Boris Gelfand beats Rustam Kasimjanov and Alexei Shirov knocks out Mickey Adams. Both took just three rapid games. Aronian and Carlsen went all the way to blitz, where Aronian just finished winning both games to move on. A heroic fight from the 16-year-old Norwegian. Official site.
The final set of matches: Bareev-Leko, Grischuk-Rublevsky, Aronian-Shirov, Kamsky-Gelfand. They begin Wednesday, June 6. More soon.
Amazing match between Aronian and Carlsen. Congratulations to both.
What a shame that Aronian and Carlsen were drawn against one another. Either of them would be worthy qualifiers for Mexico.
Magnus' time will come!
Heroic effort by both players. I'm proud of Magnus!
Depressing defeat for Magnus.
No good explanation why it should be this way, he knows chess, plays very well, and fights 'heroically' ( as Mig would have it).
Yet he lost.
Perhaps you get what you deserve when you put your faith is something which is, in essence, gambling not science.
Heroic effort by both players. I'm proud of Magnus!
I was impressed by the way Magnus kept playing on drawn positions so long in the rapid.
Great fight by Magnus! Maybe he was tired in the end. He has great future.
In general good figts in Elista. It is strange however that Danailov will negotiate Topalov to play without qualifications http://www.chessdom.com/news/topalov-danailov-talin . The position of the federation ok, but that big delegation??
Back to Elista, everybody thought that Aronian will win easy against Magnus. Mig was right about unstable Aronian. However, Mig, will he be unstable in round 2? I think Aronian has all chances to qualify and if he concentrates why not win the world championship.
1)
I am glad Aronian went to the next round; he played better chess and had the toughest match at all. From the psychological point of view, it is much tougher to face an opponent "you are supposed to defeat, because he is only a teenager", than an opponent at similar level that feels similar pressure to the one you are feeling. He faced an opponent that was free of pressure, that has the idea that everything he could do would be OK and started as the underdog.
In other words, I feel that in normal circumstances, Aronian is still much superior to Carlsen (although the kid is progressing at astounding pace), and I believe that now in normal circumstances, the match against Shirov is going to be very one-sided in Aronian's favour.
PS: It is a shame that between Carlsen, Shirov, Adams and Aronian, only one can go to the WC tournament.
2) I am glad Gelfand defeated Kasim ... what a tough match (and overlooked here). This could be seen as a punishment for Kasim for not pushing for a victory in the sixth game he had white. I believe Kasim was confident he would have the edge in the rapid playoff against his "older opponent". Gelfand-Kamsky is going to be an espectacular match, much reminiscent of the 90's.
I agree that we need a moment of silence for Magnus. I think we need more irreverence like his--more people to win drawn positions instead of letting opponents off the hook in "book" positions with a handshake!
Ovidiu, wtf?! Any theoretically solvable game is empirically provable, and thus scientific. Any failure is the fault of the player, not some gambling luck. Get over yourself.
Magnus is now ready for the next phase of his chess -he's ready to contend with the world's top 10 players. By this time next year, my guess is that Magnus is going to be a top 5 player, if not better.
Kramnik doesn't like this format for the World Chess Championship. But I've enjoyed it very much.
Go Gata!
Congrats to Shirov too!
I really thought he was going to be eliminated before the rapids. Great fightback.
It is a shame that Aronian, Carlsen, Shirov and Adams were bracketed into the same quarter.
Looking forward to Aronian - Shirov.
I want Magnus in Mexico as a wildcard. He deserves it.
Come on Kirsan do it for the love of the brand of chess he represents.
The Aronian-Carlsen match should be remembered for a long time to come. It was GREAT to see the fighting spirit and the back and forth victories by both players.
I know it is off topic and it must be somewhere else, but could someone tell me how these candidates were selected - and, for instance, why Ivanchuk is not there?
BTW, great games and a lot of fighting spirit! Congrats to Carlsen, who proved to belong to the very elite of chess. Now I am rooting for Gelfand, even knowing that he has to beat Brooklyn. Epic battles ahead...
Ronald
Aronian too deserves praise for having allowed such an open fight (tough it made him appear as careless and "unstable" at times)
Yes, even the tiebreaks were loads of fun! Great that Shirov went through. A pity about Magnus, but then again Aronian is wonderful to watch. And him against Shirov will be really exciting! Only problem is I'm not sure who to hope for... Since Shirov more or less "lost" (not sure what is the correct word here) an opportunity for a match against Kasparov, I think I'll cheer for him. Would've been nice if he finally got a chance. Even though he is not as strong as back then.
What about Gelfand vs Kamsky? I'll vote and hope for Kamsky. It is a bit nostalgic to see him come back again. Who would've belived that after so many years. That will clearly be the two most interesting fights.
I guess Grischuc - Rublevsky will be rather even, with a small edge to the slim lazy one. Leko - Bareev will probably be too one sided.
I am extremely disappointed by the performance of Michael Adams. He really does need to change his approach to these kinds of matches. He should have a second, so that he can play some other openings than the predictable ones he plays and have someone to advise him. His game is kind of stale and stagnent at the moment.
"I know it is off topic and it must be somewhere else, but could someone tell me how these candidates were selected - and, for instance, why Ivanchuk is not there?"
