Live and replay here. I suppose this is really the quarterfinals +1 since the final is really a match to face Topalov for the right to play for the world championship. But we can get into that when we finally have a winner in Khanty-Mansiyisk. The pairings:
1) Ponomariov-Kamsky. Two games at the 2006 MTel event, Kamsky drew an anti-Marshall with black and won one with white. They both won with white at last week's blitz championship.
2) Carlsen-Cheparinov. Carlsen eliminated Cheparinov in rapids at the last World Cup. Carlsen beat him at Corus B in 2005. They drew at the Corus B 2006. Cheparinov is better known as Topalov's second.
3) Karjakin-Alekseev. Haven't played since Alekseev won at the "Young Stars" event in 2005.
4) Shirov-Jakovenko. Played each other three classical games this year already. Two draws and a win for Shirov. Shirov is the only player left who hasn't needed tiebreaks yet, if rest counts for anything.
Player listed first has white in today's first game. Winner of match one faces winner of match two and 3 vs 4 in the semifinals.
In round 4, Ponomariov won the first game against Sasikiran in a hot line of the QGA. Cute finish. Sasikiran kept up the pressure in the second game and would have had winning chances in the endgame had he found the clever 51.Rg8+ Kf6 52.Rxg5+! with a fork getting the rook back with a spare pawn profit. But it wasn't to be and so ended the longshot 2009 all-India world championship. Ponomariov and Kamsky are both best known for their fighting qualities, so this should be a tough match. I gotta go Brooklyn, baby.
All-Russia and all-Bulgaria are still possible, however. Cheparinov got nothing with white against Wang Yue but struck with an aggressive line of the King's Indian Saemisch in the second game. Black started out with a sharp 12..b5 pawn sac and never let up. The queenside attack was far ahead of White's activity and the young Bulgarian smashed through in spectacular fashion with 26..Bxa3! a bishop sac followed by a rook sac. Tremendous stuff and one of the games of the tournament so far. That was the end of the massive Chinese delegation. We'll hold off on the Topalov-Cheparinov match jokes until the finals since he'll be a big underdog against Carlsen, who is looking very strong.
The Norwegian teen took out the redoubtable Mickey Adams on the Englishman's home turf. No, not a pub in Cornwall, but maneuvering into superior endgames. After winning the first game with two bishops against Adams' two knights Carlsen held on in the second game despite a pawn disadvantage. Adams consolidated the opening gambit pawn against the topical "delayed Marshall" planted by Carlsen but missed a few winning endgame lines in time trouble.
These delayed ..d5 Spanish lines have been popular lately. (Grischuk-Aronian in Mexico City.) The next day Jakovenko also held on to the pawn against Aronian and rode it all the way to a win against Aronian in their first rapid game. That came after two brief classical draws. In the second rapid Aronian entertained the crowd by playing rook and pawn against rook for forty moves before accepting his elimination.
Jakovenko will go for his second upset in a row against Alexei Shirov, who is rolling along with flair and frenzy. He slowed things down to grind out a win with black against Akopian's horrific pawn structure in their first game. In the second Shirov didn't take the safe path and sacrificed a knight out of the opening. He kept enough initiative to swap everything off the board in a piquant finish.
Russian champion Alekseev finally did in veteran Bareev in tiebreaks. He threw the kitchen sink at the Caro-Kann in the first rapid game and Bareev couldn't find the right defense. Had Black countered with 28..e5! he would have had a fighting chance. Alekseev is really a lot of fun to watch. Bareev played a promising positional exchange sac in the second game against his countryman's Benoni but couldn't find the right follow-up. 29..Nc4 looks promising.
The second remaining Russian will face the second remaining Ukrainian, Sergey Karjakin, who beat Nisipeanu with black in their second game after Nisipeanu's Caro-Kann held up nicely in the first. The Romanian hasn't been playing his goofy 7.Nfe2 against the Najdorf in the World Cup despite having three chances. They played a popular line here and Karjakin surprised by castling early instead of leaving his king in the center. Nisipeanu responded by going for broke with pawn sacrifices but Karjakin defended well and never seemed in any trouble. This avenged Nisipeanu's elimination of Karjakin's countryman Ivanchuk (who played ..Qc7 in the same Najdorf and lost). This last quarterfinal match is a toss up and should be a good one. I'll stick with my last remaining pre-event pick Alekseev for the sake of mindless consistency.
Gata's preparation today was based on the assumption that he plays White. So it is curious how he does without prep against Ponomaviov.
Oops! How did that happen? Don't they draw the new lots at the end of the tiebreak day? Anyway, if you see him give him my best. All our best! Viva Brooklyn.
Looks like we have four exciting games after two hours. Could all be decisive. Carlsen-Cheparinov is wild.
Both Carlsen's and Shirov's games will be decisive I think. Does Cheparinov have enough for the sac? I think Carlsen is winning.
I think Carlsen is fighting for the draw.
Shipov talks of them making the time control at move 40. Does that mean they are playing at some sensible limit instead of FIDE's usual nonsense?
Any sites showing this live other than chesspro.ru? They only show two games, and one of those is finished.
Right at the top of Mig's article rdh.. I bet lawyers charge for hours spent reading their clients documents..
chesspro.ru does not cover Pono - Kamsky. You may find comments here:
http://www.chessdom.com/world-chess-cup-2007/kamsky-ponomariov
Now I think Cheparinov is struggling. Which probably means it's been equal all along. What IS clear to me is that I understand nothing.
d_tal: I was taking it for granted that the official site has as usual fallen over. Maybe it's just my machine.
Thanks, Reyk.
sorry, I couldnt resist... I need to keep refreshing as well, but seems to be updating ok. Cheparinov is almost lost now I think, the g6 pawn is a monster. Shirov looks to be completely won.
48.Bc6 a4 49.Be8 Rg1 50.g5! a3 51.Bf7! Rxg5 52.Nxg5 hxg5 53.Bxc4 +- Zagrebelny
nice line. I like g5!
Carlsen won. Looks like that piece sac didn't hold.
