Two wins in a row have put top seed Vassily Ivanchuk in good shape to win yet another tournament this year. Going into today's final round, the Ukrainian leads the Montreal International by a half point thanks to wins over Bluvshtein and Miton in rounds seven and eight. He caught up Tiviakov when the Dutch champion's amazing run was ended by early leader Harikrishna in round eight. Tiviakov had won three in a row before that, but even more remarkably he has now played seven consecutive decisive games. He's now in a tie for 2-3 with Harikrishna with 5.5/8, a half-point back of Ivanchuk. Ivanchuk beat Miton with black with a pretty bishop sac preceded by an elegant knight wheel. That sets up today's Ivanchuk-Harikrishna battle nicely. Gata Kamsky hasn't been able to buy a win in the last four rounds and is still on +2 undefeated with five points. Nigel Short scraped himself off the sticky floor by beating Eljanov in round eight and now has an outside shot at making an IM norm. (He has just played the King's Gambit and sacrificed his queen against Bluvshtein, who has already lost four in a row.)
The moth-eaten grudge match between Short and Kamsky was drawn in round seven. For some reason Short was asked about the ugly mess around their candidates match thirteen years ago and for some reason he answered in detail. I suppose this being their first game since that 1994 encounter (5.5-1.5 Kamsky) is good enough reason to ask. This is actually the re-rehash since we blew some of the dust off this last year. Regardless of what it occasionally reflects, Short's candor is always welcome in a too often boring chess world. As for Gata, well, as the saying goes, not finishing last is the best reward.
Even if you don't want to read those bits, rockrobinoff's blog for the Montreal event is a must.
Update: Ivanchuk beats Harikrishna to storm to yet another tournament victory. He scored 7/9, winning his last three in a row. At this pace he's going to make the next rating list an interesting one. But keeping up a great pace has always been his problem. That and he hasn't been running up these numbers against top-10 players, much like how Morozevich would jump up to #4 and then flatline at Corus. Still, it's sad to see him not in Mexico City (he failed to qualify for the candidates in '05). Maybe the winner of the World Cup should play Ivanchuk.
Tiviakov failed to beat Charbonneau and finishes second. Harikrishna is third. Kamsky fell back into the horrible time management we saw at MTel and the Candidates and lost to Eljanov to finish at +1. Sutovsky started 0/3 but, always the fighter, battled back and finished on an even score after beating Miton in spectacular fashion. Short eventually lost a wonderfully romantic game against Bluvshtein and at 2/9 may head back to the dentist for some happy gas. An exciting event. The local heroes had satisfactorily painful performances and gained points.
Try not to confuse candor with more whining, and as such, that is boring. 5.5-1.5 pretty much says it all, and after 13 years he still can't deal with it. tsk tsk...
Chucky raps up another one. The man is unstoppable as of late. Playing this well, I'd love to see a match between him and Kramnik. I can't think of anyone who deserves a shot at the title more than the Chuckster.
Is Ivanchuk going to be No. 1 in the next rating list? I think Anand drops 3-4 points from Dortmund, Kramnik doesn't gain enough to bridge the gap, Topalov doesn't either (I'm not sure if he loses some or any points from Mtel, but I guess +-3 is the max he'll swing). Ivanchuk needs about 25 points to catch up with Anand (at roughly 2787, I think), does anyone know how much he's picked up yet?
bs, Ivanchuk picked 14.5 pts in Foros and 9.7 in Montreal. But Anand lost only 1.3 pts in Dortmund, while Kramnik added 10 pts. Assuming none on them plays classical chess in august, Anand will be at 2791, Ivanchuk at 2786, and Kramnik at 2779.
So how exactly does Nigel Short make his living, if, as he claims, it is not through chess?
He can't 'deal with it'?
13 years after being victim of criminal intimidation, he still thinks he is victim of a crime?
I think Rustam Kamsky and therefore Gata is getting support here only because he went from being a Soviet thug to being an 'American' thug.
I don't know of any American players, Grandmasters or otherwise, that were in support of Rustam while he pulling strings for a young Gata. In fact it was quite the opposite, so lets leave nationalism out of it. I don't like Short, but that doesn't mean I think all English are pinheads.
Succinct summary from Short as usual. It's too bad he was too bunged to make a mess of Kamsky over the board this week. On the other hand, Kamsky couldn't hit a tin duck in a shooting gallery from two feet away. Compared to their 1994 match form it was like the Côte-des-Neiges Nursing Home Challenge.
Clubfoot,
I think it is a little unfair to call Short a tin duck, don't you? Contemptuous egotist, maybe, but 'tin duck' takes it just a little too far.
It is not Nigel who claims not to make a living from chess, it is M. Charbonneau.
Last post (currently) in the thread "Short Circuit in..." is by GM Shirov and seems to have gone unnoticed by a lot of people:
--------------------------
I think it's not nice to speculate about Nigel's unfortunate play, he'll definitely do better in his next event. As for the dental problem I suddenly remembered having one precisely with the wisdom tooth right before the rapid tournament Tallinn 2006, remember my result there?
Posted by: Alexei Shirov at July 27, 2007 19:10
"I don't know of any American players, Grandmasters or otherwise, that were in support of Rustam while he pulling strings for a young Gata"
No, but you all seem to be loving him now...