Ten qualified by the World Cup back in 2005, and five by rating. Kasimjanov got the last place by virtue of being the last knockout champion. Ivanchuk's rating was not high enough to earn him one of the automatic spots, and he lost in the second round at the World Cup, effectively knocking him out of this cycle.
Ronald, see this article:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2791
to understand where these players came from. It's a little out-of-date because it was written before the final rounds of the World Cup that determined the final participants, but it answers the Ivanchuk question, for instance.
Congratulations to Aronian from Norway! Hope he qualifies for the final in Mexico. Magnus will be back in 2009, better than ever before. Next tournament for Magnus is Biel :-)
Magnus had the best match so far. Kamsky and Bareev come close second.
So what are your picks for the final 4? I think Aronian will go. The battle of the 90's should be won by Kamsky. The rest are very unclear.
Aronian-Carlsen was THE most entertaining (candidates) match for as long as most of us could remember!!! Whatever happens in Mexico, it shouldn't be too difficult to find a sponsor for a 12-game match between these two!
1. Congratulations to Aronian for (all things considered) deserved win.
2. Magnus Carlsen's saga continues!
3. My favorites to go to Mexico: Aronian, Leko, Grischuk & Gelfand.
Well done Aronian. I hope Carlsen will not get used to losing at the last moment like against Radjabov.
1. Congratulations to Aronian for (all things considered) deserved win.
2. Magnus Carlsen's saga continues!
3. My favorites to go to Mexico: Aronian, Leko, Grischuk & Gelfand.
Depressing defeat for Magnus.
No good explanation why it should be this way, he knows chess, plays very well, and fights 'heroically' ( as Mig would have it).
Yet he lost.
Perhaps you get what you deserve when you put your faith is something which is, in essence, gambling not science.
Posted by: Ovidiu at June 3, 2007 12:33
Hmmm, let's see. The youngest candidate in history loses to an older and much more experienced opponent who is rated almost 100 points higher.
Yet, you can find "no good explanation" as to why this might happen, let alone acknowledge Carlsen's achievement.
Perhaps you should "put your faith in something which is, in essence.....science"
Perhaps if you are gonna go by rating and experience rather than the quality of on-the-board play in this match, the question is how did the player who has more experience and a huge rating edge end up being drawn 2-2 in 6 classical games, drawn again in rapids and ended up having to settle the edge in blitz, which is probably not so much science.
"He [Aronian] faced an opponent that was free of pressure, that has the idea that everything he could do would be OK and started as the underdog."
-Posted by: Sandorchess at June 3, 2007 12:41
Carlsen may have been the underdog, but the presence of the Norwegian media at these matches, mentioned in another thread, would have to qualify as pressure don't you think? The sense that your home country is closely following your performance is not a light burden. He deserves credit for very resilient play under these circumstances against a very strong opponent.
I'm not sure about what is disappointing about Carlsen performance... sure he lost by a hair. But after all, Aronian is currently rated #5, and he is a fast progressing chess player - 5 years ago he was "only" rated like 2580ish.
Carlsen is 8 years younger.
In any case, I'm not sure what their early FIDE title has brought to Ponomariov and Kasimdzhanov. Neither of them did any progress since them.
It would be sad if Carlsen had won a FIDE title at 16 years, and downhill from there, became a Chess version of Britney Spears.
Marca: Leko is the heavy favorite to crush Bareev.
Congrats to both Carlsen and Aronian. They both deserve to be in Mexico, and they are both very nice persons. They are the kind of people whom you wish luck whether you are an Armenian or Norwegian.
Magnus did an impressive job. I want to thank him for reminding everybody with his sportsmanship and personality that chess could be an enjoyable matter when we can (even briefly) forget about high profile toiletgate scandals and all the harsh things money has brought to a pure sport. Best wishes for Levon in an exiting match with the fire maker :)
Let's just consider this loss as time on the farm for Carlsen. A match like this can only make him a better player and not a worse one. Most of his life is ahead of him, and so is his
chess career. It's not his time yet to be on top of the chess world.
Let's just consider this loss as time on the farm for Carlsen. A match like this can only make him a better player and not a worse one. Most of his life is ahead of him, and so is his
chess career. It's not his time yet to be on top of the chess world.
Magnus did an impressive job. I want to thank him for reminding everybody with his sportsmanship and personality that chess could be an enjoyable matter when we can (even briefly) forget about high profile toiletgate scandals and all the harsh things money has brought to a pure sport. Best wishes for Levon in an exiting match with the fire maker :)
Magnus did an impressive job. I want to thank him for reminding everybody with his sportsmanship and personality that chess could be an enjoyable matter when we can (even briefly) forget about high profile toiletgate scandals and all the harsh things money has brought to a pure sport. Best wishes for Levon in an exiting match with the fire maker :)
The only depressing thing about Aronian-Carlson is that they both can't play in Mexico. Bravo!
Carlsen has lots of talent, killer instinct and is an incredible fighter, can only be a very bright future for him. Gelfand I must say showed lots of stamina for a veteran like himself, never allowing Kasim's aggression to push him into passivity, he always accurately and ruthlessly refuted his repeated attempts, often coming out on top. Shirov back in form or is it just Adams collapsing? I guess we'll know when he faces Aronian, although the latter is almost certainly not in top form himself. Leko vs Bareev is the easiest to predict naturally. Gelfand Kamsk 50-50 imo, just my 5 cents, cheers!