I must say, beautifully played game by Carlsen. Many minefields he avoided, and that endgame line needed to be very precisely calculated.
Around the 50's moves I think Chepa could hold the game, if his king should go for the c pawn. What says the computers?
According to live commentators there were several errors in final time trouble and draw was possible in between. Interesting stuff to analyze.
Zagrebelny gives these winning lines:
a) 53... Kg7 54.Ke5 Kxg6 55.Ba2 Kh5 56.c4 g4 57.Kf4! Kh4 58.c5 g3 59.Kf3! Kh3 60.c6 g2 61.c7 g1 62.c8 Kh4 63.Qh8 Kg5 64.Qg7 Kf5 65.Qxg1
b) 56.Bd3 Kg5 57.c4
Decisive mistake(s) maybe between 57...g3 and 59...Kf4
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessplayer?pid=101612
Carlsen enters top 10 on the live rating list! Meanwhile, Shirov's about to clock his lifetime peak.
01 Anand 2799,3 -1,7 (1) 3 1969
02 Kramnik 2798,8 +13,8 (1) 9 1975
03 Topalov 2779,5 +10,5 (2) 14 1975
04 Morozevich 2765,3 +10,3 (2) 12 1977
05 Svidler 2763,3 +31,3 (3) 19 1976
06 Mamedyarov 2759,7 +7,7 (5) 35 1985
07 Shirov 2757,5 +18,5 (5) 40 1972
08 Leko 2753,0 -2 (1) 9 1979
09 Ivanchuk 2746,8 -40,2 (5) 25 1969
10 Carlsen 2739,0 +25,0 (4) 34 1990
11 Aronian 2738,6 -2,4 (2) 16 1982
12 Gelfand 2736,6 +0,6 (1) 9 1968
13 Radjabov 2735,0 -7 (3) 20 1987
14 Karjakin 2730,5 +36,5 (4) 33 1990
15 Adams 2725,8 -3,2 (5) 31 1971
16 Jakovenko 2725,0 +15,0 (5) 32 1983
17 Ponomariov 2724,3 +19,3 (5) 39 1983
18 Cheparinov 2712,6 +42,6 (5) 35 1986
19 Grischuk 2711,3 -3,7 (4) 21 1983
20 Alekseev 2710,8 -5,2 (5) 34 1985
21 Kamsky 2710,0 -4,0 (3) 25 1974
22 Polgar 2706,8 -1,2 (1) 10 1976
23 Wang 2702,3 -0,7 (2) 14 1987
24 Bacrot 2700,4 +5,4 (4) 23 1983
25 Akopian 2699,8 -13,2 (4) 30 1971
Magnum vici ! Great, fighting game ..albeit a comedy of errors in the last 4 moves.
So presumably we have some absurd FIDE increment finish to thank for the final comedy in this game?
Brilliant game though. Reminds me of a similar ending by Capablanca, though I can't quite recall the exact game, and since the players weren't required to blitz in 1920 I expect the play was more accurate back then.
Magnum vici btw means I defeated Magnus. Magnus vicit was what you were after.
I think Chepa could actually have won this endgame by playing 56.-,e5! 57.Bf1 e4 etc. One variant is 58.c4 g3 59.c5 Kf6 60.Kxa3 e3 61.c6 Ke6 and the white passer is under control, while the bishop cannot control both black passers.
Gata has white in game 2, yes?
no, Gata will have black twice.
I thought he had white, but was blindfolded and had to listen to Slayer?
parsnips that's witty
That's nothing, his opponent was not blindfolded and had to watch Gata play his openings.
Anand still ahead of Kramnik? Then why was chessbase prematurely congratulating Kramnik in an interview the other day?
If you round the ratings to the nearest whole number, Kramnik and Anand are tied, and the tiebreak of most games played puts Kramnik in 1st.
yuriy,
i'm a kamsky fan and you still made me laugh. perfect!
I'm a Carlsen fan and a Kamsky fan. Carlsen will get stronger, but I'm not convinced that Kamsky has enough in the tank, so to speak, to go all the way.
Anyhow, I am looking for a reliable chess e-mail pal, female or male, 28-50, to exchange tips, play e-mail games, study openings, etc......I can't play games on line, as I don't own my own pc and use a public library facility, which does not allow this sort of activity. If interested, send a note to mw2196@hotmail.com Cheers! Mark
Something seems wrong with the way chessgames.com calculates it's ratings. After the previous round:
17 Ponomariov 2724,2 +19,2 (5) 38 1983
21 Kamsky 2710,1 -3,9 (3) 24 1974
Then after Kamsky draws his higher rated opponent, his rating drops and Ponomariov's goes up:
17 Ponomariov 2724,3 +19,3 (5) 39 1983
21 Kamsky 2710,0 -4,0 (3) 25 1974
0.1 is a slight amount but it shouldn't happen that way.
I dont understand the logic of rounding and then using something else as tie break. Why not use the decimals as tie break themselves?
Rich,
Kamsky is higher rated in the official October FIDE list so he lost a fraction of a point with his draw. The chessgames.com rating list attempts to predict what the new FIDE ratings will be in January; they aren't real ratings (yet).
and karjakin has really climbed..... !!
Regarding the #1 spot on the rating list:
Both Anand and Kramnik will get a rating of 2799 - but Kramnik will get the #1 spot because he has played more games (which is what decides ties).
Carlsen game entered 6-man chess as a draw and Carlson handed draw opportunities to his opponent twice after that. Poorly defended under time-pressure: a pity about the FIDE tempo enforced here - clearly to the detriment of good chess.
Lovely live comments on Cheparinov-Carlsen at chessdom.com.
For instance, just before the game started :
" Today Cheparinov will try his best to win and reach the tiebreaks and Carlsen taught us that he's not afraid to accept the challenge of complications. We can expect fireworks only. Enjoy!"
...but the game is pretty uneventful. They blast through the exciting parts in blitz speed, and settle for a drawn endgame.
Is Gata winning? Will there be a lost black Queen?
