Elista, the capital of Kalmykia, which exists, isn't exactly a resort, but it is the chess venue of last resort. The third leg of the of the 2008-09 FIDE Grand Prix series was nearly amputated a few weeks ago when the original organization in Doha broke down. The event, like so many FIDE messes past, was quickly swept off to Elista, where FIDE president, also Kalmykian president, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov always has a light on in the window and tax dollars to spend. Several of the players originally slated to participate aren't there, most notably Magnus Carlsen and Mickey Adams. Official site here, also with live games. The ICC is also showing the games live.
What remains is still a very strong event that has nothing to be ashamed of as a chess tournament. It's only as a symbol of FIDE's shambolic organizing that it merits censure. So now that the first pawns have indeed been pushed, let's focus on the chess. The players: Radjabov, Leko, Wang Yue, Jakovenko, Mamedyarov, Grischuk, Cheparinov, Eljanov, Bacrot, Alekseev, Gashimov, Inarkiev, Akopian, Kasimjanov. 13 rounds with free days on the 19th and 24th. Yes, they are playing on Christmas. (Which sort of makes up for FIDE's habit of scheduling big events to start on major Jewish holidays.) Rounds begin at 3pm local, noon GMT, 7am EST. With the Pearl Spring games starting five hours earlier you can really make a day (or night) of it with time for a snack in between.
Round one immediately ended the most interesting side story of the event: would Wang Yue ever lose again? China's first candidate for the top 10 had gone months, including two Grand Prix events, without a loss, running his streak to 82 games. (I only get 81 in my database for some reason; FIDE lists 80. A few Torch league games missing?) That threatened Mikhail Tal's famous streak of 93 games undefeated. I see ChessBase mentions Tiviakov had a 110-game undefeated streak, achieved in under one year's time from 2004-05. I can only come up with 98 games, but he plays in a lot of off the beaten track opens that don't always make the databases complete and I have no reason to doubt him. It is worth noting that only three of those games came against 2700+ opposition. Tal's opposition on average was also relatively weak compared to the elite-only diet today's 2700s usually face. But he was Tal and his winning percentage and risk-taking made his streak (and another over 80 games) all the more remarkable.
But Jakovenko put an end to the drama right off, outplaying Wang Yue in one of the Chinese player's favorite Berlin endgames. It's amazing that you can play over Almasi-Wang Yue from earlier this year and see the exact same ending and compare them to one another for a nice lesson. Jakovenko certainly put it under the microscope and infiltrated to victory. 39.c3 looks like the key idea, threatening to run the black bishop out of squares and forcing (?) ..c5, after which the white king has a way in, unlike in the Almasi game. Cool. The only other decisive game of the first round was also a Berlin, if an antique "declined" version that doesn't swap the queens immediately. Gashimov won a pair of pawns against Eljanov and ground him down in 93 moves despite opposite-colored bishops.
The Caro-Kann is definitely the flavor of the month in the Topalov/Cheparinov laboratory. Radjabov got a plus against Topalov's trusty second but here the opposite-colored bishops were enough to hold the draw. I've always liked the old g4 lines in the Advance and it was interesting to see Cheparinov defend it without ..h5. He later let White keep an extra pawn and proved it wasn't worth anything. Or Radjabov couldn't prove it was. Interesting stuff. Several games were drawn with almost no fight, or at least with plenty of fight left in the pieces, if not the players. With other top events adopting the Sofia rules these draws look even more pathetic.
While FIDE is doing more bad than good in the chess world, I wouldn't blame them for scheduling a round on christmas eve. Christmas is celebrated on different days in different countries. In most of Europe it's the 24th, and in Russia it's January 7.
Out of 14 players 2 (Leko, Bacrot) will be celebrating Christmas probably, others are Muslim/Orthodox Christian/Other.
Wonder what would happen if FIDE didn't stage anything on all Jewish, Russian, Armenian, Chinese( and so on) holidays.
FIDE is doing more good than bad. As Kirsan says, let all those complaining step up and organize an event. Doha dropped out (maybe financial crisis related?), and a strong tournament is anyway taking place in a reasonable substitute venue. And certainly not in the USA.
You have to wonder what Leko is doing allowing a draw by repetition after 28 moves as White, with all the pieces still on the board, against one of the ( relatively ) weaker players ? Why does the guy bother showing up at all ? He was a bit short of time ( 24 minutes for 12 moves ) but even so. Would Topalov or Carlsen have done this ? I don't think so, and one of them has been World Champion ( sort of ) and the other will be. Nuff said.