On the light side, this talkshow interview with Magnus Carlsen from after Linares is quite entertaining:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N003wIDsiCc
Norwegian language, English subtexts.
Great fight from Magnus. His time WILL come...
In the remaining matches the favorites are relatively clear:
1) Aronian-Shirov: Aronian should advance without much difficulty - I'd say 4-2.
2) Leko-Bareev: Leko will be solid and advance 3,5-2,5 (+1,=5).
3) Rublevsky-Grischuk: could be the most even match of the four. Anyhow, Grischuk to win 3,5-2,5.
4) Gelfand-Kamsky: a good pairing for Gata, because he knows Gelfand's game a lot better than Kasimjanov's. Gelfand's tough, but I pick Kamsky to win - 1,5-3,5.
** PS: It is a shame that between Carlsen, Shirov, Adams and Aronian, only one can go to the WC tournament. **
No kidding - the final championship tournament would have been quite credible with those 4 getting all the candidate spots. Not the very best group, but certainly credible.
I don't think the Leko-Bareev match will be one sided, and Leko will crush Bareev. Even though Leko is rated 100 points higher, they both have similar styles and I think the Caro-Kann is a tougher nut to crack than the French. If Bareev manages to win a game with white the presure on Leko will be enourmos.
My guess is we will see rapids, where Leko should be the favourite.
I'll be rooting for Shirov, but I'd have to say that Aronian is the clear favorite to advance.
Shirov's victory had more to do with Adams' poor form, than anything from his own play.
Bareev seems like a decent chap, but he eliminated Judit, and Leko will be a better addition to the Mexico tournament. If Bareev keeps his fine form, and is prepared to face Leko, it could be a closer match than people reckon. But, I think that Leko will prevail.
Grischuk vs. Rublevsky is the match that is most likely to go to Tie-breaks. However, if it comes down to Rapid Chess, I think that Grischuk has the edge.
Folks are predicting an easy victory for Kamsky, but Gelfand is a better player than Bacrot, and in a lot better form. Neither Kamsky nor Gelfand lost a game....although Gelfand had quite a few more draws. Still, if Kamsky can't obtain an opening edge, Gelfand will be tough to crack. Gelfand's weakness is in handling unbalanced, super-sharp positions, but Kamsky eschews sharp openings.
Just to be different, I'll predict a victory by Gelfand
"I think the Caro-Kann is a tougher nut to crack than the French. (iulan)"
I doubt that Leko will have much trouble against the Caro-Kan. Bareev's Rd5 in game 1 was 'officially' refuted by Khalifman in ' an opening according to Anand 3' (Bf4 instead of Ne5). Judith didn't do her homework, Leko will be much better prepared.
"Yet you can find "no good explanation" as to why this might happen, let alone acknowledge Carlsen's achievement."
What "achievement" Babson ? Are you into "positive thinking" kind of pop psychology ?
Defeat is failure, success would have been surfing the wave in a Tal-like trajectory.. but not such luck for Magnus. Bad fate I guess.
Let's hope, what else can you do anyway in such uncertain matters, that Magnus will not start losing steam as Grischuk did after he played Linares at 16.
At the end Carlsen was a victim of his own opening choice. In the last blitz game he pulled out an Nimzo Indian that was not really good working since Aronian could grap a pawn and things went downhill for Magnus.
Too much flexibility in Magnus' game?
Hey all, new here...
I enjoyed the first round of matches this week and felt the quality of the games was on-par with what we normally see in Candidates Matches. Some blunders, some brilliancies.
My two cents (predictions) on Round Two of the Matches is:
1). Bareev will win. -- Inactive but not inept. Way underrated as his match with Judit should have shown.. Besides, who can route for the "sleeper king" Leko????
2). Aronian on Tie Break over Shirov despite my tremendous desire to see Shirov advance (I hope I am proven wrong on this!)
3). Grischuk over Rublevsky. -- Because he plays better...
4). Gata over Gelfand. Just wait till he starts playing thoeretical stuff. Just ask Kramnik, Salov and Anand how tuff it is to beat this guy in a match!
As a side note I would like to add that I am not Norwegian but as an interested chess fan I must ask.... Magnus WHO???? ...please...........
Axel
@ Mefisto
I doubt that a player of Bareev's quality plays a completely refuted move. He must have an improvement over Khalifman's analysis somewhere. Some strong players (GMs) told me that though Khalifman series is superb, the books do have some analytical errors here and there.
@Peter
Sure, his books are not the bible, but Khalifman's recommendation was superior to Polgar's move.
By the way, last december, Gelfand won against Svidler in a line recommended by Khalifman. In the press conference afterwards, Gelfand said that he got the idea from Khalifman's book. So, the books are even useful for top-GM's.
"The final set of matches: Bareev-Leko, Grischuk-Rublevsky, Aronian-Shirov, Kamsky-Gelfand. They begin Wednesday, June 6."
OK, I didnt realise that the second set of matches was due to start so soon.
That's brutal for the players, but good fun for us spectators!
Well I guess I gotta put my predictions in as well.