Shirov is smoking hot man, he rolled over Jakovenko like he wasn't there... And isnt Gata winning?
It was all theory and home-prep up to the endgame, they just blized it off. But why would Cheparionov go for such a tedious position in a "must win" game ? Puzzling.
Maybe Cheparionov's plan is very deep, he aims to exploit again Carlsen's notorious (see Aronian-Carlsen 2006) weakness in the Philidor's R+p vs R endgame. He wants to get there asap.
Shirov and Kamsky are through. Carlsen looks to be doing fine, that should be a draw - then he moves through as well! Tomorrow we get to see Alekseev vs Karjakin, that should be very exciting.
rich,
like insomniac explained, ratings in fide are calculated based on the last official fide list at the time of a tournament's beginning. the only thing "special" about my live top list, is that i try to keep a running score of what the ratings are, with all known tournament results included.
i'll do another update this evening, adding a few more tournaments for yue wang as well, in addition to the wcc results.
:o)
Naive question: why didn't Pono take the Poisoned Pawn? It's doing OK theoretically AFAIK, and Kamsky's Najdorf preparation woes are well-known.
Was he caught off-guard by 6.Bg5?
Alright, the chaff is finally getting winnowed out. Ponomariov hung around like grim death, but he can't even handle playing the Sicilian. So, why did he play it, rather than striving to settle things in Tie-Breaks. Pono can certainly play the Endgame (he may be the 3rd best Endgame technician in the World, behind Kramnik), but before the Endgame, the gods gave us the Middlegame--and Pono has too many deficiencies in that phase. Plus, he debased the World Cup through his trifling play in the first 2 rounds.
I wonder why Cheparinov couldn't come up with a better "must win" Opening with the White pieces? As he demonstrated yesterday, his technique is not all that refined yet--certainly not good enough to grind out a win from what was, at best, a miniscule advantage. Oh well, I doubt that Kamsky would have had much trouble dispatching him anyhow. But now we'll have the spectacle of watching Kamsky play Carlsen.
I'll pick Kamsky to adavance to the World Cup final match. Very quietly, he has been demonstrating that he has regained much of his form from the Mid-1990s. Kamsky is going to make Carlsen outplay him; I don't think that Magnus can do that just yet.
Shirov did the Chess World a favor by bouncing Jakovenko out of the tournament. I could see Jakovenko advancing a few rounds, but his playing style is a bit insipid. It would have been a taint to have him vie for the Title Match. It was a very feeble effort in the Final Game. He played as if he had the Black Pieces, and a win was of no consequence. And then Jakovenko proceeded to get his Rook trapped, and so had to resign. He blew nearly all of the ratings gains he made by beating Rahman, Below, and Almasi....
Shirov has to be favored to defeat whomever prevails in the Tie-Break phase of the Match Karjakin--Alekseev. I'll pick Karjakin to win:
Alekseev still needs to pay the piper for his 1st Round loss to Anuar Ismagambetov (KAZ) 2480. He's played well since then, but he's benefited from having an "easy row".
In the end, probably Kamsky or Carlsen will be a tougher opponent for Topalov, than will Shirov.
But the winner of Anand--Kramnik ought to be able to beat Topalov, or any of these guys. In 2009, Carlsen might give either of them a tough time; they are probably hoping that either Kamsksy, Shirov, or Topalov manage to save them from the match-up
A fine game by Carlsen in a very Kramnik-like style. At just 17 his play is very mature!
So we have Shirov the "talented amateur" vs Karjakin/Alekseev after Shirov used Jakovenko to highlight the difference between visitors to the 2700 level and permanent residents. Nasty.
Carlsen vs Kamsky looks to be the most interesting matchup. Both are playing excellent chess. My heart is with the young challenger but my head says Kamsky will grind out a win.
My database (Not fully current) shows Shirov with a positive score against Topalov. I think Topalov has played Kamsky maybe six times and won four of them. Carlsen who knows/cares, as right now his upside seems unlimited.
Carlsen has a nice score against Toppy. 5 encounters in 2007 according to chessgames.com. One win for Topalov and two for Carlsen. Topalov had white in both of the drawn games. Good score for Carlsen, but Topalov has had periods out of form this year and maybe been preparing for the match against Kramnik instead of tournaments?
Whoops. Two of the games were from Bilbao (Blindfold/rapid). The score is equal in classical games. Sorry.
Let's not forget that in M-Tel last year, Kamsky would have at least tied for 1st if he could have managed even 1/2 point from his 2 games vs Topalov. But though he vaporized the rest of the field, he lost both his games with Topalov, so was relegated to 2nd.
Now I'm kicking myself that I never made an effort to play in some of the many local NY events Kamsky entered while playing himself back into shape early in his comeback (2003? 2004?). It would have been nice to get paired with him and be able to say I played him. Of course I've played (and lost to) Yudasin, another former Candidate, 5 times in the past 2 or 3 years. But at this point it would obviously be more significant to have faced Kamsky.
>A fine game by Carlsen in a very Kramnik-like style. At just 17 his play is very mature!>
He does give this impression but it may be his even/balanced/stable natural temperament rather than some sort of "early maturity".
One year ago I looked at chessbase.com over few games Carlsen played when he was 12(!) and I had the same (strange) feeling.
I would venture to say that looking over Karpov's early, teen-age, games one would get the same "uncanny" feeling. Some people are born old.
Well Jon, I did play Kamsky. He was only 15 at the time and believe it or not...I lost. =8-)
Anyway, it would have been ideal for me to have my two favorites meet in the final round, but this is still good. With mixed emotions I have to go with Carlsen only because of all my prior babbling about Magnus becoming the youngest world champion to date. On the other hand if Gata wins, I'll be just as content.
Carlsen has the Capablanca talent! Can Kamsky drive the Alekhine chess talent farther than himself?
As a Carlsen fan I can appreciate all the hoopla about him. What I find interesting is that another 17 year old whose current rating is similar to that of Magnus, and may very well get to the semi-finals, is hardly getting any mention at all on this blog. I wonder why? Oh yeah, his name is Karjakin.
