Another day, another decisive game at the Tal Memorial. Today it was Anand's turn, and the victory put him into a tie for first Kramnik on +2. The world champ trampled Leko with the latest hot novelty in the Semi-Slav. Last year Kramnik took out Aronian in similar fashion in the same line, giving back the extra piece with the spectacular 25.Nc3!, improving on Radjabov-Anand, 2006. Today it was Leko's turn to step into a world champion's sights when Anand dropped 22.Nxd4! on him. The Hungarian was up to the challenge for a good long time, however. He used his time judiciously and wended his way down a very narrow path toward safety. It wasn't until move 30 that he started to slide off the cliff under the intense pressure. After that it was a ruthless dismantling job by Anand, closing in on the open black king. After White eliminated the black d-pawn, all the rook and queen endgames were doomed for Leko, who hung on grimly even after reaching the time control in a hopeless position. A sweet piece of preparation and a classy win by Anand.
Gelfand-Kramnik took an unexpected turn for the dramatic after a tranquil start. Kramnik steadily made progress on the black side of a hybrid Catalan. It wasn't clear if Gelfand was going to be able to ge this pawn back without suffering, but it seems like he had it under control. Time trouble began to set in for both players before move 30 and Kramnik's nerves held up much better than Gelfand's. Just when White could have played for an advantage with 27.Rb7, the Israeli began a series of retreating moves that left Black in control. Soon they were both blitzing and they crossed the finish line on move 40 with seconds to spare. During the scramble both missed improvements. The cool 36..Rd8 would have eliminated White's only source of counterplay. Instead, Gelfand got a miracle save just in time, the saving geometry of 41.Rc7! coming when he had time to find it.
Gelfand's day still wasn't over though, as they reached an always annoying to defend R+4 vs R+3. This is almost always drawn, but Kasparov encouraged a generation of players on the stronger side twice in a single year. First, in February 2000, Kasparov shockingly lost a 4 vs 3 to Jeroen Piket in the final of the KasparovChess Online Grand Prix. Later that year, in a slightly more prestigious event, Kasparov came very close to beating Kramnik in it near the end of their London world championship match. Oddly, they've played it a few other times as well. So you definitely play on, but you don't expect to win against someone as steady as Gelfand unless the weaker side's pawns are in bad shape. Kramnik gave it a go for 80 moves before accepting the inevitable. A great second-half battle.
Carlsen is still quite ill, but Ivanchuk was the one showing the symptoms today. He played what GM Larry Christiansen called "The Granny Opening" today, aka the London System. These Colle-ish lines with the white bishop on f4 are a form of anti-theory, notably favored by Kamsky in the early parts of both phases of his career. It has the advantage, if you want to call it that, of avoiding an opening discussion. Perhaps it was Ivanchuk's plan to avoid having such a discussion with Carlsen and his illustrious coach. Carlsen held the long and uncomplicated fight without any punches landing. Morozevich took a risk by playing a Dutch against Aronian. The Armenian made a little progress, and is usually very dangerous in such fixed maneuvering positions. But he lost his way somewhere along the line and ended up with a dominating position and no way to make progress. Svidler played an aggressive line against Ponomariov's Berlin but couldn't avoid liquidation and a draw.
That Berlin was the second game of the round attended by the spirit of Etienne Bacrot in Novi Sad a few weeks ago at the Euro Teams. He drew against Adams in the stem game. And his win over Aronian in the Semi-Slav was duplicated up till move 17 in Anand-Leko. News you can't use.
Round 6: Carlsen-Anand, Kramnik-Ponomariov, Leko-Svidler, Morozevich-Ivanchuk, Gelfand-Aronian. The heir apparent vs the world champ is the obvious top billing even though it's hard to say if Carlsen will be in fighting shape at all. Leko and Svidler share the cellar on -2 and have only rating points and pride to lose at this point. Hard to imagine a Marshall when they want to lick wounds, but we can hope. I'll be on Chess.FM in, blargh, seven hours with Joel Benjamin.
I predict 4 draws today. The win could come up in Kramnik-Ponomariov with Kramnik's usual grind deciding the play. Carlsen helped Anand in his preparation for the Wch match so I think they both pretty much know each other's game. Leko-Svidler has dead draw written all over it. Both would be happy with a little bit of reprieve. Moro-Chucky I think would be drawn too with both likeable opponents in good and drawish form. Again, Gelfand-Aronian is dead drawn too with both being ultra-solid in their own systems.
I predict 4 draws today. The win could come up in Kramnik-Ponomariov with Kramnik's usual grind deciding the play. Carlsen helped Anand in his preparation for the Wch match so I think they both pretty much know each other's game. Leko-Svidler has dead draw written all over it. Both would be happy with a little bit of reprieve. Moro-Chucky I think would be drawn too with both likeable opponents in good and drawish form. Again, Gelfand-Aronian is dead drawn too with both being ultra-solid in their own systems.
You have to give Kramnik credit for his recent play, throwing down the gauntlet to his rivals and refusing to go into that good night of former champions. Since losing the WC match to Anand, he has sparkled.
Kramnik is motivated by the fact that he can regain the WC title through a "legitimate" qualifying process, read not being handpicked.
Based on his blog, Carlsen seems gung-ho about playing Anand. I'm assuming he has recovered fully then.
Kramnik in his present form should press Pono heavily. Leko-Svidler has draw written all over it.
Carlsen-Anand, difficult to tell, unless Carlsen has a Boss novelty it might be that Vishy may also fight it out.
"Based on his blog .... I'm assuming he [Carlsen] has fully recovered"
Not necessarily, it could also be a psychological game? He knows that Anand might read his words (at the source or quoted elsewhere), so it certainly wouldn't be a good idea to write "I am still sick, I hope Vishy will accept a quick and easy draw" ... .
Magnus's 12.g4 a Boss move? Carlsen certainly willing to fight it out.
Anand and Kramnik would be keen to beat Carlsen just to show who's the boss and to mute all the talk of Carlsen as the uncrowned king. For added motivation, they would be indirectly taking on their old rival.
I wouldn't be surprised if Anand even uses a novelty he has preserved for Topalov.
Kapalik
Mig and others,
Why all this obsession with Carlsen's health in the absence of any evidence or statement. Why bring it up repeatedly when Carlsen himself says he's fine. Wasn't Kramnik also unwell in the early rounds? You people seem to underestimate the power of antibiotics. It all seems to be used as a latent excuse to explain Carlsen's sub-par performance.
Kapalik
ps: Are all Garry supporters supporting Carlsen now?
"Based on his blog"? Carlsen has a new blog?
Ivanchuk wore a mask for his game with Carlsen yesterday (admittedly the other players found it quite amusing!) - this isn't an issue made up by Mig and a few people on here.
Yes, Carlsen is apparently sick - still strange that, recently, some top players were (considered) "more sick than others":
- Svidler and Vachier-Lagrave at San Sebastian: no big deal, worth a footnote
- Nakamura at Rising Stars vs. Experience: BIG DEAL
- Carlsen at Tal Memorial: dito
- Kramnik at Tal Memorial: it doesn't show in his play. If it did, would people consider it a valid explanation or a cheap excuse?