Bareev-Leko: Gotta give this one to Leko (I have to agree with peter above though; I doubt Bareev, of active players probably THE expert on the Caro-Kann, would play Rd5 without having some sort of improvement against Khalifmans recommendations). This should be a close one, very likely only 1 decided games or even tie-breaks, but although I quite like Bareev I have to give a small but definite edge to Leko.
Grischuk-rublevsky: I will go with Rublevsky. Very hard match to predict, so mostly just to be different and I like upsets :-)
Aronian-Shirov: Aronian. Should be another entertaining match, but I think Aronian is just the stronger player at the moment.
Kamsky-Gelfand: Another tough one, but I'll go with Gelfand unless Kamsky improves his opening play. Gelfand is a very solid player and also well capable of taking advantage of suspect opening play. However if Kamsky 'survives' the opening stage I think he's probably the more talented player (however you can measure that).
Note that if Bareev and Rublevsky win their matches, the last eight in Mexico will include two of Kramnik's seconds and his buddy the Svid...
I'm rooting for Shirov all the way, come on man! this is the moment to use all the angst from the aborted and unpaid matches positively as added motivation!!
Mefisto, yes - Khalifman is valuable.
But even me - a 2300-player - is never playing an opening without knowing what to do against Khalifmans recomendation. If I want to play an opening, I first have to find a small analysis/evaluation error in Khalifman. I could take days, but I will never play an opening without knowing what to do against Khalifman.
I'm sure Bareev has an idea, too.
peter:
Yes, and I would be extremely surprised if there weren't plenty of analytical errors, considering the enormous amount of variations in those books. Put the Kramnik and Anand series together and you have approximately one billion pages lines, lines, lines. He can't possibly have checked everything as carefully as would be needed to draw surefire conclusions. But it's a great project.
Peter, Tigrano,
Bareev had most probably something in store against Khalifman recommendation but Polgar did not test him. She probably did not look at the variation thoroughly at home.
I'm sure Leko will pose Bareev some concrete openings problems in his 'beloved' Caro-Kan.
My bet is that Leko will win the match 3.5-1.5, two wins with white and three draws.
Kamsky has a tough experienced opponent in Gelfand. I would be amazed if Kamsky won this match, as it seems, Gelfand is better prepared with theoretical opening surprises!
So, here we are with our predictions! For my aprt, I think Gelfand will win convincingly over Kamsky. Forgive me, but I feel that Kamsky had a virtual bye when he was paired with the evidently out-of-shape Bacrot. Just look at his games. Leko has been erratic in his performance and so we don't really know who's going to show up against Bareev. I will go with Leko nevertheless. Grischuk over Rublevsky because the former is still considered a rising star with great potential and a bright future. Of course, there is Aronian. He is the best player in that group, in my opinion. My holy trinity is Kramnik-Anand-Aronian. Shirov and Rublevsky are, of course, very very good players but they have passed their prime, kinda missed the boat in regards to going all the way to the top of the WC.
Aronian - Gelfand - Leko - Grischuk.
To go with Anand - Kramnik - Morozevich - Svidler.
Not a bad tournament, for sure.
I think Anand will win it.
I think Rublevsky is pretty much able to win against Grischuk. Ponomariev is not much weaker than Grischuk.
"Yet you can find "no good explanation" as to why this might happen, let alone acknowledge Carlsen's achievement."
What "achievement" Babson ? Are you into "positive thinking" kind of pop psychology ?
Defeat is failure, success would have been surfing the wave in a Tal-like trajectory.. but not such luck for Magnus. Bad fate I guess.
Posted by: Ovidiu
As typical when challenged to defend his nonsense, Ovidiu scuttles away from his earlier indefensible position and now shines his clown logic somewhere else.
What achievement?? What planet are you on? Being the youngest candidate in history and battling a higher rated, more experienced opponent into the tie-break round. Winning a must win game in round 4 to take the match to blitz games : most people, except Ovidiu apparently, would see something positive to take away from this. I'm sure Carlsen is disappointed, but "depressed"? Who's playing pop-psychology now? Did you see Carlsen on TV after Linares?
"Defeat is failure" - this from the Reader's Digest Sun Tzu. I much preferred it when Ovidiu constrained himself to posting wads of pasted Rybka analysis and declaring that all chess not played by machines was unworthy of discussion.
Ovidiu, I suggest you go back to your earlier ways, abandon such laughable phrases as "surfing the wave in a Tal-like trajectory" and leave the discussion of tournaments to people who actually admire and respect the players and their achievements.
P.S (Sorry for the long post everyone else, but straw, camel etc.)
Babson,
When the greatest fighter in chess history sits with his little toy toilet forlornly on the WCC sidelines, everything in the world, even Aronian-Carlson, seems depressing.
Match predictions
1) The most interesting one---Kamsky-Gelfand. Comments like wait till Kamsky plays theoretical lines or Gelfand can't handle sharp openings show zero comprehension of who is Gelfand. Gelfand is a master of deep preparation in a very narrow and sharp repetoire. Kamsky will have a very hard time surviving the openings and Gelfand has a big edge.
2) Grischuk- Rublevsky. Grischuk is a monster with white and I don't see Rublevsky's black openings holding up. He may hit back with white, but not enough.
3)Aronian-Shirov. Aronian is too strong.
4) Leko-Bareev. Leko seems like Bareev+. The only scenario I could see Bareev pulling an upset is if Bareev can grit his teeth and make it to the tiebrakers when Leko's weak nerves might take over.