Off topic but has anyone seen these shenanigans in the recent world youth chp:
http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=1434
the midnight knock at your door to see Azmaiparashvili, Campomanes and Makropoulos...can't be good.
"Alright, the chaff is finally getting winnowed out. Ponomariov hung around like grim death, but he can't even handle playing the Sicilian. So, why did he play it, rather than striving to settle things in Tie-Breaks. Pono can certainly play the Endgame (he may be the 3rd best Endgame technician in the World, behind Kramnik), but before the Endgame, the gods gave us the Middlegame--and Pono has too many deficiencies in that phase. Plus, he debased the World Cup through his trifling play in the first 2 rounds.
I wonder why Cheparinov couldn't come up with a better "must win" Opening with the White pieces? As he demonstrated yesterday, his technique is not all that refined yet--certainly not good enough to grind out a win from what was, at best, a miniscule advantage. Oh well, I doubt that Kamsky would have had much trouble dispatching him anyhow. But now we'll have the spectacle of watching Kamsky play Carlsen.
I'll pick Kamsky to adavance to the World Cup final match. Very quietly, he has been demonstrating that he has regained much of his form from the Mid-1990s. Kamsky is going to make Carlsen outplay him; I don't think that Magnus can do that just yet.
Shirov did the Chess World a favor by bouncing Jakovenko out of the tournament. I could see Jakovenko advancing a few rounds, but his playing style is a bit insipid. It would have been a taint to have him vie for the Title Match. It was a very feeble effort in the Final Game. He played as if he had the Black Pieces, and a win was of no consequence. And then Jakovenko proceeded to get his Rook trapped, and so had to resign. He blew nearly all of the ratings gains he made by beating Rahman, Below, and Almasi....
Shirov has to be favored to defeat whomever prevails in the Tie-Break phase of the Match Karjakin--Alekseev. I'll pick Karjakin to win:
Alekseev still needs to pay the piper for his 1st Round loss to Anuar Ismagambetov (KAZ) 2480. He's played well since then, but he's benefited from having an "easy row".
In the end, probably Kamsky or Carlsen will be a tougher opponent for Topalov, than will Shirov.
But the winner of Anand--Kramnik ought to be able to beat Topalov, or any of these guys. In 2009, Carlsen might give either of them a tough time; they are probably hoping that either Kamsksy, Shirov, or Topalov manage to save them from the match-up
Posted by: DOug at December 7, 2007 11:49"
Are you retarded? This even beats Ovidiu's b.s.
"I wonder why Cheparinov couldn't come up with a better "must win" Opening with the White pieces?"
He is very well prepared in the opening-- has a rich stock of prepared variations&final-positions-- but, paradoxically, it worked against him in this match.
He didn't choose an opening to "play, fight and win", that was what Carlsen did with his 3.Bg5 in KID in the previous game.
He wanted at any costs to make use of one his (and Topalov's) many home-prepared "white is better" positions. He got better, but not enough to win.
This approach makes sense in a tournament (playing comfortably for a win or, at worst, easy draw) and much of his opening barn is filled with such (good in fact) material.
You may recall the Topalov-Sokolov game at Essent in 2006 ( immediately after Elista). Topalov bashed out in 5 min some 30 moves in Slav only to reach a better endgame-like position. Sokolov didn't went wrong under pressure for another 5 moves and after that it was dead equal..and endgame.
In retrospect it all looked as if Topalov "wasted" a white and he could have had better chances with 1.f4 and no theory.
re: Sokolov and other similar games by Topalov
In your opinion, Ovidiu, was it the type of position where you would expect a stronger technician to triumph or is the size of advantage Topalov usually gets from opening simply too small to triump through anything other than shock and awe?
"Are you retarded? This even beats Ovidiu's b.s.
Posted by: x y at December 7, 2007 14:48"
Wow! Your entire "argument" consists of a couple ad hominem attacks. I'm sure that the other readers of the Daily Dirt will be bowled over by the force of your logic.
"x y": Perhaps your intent was to pay some sort of perverse homage to the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor that took place on this very date?
I'm not sure what your fixation is with Ovidiu, but if you are so vexed by my comments, why don't you just do us both a favor and ignore them.
"As a Carlsen fan I can appreciate all the hoopla about him. What I find interesting is that another 17 year old whose current rating is similar to that of Magnus, and may very well get to the semi-finals, is hardly getting any mention at all on this blog. I wonder why? Oh yeah, his name is Karjakin."
It's not his name that makes him less popular, it's his moustache.
"As a Carlsen fan I can appreciate all the hoopla about him. What I find interesting is that another 17 year old whose current rating is similar to that of Magnus, and may very well get to the semi-finals, is hardly getting any mention at all on this blog. I wonder why? Oh yeah, his name is Karjakin."
Karjakin's accomplishments have been a bit discounted because he has been a fixture on the world chess scene for longer than Carlsen. He was already a GM before most people had even heard of Carlsen. It is indisputable that Carlsen's rise has been more "meteoric" in nature, whereas Karjakin has made more gradual gains, seeming to plateau at times. Carlsen's career results have generally been somewhat better--if only because he has been given opportunities to play in Linares (and perform well there). Carlsen's rating is a bit higher, he crossed the 2700 barrier before Karjakin, he seems poised to crack the Top Ten before Karjakin, etc. Even in this event, Karjakin (simply because of the luck of the pairings) has not had a result that is of the same magnitude as beating Mickey Adams. If Karjakin had beaten Ivanchuk, rather than Nisipeanu, then I'm sure that he be getting the Lion's share of the buzz right now.
But you do have a valid point. Much of the attention that Carlsen has garnered has been due to the fact that he has had better "brand" promotion. Karjakin is an undifferentiated brand. He does not overshadow Ivanchuk (yet), or even Ponomariov. What is his image? Is he now merely another "strong Eastern European" player? Does he play flashy, attacking games?
