The final round is just underway in Sofia. The posted tiebreak rules are written confusingly, but I think they play a tiebreak match no matter how many people are tied for first. They just take the top two by system. Sasikiran is in the lead on +1 going into the final round, but has black against Topalov. Anyone can win the tournament except for Adams!
Great games for the last round. Nisipeanu and Topalov on the attack!
Looks like Sasikiran choked in the last round (of course, Topalov gets credit for applying pressure, but still...) & is in a lost endgame now after the Q trade. Even someone who's a total idiot re: endgames like me has to be intimidated by those pawns! And that bad bishop: ugh!
Hard to see a win for either Kamsky or Adams, so it looks like Toppy will win it after all. Another amazing comeback. Hope Sasikiran doesn't get too dismayed by this; he played some great chess and is evidently a huge talent.
No praise too high for Topalov's game!! Man, what an effort. That Knight sac came out of the blue. Shades of Tal and Kasparov.
The knight sac was risky and unsound. Accurate play by by Sasi after the Sac would have won him the game. Two examples are Qxd4 instead of Qe7 and Bc8 instead of Ng7 (would have unlocked the Bishop).
Kapalik
[Kapalik wrote: The knight sac was risky and unsound. Accurate play by by Sasi after the Sac would have won him the game. Two examples are Qxd4 instead of Qe7 and Bc8 instead of Ng7 (would have unlocked the Bishop).]
Maybe, but with the clock ticking & the world watching...I don't think too many players would have successfully defended that position in OTB. At least, not without a computer or Danailov [LOL]...kind of ironic that despite the sensational comeback it looks like Topalov will lose points due to the slender margin of victory!
Adams-Kamsky looks pretty even to me; anybody think Adams can get his extra P going or Kamsky can use the B to advantage?
[Kapalik wrote: The knight sac was risky and unsound. Accurate play by by Sasi after the Sac would have won him the game. Two examples are Qxd4 instead of Qe7 and Bc8 instead of Ng7 (would have unlocked the Bishop).]
Maybe, but with the clock ticking & the world watching...I don't think too many players would have successfully defended that position in OTB. At least, not without a computer or Danailov [LOL]...kind of ironic that despite the sensational comeback it looks like Topalov will lose points due to the slender margin of victory!
Adams-Kamsky looks pretty even to me; anybody think Adams can get his extra P going or Kamsky can use the B to advantage?
hey kap, Qxd4 craps out to knight check. jcrist why not lets leave the analysis to gms. peace
[Kapalik wrote: The knight sac was risky and unsound. Accurate play by by Sasi after the Sac would have won him the game. Two examples are Qxd4 instead of Qe7 and Bc8 instead of Ng7 (would have unlocked the Bishop).]
34...Bc8 gets crushed by 35.Bf5. But after 38...Qd4 it looks like white has to take a draw with 39.Kg3 Kh6 40.Qh8, etc. So the sac is hardly 'unsound', as black's position would have otherwise difficult to break through and white had the draw in hand.
Joeblo, what you said makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. If only GMs should analyze games, then why bother playing it at all if one is not a GM, and how would people become GMs except that they climb through the ranks by assessing positions better than GMs? If one relies solely on GM or computer analysis in order to understand chess, then this person is far from a formidable opponent. At some point, people have to think for themselves, and it is perfectly fine to do so and come up with flawed analysis. Even GMs miss knight moves, guy.
Hotep,
Maliq
joeblo, you wrote "Qxd4 craps out to knight check"
38... Qxd4
39. Nf4+ (the only knight check possible) runs into the slight problem of
39... QxN+
assuming we are talking about the same position.
point well taken maliq, i do agree not all gms are great analyst, but my opinion is that most great analysts are gms. lots of pseudo analysts retro fitting great moves after the fact and conveniently off the 'battlefield'. would it not be entirely incorrect to surmise that great players (ie.world champions) are great analysts and extrapolate from there? peace.
actually my reference was more in the threat of Nf4 after Kg3 etc... thanks
Great win by Topalov giving him clear first at MTel! The Indian number two fought valiantly but had to give in at the end to the power of the Bulgarian numbero uno. Nonetheless, Sasi played very well in this tournament. Kudos to him. He is a promising young player. He was just a little too overmatched against Topalov, but did great against the rest of the field.