Everyone seems to forget that Gelfand was content to take 6 draws to go to tiebreakers even when he was the underdog against Kasim. If Kamsky is pressing with his whites and Gelfand is sitting on his, Kamsky will win. Past performance IS an indicator of future performance.
The problem is that he is deeply prepared only within a narrow repetoire. Especially when he is Black, he is less sure in dealing with sharp openings. Also, when the game enters the transition from sharp opening to sharp middlegame, and Gelfand leaves his prepared analysis, he seems less sure of himself, and has fumbled away promising positions (even where his preparation gave him a big edge).
I like Gelfand, and find his play to be interesting, and worth playing over. He is a Super-GM, in every sense of the word. But every player--even Kasparov--has his or her relative weaknesses. Gelfand's strength is in strategic and positional play; his relative weakness is in the realm of tactics
"1) The most interesting one---Kamsky-Gelfand. Comments like wait till Kamsky plays theoretical lines or Gelfand can't handle sharp openings show zero comprehension of who is Gelfand. Gelfand is a master of deep preparation in a very narrow and sharp repetoire. Kamsky will have a very hard time surviving the openings and Gelfand has a big edge."
"...Gelfand was content to take 6 draws..."
Not if you actually look at the games. Do so.
Yeah, I have seen quite a few of the higher-ranked commentators rate Gelfand-Kasim (with exception of the no-game Game 6) as having the highest quality chess. It was a bit underrated and underwatched match, because games ended in draws and because few people have strong emotional connection to either player.
"P.S (Sorry for the long post everyone else, but straw, camel etc.)"
Too late Babson, you have already posted it.
As for Magnus, he is young, he has all the future ahead to gain more OTB experience, etc. you know the line.
The supreme irony of this match would be if Aronian becomes WCC.
Neither Gelfand or Kamsky has a big edge in this upcoming match. Gelfand does have an advantage in theoretical knowledge, but Kamsky has more experience in "elite" match play. It should be hard fought and predicting a winner now would be the equivalent of fliipping a coin.
I think Shirov has a reasonable chance against Aronian and might surprise everyone. They have played 3 times the first in 05 a slav Shirov drew a very double edged rapid game as black and 2 whites for Shirov - a marshall in 06 where Shirov famously overpressed and lost and the 3rd an anti marshall line this year drawn
Apologies to whoever I'm stealing this from but...
Gelfand plays positionally because he wants to, not because he can't play sharp games.
Look em up. :)
Apologies to whoever I'm stealing this from but...
Gelfand plays positionally because he wants to, not because he can't play sharp games.
Look em up. :)
Let Topalov be the 9th player in the finals. Let Kasparov choose the 10th player.
amen.
Aronian next champion. kramnik going down.
really hope Danailov gets Topalov into Mexico tournament. but then Aronian might not become champ...
Petr
Gelfand vs. Kamsky is maybe the most interesting setup. I would say Gelfand is the better player in the moment, but he does not like to play against Kamsky - which is no good sign.
Aronian over Shirov.
Leko over Bareev.
Grischuk over Rublevski.
Gelfand over Gata.
Winner of Mexico = one of the Russians.
Suppose that Bareev qualifies. Then we will have 5 Russians playing (Kramnik, Bareev, Svidler, Moro, and either Grischuk or Rublevski) in a field of 8. Even without Bareev there will be 4 Russians. At San Luis there were only 2 Russians (Moro and Svidler). Frankly this tournament is an accident waiting to happen. I am not accusing anyone but the incentives the Russians will have to gang up against the others are clear. This is the reason Fischer argued for candidates matches 40 years ago. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
Indeed, it is striking how deep-seated American anti-commie prejudice is.
And Gata was born in Russia- that would make 6 russian-born out of 8
And if Shirov qualifies, that is another ethnic Russian. Poor Anand, all alone against the entire might of the Russian chess machine ...
Kramnik has played 4 classical games against: Aronian, 3 draws with black and 1 (beautiful) win with white. If you look at the 3 black draws by Kramnik and compare them with the Magnus classical black games against Aronian its a different world - not surprising given the age/experience difference.
Shirov is of Latvian origin.
rdh,
This has nothing to do with American anti-commie. It is a matter of incentives. Ecomimics 101: people respond to incentives. Have you seen any super tournament recently in which 5 of the 8 partipants were of the same country?? Organizers of super tournaments dont invite 5 out of 8 from the same country for a reason. I feel really sorry for the Mexican organizers. As I stated before this WCC tournament in Mexico is an accident waiting to happen.
To all the whiners,
Let's re-name the Mexico event into USSR Open Championship 2007.
The so-called last Soviet championship in Reggio Emilia 1991 was won by the only non-Soviet in the field - Anand.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1008081
I don't know much about Shirov's ethnic origin but both his name and appearance suggest it's Russian--he may be from Latvia but especially back when he was born lots of Russians lived there.
On the question of national origin of final 8--it is probably more dangerous that some of these guys are good friends than that they come from the same country. If Karpov and Kasparov were in the same tournament they would be rather unlikely co-schemers. Petrosian and Korchnoi hated each other and there was no friendship lost between Botvinnik and Bronstein.