Sure, maybe Carlsen has a smoother glide path to the Top. However, even if Karjakin hass a higher burden to "prove himself", it is within his control to do that--just within the next couple of weeks.
"All he has to do" ...is beat Alekseev in the Tie-Breaks, then upset Shirov in the Semi-Finals, and then....beat Carlsen head-to-head in the 4 game Finals.
In the end, it is really all about results. If Karjakin's results begine to clearly surpass Carlsen's , then he'll be the one receiving all of the mention.
>In your opinion, Ovidiu, was it the type of position where you would expect a stronger technician to triumph..
Yes (Karpov, Kramnik).
"Technique" is a sort of a buzzword. There is indeed a technique to mate in K+R vs K endgames but not really one to convert a small advantage.
It takes more, some genuine creative thinking, some help from your opponent who is now under-pressure for a while.
But you have the first chance, good chances, so it makes sense to go for it.
(it fizzed out against Magnus, though)
Karjakin has been in the top chess level since he became a GM 5 years ago and now can be considered an established and regular player in tournaments and WC circles, so nobody really become surprised by his results. He is no longer a wonder kid.
On the other hand, Carlsen keeps improving game by game so everybody is excited about him.
By the way, cadlag, you are right. That mustache and the way Karjakin dress also makes him look older contrary to Carlsen's baby face and casual cloths.
I think members of english language chess forums just feel that they can relate more to Carlsen than to Karjakin. Traces of the iron curtain still exist in the chess world, and Carlsen's "our guy".
Sorry Artin and DOug. I don't buy that. Looking at the ratings from april01, Karjakin has had a better rating progress. Magnus' had a huge dip in his rating progress lasting approx. a year, but he made quick progress afterwards. Karjakin rating changed more gradually. Until recently he was also rated higher than Carlsen even if one is to correct for the age difference.
I am a Carlsen-fan but this lack of interest in Karjakin have puzzled me since I started to watch Carlsen. At that time Karjakin was clearly a wunderkind. But the buzz around him was never anything near what Carlsen experienced.
Why are so few people talking about him as the future champ? What does he lack...except a sharp razor and a mirror?
Magnus' games against Karpov and Kasparov at a early age and their comments about him afterwards must have meant something. And of course being a western, coming from a pile of rocks up north with next to zero chess tradition. But why do strong chessplayers rave about his potential. Why do people think his potential is so much greater than Karjakins'. Or do they?
"Karjakin.. is hardly getting any mention at all on this blog. I wonder why?"
With moustache, babyface or mother coaching Krajakin needs some more results.
Just compare the CVs :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Carlsen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Karjakin
Sorry Lars. Didn't see your post before I wrote mine. I agree. Magnus is absolutely our guy. Go Magnus!!
I don't have any doubt that much of the buzz about Carlsen come from his name...he's Norwegian, for crying out loud! He's a big time outsider cracking the ranks at the very top, breaking the near-monopoly of the Soviet chess machine. And he's a kid! Go Carlsen!
Karjakin? He suffers the great misfotune of being from the land of the Perennial Chess Powers. Boo Karjakin!
Well.. the guy that wrote Karjakins CV didn't put his heart into it. Quite a few tournaments missing there. And Karjakin has generally performed well in the few tournaments he and Magnus have been in together. I would say it proves my point. Karjakin does not get the same amount of invitations to quality tournaments. And nobody even bothers to write a complete article on Wikipedia about him.
Considering Karjakin is from the Ukraine where they churn out GMs like butter, I can see why Magnus gets more attention.
> He's a big time outsider cracking the ranks at the very top, breaking the near-monopoly of the Soviet chess machine. >
He is a kid promising a king.
As for us, we show signs of the "victory of hope over experience"-syndrome since we have already seen many (Lautier, Barcot, Grischuk, Ponomariov, Radjabov..heck even Leko was playing Karpov at 16) of similar wunderkids failing to become the "next".
I'm a Norwegian and frankly I had zero interest in chess until I picked up a small notice in an online newspaper one dark and cold day late in November 2005.
It said that some kid named Magnus Carlsen was making upsets in an ongoing world cup in chess over in Russia.
I tried to read a bit about this kid and suddenly I realize that our small nation has a so called "chess prodigy" on our hands. And as they say, the rest is history.
Now, 2 years later I can probably recognize half the top 100 in the world by only looking at their picture. I've been bitten by this disease they call fanboyism... :)
Thing is, Karjakin is just another chess player from "over there". If he had been born in the "west" I am sure we'd be raving about him just as we rave about Magnus. But I can't see that special thing about Karjakin, he doesn't have the spark in his eye. And I don't find his chess as interesting as Magnus' chess.
So I must admit that it's more exciting to follow Magnus when it comes to the way he plays chess. He has the guts, he has the spirit, and more than anything he hates to lose.
Since when did the "west" have a great chess icon like Magnus is turning out to be? Bobby Fischer?
If we could calculate the odds for this to "happen", a kid from Norway (4.5 million inhabitants) entering the top 10 in the chess world at age 17... I wouldn't even dare.
This is a quote from a person taken from the guestbook where Kjetil A. Lie (Magnus' second) posts updates on the tournament now and then, which I think can summarize Magnus and the exceptional case that he is (freely translated from Norwegian):
"Magnus' first chess tournament was the "miniputt" (very young boys) class of the Norwegian Championship in Gausdal in 1999. He did pretty well, by scoring 6.0 points in 11 rounds. That was enough to place him at place 13 of 32. In he result list he's listed as Sven Magnus Øen Carlsen, didn't he recently use Sven Øen as his name too? .
When I remember this, it's because I was there - Sigmund Salamonsen and yours truly were the leaders for the "miniputtene". Well, I don't really remember it if we think of a total of 69 young boys, and I certainly didn't notice this Magnus.
But the point is that it's truly remarkable, at an age of 8 years and 7 months he's playing like a total newbie, and less than 5 years later he has become a GM (April 2004) and at an age of 17 he's about the 10th strongest player in the world - and climbing!"
This was a quote from Egil Arne Standal.