BTW, today many players again show boring chess and lack of respect for organizers and sponsors. Or maybe I should look at the games to check if such a statement makes sense?
It reminds me of the only game Short won against Kasparov in their match - when he came to the board with a bad cold.
Huh??
I was ironic ... and thought this was obvious enough without putting a disclaimer. ,:)
Carlsen is writing his blog here. Not sure what happened to his own!
www.arcticsec.no/index.php?button=blog&main_image=35
Carlsen's previous blog was actually mostly written by Henrik Carlsen. Some time this spring, he wrote that it would be updated less frequently, because providing inside information could help Magnus' opponents [this roughly coincided with Carlsen becoming Carlsparov ...]. Maybe the new blog is checked/edited/censored by Kasparov??
I don't think Kramnik has or had more than a slight cold. Carlsen's problems seem more serious to me. Certainly natural to mention it.
And when did Carlsen say he is "fine"? Last I saw he just said he was feeling a little better.
Again Anand draws effortlessly as Black. I am really impressed by his play so far, rock solid.
But why feed the trolls?
Yes, not that I would be able to tell, but my patzer impression is that Anand has been playing better than everybody else including Kramnik so far in the tournament. Who knows though.
Omigosh, Kramnik-Ponomariov has gotten insane prettty quickly.
Wasn't it insane (or complex) almost from the very start? On moves 17 and 19 both players exchanged blunders - entertaining for us if not for those moving the pieces in Moscow ... .
Thomas, how can you call 19 c6-c7 a blunder?
What was the blunder on move 17? Thag Black didnt keep harassing White's Q and get a draw? Hah! Hardly a blunder. And on move 19? That Kramnik didnt go for a long forcing variation with Qh7+? Again, hardly a blunder I think.
Yeah, maybe I am too harsh on the players, also a bit influenced by engine analyses all over the place ... though also from (my) human perspective it looks odd to
- give up h7, and
- to decline the gift.
In combination, those moves lead to the present position, with material imbalance, an "active" white king and a potentially dangerous white pawn on c7 (while it is under full control at the moment).
"Anand and Kramnik would be keen to beat Carlsen just to show who's the boss and to mute all the talk of Carlsen as the uncrowned king. For added motivation, they would be indirectly taking on their old rival."
A nice theory but both Anand and Kramnik have gone on record saying that Carlsen will be No1 soon if not WC. Anand has also worked with Carlsen before, and finally Carlsen is not Garry's sock puppet.
Kramnik-Ponomariov is a lovely game for people who don't have engines. So just sit back and enjoy the show!
For me the most enjoyable way to watch today's games is following the live feeds from the tournament web page and listening to Mig and J.B. on Chess FM. Some great stuff today!
Hail to Kramnik, the time trouble king :) Even if Ponomariov missed a shot or two to turn the tables. I was going to post that today and yesterday he really seems to be struggling to make decisions in the middle game, which might be a sign of all the long games/cold taking their toll, but if you can hold things together like he has when short of time, why not? It's one way to increase the chances of a decisive result!
Yeah, looks like Mig can do some copy-pasting for his forthcoming report:
"Time trouble began to set in for both players before move 30 and Kramnik's nerves held up much better than Ponomariov's. ... Soon they were both blitzing and they crossed the finish line on move 40 with seconds to spare. During the scramble both missed improvements."
Not sure whose nerves held better this time, but we might be in for some deja vu?
Kramnik should be winning now, but it is far from resignable. Among the cute shots missed was apparently 32..Bc2! and White is in trouble after 33.Nxc3 Rxc3.
Pono showing his defensive chops with 43..Re8!
99% of people would have enpassanted at g3 :)
Even thinking about the amount of work and accuracy necessary during a game to get the full point at top level is giving me a headache.
Kram spends about 20 minutes on 44.Re5? and Pono almost immediately rejects the swap and plays 44...Rb8?? Pono wins the bonehead award.
Pono is playing like a moron. Kram should win easily. If he can't beat Pono's stupid moves, he should give up.
Luke,
Why do you bother analysing games by patzers like these? They are not worthy of your time and attention.
Luke,
Why do you bother analysing games by patzers like these? They are not worthy of your time and attention.
Kram looks very weak in time pressure. He must be getting old. I hope he doesn't end up to be another punch drunk tomato can like Karpov.
"Tomato can" is a term for boxers who never make it to mid-card, far less a championship bout. They usually have an irreversible flaw in their repertoire, most often a glass jaw. So although the poster is fond of affixing the label to Karpov, in fact he cannot be considered a tomato can by any stretch. Moreover, tomato cans almost never get "punch drunk" because their careers (much like their fights) are shorter than main-card boxers.
So if the term were to be properly applied to competitive chess, a "tomato can" would be a club-level fish, never improving or moving up in the ratings world.
Or put another way, a "tomato can" is a player who would crush Luke 20 straight games using beginner's tactics like the Gord attack, the Fool's and Scholar's mates and Philidor's legacy.
I see that you have awoken from your stupor. Well done. Meanwhile, Pono and Kram are slopping away.
Is this the Daily Dirt, or the 10 times hourly Luke? Might as well affix a permanent poster on the "latest comments".
This ending, (K R RP v K B RP)if I remember rightly, has had several top level workouts, including Kasparov.
Apparently this version of the ending is a tablebase win for white. The most recent similar one I remember is Carlsen-Anand 0-1, Morelia/Linares 2008..
Anyone know the result in this endgame with the h-pawns in Kramnik-Pono? I have some idea White is winning - some zugzwang with Kg6 Re4 against Kf8 Bg3? Can White force this? Didn't Rubinstein win this ending once without this trick, then someone (Maizelis?) found it, and then someone else (Yusupov? Kasparov? Someone good, anyway) missed it again. Or is this a totally different position to whatever I'm thinking of?
Well, if he can it doesn't look like Kramnik knows how to do it. Not to say he won't work it out, of course. What would Dvoretsky say, I wonder?!
Apparently someone forgot the tablebases in the Hotel National ´s bathroom , but don´t worry as we speak the responsable is having an accident.
:)
Aha. I suppose if you can work it out you don't need to know how to do it. What a game. Tough one for Pono to lose.
That´s got to be frustrating, after all that fight Pono was really close to the 50 moves...
It's funny, I was thinking you'd say something like that the moment it got to a tablebase win. Anyway, cool final position - I'm glad Ponomariov blundered into a position I can understand :)
Kramnik is a f*&Kin genius...how did he win that endgame...HOW??????? This is unbelievable...the most instructive endgame I have ever witnessed live. My word.
I don't think pono was close to 50 moves...nalimov was talking about mate in etc number of moves...but Kram could take the pawn and it resets back to zero...think that's what guys were overlooking...but an amazing display of creativity, fighting spirit and other-worldly technique by Kramnik. After seeing this, in my book he is the greatest endgame player of all time. Superb stuff...I am now inspired!!!
A win is a win, even if it won't hang in the artiste's Hall of Fame.
:-)
Leko could learn from the all-new model "Exciting Kramnik" (a phrase that was once an oxymoron).