Svidler and Bareev though are both good friends of Kramnik and are likely to play with more fight against Anand than against Vlad. Moro is not as close as the other two, haven't heard about Kramnik & Grischuk, so I don't think they are especially close. As for Kamsky, Vladimir was the one who broke his laptop and Rublevsky tried stealing his camel so I don't think Gata will be part of Team Vlad.
Shirov: "But I hate that guy. I beat him, but he got a match for the title."
Voice behind Iron Curtain: "It doesn't matter, puny Latvian. You will help or I will Molotov-Ribbentrop your ass."
Shirov: "Yes, Comrade Putin."
Yuriy,
Really funny!
Shirov was not born in Russia, and is not Russian. It's not open for debate or opinion, it's a simple fact. It's like saying all people born in the USA are Californians simply because California is the highest-populated state in the USA.
Technically, the country of Shirov's birth was the USSR, which no longer exists. Within the USSR, he was born in the "state" of Latvia.
I was born in Virginia, and at the time, it was part of the USA. If the USA breaks up and every state becomes its own country, I won't suddenly become a Californian. I wasn't born in California, regardless of its status as part of the USA when I was born in the USA.
Josh the difference is that Russia comprised more than half of the USSR, but California is more like a tenth of the US. When people born after the breakup of the Soviet Union think of it, they think of Russia. If the US broke up, people born after it wouldn't automatically think of California. True, Shirov is not Russian, but he is certainly Slavic. Pan-Slavism, man.
Well Kramnik and Grischuk are close enough to have their picture taken in the last issue of NIC, watching the games in Monaco. The picture says something like "Grischuk stopped by because he was in town due to the Poker tour". Does anyone know anything more about Grischuk's poker career? Is it successful?
Actually Shirov IS Russian. He was born in latvia but he is not Latvian by origin. It's just like an English person born in china because his parents were living there at the moment does not mean he is Chinese or vise versa. Anyway, nowadays Nationality doesn'y count that much :) money talks
Yes, Artin. Shirov is an ethnic Russian, just like I said. That is why he had problems getting citizenship in racist Latvia after independence.
And that (Shirov being Russian) is "not open for debate or opinion, it's a simple fact".
I don't think there is a risk that the ethnic russians will form a front
against the others (in casu Anand and Leko). Kramnik and Svidler are friends but they never shown
much respect for each other on the chessboard. Morozovich has no friends
and Shirov would rather die than to agree to lose against Kramnik.
I would not be surprised that each of the Russian contenders prefers Anand as World Champion than a fellow Russian.
however if Rublevsky and Bareev win then Mexico will have 3 of Kramnik's good friends and seconds (Bareev, Svidler, Rublevsky). i'm not saying they wont play 100% professional however imagine that two rounds from end Anand leads with 0,5 point over Kramnik and in the last two rounds he plays against Moro and Leko and draws both games. Kramnik plays against Bareev and Rublevsky and wins both. now imagine that one of those two players has the missfortune of blundering something against Kramnik...
I hope Bareev and Rublevsky qualify. Who will Kramnik prepare with then? :)
Shirov gave an interview to NIC a long time ago, telling how difficult it is to be an ethnic Russian in Latvia. He took off to Spain shortly after that.
I wonder if he finds his situation easier now, living in Lithuania as a Spanish(?) citizen.
Only Bareev is an ethnic Russian, as far as i understand. Other "Russians" are Russian jews. And being a Russian jew or a jew from somewhere else has very little to do with anything.
Leko to win. Other 3: i dont know and that's why it's such a brilliant tournamnet. I'd make Kramnik strong favourite for Mexico.......... with a much more double edged repertoire as black
Now, now. This "russian" discussion is slippery. On the specific topic of collusion, I'll go as far as saying there is a risk of it (as in any closed tournament) among friends (not along national lines any more, even less along "ethnic" lines), especially at the end of the tournament (when some players are out of contention). But that doesn't matter a bit: it's only suspicion (and could degenerate into conspiration theory). What matters will be the facts, i.e. the actual games.
Kramnik would be a favourite if the title was decided by matches. Anand, Aronian and Topalov have proven to be the best tournament players in the past two years. Topalov isn't playing, so Anand and Aronian are the favorites.
my prediction is (if Aronian qualifies)
Anand: 40%
Aronian: 30%
someone else: 30 %
Is Kramnik a jew? I always thought that Shirov was, but now I find out that he is ethnic Russian?
Someone said that Bareev is the only ethnic Russian out of the 'Russians'. So this means that Shirov, Kramnik, Grishuk, Rublevski, Svidler, Morozevich are all jews? Can anyone clarify? Perhaps Mr. Yuri Kleiner knows?
Linux fan: Yeah, I don't know if it's the same interview, but I read a long one in NIC 1995/6 where he talks a bit about this, although just a little. He was also disappointed with the lack of support from the Latvian chess federation, saying that they apparently were more loyal to Kasparov and the PCA. At this time I think he already lived in Spain but had not yet become a citizen.
Ok, a few things:
Let's learn the difference between ethnicity and national origin and then quickly forget both of those silly concepts.
Even if Shirov was Latvian (which he isn't), Latvians are not Slavs--they are "Baltic," closest connection they have is Lithuanians.
Here is some of the respect recently shown by Kramnik and Svidler to each other: http://www.chessbase.com/news/2007/games/wijka09.htm
Why would somebody assume Moro has no friends? Because he is an eccentric player? He happens to be very close with Kasimdzhanov.