Oh well, just my 0.02$
-Martin
I imagine you already know about this, Mig, but just in case...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/article/0,,2224336,00.html
Listen to Korchnoi's comments on "genius". He speaks about many of players here.
http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=1398
And also here.
http://www.e3e5.com/article.php?id=1179
>Listen to Korchnoi's comments on "genius".
Interesting interview. Korchnoi is fascinated with Magnus but not with Karjakin.
Could be this because he has lived too much in the west ?
Read some comments at www.chessgames.com that, Morozovich, even though he qualified for the World Cup, he stated he wouldn't even want to play Topa if he won. I guess he's one of the players who really distains Topa and his manager?
Wow - the Carlsen hype machine is really working overdrive! He is a good story and has ridiculous potential but what has he actually accomplished? Fantastic result in Biel but still a long way to go before we put him in young Fischer territory. I love the guys games but he needs a few first place results against top 10 competition before he justifies the hype. 5 years from now he better have more than 2nd place at Linares 2007 to hang his hat on. As pointed out above...he could very easily be "just" another Radjabov, Karjakan, Pono, etc. Time will tell of cours...
I think the Shirov and Kamsky stories are much more interesting. Both may be experiencing their best (last?) chance at becoming champion. Can you imagine the drama of a Kramnik-Shirov battle for the crown!!? Or Kamsky-Anand? I do't think Topalov wants any part of these guys...
>Read some comments at www.chessgames.com that, >Morozovich, even though he qualified for the >World Cup, he stated he wouldn't even want to >play Topa if he won. I guess he's one of the >players who really distains Topa and his manager?
>Posted by: Bruce Towell at December 7, 2007
I don't know, but I would believe that a lot of top players don't like Topalov's management, but still they participated in the tournament. I also believe that even in top form, Morozevich wouldn't be able to win a KO world championship event... so, instead of giving a sincere explanation of why he didn't participate, he chose a lame excuse of blaming others. It is not the first time a top player shows some sign or arrogance and it won't be the last one, that's for sure.
Re: Morozevich
Since you know that you are not going to participate why not spit on Topalov anyway? It is free and everybody does it. I cannot imagine that playing and winning (and getting all the money) and then making your point would not have been much better.
WizardOfOz, Carlsen never even played against top tenners until one year ago at Tal. He got crushed. And got crushed again at Corus. Now he's winning--second at Linares, final four at world cup (and still playing). His losses last year? Blown end games. And then he must have hit the books because at Linares his endgames were quite good, and his transitions to winning endgames seemingly out of nothing were impressive--Capablanca-esque.
He finds his weaknesses and turns them into strengths, and there aren't that many weaknesses left. Within five years, he'll definitely have more to hang his hat on than 2nd place at Linares. He's most likely moving into the top ten on the January list and before another year passes he'll be right there with the big three.
Sandorchess
I think you got it all wrong about Moro's comments. He only explained why he is not participating, he didn't blame anyone for playing in the world cup. So don't put your words in Moro's mouth. In his original interview he says that when he plays in a tournament, his aim is always the 1st place. But since the winner of the cup then plays Topalov and he (Moro) is not on good terms with Topalov, there's no way he is going to play the bulgarian if he wins the cup. So his motivation to play for the 1st place is kinda undermined. And why play at all, if you don't play for the 1st place. I think it's all pretty logical and no word of blame on anyone participating.
Not a crazy Moro fan, but maybe we can guess his perspective.
Morozevich comes across as really Bohemian... and hence his appeal to a lot of players. He's not out to "make his point", kick the world's door down, get his manager to throw wild accusations at you and smash in your kneecaps in an effort to claw his way into a world championship. Maybe the guy just wants to play some chess and skip out on the primitive stuff (?).
Bohemians get irritated at people who aren't. And who can blame him for getting turned off by it all? Chess politics can be sort of despicable.
Think the Moro fans are being a bit naive.
1) An intense dislike of someone is often an excellent motivation to beat them. The fighting quality of the Karpov-Korchnoi and Karpov-Kasparov matches is the best example of this (Fischer also used his dislike of the Russian machine (not the individual players) as motivation. I think Moro just believes he can't win, either this event (too much luck require) or the match vs Topalov.
2) Better to fight to win the event and then pull out (insist on a neutral venue etc.). He'd be putting across his concerns from a position of strength rather than one of cowardice. Not to mention the financial benefits.
3) I just think he is visibly fragile and human- that is part of the appeal compared to some of the expressionless robots out there. Same with Ivanchuk; given the quality of his play over the last 20 years who can't be moved by his inability to make it to the very top. Sadly, neither of them are winners at the top level.
"Wow - the Carlsen hype machine is really working overdrive! He is a good story and has ridiculous potential but what has he actually accomplished? Fantastic result in Biel but still a long way to go before we put him in young Fischer territory."-- Wizard of Oz
Why, because he hasn't won his national title four years running? Was Fischer top ten in the world at 17? 18 months ago I might have agreed, but the way Carlsen is playing now, no way. What would you have him do, wiz?
"still a long way to go before we put him in young Fischer territory" he just turned 17 a few days ago and as of now he is shared top 10 with aronian. 16yoMagnus>16yoFischer.
magnus is cuter. that is all !!!
Re. Carlsen vs Karjakin
I think a lot of Carlsens popularituy with the 'masses' has to do with the fact that he has a lot more fight in him than Karjakin. He is not afraid of taking chances, and even if he some times he finds himself in objectivly inferior positions, he feels at home in them whereas his opponent does not. His games are simply more entertaining.
I think that ine pure chess-ability, the two are about equal, but Carlsens willpower and strong psyche, for lack of a better terms, is what puts him pver the top and will take him to the highest echelon of chess.
Sometimes you can just tells someone is good... think about for example Sidney Crosby. He was touted to be a new Wayne Gretzky well before he achieved anything and he has lived quite well to the expectations. But there are other players who are almost as good or at some ways even better than Crosby, like the young russian Ovechkin, Kovalchuk or others.