You can play around with a tablebase here in case anyone's curious: http://www.k4it.de/index.php?topic=egtb&lang=en
I think before the final couple of "blunders" Kramnik had already worked out the plan - Pono just sped it up. As Mehul says Kramnik takes the h pawn so the 50 move rule wasn't too serious (though Kramnik probably had it in mind when he didn't take the b3 pawn sooner). It's hard for white to play perfectly, of course, but fortunately just as hard for black!
Would Kramnik now have the right to play ONE quick draw - after all of his efforts and (time) troubles especially yesterday and today?
Kramnik has won the same endgame that Kasparov failed to convert against Yusupov in 1993 - except that the pawns were on the a-file in the Kasparov's game (which of course doesn't affect the evaluation).
I think you are wrong.
And with what piece do you think Kramnik would take the pawn?
Because if he takes it with the rook then bishop takes rook and its a draw..
Someone correct me if im wrong with this.
I'm happy for doctor Vladimir Borisovich Kramnik . was really a nice game
Kudos to Ponomariov who defended very well until the end , it took a lot of energy out of him so i understand why he couldn't prolong the endgame towards the 50 move rules .
Rybka's evals are an indication , but not the absolute truth , people criticizing why he didn't play qxh7 etc.. need to realize that sometimes Rybka gives higher evals , like +0.80 instead of 0.45 because it overrates the space advantage or other factors like BvsN , but the fact is quite often that the slightly weaker move according to Rybka (ie +0.40 ) actually gives more winning potential for a human playing another human , because factors such as complexity of the position , difficulty to find the right continuation for the opponent , long term pressure maintained and time trouble among other things are not a problem for a Rybka programm who can go through any position in limited time , find the best moves in any context , has no problem leaving the initiative to the opponent if it is sure that the position is winning for "her" and has no psychology , but for a human , these factors sure are a problem .
Kramnik chose to keep the pressure and the pieces on board , Ponomariov from the opening until the endgame defended remarkably well if you except the moment when he could play Bc2 and the fact that he did not manage to prolong the endgame at the very end was probably due to fatigue , but Kramnik sure understood how to win this endgame
. Credit to Kramnik's excellent technique and performance today , he gave a lot of energy since the start of the tournament despite having a flu , and deservedly leads the Tal Memorial .
Mark my words : Kramnik is the next WC after Anand.
Rubinstein did beat Salwe by driving the K away - but not without some help by Salwe, I think. Mazelis came up with the zugzwang idea where the stronger side keeps the k in the corner instead of driving it away. The pawns were on 4/5th ranks in the Rubinstein/Mazelis endgame, though, so the zugzwang mechanism was slightly different here and in the Kasparov game.
Manu according to the Nalimov, even if Kramnik was not playing perfectly...but he was on the right track...somewhere 30 moves down the line with a mixture of best and second best moves Kramnik would have gotten a zugzwang and picked up the h pawn. Reset back to zero. Go check it out with the tablebases and see for yourself. An example is the final position of this game.
That is a complete different thing from what you said in first place , if he picks up the pawn he is not ¨reseting the countdown to zero ¨, he is either winning (in case of zugzwan ) or drawing .
The countdown would never be ¨restarted¨ , and for what i heard from people who were kibitzing the game Pono got very close to reaching the 50 move draw before the blunder.
Understand what i mean?
Kramnik is showing his incredible talent. But we knew that, didn't we? After all, only a truly great player can convincinly beat the best of all time (Kaspy) in a match. It was so devastating for Kaspy, that he was asking for an early draw when behind in the match with two or three games to go.
That's no easy feat, boys.
But Magnus Drawlsen will avenge him one day
As GM Dimitri Reinderman explained in the live commentary on Chessvibes: "The basic winning idea is to take on h4 at the moment when the black king cannot go to f8 on time, or to win h4 because of mating threats and zugzwang. The first is normally not possible though, the second is."
Actually in the game Carlsen-Anand I mentioned, black used (mostly) the first plan. It was slightly different: pawns were also on h3 and h4, but black was the exchange up
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1485815
[annotated by Anand in NIC 3/2008]
Manu , Pono didn't come "very close" to 50 move draw , the limit was 112 moves or something , and the game ended in move 80 . Nalimov were saying mate in 30 , but Kramnik could win the pawn way before , thus the position change and the countdown reset to 0
It was an easy win once you managed to capture the pawn
UNBELIEVABLE! Kramnik plays really amazing chess - it can't be any better
The other players, especially Aronian, Svidler and Carlsen, trying to restrain their laughter when Ivanchuk arrives with his mask :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMT4tOvJThA (from about 1:40)
Like i said there were only 2 ways of taking the pawn , one wins and the other draws , in both cases the countdown is useless once u take it.
All hail the peasant of Tuapse :)
VBK is on 4.5/6 with 3 rounds left , he still needs to play black against Aronian and Ivanchuk which is a very difficult task , but hopefully he grind his way through and win the tournament
Cool video thx.
Not over yet but I didn't think I'd see anybody at +3 in this field.
Setting up an exciting finish. Kramnik on 4.5/6 has Black against Aronian, White against Leko and Black against Ivanchuk.
Compare this to Anand on 4/6 who has white against Morozevch, Black against Gelfand and white against Aronian.
Kramnik has better chances but two blacks against potentially dangerous opponents means the outcome is still up in the air. The Big Two will also be playing the losers of the previous round!
Don't forget Ivanchuk. He's on +1 now, and in the last round plays against Kramnik. With a bit of luck, first place is within reach.
Ivanchuk has white against Gelfand, black against Aronian and white against Kramnik.
Infact, had Aronian not lost today it would have been a pretty wild last 3 rounds with four potential contenders.
Your point seems to be that taking the pawn in a position where the bishop can capture the rook when it takes the pawn is only a draw, whereas winning the pawn outright wins.
The scales fall from my eyes. We are fortunate to have you here leading us on this voyage of discovery.
Wow. Had to go after 43.g4. Looks like I missed something... Very nice thing to return to though.
I myself stopped after 45. g5. It wasn't quite as pleasant for me to see what happened, but Kramnik is in extremely impressive form.
Nope genius ,my point is that after taking the pawn there is no more countdown ...
But you seem to have some extra time on your hands , why not use it with someone who actually cares about what you have to say?
Priceless video. Thanks, mishanp. Ivanchuk lives up to his legendary unpredictability:
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=881
Manu, I think you're wrong: "after taking the pawn there is no more countdown". You forget that the 50 move rule is still in effect, and more importantly, the result depends on how and when he takes the pawn. For instance, if he takes with the king and the pawn is protected, it would be an illegal move.
I hope no one is under the illusion that you can keep airborne viruses at bay by covering half of your face. They are in the air that you must breathe......
HardyBerger,
Yeah, yeah. A mask can't stop a virus, but it can stop the spittle and snot that carry the virus. Viruses don't float about in the air by themselves!
There seems to be some kind of swine-flu hysteria in Ukraine, which would perhaps explain Ivanchuk's slightly odd behavior:
“Swine-Flu Panic in Ukraine: Crisis or Political Ploy?” (Time)
http://tinyurl.com/yaz5dfm
Folks, the tournament is more open than it appears.