By the way, did anyone find it amuzing that both wins by Topa against Sasi came after strong pawn attacks? lol
A terrific way for Topalov to finish off the tournament and secure first place.
Ah, what a great day today! Federer just beat Nadal and now I am off to watching NBA playoff basketball!
actually my reference was more in the threat of Nf4 after Kg3 etc... thanks
I have a question-Is it really legal to win a game that one has resigned!? I did it!
I made a blunder that should have cost a rook-I immediatlly said "I resign" My opponent stared at the board for a long while and then made a losing move!!!!!!!
I have a question-Is it really legal to win a game that one has resigned!? I did it!
I made a blunder that should have cost a rook-I immediatlly said "I resign" My opponent stared at the board for a long while and then made a losing move!!!!!!!
Joeblo: Yes, I agree that great players are great analysts, but it does not therefore logically follow that all great analysts are great players. There are many dangerous tacticians who have not attained GM status because they are not yet knowledgeable enough about the laws of chess to know how to break them properly.
Miguel: Don't bother watching this round of the playoffs; just save your energy for the Finals, because this one will potentially be a sleeper. I am living in Ohio and everyone here is crazy about the Cavs, but I don't see that upset happening, and as for Utah vs. San Antonio -- please!
Hotep,
Maliq
Topalov got a solid, though perhaps hard-to-convert advantage, and threw it away for a phantastically risky attack. I am impressed.
I learned a long time ago not to be carried away by phantastic attacking moves. They never work out when I play them. The proper way is to be content with a small advantage and build on it. Why can he win tournaments playing like this?
Because in order to win, OTB play requires also nerve and balls. BTW after 38...Q:d4 39.Kg3! Kh6 (only move) 40.Kh3 White can still play on, although a draw is the most probable outcome in any case.
Topalov is the only first in the end ?!?!?!
Bottom line: Topalov's poor showings continue. Three wins against the two lowest rated players, some very sloppy games, one-move blunders and a couple of lucky escapes. Add to that the further loss of rating points.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the greatest strength of Topalov's play at super-GM level has been (or had been) his superior opening preparation. Once the big novelties ran out, Topalov seems no better or worse than other over-2730 players. His games are surely interesting to watch, but that's about it, I think.
A tournament win is a tournament win. That can't be too disappointing.
You also forgets that Topalov pressed quiet hard in some of his drawn games. He was well worth his 5½ points.
But, as you say, it's not too impressive.
Giannis, if 40.Kh3, black has 40...Bc8, and after 41.Qc8 Nh5 42.g4 Nf6, it's black who has chances, I think.
Hard to see how Topalov threw anything away, though. Instead of trying to grind away forever on a slight plus, he played an extremely strong practical sacrifice which draws at worst (unless there is a real refutation somewhere).
well done Topalov, great player, a pleasure to watch as usual..and +1 is not that bad, after all only Kramnik can always get his +2
poor luckless Adams, his soul got broken by Hydra and it seems that he has never quite recovered from that trauma
Nisi..hmmm..weird openings but honourable play, next time more ambition.
Kamsky, still possesed by an underdog mentality..time to believe that you 'are' the champ, Gata..or Short will eat you alive.
Sasikiran..Hare Krishna bro !
Mamedyarov, unconclusive this time, perhaps a tendency to run out of fuel midflight.
"It is becoming increasingly clear that the greatest strength of Topalov's play at super-GM level has been (or had been) his superior opening preparation."
Exactly. That's why he can win with sacrifices (exchange; or whole piece like today). This is 100% preparation, any idiot can win a game after a sacrifice.