It's not possible to call Carlsen a new Kasparov yet, but we already know he is a great player. Perhaps one of the greatest players in history considering his young age. But how can you tell what's going to happen tomorrow?
Btw. I remember an interesting quote from Kasparov, when he decided to end his career. He said something about giving his opening knowledge (database) to some young player and I think he mentioned he will consider Carlsen as one of the candidates. Don't know if that ever happened, but it would sure be interesting to know. I think it was a chessbase interview or something.
Carlsen deserves all the credit and invitations he gets because he is one of the very top players on merits, even if we forget about the age. The issue here is that Karjakin does not get enough credit and invitations.
All the talk that Karsen has more fight in him than Karjakin is bollocks. In all recent top tournaments they've played together Karjakin finished higher and scored more wins: see Corsica or Weijk. Yes, Carlsen achieved some high profile wins recently, however
1) Carlsen had an opportunity to score these wins and Karjakin had not because he wasn't playing in all these super tournaments.
2) Karjakin also had some high profile wins, e.g. over Grischuk in Russian Team championship, but nobody talks about them.
Who has more will power or stronger psyche of the two remains to be seen. I certainly would like to see Karjakin-Carlsen in the World Cup final, and I wouldn't put my money on Carlsen if such a final will materialize.
Karjakin has a plus score against all the other semi-finalists, so he's the favourite now.
"magnus is cuter. that is all !!!"
I really have no opinion as to that particular point, but I can state that when Karjakin played 25. Nd5! in the 2nd Tie-Break game, it was a really cute tactic. That position will make it to the tactical anthologies for sure.
Maybe Karjakin ought to challenge Carlsen to a Match. True, Kajakin would be the one to arrrange for the Prize Fund, but at this stage in Carlsen's career, it might sti;; be on the modest side. The winner of the match would get Bragging Rights as the Best Young player....at least until Fabiano Caruana surpasses them both :-)
"Was Fischer top ten in the world at 17?"
According to chessmetrics.com, yes, he was (barely).
martin: I'm a Norwegian and frankly I had zero interest in chess until I ...
Enjoy this extremely rare and remarkable event for any sport --
someone who comes totally "out of the system" and kicks his way to the
top is indeed something that happens mainly in corny cheap movies
loaded with sugary wishful thinking... The only difference is that in
this case the story is true. There is no exaggeration in Carlsen's
talent -- the kid is a monster and shows truly remarkable
maturity. Soon he should be able to take on the biggest dogs in long
protracted matches!! The presnece of such unusual characters raises
ther global profile of Chess.
D.
P.S. If Carlsen can make 3 more people in Norway drop their skis and
get a chess board, so much the better... Topalov and Stefanova
created a similar spike of interest on chess in Bulgaria -- a lot of
people started to get curious all of a sudden, including me...
Really, there's only one "system" to be outside of: the (ex)Soviet system. So it's this vs. rest of the world. Is it patronising to the rest of the world to suggest that it's a novelty when somone from their number turns out to be talented at chess?
Good hockey analogy by raindeer. Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, and even Malkin are tremendous young talents, and of course they would have been virtually unknown to the North American audience before coming in to the NHL, whereas Crosby was hyped well before he even entered the league. So it is hard to objectively explain why they don't get as much press as Sid considering their rise to the top could be viewed as more surprising. Media bias must be largely responsible, but also probably the origins factor that some have brought up. The Russian hockey tradition is well established, whereas if they came from, say, Germany, or even the U.S., there would doubtless be more headlines. Look at Dirk Nowitzki and Steve Nash in the NBA for example.
How do you know that Karjakin doesn't get more press coverage in the Ukraine than Carlsen does? And would it astonish you to find out that he did?
Is anyone surprised that "hype" involves catering to the interests of the public that ulitmately pays for the entertainment?
Are we on Norwegian blog or what? It's entirely possible that Karjakin gets 10000 times more press coverage in the village he was born. To be honest I fail to understand why a guy from Spain should care more about a guy from Norway than about a guy from Ukraine.
No Theorist, that's pretty obvious. But in chess the masses are not paying for the entertainment. obsender, that's the question everyone is trying to answer.
Karjakin wins rapids match and is through.
That Karjakin win reminded me of the early Anand, same lethal elegance in the attack.
Well, whoever's paying for it, it's not the Ukrainians. Otherwise, we'd have European, American, and Chinese chess players making a pilgrimage to Odessa or Kiev to play in one of the supertournaments the Ukrainians put on, or in one of the many professional chess leagues the Ukraine supports. Which we don't.
Osbender, I don't think a guy from Spain "should" care more about a guy from Norway than about a guy from Ukraine, but a lot do anyway for no reason other than his outsider, underdog status. Norway is a pipsqueak country without a mega-strong chess culture, and his trainers are Norwegian too (Simen Agdestein, Kjetil Lie). A David (Norway) tackling the Goliaths (ex-Soviet republics and satellites). If you don't "get" it, that's fine. No one says you "should" root and buzz for Carlsen, but it is a great story.
Theorist: Is it patronising to the rest of the world to suggest that it's a novelty when somone from their number turns out to be talented at chess?
Well, it depends entirely on the individual interpreting it -- there
are always people who love to seek offense and see everything as a
backhanded compliment. Yes, to me it is a novelty to have a
magnum-talent like Carlsen to come from Norway and there's nothing
patronizing or against the people there... How many top notch Chess
players has Carlsen had as coaches? Even Khalifman remarked during
Corus that Carlsen apparently lacks "a school". On that background his
achievements are unbelievably remarkable.
D.
"...a lot of people started to get curious all of a sudden,including me..."
Dimi, don't be so modest. I'm sure you've been curious for a long time.
Hmm, let me get this straight. The guy has several GMs as coaches. Gets invitations to every top tournament in sight. Care to name any Karjakin's GM seconds? Who's David and who's Goliath in this analogy? Who are these "ex-Soviet republics" that Carlsen is taking on? Is he fighting Putin? Is there some governmental machine behind Karjakin or even Alekseev?