Mig, you try too hard to be cute or clever and it distracts. You have a need to be funny, but your forcing it into every paragraph makes the writing weak yaknow? Always trying to come up with a twist of phrase. Here is an example of fluff, forced writing. Or are you more concerned with column inches?
Several games were drawn with almost no fight, or at least with plenty of fight left in the pieces, if not the players. With other top events adopting the Sofia rules these draws look even more pathetic.
Simply stated: without Sofia rules in place, GM draws were pathetically prevalent.
I KNOW you see how much stronger my paragraph is.
Hey, dont hate the player, hate the game. Great site otherwise.
Let's not exaggerate - I feel (again) the urgent
need of posting ,:) to clarify several things:
1) The Sofia rule would not have changed anything. Maybe it has changed the attitude of players even in events where it is not applied ... to the extent that they feel obliged to 'find' a move repetition rather than simply shaking hands.
2) David Young, Topalov _did_ something quite similar the very same day ... . He was black against Movsesian, and one pair of bishops had been exchanged, but I consider these differences relatively minor and irrelevant. Well, today he just showed that he is still alive and kicking - I always have a bit mixed feelings about such Gruenfeld demolitions, because I play the opening myself and they do also occur in my own games.
3) I don't think 2 GM draws in 7 games is "pathetically prevalent". Mamedyarov-Grischuk may count as a third one, but here there was 'real' time trouble ahead (12 moves to go, 13 minutes left for white and only 4 for black). And the draw was preceded by some sort of fight. I concede that I don't know until which move they followed established theory - yet given the time they spent so far, they may not even have been fully aware if most moves had been played before.
And the "BTW's":
I do not consider my comments 2) and 3) above contradictory ... I can play an opening at amateur level (~2000) without knowing all the latest twists of theory - though with 'predictable' results if I occasionally face a stronger and/or more theoretically knowledgeable opponent.
Mig, I like your site exactly (or also) because of your ironic and 'cute and clever' writing. Sometimes you may overreach or your jokes may be bad or misplaced - as I wrote before, IMHO this is the case for the "Vive la resistance" tag ... but this is part of the story.
that's a fair admission
Some of torch league games have not been published, the 2008 cycle was recently completed at 18 rounds
Mate,
I can see why you didn't win, place, or show in the Chess Journalist of the Year voting. Mig's version is equally informative and much, much more entertaining. (Mig's only flaw is the early onset of arthritis contracted from years of sewing new clothes for the emperor).
And Adolphus Berlin must be celebrating today, as Mig called a position from his much-maligned defense "cool." (The ban on positive comments about the Berlin Defense, instituted in October 2000, was repealed after Kramnik-Anand).
Regarding the Topalov game against Movsesian, nobody seems to realize, that white is the only one, who can play for a win. Mentioning that only a pair of bishops had been exchanged says very little about blacks possibilities in the position (and - at this level - the variation in general).
I think the position is equal after the exchange of the bishops. Movsesian simply did not want to run into Topalov's preparation and chose a safe and harmless line. And to me it sounds odd that a position forcefully arising from the Moscow variation can be particularly good for white.
Sofia Rules help, but there are still plenty of draws when the players adhere to them. If you have two Top players who are both inclined to settle for a Draw in a particular round, a Draw is usually the result. The players can work around "No Draw Offer" regulations, or even Move Minimums (of, say 30, 40, or 50 moves), by steering the games into dead drawn positions, necessary repetitions, or even Bare Kings. Of course, as long as players are still playing, there is always a chance that one of them will blunder--leading to a decisive result.
Most of the benefit of the Sofia Rules is simply from appearances: A fightless game that is Drawn as a result of all the pieces being swapped off is still more appealing to Chess fans than a Draw that takes place on Move 13, with all of the Pieces still on the Chessboard. Top Chessplayers are also performers (or need to be, if Chess hopes to truly be seen as Sport), and they need to put on a good show for the fans.
Mate, did you just pass ordinary levels in English? A little learning is a dangerous thing, as they say. When you go on to advanced level and learn a little more, have the humility to admit your ignorance about creative writing.