Kramnik is leading but he has two blacks, plays dangerous opponents and most importantly will be very exhausted with two long games and no breaks - and he is not known for his stamina/endurance and isn't in the best of health.
Anand is half a point behind but he has already played his bunnies (Svidler, Leko, Carlsen) but he will be playing Aronian, who he does poorly against, and Moro, who is dangerous and has beaten him a few times.
And the unpredictable Chukky isn't far behind. It certainly would have been lot more open if Aronian hadn't lost to Gelfand.
Kapalik
Kramnik is in good form, but he has also been somewhat lucky. Most markedly against Ponomariov, who in time trouble missed the very strong 32..Bc2, after which he might even be winning. And by all appearances, that wasn't a very good game in general either, even though certainly nobody can expect perfect play in such complicated positions.
"Izvestia: Still the highest rated player - Veselin Topalov from Bulgaria - did not arrive to Moscow. His absence did not upset you?
Alexander Morozevich: You know, I will tell you my own, totally personal point of view. I myself do not miss Topalov here in Moscow, or in any other tournament. Granted, millions of chess fans certainly have different opinion on this matter."
http://interviews.chessdom.com/alexander-morozevich-izvestia
Also talks about Carlsen and Kasparov.
http://www.izvestia.ru/sport/article3135172/
Why don't you take your own advice? Nobody on this blog cares for your incessant blather, why not do yourself a favour and shut up? Finding it hard to do something with all that free time?
It could be that the Chessdom translation of Moro's interview was (deliberately?) inaccurate - the Google translation of the key sentence says "Well, personally I am not boring to play without Topalov and in Moscow, and in any other tournament." Not quite the same, and more a reaction to - IMO odd - statements along the lines of "a pity that the tournament has only eight players from the current top10".
BTW, are there really _millions_ of chess fans interested in, and following the tournament?
As far as Kramnik is concerned, he almost reached his (suggested) initial goal of defending his rating ,:) - I think he still needs one draw from the three final rounds.
I never thought I would be defending Kramnik from acirce, but you can only play the opponent in front of you. This to me was a high class game, and Kramnik showed his superiority over Ponomariov. The ending was wonderfully played, and the complex middle game required some fine tactical calculations. That he and Pono both missed a couple of nice shots in time trouble doesn't take away that much to me (32... Bc2 is hard to see with your flag hanging), but 37... f5 is a bigger blunder in my opinion. You want to keep the Bs on surely, and almost anything is better it seems. Even so, Kramnik held his nerve, and won after his opponent made these mistakes, displaying immaculate technique.
"you can only play the opponent in front of you"
Of course, and that is a trivial fact, but I'm not sure how it rules out being lucky or anything else I said.
I was also thinking about the game against Gelfand, whom I thought was much better when he started to lose his way, but it doesn't seem to have been anything special in objective terms. So apart from the Pono game it doesn't appear that Kramnik has been particularly lucky at all, although there could be subtler forms of luck that don't get noted by amateur observers.
Anyway, I doubt Kramnik has been playing better than Anand so far, even though he is ahead in terms of points. But again - who am I to judge.
My first reaction on seeing Chessdom's translation yesterday was to check the original, but I think it's fine (I prefer "I don't miss" to "it's not boring without" - to miss and to be bored use the same word in Russian). They left out the later part of the interview where Morozevich said Kasparov could still compete at the highest level if he wanted to, but basically it's wasn't a particularly interesting interview.
On that video of Ivanchuk in the mask yesterday. I forgot to mention that when interviewed at the end he explained it by saying that Aronian fell ill after playing Carlsen.
I don't know if there is any essential difference, is there? And is it even an inaccurate translation? "мне не скучно" does mean "I'm not bored" but maybe it can mean "I don't miss" as well? How well do you know Russian?
Ah, thanks. I suspected that.
Luck, how do you define luck? Kramnik played an opponent who put up a spirited defense, even playing his own novelty first. This same opponent also plays everybody else in the tournament. To me luck would be off the chess board, as in Pono fell ill just for this game or was affected by some other factor which caused him to play substandard Chess. On the chessboard, you make your own luck.
I define luck in the same way as I define luck otherwise!
You're lucky on the chessboard if your opponent misses a fairly easy win (not saying Pono did), and you are lucky in soccer if somebody in the opposing team fails to score into an open goal. Luck exists everywhere, including in competitions.
I don't believe that it is even theoretically possible to "make your own luck". If you believe that, we are clearly using the term in different ways.
The top 4 now are Kramnik, Anand, Ivanchuk and Gelfand. Quite surprising as you have no energy at this age. At that age you can hardly keep up with the competitive pace of younger players.
I hope Kramnik is not too exhausted after those long and tough fighting games. I would think he would be happy enough if he's able to "get away" with a quick draw today. But Anand may well beat Morozevich to catch up...
"How well do you know Russian?"
At most a few words, clearly not enough to have an own opinion on the accuracy of the translation - after all I have to rely on Google or mishanp ,:). Apparently (as confirmed by mishanp) it is at least ambiguous: "I do not miss Topalov" _could_ mean "I don't care about him" or even "I hate him" [actually this _might_ be the case?]. "I am not bored without him" just means "It is still a very strong tournament"? What would have been a 'correct' answer by Moro to the - IMO a bit odd - question?
In any case, there was little if any chance for Topalov to play in the Tal Memorial, for three reasons:
- the organizers don't like him
- he doesn't like the organizers
- Topa and Anand avoid playing each other prior to their match (at least at classical time controls).
Maybe it's bad news that Topa isn't playing, the good news is that the four other top5 players do participate. It would be a different story if - only if - Tal Memorial was an official WCh (qualifying) event.
"You're lucky on the chessboard if your opponent misses a fairly easy win (not saying Pono did)"
Then how is Kramnik lucky? Two points:
1. You are in danger of going the way of all these idiots who armed with the latest version of whatever engine is the current fashion choose to pontificate when they see some long convoluted line that gives a fractional improvement over the line played, regardless of whether or not it constitutes a true improvement.
2. By your own words Pono did not miss anything "fairly easy". I think he did make a blunder with 37.. f5 but time is part of the game, and that he got into time trouble is because Kramnik played so well.
As to making your own luck, it's certainly shades of grey, but Kramnik poses problems of his own unique making when he plays his opponents. That they are less able to handle these problems than those posed by other playes is his talent. Just as Tal bamboozled his opponents and half a year later somebody "refuting" that line by finding some long complex variation that could not have been found over the board ever did not mean Tal was "lucky". His ability to play like that was his talent. Kramnik wasn't lucky here, he deserves his place at the top of the leader board, and if Anand plays oh so "solid" chess and is half a point behind, it doesn't change the fact that by definition of the scoring laws of Chess, Kramnik played better; i.e. he has more points. And I speak as a huge Anand fan, and a cordial Kramnik critic.
However hold your horses before annointing Kramnik as the cat's whiskers, because I feel Anand has played so well that he hasn't given a ghost of a chance to anybody, and there are 3 rounds to go...