Short can be an @rse, but he speaks his mind, and in the early/mid 90s he was one of the more exciting players in the world.
hey Stendec, I was only referring to Short's dental affliction, which for several rounds made him a rare easy mark for his opponents. Usually he's one of the kinghunting monster greats of the game; in this sense his ego comes and goes with the territory. In the 90's his brutal honesty made him the anti-Kasparov, so it's an ego I can live with.
Mark,
So, it's ok to support a player who IS an arse, but not one who WAS one?!
Clubfoot,
My opinion of Short has nothing to do with his chess. I have certainly have watched many, many of his 3 0 games on the internet. My opinion of Short has nothing to do with his nationality either: I also don't like Fischer or Browne. You chose to like someone in spite of their egos (something that smacks of the American disease) and I chose to dislike someone for the same reason.
Hmmm...y'know Stendec, we may not be talking about the same thing. But it's clear I haven't brooded about Nigel Short as long as you, so I'll concede whatever point you're belaboring.
As to my "American disease", not to worry. It's probably just sequelae from the War of 1812.
Clubfoot,
You may find it useful to "brood" about your opinions before sharing them.
I wouldn't think so, kiddo. Mine are weighed and considered. Brooding is for Topathought police and the Stendec Stasi. But hey, it's a big tent, right? Gouge away.
Clubfoot,
I see that we've reached your limit of useful banter.
Everyone else,
Does anyone have predictions about how far Harikrishna will go in the chess world? He has really had some solid preformances in the last few years...
Short gave an interview (interrogation?) to Chessbase. Has he had a drinking problem in the past? He talks about delayed trauma regarding the Kamsky match but after 13 years ..... Of course he still comes out with those unpleasant remarks: "So I was supposed to compete on wage terms with a Cuban, although, of course, he has nothing like my name recognition." A Cuban??
Yeah, a Cuban! Imagine that. Perhaps next time it will be some random Uzbek.
Not too bright are we? How well would you two get by if you earned an avg. Cuban wage, assuming you're living in the west?
What's unpleasant? All sorts of Westerners fear wage competition with Chinese, Indians, etc. If you live in the west you can't live on a Cuban salary.
Now, without US sanctions, maybe Cubans will be as prosperous as Greeks.
Hmm !
Cuban was going to be given these wages for appearing in a Canadian tournament and so was Nigel. Cost of living in Canada is same whether you Nigel or a Cuban.
Nigel's apologists will continue to make excuses for him no matter what. He wanted an appearance fee for scoring - let's see - 2 out of 9? Perhaps world owes him beccause he is British and god forbid not a Cuban!
By the way, did he make an IM norm?
Hmm !
Cuban was going to be given these wages for appearing in a Canadian tournament and so was Nigel. Cost of living in Canada is same whether you Nigel or a Cuban.
Nigel's apologists will continue to make excuses for him no matter what. He wanted an appearance fee for scoring - let's see - 2 out of 9? Perhaps world owes him because he is British and god forbid not a Cuban!
By the way, did he make an IM norm?
Well, Bruzon is 2605 and Nigel is right, does not have much name recognition.
If the Canadians are so cheap, they could get a 2600-ish middle-aged Russian from the US for much the same budget.
Nigel, I understand some of your points, but why do you accept a certain amount of money to come to the tournament and then say it's unacceptable? Just refuse if you don't get enough.
"I can't think of anyone who deserves a shot at the title more than the Chuckster"
1) Kasparov - historic tradition for a rematch,
2) Anand - highest ranked player in the world,
3) Topalov - achieved highest ranking amongst all active players,
4) Leko - was leading in Brissago by one point just before the final game, match ended at 6-6,
5) Aronian - has just defeated Kramnik in semi-rapid chess in a match.
To these 5 guys you'll probably be able to add soon Radjabov, Mamedyarov and Carlsen.
Apart from those details, my database says that Kramnik-Ivanchuk generaly ends up in 1-0 while Ivanchuk-Kramnik games are balanced. Quite far from Lekos or Anands chances against Kramnik.
You shouldn't mix good results in open tournaments and results gained in top tournaments. Getting a 2800 rating in Wijk, Dortmund and Linares and getting your 2800 rating with a 85% ratio against 2650 players isn't precisely the same thing. By the way, despite of his stratospheric rating, you'll never hear Ivanchuk claiming for any kind of special right. He's just a gentleman loving the game.
By the way again, seing ivanchuk at 2790 is no more suprising than seing him at 2699 (jan 03 rating list). He is, like Morozevich or Shirov, and agressive and unpredictable chess player. As a human he's never been recognized as a quite stable person... of course his chess understanding puts him amongst the best players ever with Karpov, Kasparov, Kramnik, Fischer and Anand, but his psychological problems would certainly make it impossible for him to resist the high pressure of a world championship match.
... which changes nothing to the fact that Ivanchuk will be either Nr 1, or quite close in october rating list.
Two years ago I was saying somewhere on this site that Kasparov had been a total psychological bareer for Ivanchuk's huge talent from 1990 to 2005, and that ... Kasparov leaving chess would certainly re-open a way to the idea in Ivanchuk's mind that the world champion title would be accessible.
At that time I was also saying that Kramnik was amongst the 4 or 5 best players ever. Everybody was laughing at me on the site (Kramnik was 2730). For some funny reason Topalov's fans have vanished today...
>For some funny reason Topalov's fans have vanished today...
Maybe unlike you they have a life and are on holidays chasing after girls :-)
After all it's a long way to go for Kramnik to qualify in Mexico for a rematch with Topalov :-)