Arthritis is one thing, but just as troubling is Mig's contraction of tinnitus, diagnosed after years of blasting his stereo at 11 to drown out his nagging conscience while engaged in the act of knitting said emperor's clothes. And he was denied even the luxury of saying "at least it was cool music," since punk rock never happened to him; and so he destroyed his hearing with the help of Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Scorpions, Quiet Riot and Accept. If he'd only just cranked The Knitters...
I'm glad the topic of Mig's writing style has come up. It's absolutely first-class, a splendid combination of observation of, knowledge about, affection for and humour for chess.
Is there anything else close on the web or in print? I think not.
At the extreme opposite end of the web-spectrum, we have the Polgar/Truong blog, apparently an increasingly lazy and self-centred product of RSS-feeds and Google-News on 'chess'. Polgar used to take the time to give her own perspective on games: now, nothing much. In between there are chess-players who can't write and writers who don't know enough about chess.
I look forward to Mig's book of Chess Anecdotes, and will be up for several copies to give to friends.
g
All of today's games in Elista were fought out - Akopian-Jakovenko was just 25 moves, but no remaining questions on the final position ... . Did the organizers 'comment' on yesterday's short draws?? I don't think the players care or even notice what's been written here and on other sites.
And is it coincidence or justice that the two players accepting a short draw with white yesterday (Bacrot and Leko) lost today? Leko actually was forced to play a rather interesting game: after losing two pawns with a nice but simple combination, he had to go for an all-or-nothing kingside attack and ended up with nothing
If the subject is chess prose, Mig is in a class by himself. Original thinker, funny, lots of style; the best, no contest. If writng is just another word for thinking, Rowson and Ree of NIC are very good. I really can't think of anyone else that rises above drivel.
Donner was very witty but he wasted too much of his talent on chess politics.
As for analysis or game commentary, we haven't seen anything like Reti or Bronstein in a long time.
Just one man's opinion.
"Is there anything else close on the web or in print? I think not."
g, you should get out or stay in more; either way you're not paying attention. There would be no chessninja without the work of Dutch columnists Guzendam and Ree, who balanced caissic knowledge with a laconic wit that turns up here in a hammerhead joke style.
Just listen to Mig's ICC broadcasts, where he strains mightily to graft a Three Stooges "huh-huh-gotcha-BOING" onto every observation by a GM co-host, and you'll see that he's Barth Gimble to their Charlie Rose. If that's your thing, fine, and at least it's not in the dreary BBC style...but to say there's either Mig or the Polgar "chess-narcissus" option is ridiculous.
"In between there are chess-players who can't write and writers who don't know enough about chess."
Don't know enough about chess to...what exactly? Entertain you? Make you feel superior? Don't see where you're going here. Would you condemn writers like Martin Amis and Alexander Cockburn for writing about chess because they're sub-2000? Believe it, a paragraph about chess by Amis is more informative, entertaining and beautiful than five years of Mig's monographs. So would you refuse to read it because he's not assisted by Fritz?
It is completely unfair to compare Mig's off-the-cuff live commentary with his writing.
The Amis article was just the kind of cheap sensationalism I'm used to reading by writers who know next to nothing about chess. This stands as proof that even good writers like Amis should stick to writing about what they know.
Chess is a difficult subject. Just ask Nabokov.
Mig is emotionally fragile and finds it hard to speak up to critics, so ixnay on the ashingbay of his osepray.
"It is completely unfair to compare Mig's off-the-cuff live commentary with his writing."
Actually it's manifestly fair. Why do you think there are blogs in the first place? Fast food, off-the-cuff and entertaining prose by spoiled white guys stompity-stomping and DEMANDING TO BE HEARD!! As such I can easily identify the ICC commentator as the chessninja blogger.
"The Amis article was just the kind of cheap sensationalism I'm used to reading by writers who know next to nothing about chess."
There were several, but you could just admit you haven't read them instead of lying. "Cheap sensationalism" would be the soft-porn aspirations of Chessbase, or maybe a TMZ crew pursuing a chessplayer from a nightclub to his motor vehicle, which will happen to Carlsen in a few years.
r -- you're right. My apologies.
long live the mig! the best!
fresh, refreshing, and stimulating.
always interesting. change nothing.
Help me out Clubfoot. If Mig is so dreadful, why are you incessantly posting on the man's blog? Are you on a one-man mission? To obliterate the Mig Monstrosity?