It is well known that Morozevich doesn't like Topalov, to put it mildly. So it's not that hard to make an informed guess what he really means.
And what was odd about the question? It's notable that the highest rated player in the world and the World Championship challenger is not participating.
Personally, I wish he'd retire, but most fans seem to like to see him play.
1) I disagree. I agree with your sentiments regarding that phenomenon, but I don't think I have done anything near that.
2) Nope, I said he didn't miss a fairly easy win.
I'm already tired of this discussion, so I'll just give you the last word.
A while ago, I suggested that there is such a thing as luck in chess, provoking several strong reactions ... . It seems that acirce wants Kramnik to play a perfect game - as Vlad did or tried in the past, resulting in a high drawing percentage. Maybe even now Kramnik was striving for perfection during the game, which got him (and his opponent!) into time trouble in the first place. Then at a certain point he had to rely on intuition and - maybe - luck ... .
What could d_tal mean with "make your own luck"? In a complex situation with the clock ticking, mistakes or inaccuracies are almost unavoidable. Then the issue is whether your opponent makes more mistakes, worse ones and/or the final crucial one - maybe a matter of luck, but not "pure luck"?
Given his handle and track record on this blog, I guess d_tal had a certain player in his mind - the one giving his name to the tournament ... .
"It seems that acirce wants Kramnik to play a perfect game - as Vlad did or tried in the past, resulting in a high drawing percentage."
That's a strange comment - while technically true, I struggle to see the connection to the discussion...
Obviously Kramnik strives for perfection. It's hard to believe in the idea that he would deliberately play inferior moves, other than very exceptionally. And obviously I'd want Kramnik to play perfectly if possible. Equally obviously, though, it is humanly impossible in the kind of complicated games he's gotten recently - especially the mess against Ponomariov. So it's not like I am even slightly disappointed that he doesn't.
"It is well known that Morozevich doesn't like Topalov, to put it mildly. So it's not that hard to make an informed guess what he really means."
Agreed, but to me it makes a difference whether he actually said it. It may be "between the lines", or "in the lines" based on one of two possible translations. Maybe someone (Macauley Peterson who seems to be present in Moscow?) should ask him the same question in English?
"Why isn't Topalov playing?" remains a legitimate question, but even then it is odd to ask it to Moro - maybe the journalist was expecting or hoping for a stronger and unambiguous statement such as "actually I am glad he isn't here"!? Somewhat similarly, during the Bilbao tournament Shirov and Karjakin were asked to comment on the Anand-Topalov match [back then it was just an "informed guess" that it would take place in Sofia]. Shirov's answer started with "first of all, I am not Anand" ("primero, yo no soy Anand") ... .
"Why isn't Topalov playing?" should be asked to tournament organizer Alexander Bakh!?
Thomas - I think you're making too much of Morozevich's precise words. He certainly didn't say he hates Topalov (he might, but he didn't say it) - he was very diplomatic. I'm surprised in a way that Chessdom published the interview, but I guess they like the "millions of chess fans" bit. "It's not boring for me without Topalov" & "I don't miss Topalov" is essentially the same, even in English.
Well, he clearly didn't say that (or at least not according to the published text)... If that's all you are wondering, you have the answer.
Agreed that Morozevich was very diplomatic - that's actually the key point I want to make! As far as Chessdom's motivation for publishing the interview is concerned: Based on their track record, part of it may well have been trying to shed a bad light on Moro? Generally they aren't "anti-Moro" (only anti-Kramnik), but they are clearly pro-Topalov.
BTW, "interesting" that Chessdom has 'only' live coverage of the Tal Memorial, but no round reports. If they did, they probably couldn't avoid saying at least a few nice things about Kramnik's chess ... ?
"Making one's own luck" is a common phrase in America, at least, and means to have properly positioned one's self to be the recipient of good luck.
The usage is especially prominent in sports, where, for example, we say the better baseball player will have positioned himself perfectly to catch the ball that takes a "lucky bounce" - he made his own luck.
A tennis player has approached the net, and is able to hit the ball that deflects from the net - he made his own luck.
In chess, keeping someone under pressure and playing well up to the point of an opponent's error means one has kept in position to receive the lucky bad move, and one has made one's own luck.
Thank you for explaining this so clearly.
To take this metaphysical subject of making one's own luck further, there are sayings like, "Luck is 90% preparation," or "Luck is 90% anticipation," which make the same point. One must be there, to receive the good luck.
When someone seems to be lucky over and over, it makes sense to think that the person "makes his own luck" by being able to recognize, respond to, and exploit the coincidences which other people call good luck.
Maybe this is a typically American thing, to think one can "control" luck by being prepared to grasp the ring, when it is presented.
Let me clarify a bit: In the past, Kramnik consistently chose the best, or rather the safest move - even if it leads to a more or less forced draw. Now he _deliberately_(?) enters complications where it is "practically impossible" to find the best move all the time - only Rybka would be up to the task? In his match against Anand, such complications were forced upon him, and Vishy prevailed in the end (or from the very start of the match).
I can live with your "somewhat lucky" regarding Kramnik's chess or results, but it mostly means that he was prevailing in complications. This refers to his games against Gelfand and Ponomariov - earlier against Moro and Svidler, it _seems_ (to me) that he had everything under control for the entire game?
Regarding "that [Kramnik-Pono] wasn't a very good game in general either", I disagree or would at least call it a matter of taste. Yes, Rybka was laughing at both players, but was it _that_ bad from a human perspective? Besides all the inaccuracies, both players also found a number of good moves and interesting resources .... .
Actually I think we 90% agree with each other, yet others might misunderstand or misinterpret you words. "Kramnik was just lucky, he played badly but Pono did even worse" - you clearly don't mean that [language of Luke]?!
If you want a "perfect" game go m%%turbate yourself while watching rybka play itself and stop watching elite gm games.
Thanks for clarifying. I still disagree with much of your post, for instance your apparent grave over-simplification of Kramnik's "past" style, but the games are about to start, so let me just answer your questions.
"Regarding "that [Kramnik-Pono] wasn't a very good game in general either", I disagree or would at least call it a matter of taste. Yes, Rybka was laughing at both players, but was it _that_ bad from a human perspective?"
I'm not really in a position to judge. My impression is that it was neither "very good" nor "very bad". I haven't seen or heard the players comment it yet - going to be interesting. However, I'd be surprised if Kramnik is proud of the game, if taken as a whole; of course Pono ought to be even less so. Anyway, taste shouldn't enter the equation at all when we're talking quality.
""Kramnik was just lucky, he played badly but Pono did even worse" - you clearly don't mean that [language of Luke]?!"
Correct. The difference between "somewhat lucky" and "just lucky" is so obvious that if anyone misunderstands the former to mean the latter, chances are that he is doing it deliberately.
PS - I like Kramnik's so-called "boring" style better! But that is mainly due to aesthetics and the higher (subjective?) sense of subtlety.
Thanks for your comment, gentleman.
"This refers to his games against Gelfand and Ponomariov - earlier against Moro and Svidler, it _seems_ (to me) that he had everything under control for the entire game?"