Indeed Carlsen is a great story because he plays remarkable chess at such a young age. So is Karjakin. What I don't get is the need to paint Carlsen as a guy who fights against some "system" and Karjakin as a representative of that "system".
Theorist,
Actually, Foros is a Ukrainian tournament. So there is infinitely more Ukrainian super tournaments than there is Norwegian ones. Haven't heard much about Norwegian chess league too.
Hey guys,
What's the matter with you?
Just wait until next week and we will practically see who is stronger. Both of them are going to play a strong GM and have a good chance to meet in the final.
As Michael Adams mentioned in his interview, almost everyone get what he deserves in this KO system. So, just relax and enjoy the games and let the kids prove themselves...
Listen to Korchnoi's comments on "genius". He speaks about many of players here.
http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=1398
-- Posted by: Rich at December 7, 2007 20:23
What does Korchnoi have to say about genius? Does he say that Carlsen is a genius?
Thanks.
If Karjakin fans have nice things to say about his play, why not take the constructive path and say it (and update his Wikipedia page) instead of bitching and moaning about Carlsen-favoritism? I'm quite open to learning more about Karjakin - why don't "you" give me something worth reading, rather than complain about what "they" have or haven't said or done?
..."Hmm, let me get this straight. The guy has several GMs as coaches."
Actually, no. Carlsen does not have any coaches and is basically 'self-taught'. Heine and Lie have helped him out a lot as 'seconds' but no one is his 'coach'.
The point of my earlier post was that the Carlsen hype is unfortunately overshadowing the Kamsky and Shirov story lines that I find more compelling. Carlsen may indeed reach his astronomical potential but for now thats all it is...potential. We will see if he lives up to his hype...I'm quite certain that Kamsky and Shirov already have.
Shams - Yes, Fischer was in the top 10 at 17. He had won the US title outright 3 times and produced a game (Byrne-Fischer '56) that was (arguably) the best ever played. His did so without a support system or the aid of computer training tools.
"Yes, Fischer was in the top 10 at 17."
TopTenNowdays>>TopTen~1960. Karjakin is also amazing.
can somebody explain to me how was Fischer in the top 10 when there was no ELO at the time?
Op: Could you please elaborate on 'TopTenNowdays>>TopTen~1960.'
That was before huge chess databases, computers, and 'Polgar method of 10 hours of chess per day to raise a genius.'
Kramnik and others have spoken about older players having to accumulate a great deal of "chess knowledge" to offset age-related decline in their calculating speed.
In this era we're seeing younger WCCs. And unless Kramnik prevails for five more years we'll probably never see another 37-year-old WCC (his great predecessor).
Age at which fourteen classical WCCs won the title:
50 Steinitz
37 Botvinnik
36 Smyslov
35 Alekhine
34 Euwe, Petrosian
33 Capablanca
32 Spassky
29 Fischer
28 Lasker
25 Kramnik
23 Tal, Karpov (1974 match)
22 Kasparov
Age at which twelve classical WCCs lost the title:
(omitting Fischer/Alekhine)
58 Steinitz
53 Lasker
52 Botvinnik
40 Petrosian
39 Capablanca
37 Smyslov, Kasparov
36 Euwe
35 Spassky
34 Karpov
32 Kramnik (title "on loan")
24 Tal
I cannot believe what I am reading here!
C'mon people! We are arguing about two 17-year old boys who are not close to their maximum potential yet. Give the boys a break and give them credit for what they have done so far! Both Carlsen and Karjakin are amazing chessplayers. Both have shown a fantastic potential. Someone likes this or that, I liked Karpov in the 80s and now I love Kasparov, but what the hell: We havent got clue yet what might become of these two guys. Personally I hope we get a lot of C-K matches in the 2010-2025, but I'll guess some other guys want to stick their queen in this soup..
Good luck both Carlsen and Karjakin!! You are both amazing chess talents, and I cant wait to see your further progress.
Shut up people, there is no point yet in arguing who is the best.
re: raindeer at December 8, 2007 10:13
Carlsen actually visited Kasparov for training (on invitation), but Kasparov demanded a very strict training regime that was unfit for the Carlsen personality.
re: raindeer at December 8, 2007 10:13
Carlsen actually visited Kasparov for training (on invitation), but Kasparov demanded a very strict training regime that was unfit for the Carlsen personality.
-- Posted by: zeitgeist at December 8, 2007 20:44
Wow, if -I- had the chance to be trained by the greatest player of all-time (Kasparov), I would have done whatever he said, including eating worms for breakfast if that's what he said I needed to do.
osbender, you can lead a horse to a story, but you can't make him think!
Re:Morozevich
Morozevich has been a top ten player for a lot of years and has never created any problem.He is a special kind of player and personality.He never showed any kind of arrogance in contrast to other top ten players.He can't be accused of arrogance just because he made a choice.Not wanting to play a match against Topalov is his right.He didn't speak badly of Topalov,he just said that he doesn't have good relationship with him and he is not interested in playing a match against him.
Say, wasn't Carlsen supposed to play Karjakin in the semi-final? They were on boards 1-2 and Shirov-Kramink on 3-4.
Gata! Gata! Gata! Gata! Gata!
It was well worth losing a night of sleep to see this one. Congrats Gata!
Wasn't Moro the first GM to begin whispering unsubstantiated and almost certainly false accusations about Topalov receiving computer assistance? That Moro wasn't vilified for this continues to surprise me. Maybe it is somehow morally superior to whisper rather than speak openly.
Seems to me Topalov is the one who has been wronged in that little human melodrama.
PS: Kamsky is looking like a real killer these days. Makes the chess scene even more interesting. A Topalov-Kamsky match would be fierce.
"Wasn't Moro the first GM to begin whispering unsubstantiated and almost certainly false accusations about Topalov receiving computer assistance?"
According to whispered, unsubstantiated and possibly true accusations, yes. Or does anyone have solid facts to back it up with?
Thanks for clearing that up, acirce. I was pretty sure Moro would never have stooped so low.