You could always serve up your bile sandwiches elsewhere. Your posts are a recipe for future colon trouble, I'm rather concerned for you.
Anyone who has nothing to say but to give boring lectures about his smarmy opinions about Mig's writing style should (follow the lesson of Kirsan and) get their own blog.
I imagine a pimply faced college student armed with a fresh copy of Strunk and White who just got his first B+ in an Intermediate Composition class at the local university. Too bad you couldn't make it as a pre-med like dad.
You mustn't be so catty, chesshire. I never said he's dreadful, not a once. I was responding to an obsequious poster who was logrolling Mig's name over all chess writers on earth.
I post here for probably the same reasons you post here.
Kirsan is vacillating in his latest interview. The path to WC continues to meander.
IF ANY OF U CLOWNS THINK U CAN DO BETR THEN MIG START UR OWN CHESS WEBSIDE
Tic-Tac, your paragraph is indeed fabulously, comprehensively, stronger than Mig's. Would you be so kind as to post a link to your own blog, so that the rest of us may enjoy your pithy, well-written, and most of all, strong, insights on the world chess scene?
Gracias.
I hate to post about these personal attacks, but in all fairness, there is enough room for everyone to make a contribution in the chess world. Believe me... there is so much NOT being covered in chess and most sites cover the same events and players. So... here's your chance.
Mig has his own style and it may be pointless to compare him to any other journalist. There simply aren't enough people putting in the time. Believe me, I know practially every major chess journalist there is and there are still tremendous gaps in coverage.
Of course with chess, players are very meticulous and unforgiving with those things they find ambiguous or disconcerting. However, if you don't like Mig, then find another site/blog to suit your tastes. If you can't find one, create one!
I agree with Daaim that there are many Internet chess resources, but still room for additional ones - to fill gaps in coverage or maybe also to provide (yet) another view on events and players that are already widely covered.
To comment on some (obviously not all!) existing sites:
Mig has a unique writing style - like it or not, but don't ask or expect him to change. I guess this would also be the case if there were hundreds or thousand of comparable sites rather than maybe a dozen - or anyone merely trying to copy him would be at most second-best. [So here I slightly disagree with Daaim - "there simply aren't enough people" is not the point IMHO].
And Mig is known to have friendly and/or professional relations with Kasparov. So the site may be considered slightly "pro-Kasparov", or at least providing more coverage on Kasparov's views (at times including his political activities) than other sites. Again, like it or not, consider it an added value or just skip these posts [or, more commonly, sentences to paragraphs in some post], provide critical but constructive comments if you want to, or (if you cannot handle it at all) do not bother visiting the site.
Chessdom is, IMHO, "pathetically" pro-Topalov (and, by definition, anti-Kramnik). I've gotten used to it and it makes me more amused than annoyed or angry - and it still has some interesting stuff to offer.
Chessbase has many pictures of women playing chess .... many people complain or make fun of it. This shows that at least they are (still) visiting the site - and maybe some secretly like it but want to leave a different impression 'in public'. In any case, calling it (merely) a sensational soft-porn site does not do justice to much of the other coverage. [Personally, I visit the German site because it can by definition provide more coverage on German events and players than its international competitors.]
The Carlsen blog is, by definition, pro-Carlsen ... .
And, as I respond to Daaim's comment: The Chessdrum site is unique in providing coverage on African and Caribbean chess. To do so, one needs a special motivation and lots of personal contacts - so I don't know if anyone else could do a similar job even if he wanted to. This being said, I agree that during the Olympiad other sites could have provided a bit more coverage (also) on the lower boards, visa issues, .... .
BTW, much of the above also applies to comments by bloggers: Feel free to like or dislike, read or ignore, comments by e.g. Freddy, Paul Miller or Bogoljubov [making up some names so nobody feels personally insulted]. But accept everyone's freedom of speach, and everyone's choices concerning style and length of their posts.
I like Mig's articles and I like the comments on his articles.It's like Victor Mollo's Menagerie life on internet, "Masters and Monsters", the human side of chess.
>>>
"In between there are chess-players who can't write and writers who don't know enough about chess."
Don't know enough about chess to...what exactly? Entertain you? Make you feel superior? Don't see where you're going here. Would you condemn writers like Martin Amis and Alexander Cockburn for writing about chess because they're sub-2000? Believe it, a paragraph about chess by Amis is more informative, entertaining and beautiful than five years of Mig's monographs. So would you refuse to read it because he's not assisted by Fritz?