I have a theory - though I suspect it's mainly nonsense :) After his game with Svidler, and his amazing demonstration after the game, Kramnik probably went back to check with Rybka and might have been a little shocked to see that he'd missed a simple tactical blow while calculating moves (instead of Qe3 he was seriously looking at Bc4, which falls to Re6 - he finally spotted this in reply to f3, but didn't seem to see that it stopped the other lines too) - and also that while in the demonstration he said at various points that black's position was bad and "why calculate variations?", the actual variations support Svidler's view that the position was still defensible. To an extent what allowed him to play so quickly and decisively (and to overpower Svidler), was that he didn't look too deeply into the position.
So it's possible Kramnik decided to calculate more carefully and in greater depth against Gelfand and Ponomariov - and in both cases he ended up making probably weak moves after long thinks in the early middle game, which led to time trouble. Only in time trouble he couldn't calculate so much and relied more on strategic factors - and came out on top.
From which it mainly follows that he's so good at judging positions that it might be worth trusting his strategic intuition more - even if he sometimes allows drawing or winning lines for his opponent they still have to find them. And he's likely to be ahead on the clock.
Has any website loaded today? I can't load the main website and TWIC hasnt updated from yesterday. Where can you watch the games?
http://chessok.com/broadcast/?key=tal07.pgn is one option.
There are some crazy lines if Kramnik tries 13...Nd4 now (he's gone into another long think) - but I wonder if you want to play into too unbalanced a position against Aronian.
I am currently watching at Chessvibes, chessok and Chessdom ... .
Chesspro gives the line (black winning the exchange for a pawn, but the pawn is on f7!): 13.0-0 Nd4!? 14.Nxd4 Bxc3 15.Nf3 Bxb2 16.Rxc5 Qb6 17.Qc2 Bf5 18.Qxf5 Qxc5 19.e6 g6 20.exf7 Kg7
http://chesspro.ru/chessonline/onlines/index_2619.html
13.-Nd4 played by Kramnik ... .
"PS - I like Kramnik's so-called "boring" style better! But that is mainly due to aesthetics and the higher (subjective?) sense of subtlety."
What gets my back up is the opinion of people who have a strictly limited ability that a certain style, similar for example to that typically adopted by Kramnik, has a "higher" sense of "subtlety" and "aesthetics" than a different perhaps more tactical style. They like to give the impression that a preference for such a style is somehow more sophisticated than a preference for another, and view with disdain something as mundane as the actual result of the game. I believe they look on this attitude as confering some sort of superiority over "lesser" followers who don't share the same view.
What a load of trollop. To show superiority over one's opponent, you have to win. Luckily the laws of Chess provide the distillation in their own pure essence of arbitration of such wooly, mutton-headed theories. To wit, I win, you lose, yaha.
I understand you can´t get over the beatings i gave to you , but you should stop this pathetic attacks before i take care of you again.
And then you call me a troll and that i attack the person instead of the argument.. , what a loser.
Ah, the charm of illiteracy combined with the intelligence and sophistication of a troll (the mythical one that is): "Boo hoo, let me play, I want in, how dare you exclude me from your party just because your olfactory senses are more developed than mine."
Hmmm, not too much "action" in the games today - Aronian-Kramnik had its moments but seems to peter out to a draw by move 22.
Accordingly, time for other "battles"!?
Whatever.
Wouldn't you miss the juvenile snarkiness, the compulsion to talk with nothing to say, the kick-your-ass-and-hide-behind-the-keyboard-bravado, the relentless, fawning Topalov/Danailov tributes, the side-slapping toilet jokes....on every thread?
Would you agree that Kramnik was slightly lucky this time - Aronian having 20.Nd6 and 21.Nxb7 with an advantage but, presumably in an attempt to improve on this line, tried to get in the Zwischenzug 20.a3 and missing 20..c4 (working for tactical reasons, for instance 21.Nd4 Rd5 22.axb4 Rad8 23.Rxc4 b5)? At least I guess that's what happened..
It's curious whether Aronian simply missed 20. Nd6 - giving him a better endgame - or decided he was happy with a draw and "blundered" 20. a3 to allow Kramnik to draw instantly with ...c4 (Shipov on the live video feed thought it was a blunder). Kramnik probably needs a rest anyway.
All the other games look interesting other than Leko's :)
Kramnik and Aronian demonstrating the game now on the live feed...
I cannot really follow ... they are talking Russian and tall Kramnik is covering half of the demo board ,:) . But the atmosphere seems to be friendly and animated.
Oh, the sign of a lost battle , koster jumping in to help you ...
It is like those wrestling fights when one fighter is in trouble and his friend jumps into the ring to help him .
Maybe d_tal should call more reinforcements..
Just understood a word from Kramnik: "attack" ,:)
I don't believe many people actually talk with him anymore, other to point out (e.g. rdh above) some particularly silly piece of claptrap. There are so many opportunities, it's true. But if we all could just cure ourselves of the habit maybe he'd just go away.
What is the end of evolution for a chess-player's nickname in the Internet?
Drawin.
What I particularly love about Ivanchuk's mask is that he seems to have fashioned it himself from his own underpants.
'I don't miss X' and 'It's not boring playing a tournament without X' are not the same thing at all, as any native English speaker can tell you. At a purely logical level, just because you're not bored, doesn't mean you're not missing somebody.
My Russian is elementary, but I would struggle to believe that 'nye mne skuchno' can be fairly translated as 'I don't miss'.
Yep, it would help if someone asked Kramnik to move!
I didn't follow too much of it, but a3 was definitely just a blunder - apparently Aronian thought it was subtler than playing Nd6 immediately.
Generally they both agreed the lines with 14. Nxd4 were ok for black (though it was hard to calculate everything). After 14. Be4 I think Aronian said that he thought 14...Be6 was the only move (Kramnik also talked about the Rybka move 14...Bg4), but I might well have misunderstood that. Kramnik was pretty confident he had a draw, but Aronian thought black's position was shaky.
On health matters... Aronian does seem to have a bit of a cold.
Here is a thread on the meaning of "мне скучно" and similar.
http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090618054435AAy4VtP
Don´t hold your breath .
Hey, not bad.
I am an English native speaker and you altered my words a bit, but I agree I shouldn't have written that they were "essentially the same" (you can imagine phoning your girlfriend, though, and there's some overlap in meaning between "I miss you" and "I'm bored without you"). In Russian as Acirce says there can be completely ambiguous sentences if you don't have the context - and I still think it's better English to say "I don't miss Topalov" rather than "I'm not bored without Topalov".
The games are not much exciting for me but it is funny comments from the argueing people.
As final proof :) here the Rolling Stones line "Still I'm gonna miss you" is translated as: "Всё же без тебя мне будет скучно." http://rustones.narod.ru/Lyrics/Ruby_Tuesday.htm
Manu, we know you're not going away, but you could give it a rest for a while. With every post you attack the Tal Memorial, its organizers, participants, chess quality and anything else you can find, and when you tire of that you just attack other posters. But no one's buying it because nothing you say is true (ie imaginary gutless GM draws, Aronian's opinions dismissed because yours matter more, etc). The ONLY reason you're behaving this way is because Topalov and his dirtbag manager are not at the tournament. Perhaps you'd be more insufferable if they were, who knows....but anyway, we all get it. Can't you just enjoy the chess? Everyone's playing their hearts out this week except Leko.