Shirov is ethnic Russian, Rublevsky is ethnic Russian and whatever Kramnik is he is Christian and Russian at least from his dad's side.
Tournament results in the past year:
Kramnik--one win and one half point out of first
Topalov--one win, one MTel Win, one 2 point out first and one 2.5 points out of first
Anand--one win, one one point out of first
Aronian--one win, one 1.5 points out of first (50%), one 2.5 points out of first
I don't know if all of those guys are Russian Jews. Svidler probably is at least part Jew, but other than that, I don't know. And of course, by "Russian" can mean two things - citizen of Russia and an ethnic Russian. Everyone representing Russia is of course a Russian in the sense of being a Russian citizen. Shirov, Bareev and probably some others are ethnic Russians. Very likely that some of the players representing Russia have some sort of mixed ethnic background, like Kramnik could be part Russian, part Jew, part something else. Same with Morzevich, etc
Here's my understanding of it. Please coreect me if I'm wrong.
Those representing Russia are "rossiskie", those of Russian ethnicity are "russkie", and neither is a subset of the other. You can be a Latvian citizen and still be "ruskii", but not "rossiskii". Similarly, you can be "rossiskii" but not "ruskii", for example a Russian citizen of Tajik ancestry.
Question for Russian people--is being Jewish considered a separate "natsionalnost"? If so, does that mean that Jews are never considered "russkie"? Or am I misunderstanding something?
There's so much talk about Russian here, Russian there...Slav there, Slav here...and so on. Move to a place where you are most comfortable and try to assimilate w/o forgetting your roots, a delicate balance indeed. Blood-relation is overrated, and so is ethnicity. Judge people by how they interact with you. As I told my wonderfully hypocritical aunts and cousin, my friends treat me better than you! Peace.
IWillWorkHarder, you got it right, I think.
And yes, Jews are considered a separate ethnicity - why wouldn't they be? Actually, there is also a distinction between being Jewish by faith ("iudei") and Jewish by ethnicity ("evrei")
I ma guessing if a Russian converted to judaism, he would become "iudei". As for whether ethnic Jews are ever considered "russkie"- I guess it works the same way everywhere - if you an Italian-American, can you also be considered Irish-American? Not really, unless you also have ancestors from Ireland, and then you probably wouldn't identify yourself as Italian-American in the first place.
Thanks Russianbear--I was curious about the Russian conception of Jewish ethnicity because it seems that most ethnic identities are based on things like language and region more so than religion and customs, which tend to be associated with, but do not define, an ethnicity. Because of the Jewish diaspora, there aren't essential regional and linguistic dimensions to being Jewish as there would be for being Uzbek or Ingush or whatever. So to characterize Jews as a separate "natsionalnost" is not an immediately obvious approach.
And if an ethnic Jew converts to Christianity? Still "evrei", I assume?
Yes, still 'evrei'.
As for "essential regional and linguistic dimensions", check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast
Too bad so little attention is given to what Rustam achieved. He was (if I am not mistaken) ranked 15 on rating in the field of participants, but easily held his own against uber theoretician and +2700 monster Gelfand. And on top of that, if I may say so, these two played, according to me, the most interesting opening battles of all the matches. Most of the times going for some really sharp variations in the whole semi-slav complex.
Go Kasim, you have every right to be really proud about your achievement. Come back soon to show us that you really are worth much more than that rating on which people always judge you.
If Aronian qualifies for Mexico, there will be collusion between him and Anand because both of their last names start with A. Hey, it makes as much sense as most of the conspiracy theories on here.
Also, in case anyone still cares, the only top players I can think of who are Jewish are Svidler and Gelfand. Kramnik, Morozevich, Shirov, Grischuk, etc. are all ethnic Russians. It used to be a good assumption that most of the top Russian chess players were ethnic Jews, but it's not true anymore. Once the Iron Curtain opened up and Jews were free to leave Russia, most chose to do so, and then found better things to do for a living than play chess. So now much fewer professional chess players are Jewish.
Give me a break chuddog. Aronian and Anand were not born in the same country, do not speak the same language, do not share the same culture, and have not acted as second for Kramnik. Even if there is no collusion the expectation or suspicion of collusion will always be up in the air. Thus the credibility of the WCC in Mexico will always be under question. I have nothing against the Russians, my position would be the same if we had 5 Armenians or 5 Bulgarians or whatever in a field of 8. This tournament is an accident waiting to happen as I said.
For the sake of the argument suppose Topalov and his second Cheparinov were playing in this tournament. Suppose we go into the last round with Topa-Cheparinov and that Topa needs to win to become world champion. It does not take a genius to realize the conflict of interests in this situation. Now, Mexico will have 4 or 5 Russians, some of them closely connected to Kramnik. With that many Russians, in the last couple of rounds chances are high that we will have a number of "conflicts of interest" to put it mildly.
Mathias; From my limited 1-year experience watching the very top levels, rating within about 50 points doesn't matter so much. However, Kasim's was still a remarkable achievement. He has been relatively inactive for a while now and it can't be easy, even for a super-GM, to play Gelfand in a match.
