurich 1959, 2724 performance: 10.5/15 (70%) vs avg. 2607 opposition
#8. Kasparov, Garry at Minsk (URS Championship) 1979, 2719 performance: 10/17 (59%) vs avg. 2669 opposition
#9. Leko, Peter at Vienna 1996, 2717 performance: 5/9 (56%) vs avg. 2728 opposition
#10. Polgar, Judit at Hastings 1992, 2717 performance: 9/14 (64%) vs avg. 2642 opposition
#11. Karjakin, Sergey at Corus A Wijk aan Zee NED 2006, 2717 performance: 7/13 (54%) vs avg. 2715 opposition
#12. Karjakin, Sergey at 6th EICC Warsaw POL 2005, 2715 performance: 9/13 (69%) vs avg. 2612 opposition
#13. Morozevich, Alexander at Tilburg 1993, 2714 performance: 5.5/8 (69%) vs avg. 2658 opposition
#14. Kramnik, Vladimir at Dortmund (Open) 1992, 2713 performance: 7.5/10 (75%) vs avg. 2597 opposition
#15. Radjabov, Teimour at Linares 2004, 2713 performance: 6/12 (50%) vs avg. 2739 opposition
#16. Carlsen, Magnus at 37th Olympiad Turin ITA 2006, 2711 performance: 6/8 (75%) vs avg. 2618 opposition
#17. Almasi, Zoltan at Altensteig 1993, 2709 performance: 8.5/11 (77%) vs avg. 2569 opposition
#18. Leko, Peter at Dortmund 1995, 2707 performance: 5/9 (56%) vs avg. 2716 opposition
#19. Kamsky, Gata at New York (Open) 1990, 2707 performance: 6/8 (75%) vs avg. 2613 opposition
#20. Carlsen, Magnus at Corus B Wijk aan Zee NED 2006, 2705 performance: 9/13 (69%) vs avg. 2600 opposition
#21. Fischer, Robert J at Portoroz (Interzonal) 1958, 2704 performance: 12/20 (60%) vs avg. 2635 opposition
#22. Carlsen, Magnus at GM Biel SUI 2006, 2703 performance: 6/10 (60%) vs avg. 2676 opposition
#23. Radjabov, Teimour at Wijk aan Zee (Corus) 2003, 2702 performance: 6.5/13 (50%) vs avg. 2723 opposition
#24. Karjakin, Sergey at 37th Olympiad Turin ITA 2006, 2701 performance: 7.5/10 (75%) vs avg. 2582 opposition
#25. Fischer, Robert J at New York (USA Championship) 1958, 2700 performance: 6/8 (75%) vs avg. 2604 opposition

Note that only once has a player younger than 17 faced such a strong field: Radjabov at Linares 2003 (scoring -3 in 12 games). My performance score indicates the rating we would assign the player if we knew of no other games besides that one event, so it gives you more credit for longer events, and there is a bonus for facing stronger opposition because it is further evidence that you really are that good. Basically Magnus Carlsen will take his place at the top of this list (barely) if he preserves his +2 score. Here are his possible finishes, and the performance score he would get:

+5: 2833 (best ever for a sub-17-year-old)
+4: 2813 (best ever for a sub-17-year-old)
+3: 2792 (best ever for a sub-17-year-old)
+2: 2772 (best ever for a sub-17-year-old)
+1: 2752 (3rd-best ever for a sub-17-year-old)
=0: 2732 (5th-best ever for a sub-17-year-old)
-1: 2711 (16th-best ever for a sub-17-year-old)

Oops, forgot to include their ages in there. Here's the top-25 again:

#1. Kamsky, Gata (age 16y3m) at Tilburg 1990, 2771 performance: 8.5/14 (61%) vs avg. 2729 opposition
#2. Karjakin, Sergey (age 16y6m) at 10th Petr Izmailov Mem Tomsk RUS 2006, 2770 performance: 7/10 (70%) vs avg. 2697 opposition
#3. Kasparov, Garry (age 16y0m) at Banja Luka 1979, 2748 performance: 10.5/14 (75%) vs avg. 2607 opposition
#4. Polgar, Sofia (age 14y2m) at Rome (Open) 1989, 2735 performance: 5.5/6 (92%) vs avg. 2597 opposition
#5. Polgar, Judit (age 16y9m) at Dos Hermanas 1993, 2728 performance: 6.5/9 (72%) vs avg. 2643 opposition
#6. Kamsky, Gata (age 15y6m) at Palma de Mallorca (Open) 1989, 2728 performance: 7/9 (78%) vs avg. 2610 opposition
#7. Fischer, Robert J (age 16y2m) at Zurich 1959, 2724 performance: 10.5/15 (70%) vs avg. 2607 opposition
#8. Kasparov, Garry (age 16y8m) at Minsk (URS Championship) 1979, 2719 performance: 10/17 (59%) vs avg. 2669 opposition
#9. Leko, Peter (age 16y11m) at Vienna 1996, 2717 performance: 5/9 (56%) vs avg. 2728 opposition
#10. Polgar, Judit (age 16y5m) at Hastings 1992, 2717 performance: 9/14 (64%) vs avg. 2642 opposition
#11. Karjakin, Sergey (age 16y0m) at Corus A Wijk aan Zee NED 2006, 2717 performance: 7/13 (54%) vs avg. 2715 opposition
#12. Karjakin, Sergey (age 15y5m) at 6th EICC Warsaw POL 2005, 2715 performance: 9/13 (69%) vs avg. 2612 opposition
#13. Morozevich, Alexander (age 16y4m) at Tilburg 1993, 2714 performance: 5.5/8 (69%) vs avg. 2658 opposition
#14. Kramnik, Vladimir (age 16y10m) at Dortmund (Open) 1992, 2713 performance: 7.5/10 (75%) vs avg. 2597 opposition
#15. Radjabov, Teimour (age 16y11m) at Linares 2004, 2713 performance: 6/12 (50%) vs avg. 2739 opposition
#16. Carlsen, Magnus (age 15y6m) at 37th Olympiad Turin ITA 2006, 2711 performance: 6/8 (75%) vs avg. 2618 opposition
#17. Almasi, Zoltan (age 16y11m) at Altensteig 1993, 2709 performance: 8.5/11 (77%) vs avg. 2569 opposition
#18. Leko, Peter (age 15y10m) at Dortmund 1995, 2707 performance: 5/9 (56%) vs avg. 2716 opposition
#19. Kamsky, Gata (age 15y10m) at New York (Open) 1990, 2707 performance: 6/8 (75%) vs avg. 2613 opposition
#20. Carlsen, Magnus (age 15y2m) at Corus B Wijk aan Zee NED 2006, 2705 performance: 9/13 (69%) vs avg. 2600 opposition
#21. Fischer, Robert J (age 15y5m) at Portoroz (Interzonal) 1958, 2704 performance: 12/20 (60%) vs avg. 2635 opposition
#22. Carlsen, Magnus (age 15y8m) at GM Biel SUI 2006, 2703 performance: 6/10 (60%) vs avg. 2676 opposition
#23. Radjabov, Teimour (age 15y10m) at Wijk aan Zee (Corus) 2003, 2702 performance: 6.5/13 (50%) vs avg. 2723 opposition
#24. Karjakin, Sergey (age 16y4m) at 37th Olympiad Turin ITA 2006, 2701 performance: 7.5/10 (75%) vs avg. 2582 opposition
#25. Fischer, Robert J (age 15y9m) at New York (USA Championship) 1958, 2700 performance: 6/8 (75%) vs avg. 2604 opposition

Which poses the question: What has Kamsky been doing lately? He's dropped off the face of the earth again. Or perhaps like the previously mentioned Shostakovich, when he composed his 8th Symphony, he's cloistered in a cabin somewhere with wooden table and chair (laptop in lieu of pen and paper) composing his next masterpiece for the upcoming candidates matches.

lol, this is getting really technical, but it is interesting to see that you are actually placing Kamsky and Karjakin on top, and not Fischer or Garry.

I don't really care that much if this will be the best ever performance by a 16 year old or not, what matters is that Magnus has gained lots of confidence and now knows that he can beat anyone

#2. Karjakin, Sergey at 10th Petr Izmailov Mem Tomsk RUS 2006, 2770 performance: 7/10 (70%) vs avg. 2697 opposition
---
This was a rapid event.

Jeff!

When will the chessmetrics website be updated??

It would be nice to see the trend of Carlsen's progression beyond the age of 14.

off topic :

Brothel owners in Bulgaria are blaming global warming for staff shortages.
They claim their best girls are working in ski resorts because a lack of snow has forced tourists to seek other pleasures.
Petra Nestorova, who runs an escort agency in Sofia, said: 'We have hired students, but they are temps and nothing like our elite girls.'

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=39945&in_page_id=2

Jeff Sonas,

What kind of performance ratings are that? Magnus had above 2800 PR in Turin, same had Karjakin.

Martin!

Tale a look at Jeff's website www.chessmetrics.com

RR, right. I am waiting for one of Anand's untimely "swan dives" (to use a clubfoot phrase) as well. Seems too good to be true right now.

darn, I forgot that I am now posting as d_tal!

Jeff, wasn't Kramnik still 16 during his 8.5/9 performance in the 1992 Olympiad?

Jeff,

wow, that was fast and substantial. Thank you so much for the interesting insight and all your work.

acirce, according to this:

http://www.olimpbase.org/1992/1992in.html

the Olympiad ended on 25th June 1992, which was Kramnik's 17th birthday, according to this.

http://www.kramnik.com/eng/biography/index.aspx.

Curiously it says he was born in Moscow. I always thought he was born in somewhere called Tuapse, but maybe he was just brought up there.

rdh: Thanks, the first was exactly what I thought, so his performance was made while he was still 16. June 25 was the day of the closing ceremony which I think was not a playing day, not that it would matter a lot. Here we should note that even though he was playing on the lower boards the opposition was still pretty good - he beat Nunn and Seirawan among others - so I would be surprised if this should not be on Sonas' list.