After Ivanchuk's last two rounds maybe they'll all start wearing masks!
Ah, that decides the matter! Apparently, the song is about the not so well known Russian GM Vtornik.
Chucky's win (assuming he doesen't lose against Aronian tomorrow) sets up a fascinating last round battle with Kramnik (who must be the heavy favourite against Leko). Now Gelfand and Aronian can play spoilers or king-makers against Anand and Chucky.
Hehe , i just said that this tournament could use the Bilbao/Sofia combo , don´t take it on me if this round was a little boring.
I wouldn't blame Kramnik - where should he have moved to, or how should he have become transparent ,:) ? The setup of the demo board just doesn't seem to allow two players presenting their (drawn) game together - as if draws would never happen, or would never be interesting and worthwhile presenting!?
Yes, Kramnik may have been slightly lucky - even though I think that his position after 20.Nd6/21.Nb7: would have been (slightly?) worse but not lost. In the Chessvibes live coverage, GM Spoelman called it "still ... a bit unpleasant for black".
The way the game continued (and soon ended), both players conserved energy for their white games tomorrow: Kramnik against Leko (playing for a win?), and Aronian against Ivanchuk (anything can happen?).
Yes, but it's not as if Topa and Moro were, are or will ever become each other's boyfriend ,:)
I think I see the picture you are makng but it is strange you do that I think even with your smily dots.
Morozewitch does not miss Topalov?
Maybe Kramnik do miss him.
I know that Aronian's opinion is irrelevant to you, but as mishanp mentioned his public postmortem with Kramnik: They spent quite some time presenting their 23 move draw, at least 15 or 30 minutes - which they wouldn't or couldn't do if the game had been devoid of interest and (hidden) action. They enjoyed it, the audience seemed to enjoy it, even I enjoyed it - though I hardly saw the demo board, all I could follow was body language and laughter (mostly Aronian's).
Today Bilbao rules _might_ have made a difference in two games, but actually I doubt it:
- Carlsen could have played on against Svidler, rather than repeating when he was a pawn up (but - Bilbao rules or not - he probably had his reasons to call it a day)
- Ponomariov could have kept more pieces on the board against Leko, rather than going for mass exchanges early on. Can we blame him? Yesterday he had a tough game that - for him - didn't have a happy end ... .
Another long report on rounds 5&6 here: http://chesspro.ru/_events/2009/memtal4.html
Just a few things it clears up that were raised on here:
Anand's novelty with the knight move against Leko was found by Kazhimdzanov AFTER the match with Kramnik (23...Rf6 was essential for Leko).
Aronian's opinion of the game against Morozhevich (there was debate on here about whether Rybka exaggerated white's advantage): "I think I got a very good position, then I began to blunder [miss!] terrible things. I played terribly today!". e.g. after 28. dxe5 he says "I had to at least take with the bishop. I completely forgot that black could transfer the knight to f7".
Anand said he completely missed Carlsen's 29. Qe4. Aronian came from the board where he was losing to Gelfand to point out 32. Bc6! for Carslen, which both Anand and Carlsen had missed. It threatens Rf8+ and Qe8 mate.
Leko's wife explains Leko's play by saying he's simply extremely tired after all the tournaments he's played in a row. Apparently it was very hard to recover after China (jet lag and the temperature difference). Leko himself explained he had a very good position against Svidler until 27. Rc2?
Kramnik against Ponomariov had thought he had a win when exchanging queens with 29. Nxb4 & Rd1-d8, but then realised he was a tempo short. He missed 32...Bc2, as did Ponomariov, of course. There's a funny photo supposedly of his reaction to hearing about the move. Kramnik thought he was won after the time control but was surprised by 43...Re8.
His final assessment: "Of course the game was tumultuous, nervous. I've been playing while not quite healthy anyway, and such difficult games. Today was one of the hardest games of my whole life: so many different situations, so much sharp play, so much to calculate at the board, and of course getting through two more time scrambles! At the end I knew that the position was won, but I was so tired, I was thinking so poorly, that I couldn't work out how to execute the move order, to make the "triangulation", - I barely found it. It was elementary, but I just had no energy left... oh well, now I'll go and have a rest!
Thanks mishanp. Two additions from other sources:
Richard W on Chessmind mentions that the Anand-Kasimdzhanov "novelty" was already played in Schwenk-Auzins, Baltic Sea tournament 1/3/08. Never heard of either player, but Auzins found/played 23.-Rf6 and drew in 41 moves.
Chessvibes has a video "Carlsen-Anand (according to Anand)" - Anand on his own (so the demo board is clearly visible). The video is by Macauley Peterson [that's why I suspect he is in Moscow] but has not (yet?) appeared on ICC.
I never said Aronian´s opinion is irrelevant to me , and i never said Aronian vs Kramnik was a boring game, i just found this whole round a little boring .I´m happy about Chucky , though.
In fact i didn´t write about this round until clubfoot forgot that this is an open forum and not a popularity contest..
But hey , you shouldn´t even be talking to me , greg is gonna get mad at you :)
This is what I constantly hope, vis a comment from me in another thread:
"Manu is what one might call "maturity challenged" a syndrome apparently afflicting many internet posters. The key symptom of said syndrome being an inability to distinguish the posts of sufferer over a prolonged period from that of a pre teen or in the best-case an early teen. The prescribed cure is to ignore posts of sufferer, faithfully and unwaveringly, a course of treatment which has the wonderful added benefit of greatly improving the internet experience of people who dont suffer from this syndrome."
This time I was bowled over by the irony, no doubt completely unintended, of Manu asking rdh to take into account the interest of his audience in posting, and broke my own rule.. My apologies to you and the rest of the readers on this blog.
I knew long ago that Ivanchuk won today and it is not because of the mask. It is because of more pawns.
Suddenly everyone is sick or jetlagged or tired ...or defended by his wife or his father...
That´s why people love the man with the mask , he plays all the time with no other request that not being forced to pee in front of the audience.
People talk of players being boy friend and all this sickness now we see talk of pee. What has happned here.
Mmm , the doping control Chucky rejected?
What is the standard Russian transation of ""I lay traps for troubadours"?
Yalie at Chessgames is posting a summary of a Kramnik article on the Zurich event in New in Chess:
"Talking about the simuls - After Kramnik & Anand finished in 3 hours, Kramnik looked up and saw that Kasparov was just on move 22 (on all boards) and Karpov on move 17. This was after 3 hours! (Kramnik put an exclamation there). So he writes -
"Over tea and pastries Vishy and I came to the conclusion that these poor guys would have a tough working day... And indeed Kasparov finally finished six and a half hours after the start, while Karpov "went for the record" - more than seven hours! Prior to their forthcoming match, this should serve as a warning..."