>>>>
Not to mention the fact that Mig's peak rating is 1825. He's a perfect example that you can be a good chess writer (MIg certainly is, in spite of his agenda often interfering with the truth) without being a strong player.
For what it's worth, I think Mig's writing is excellent. It's really, really hard to be entertaining, incisive, funny, relaxed, and informative all at the same time. Mig's easily the finest writer on chess out there.
Incidentally, which player gets props for best writer? (Writing about chess, not novels.) I know that Tal and Bronstein were much-lauded back in the day; I've loved their books almost as much for the prose as anything else. Who's standing out of the new breed?
Mig's 1800 USCF rating is outdated - he is a 2300 (in Argentina). Or so he says, and I have no reason to doubt that someone who spends as much time around strong players as he does ... has picked up something along the way.
"Incidentally, which player gets props for best writer?"
My personal favorites are Gelfand ("My most memorable games") and Shirov ("Fire on the Board I and II"). But this may reflect the games presented as much as the writing, and the annotations may be a bit too 'heavy' for not-that-strong players (<1800?).
"From London to Elista" has a bit more writing and less chess - roughly 50% each. Here it is not clear who should get most of the credit: Bareev (now semi-retired?), Ilya Levitov (introduced as "an ardent chess amateur") or Kramnik himself who is not an official author, but obviously contributed. And obviously, your overall opinion depends on what you think about / which side you prefer in the Toiletgate scandal ... .
And actually, I don't have other comparable books on my bookshelf, so I cannot really compare and am curious about other opinions and recommendations.
Well Dvoretski is the man if you're serious about improving; maybe not so suitable for other purposes. I recommend anything written by Seirawan. Entertaining, fun, but also very instructive annotations guaranteed. Inside Chess was a heck of a magazine.
If you want a nice hair-raising experience try Anand's best games! I took a long look at some of the diagrams, looked at the annotations, felt a headache coming on, then realized that 2700 guys really do come from another galaxy.
Depends if you want entertainment or instruction, I guess, but Seirawan should do both! According to reviews MGP should be a good stocking-filler too, but here I speak from ignorance.
Maybe all that doesn't really answer the question about good modern chess prose writers tho :)
Writing as writing, Sosonko is far and away the best IMHO - his elegiac series on Russian figures.
And Donner, of course, if you count him as a modern, this I guess he isn't.
I actually can't think of anyone today who is as entertaining as Tal and Bronstein.
"Actually it's manifestly fair. Why do you think there are blogs in the first place? Fast food, off-the-cuff and entertaining prose by spoiled white guys..."
Why "white guys", clubfoot? What the hell does that have to do with anything?
Self-righteous race baiters make the world such a pleasant place.
For chess prose, Rowson and Watson are both excellent. The late Tony Miles was also a good writer, with a very acerbic sense of humor.
Mig's cool...his writing is usually great, but in this case he neglected to mention that the games are being broadcast live on Playchess, too. And, if you are not a member, you can download a free trial membership at www.playchess.com. You get to watch all the games for a month without paying. And you can play your own games on the site, too, and with a beautiful interface.
It has to do with blogs, Ricardio. If you believe it's race baiting, then you may also believe in the Easter Bunny, Oswald acting alone and Mig's 2300 rating.
But I certainly didn't mean to hurt your baby feelings, especially not about the Easter Bunny conspiracy.
I think the names of Jeremy Silman, Nigel Short and Edward Winter should be added to the list of great modern chess writers.
And Yasser Seirawan's articles are always a great mix of entertainment and instruction. I mourn the demise of Inside Chess magazine.
I'm just glad you left Santa Claus out of it Clubfoot. Or maybe Mig censored it. In any case, I'm sick of the lies I get told this time every year.
Season's greetings, DD readers!
And to you, chesshire, season's greetings. I never believed in the authenticity of the Shroud of Christmas Island, the size 61 candy apple red burial cloth said to have bound Kris Kringle before he vanished in the company of elves. But I won't humbug it here, so happy holidays to the DD crew.
"It has to do with blogs, Ricardio. If you believe it's race baiting, then you may also believe in the Easter Bunny, Oswald acting alone and Mig's 2300 rating.
But I certainly didn't mean to hurt your baby feelings, especially not about the Easter Bunny conspiracy."