As for his birthplace, I think he was actually born in Tuapse indeed, or perhaps Sochi? This was pointed out in the message boards a while ago, and the administrators replied that they would change that next time they updated the biography. So either they've been very lazy or they checked it and it's actually right the way it is, I'm not totally sure.

Oh, in the interview where he is talking about the World Champions he says he was born in Tuapse - not just grown up there:

http://www.kramnik.com/eng/interviews/getinterview.aspx?id=61

"I did not have the opportunity to study chess classics when I was a child. I was born in the Russian provincial town of Tuapse where chess literature was difficult to obtain; only books on modern players, such as Karpov, Petrosian, etc. were available. Of course, later I filled the gap in my education."

Sonas math makes little sense, in my opinion (having read what I've seen here and on the chessbase site).

It makes no sense, for instance, to assign higher or lower performance ratings based on the length of the event. In a short event, you can just as easily underperform your true strength as overperform. What would vary would be the error range for the rating. It would make much more sense to say something like "performance 2750 +/- 250 95% probability" or something like that. We would expect the +/- part to be higher for shorter events.

Whatever happens from here, Carlsen's display at Linares will be among the most memorable ones from someone his age. But, how much he improves and at what age he reaches his peak is what will prove decisive in whether he goes on to be become just an "ordinary, 2825-rated" world champion or an extraordinary guy to crash the 2900 barrier.. But I guess from here its more than just preparation and calculating ability that will take him to and keep him at the top (Radjabov, Mamdyarov, etc - guys from the east who tend to be more motivated and single-minded in their focus than westerners who tend to have a more well-rounded personality and choose a more balanced lifestyle). I guess it will be his philosophy about life in general which will influence his decisions over the board.. I was eagerly awaiting Kasparov's book "How Life Imitates Chess" but wonder what happened to it? Mig? Any answers?

By the way, those interested in conspiracy theories can cook up something to the likes of Kasparov not wanting Carlsen to break his record of youngest GM or wanting Radjabov (same birthplace) to be WC and having Mig be harsh on the kid (like Gladiator analyzes above) to dent his morale, confidence, etc.. Or maybe big-K was just pissed at Magnus not paying heed to his advice (from Chessbase:We asked Garry Kimovich for his opinion on Carlsen. He said he had conducted one training session with the Norwegian, and thinks that "everything will be alright with this guy". He noted Carlsen’s solid approach to chess and his remarkable resistant capacity. "Of course, he sees tactics brilliantly, but this is applicable to all modern players." My question to Mr. Kasparov: Do you think it was wise for Carlsen to participate in such a strong tournament so early in his career? His reply: "Well, my opinion is that he plays too much, but it seems their choice is to get experience from playing, and maybe such approach also has the right to exist…").

sorry, I meant youngest WC above..

Mig, since you have good contact with Garry Kasparov, I though I'd toss you this link - an analysis of his recent New York speech, by a Dutch filosophy student living in Moscow. http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=655&lp_lang_view=en

Heheh, yes, the "Garry tells Mig what to write on his blog" conspiracy added on top of the "Kasparov wishes ill to X for invented reason Y." All confabulated out of a few mild criticisms that are vastly outnumbered by compliments. (Plus some bonus gratuitious fabrications about what I said on the radio.) Case solved. Excellent work! I knew you could do it. You may now pull your tinfoil hats back on snugly and return to looking for the second gunman.

"How Life Imitates Chess" comes out in German this month, in the UK and Netherlands in April. The US and Russian versions were moved to the Fall 2007 (Christmas) catalog by their publishers. Garry's in several places in Germany and Austria to promote the German edition. Also appearances in England and a full tour in the US. Another dozen editions are scheduled (Spanish, French, etc.), not sure if they will appear in 2007 though. China might, intro by Xie Jun!

Sorry but I don't understand that first paragraph of your comment a 100%, Mig, due to the fact that English is not my native language. Anyways, do let me know if Garry likes some extra exposure for his new book book and wants to do an interview for Chessvibes!

Relax, Peter, Mig is fighting a previous war from higher up the thread.

"vastly outnumbered by compliments." Yepperdoodle, truly a legend in your own mind.

You guys really need to learn to read. As in "MY mild criticisms of Carlsen are vastly outnumbered by MY compliments of Carlsen."

And you wonder why the bias here is your own?

So far the sum total of the case for "Mig hates Carlsen" comes down to the fact that 1) I said he hadn't earned a place in Linares yet and 2) I thought repeating an entire game from earlier in the event was horrible and bizarre. And from that, and in the face of the countless positive things I've said about Carlsen long before this and during this breakout tournament, we have this clown parade of attention-whoring twits. Pathetic.

"...clown parade of attention-whoring twits"

Haven't been following this brawl...but what a line!

Thanks Mig for that info on How Life Imitates Chess

I think Carlsen is cheating. Nobody can be that good at 16.