Gelfand is growing on me, ever since he refuted a zany open Sicilian attack from Nakamura not so long ago. (Not that I have ill will towards Hikaru - quite the contrary, I wish him success.) You might argue the attack was unsound, but we've seen Grishuk, Sutovsky and other powerful players get bamboozled by similar craziness from HN. So Gelfand's defense made an impression on me. And now these principled games vs. Kasim. After all these years I am slowly realizing he's an interesting player!
I will cheer for Kamsky in their upcoming match but am puzzled by those who think he'll win comfortably. Gelfand is tough, tough.
ed, the point is that not all Russians are friends and stonehard allies, just like not all {insert nationality of choice} are friends and stonehard allies. The fact that Svidler and Bareev were born in Russia matters infinitely less than that they are friends with Kramnik. In the scenario you site Cheparainov is Topalov's second, works for Topalov, is managed by the person, etc. You have to consider the relationship of the two players individually, their characters as well as their relationship to the player they might potentially be screwing by throwing the game. For example, would Morozevich intentionally lose to Kramnik to prevent Anand becoming world champion? I don't know enough about all three guys, but the answer to me is not a clear yes.
kgd, 50 points roughly separates #1 Anand and Gelfand/Adams/Svidler, the latter group and Eljanov/Karjakin/Rublevsky. Not to say that these groups are a world apart, but generally when looking at them we have considerably different expectations of where you would expect them to finish. Kasim actually played more classical chess games this year than Gelfand.
Just for the record I dont think there was ever a time when "most" of the top Russian chess players were ethnic jews if you take for example the soviet championship there were never any where the majority of participants were ethnic jews. Although if you looked at the Soviet teams over the years maybe it might be different but I dont think so unless you start sliding in players who had one jewish parent (korchnoi, Kasparov etc) Of the current top players I believe Judit Polgar is included in the "lists" of jewish chess players although I have no idea whether she or indeed Svidler regard themselves as jewish or belong to another religion.
I like Yuri's tournament analysis of the last year which gives an interesting perspective showing Kramnik doing better than Anand and Aronian
Shirov is ethnically Russian, no one in Latvia accept that he is Latvian. His family is considered to be one of occupiers. He is as Russian as anyone born in Russia. If you are ignorant of this fact you should listen to those who know this better istead of making silly arguments.
Jean wrote: "... if Rublevsky and Bareev win then Mexico will have 3 of Kramnik's good friends and seconds (Bareev, Svidler, Rublevsky). i'm not saying they wont play 100% professional however imagine that two rounds from end Anand leads with 0,5 point over Kramnik and in the last two rounds he plays against Moro and Leko and draws both games. Kramnik plays against Bareev and Rublevsky and wins both. now imagine that one of those two players has the missfortune of blundering something against Kramnik... "
You forget that if Kramnik finishes second, he will have to play a match against the winner, and if he wins he probably must play Danailov again. I think the chances are bigger that he would make a few draws to avoid that clown, than that he would ask for help to face him again.
I still hope they will change the format, and substitute Kramnik with Topalov. Really, that would make most sense
guess it is me again: AMEN.
"Shirov is ethnically Russian, no one in Latvia accept that he is Latvian. His family is considered to be one of occupiers. "
Such non-sense is how we got war in ex-Yugoslavia (and most of the genocides). Shall we start to talk about how Adams is an ethnic Briton (or ethnic Scotish?), Nakamura an ethnic Japanese, ... ? What about ethnic Californians, ethnic Texans, ethnic New Yorkers? And ethnic Yankees?
An interesting interview with Bovaev here:
http://globalchess.eu/main.php?id=52
revealing (some of) the backstage negotiations during the toilet scandal of Kramnik-Topalov.
This qualifies for the worst thread ever. But one note according this topic:
I always have to shake my had when the US team at the Olympics plays with four ex-russian players.
Derek,
if you want your interest in Gelfand to raise further, have a look at his "My Most Memorable Games".
The betting line says...
Leko 73% Bareev 27%
Aronian 67% Shirov 33%
Grischuk 61% Rublevsky 39%
Kamsky 54% Gelfand 46%
I agree with the first 3 lines, but it surprises me somewhat to see Kamsky favored to win. Maybe he got such odds because more people are willing to bet on him than on his "uninteresting" opponent.
Yes, Leko is also my clear favorite in the candidates. He simply is better than Bareev. Not much money to make with this bet of course.
Eduardo: just curious, but where are these odds coming from? Seems like any site showing chess betting should have caught my attention by now. I wanna get in :D
I calculated the % for the lines averaging the probability implicit in the lines at bwin.com
Example:
Kamsky 1.85 Gelfand 2.00
The 1.85 has implicit a (1/1.85) 57.1% of winning, and the opponent's 2.00 has a (1 - 1/2.00) 50%. So, averaging 57.1 and 50 and rounding I got the 54%.
Of course, it means thay you only should bet on Kamsky if you think his possibility of winning the match is more than 57.1%.
Doesn't it make sense for the four Russians to cheat to not let Kramnik win but let Svidler win. I think 3 of them losing 1-2 games to him is enough. Then Kramnik and Svid will play WC and Kramnik will win and remain champion. Net gain is much more money, pride etc and the same for Kramnik. But seriously why is it that everywhere Kramnik steps he suspected of cheating? Ducking Kasparov then Toiletgate and now collusion. What has he done to deserve it?