Clever writing. It's almost blog-worthy. Of course, I don't know if you're a "spoiled white guy" or not, so maybe by the circumstance of your ethnic background you've been denied blog space by the man. Sucks for you. I, for one, hate how every time I try to start up a blog, I have to fill in "Richard" instead of "Ricardo".
At least we can be clear that Clubfoot is not Paul Truong after the 'chess narcissus' comment.
I like good journalism, and can go with Hans Ree, Tim Krabbe and Martin Amis (sometimes). I like writing that brings out the human side of chess, and explains the subtleties in a way I can begin to understand.
Clubfoot is the first person ever to suggest that I was obsequious: Mig probably knows better than that. As C.P.Snow said in 'Death Under Sail' (on an early page, so you don't have to read too much), I'm old enough to give a compliment without expecting anything in return. Praise where priase is due.
"39.c3 looks like the key idea," GM Zhang Zhong said the samething in his analysis of that game and he believed Jakovenko's home prep found the winning idea here. Wang in the past few months had played Adam (twice) and Almasi to similar positions and they both played c4 and missed the winning chance. Jakovenko finds c3 at home threating to trade bishops or force ...c5. Without dark bishop black will lose or after ...c5 white's K can get in.
Bottomline is if you play the same line again and again, some body is going to find a way to win you, even it's been tested by top GMs.
Whoa Bacrot-Leko just provided the stuffing for my turkey!
You can turn it around and say: A wrong plan is good enough three out of four times.
Foolish of WY to go to the well again, especially against Jakovenko, who is literally the most likely person in the world to find how to win such a technical position.
Leko is going from bad to worse. whats wrong with him? he used to be almost unbeatable.
I usually dont like Leko style , but i really liked him against Cheparinov.
YES, LIKE SANDS THROUGH THE HOWER GLASS, THESE ARE THE DAYS OF OWER LIVES
Quite.
Leko is trying to spice things up with some Anand-style double-edged defense. That's why he's suffering a few losses. Ultimately, he will emerge all the stronger from these stylistic experiments and once again take his place among the super-elite.
I'm not so sure about that - watching Leko get duffed up in these super-sharp positions is a bit like watching Kramnik get shafted by Anand and Topalov all over again. His controlled technical win against Cheparinov shows where his strengths lie. Maybe I should take back my previous criticism of his cowardice in accepting early draws and acknowledge that he's another Kramnik-type technician - nothing wrong with that of course. I seem to remember Kramnik trying the Sveshnikov for a while to sharpen his Black repertoire and finding it just didn't suit his style - maybe this is Leko doing the same ?
@r: What's the actual evidence for your statement? In his two losses, Leko played his typical solid openings (Queen's Indian and Caro-Kann). Against Grischuk, he had to spice things up later on because he blundered two pawns and had to go for a kingside attack. And Bacrot 'spiced things up' with white; Leko may have been surprised and felt uncomfortable about white's aggressive approach to the seemingly solid and somewhat boring main line (though that g4 stuff is not really new).
I would say Leko just has one bad tournament so far - nothing less and nothing more (he had an excellent result at the Olympiad just before). On the plus side, his chess is less successful than in the past, but more entertaining (and for this it always takes two).
I would not call Leko's game against Cheparinov (just) a controlled technical win - the position has been quite sharp throughout most of the game, despite the fact that queens were exchanged early on. So it was not really like a [Catalan] += gradually becoming ± and then +- !!?
That being said, I would agree that Leko is mostly a "Kramnik-type technician" - nothing wrong with that, and BTW nothing new.
Thanks Thomas for the kind words.
Slight addition... I do focus on the African Diaspora worldwide, but I also take pride in offering the readership coverage on main events (Olympiad, World Championships), U.S. (where I am based) and also chess from other developing regions. That's all time will allow for a one-man shop!
Most sites have a particular niche or personality and are selective in what they cover. It's hard to be all things to all people and I have not met a chess journalist that attempted... except kasparovchess.com. I could ask Mig about what happened at kasparovchess.com. That was a great site with good focus. It expanded and started offering everything under the sun.
I certainly have my diet of sites I check on a regular basis, but when I'm researching for material to write a story, no site or blog will escape my serendipity.
Some people get know just about this topic from different places. And everybody can offer to buy an essay at the essay writers. So, men usually buy custom papers.