LOL Today Topa has of course proven again to certain experts on this blog that he doesn't understand transition to endgame phase and endgames very well hehehe. Also: suffering a form crisis (cf. Linares) and still being able to win super tournaments is not impressive at all ;-)
Great Topa!
I hope for another Kramnik vs. Topalov match (I am still rooting for Kramnik. The best players around (ok. Anand deserves some credit, as well as Aronian, Ivanchuk, etc.....)
Typical Topalov performance, perhaps not always sound but gutsy and no-holds barred. Spare a thought for Sasi who I thought did very well until coming apart at the very end. Hope this strong showing convinces organisers to invite Sasi more!
jlp,
After 40.Kh3 Bc8+ White can continue with 41.g4 N:h5 42.Qg5+ Kh7 43.Q:h5+. White is never worse, probably draw.
Does anyone what Topalov's rating will be in the July list?
[Giannis: After 40.Kh3 Bc8+ White can continue with 41.g4 N:h5 42.Qg5+ Kh7 43.Q:h5+. White is never worse, probably draw.]
You have the position set up wrong - the WQ is on g8 at that point, so 41.g4 loses to 41...Be6.
Jlp,
I have the position correct, so why is 41...Be6 winning? White can play 42.N:g7 B:g4+ (only move, if 42...B:g8 43.Nf5+ or 42...Q:g7 43.Q:e6) 43.fg4 Qe3+ with a perpetual or even 42.Qf8 keeping the pressure a bit more although Black holds again.
[Giannis: I have the position correct, so why is 41...Be6 winning? White can play 42.N:g7 B:g4+ (only move, if 42...B:g8 43.Nf5+ or 42...Q:g7 43.Q:e6)]
Play through the game - the BK is on g6, not h6, so Nf5 is not check.
Whups, sorry - I mixed your line with someone else's. I think that after 40. Kh3 Bc8+ 41.g4 Nh5 42.Qg5+ Kh7 43.Qh5 Kh7 44.Qh5+ Kg7, black can run to the Q-side. Maybe White can hang on, but black must have the better half of it.
jlp,
Black is never better, not even slightly. Your 44.Qg5+ is not good for white, best is 44.Qe8! Qc3 and now 45.Qe7+ gives White at least a perpetual.
> 45.Qe7+ gives White at least a perpetual.
Plugging it into Fritz gives 0.00 (i.e. =). It would be interesting to see Kasparov's winning plan from the position before the sac, and whether it's as easy as he made it sound.
I am very impressed by Topalov's play. He always tried for the maximum and over-reached a couple of times, but he demonstrated the highest ability and understanding. In the final game, that ending was played extremely impressively; even though it was won, some niceties remained. And the build up was great too, with a nice positional advantage being obtained before opting for the complex sac with minutes remaining on the opponent's clock. The thing with Chess is, you have to beat an opponent; meeting the criteria for "correctness" as declared by some patzer armed with an engine in the comfort of his own home is not required. And Topalov did the beating part very well, in a high pressure situation.
Enough has been said here about the sac...I am more curious if there was a win earlier for Topalov considering he has a definite positional advantage coming out of the opening. Any good thoughts or links on that?
@Yuri:
You can read Russian so http://online.crestbook.com/sofia07-07.htm should be exactly what you are looking for.
Thank you thank you--that was excellent. Shipov is the man, and I largely forgot him after focusing on ChessPro and Notkin. Is there a main site for Shipov's notations? I am presuming he didn't do this for just one game.
@Yuri: You are welcome. :-)
Yes, http://www.crestbook.com seems to be -THE- site to go to for annotations of all the top games. It is becoming my favorite chess website and I don't even speak or read Russian, that's how good the site is. I just follow the annotations.
@Yuri: You are welcome. :-)
Yes, http://www.crestbook.com seems to be -THE- site to go to for annotations of all the top games. It is becoming my favorite chess website and I don't even speak or read Russian, that's how good the site is. I just follow the annotations.