Then something about them being very "rusty"
Then finally the gem -
"I guess that at least Garry is fully aware of it - his decision to use the help of a top player like Magnus in order to overcome this problem seems very sensible"
&
"He compliments a Kasparov simul game for strategic completeness, but cant resist adding that considering the time Kasparov spent in the simul, it can be considered a classical game.
He refers to Topalov as WCelin!
About Ponomariov, Kramnik is very complimentary, but adds this at the end:
"In general, after he finally escaped from the tenacious clutches of a creator of scandals well known in the chess world, his play and results have started to get better."
About Khalifman -
Sasha has already "pensioned himself off" and suffers from the Spassky syndrome - offering draw immediately after the opening.
"Fortunately, sometime the opponent is not weaker and declines the offer and 'forces' him to demonstrate his talent ..."
He talks about Zug being the main "disturber of the peace" by alternatively blowing up or playing supremely well and offering several higher rated players (Khalifman, Topalov, Kramnik) sympathy draws in better positions.
About his own play agaist Zug, he says -
"For ethical reasons, I will not give the text of this game here, since the article might be seen by children under the age of 16..."
Overall Play - he is happy with it despite some stupid mistakes and because he won (in his words) the derby:
Topalov - Kramnik 0-1"
"I never said Aronian´s opinion is irrelevant to me"
Manu replied to comment from mishanp | November 11, 2009 9:46 AM | Reply
About Aronian´s opinion , you really don´t get it , is not the opinions of the lions in the arena what one should take into consideration , it is only the applauses of the audience what counts .
and then...
Manu replied to comment from mishanp | November 11, 2009 10:36 AM | Reply
About Aronian ,What can he say? That Leko needs a gun pointed to his head to go for a fight? That some people are more interesting in keeping their ELO intact than in giving a great show?
They've got it all worked out: http://rustones.narod.ru/Lyrics/Sympathy_for_the_Devil.htm :)
Please pardon my ignorance, but who is Zug? Ivanchuk?
Zug is Hug: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Hug
I just copied and pasted...
You are not very bright , are you?
You know there is a big difference between not considering someone ´s opinion in a given context (mostly beause he is part of the event and his opinon might be compromised by that fact) than to stating that his opinion is irrelevant...
You provably know this but you need to demonize the other person´s opinion just to be able to attack it , which is nice way to show the impotence of your reasoning.
Any other doubt you might have ,just let me know.
:)
Thanks for the summary!
Sorry, I just assumed you were Russian for some reason. Anyway, clearly you were right and I was wrong about the meaning of the expression in question. Extraordinary how other languages use the same word for concepts which seem to us quite different, and no doubt foreign English speakers think the same about some of our words.
Thanks mishanp. But you really need to read the whole thing! Very good stuff, elegant and full of nice humour. On Garry, I saw that part about using the help of Carlsen as mostly a joke. I personally liked how he is calling for Garry to return to chess because, among other things, "Perhaps being a professional chess player is less profitable than being a professional democrat, but in the end one can find a mass of people who are capable of organizing loud PR actions, and few who are able to play chess so well..."
Actually that whole NIC issue is a bit of a must-have. It's a 25th anniversary special with 40 extra pages and just a lot of great reading.
If it is right that your right to be on the right needs righting, are you left with the left, or have you left yet?
The ramifications of a google translation of that sentence would be interesting to me, if I knew any other language fluently.
CO
Checking the statistics of my site I noticed many jumps from this address...
The Russian sentence "Знаете, я выскажу свою, абсолютно субъективную точку зрения. Так вот, лично мне не скучно играть без Топалова и в Москве, и в любом другом турнире" can be translated in the following way "You know, I’ll express my own absolutely personal opinion. OK, personally I don't fell bored without Topalov both in Moscow and any other tournament." ("I don't fell bored without Topalov" = "I don't care about this guy")
(You can rely on my translation, I’m a native Russian, and I’m a linguist and professional translator).
"Any other doubt you might have ,just let me know."
Thanks for the offer but I no longer have any doubt you're on crack.
Crack is not very popular here in Argentina , you should say ¨paco¨ or ¨pasta base¨ ...
I see that when your attacks and lies don´t work you go straight to accusing the person about being on drugs , very clever.
Next time bring some friends with you to even the fight , this is just too easy.
Just for the record, I'd like to comment the fact that not all argentinians are as stupid as Manu, you just had bad luck finding this one.
Thanks
Thanks for the link!
"Возможно, здесь имеется в виду смерть менеджера «Битлз» Брайана Эпстайна."
I'd never thought of this line as a possible reference to Epstein! But this seems too literal (or not literal enough -- "I lay traps for troubadors' managers"? -- good thing Danailov wasn't active in 1968): the MLK & RFK assassinations were on our mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sympathy_for_the_Devil argues (quite plausibly) that Jagger was inspired by Bulgakov.
Thanks and welcome to this wonderful place, Sam. Despite the impression one might get, sometimes we almost manage to be slightly civilized.
Really? Where are you from ? Would you mind stating the same again but in Spanish? It would be nice if you can add some tipical Argentinian slang.
Of course you should be able to do this in lets say less than 15 minutes , just to avoid outside help...
Thanks Sam. I'm not trying to be rude, by I assume you realize "fell" is an error? Typo, probably.
Thanks for the comment. We just have to remember it's next to useless to call this guy out -- no matter how many times you flush, he keeps reappearing at the bottom of the bowl. Still, the way he runs screaming from his own words is remarkable, like an embodiment of the old T-shirt:
I KNOW YOU THINK YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I JUST SAID BUT WHAT YOU HEARD WAS NOT WHAT I MEANT.
I wonder how it sounds in Spanish.
"feel bored," of course...
The interview excerpt third from bottom on the Russian site actually has Jagger telling a Russian newspaper that he was partially influenced by a copy of "The Master and Margarita" given to him by Marianne Faithfull at the time. It's a disturbingly thorough website :)
What a stupid try , you are not just easy , you are just the easiest of them all.
Yep, except for both/and instead of either/or I agree with the translation. I'd just say that Chessdom's version doesn't really give the wrong impression.
In this context, "I don't feel bored without Topalov" more or less = "I don't miss Topalov" = "I don't care about this guy". I think "miss" here is more natural in English (maybe only a Russian who knows English would express himself the other way) but on the whole I can't believe this has been discussed in quite so much detail!
"What a stupid try , you are not just easy , you are just the easiest of them all."
-Kramnik to Topalov after the Elista tiebreaks
(Google Russian translation)
You are just making an scene , pick up your tooth from the floor and go have a drink .
Not the first time i have to say this to you.
Very funny comments today. Bravo to everybody. The adverserial system seems to bring out the best in some of you guys.
I always thought that in idiomatic English "I don't miss X" was a euphemism for "I hate X's guts."
"Leko's wife explains Leko's play by saying he's simply extremely tired after all the tournaments he's played in a row. Apparently it was very hard to recover after China"
It's tough to play category 21 events so close to each other, and it shows also in Carlsen's play. Not that all draws would be a bad result for him, especially considering that he has played with fever, but it's no surprise that he is a bit from Nanjing level here.
If Carlsen ends this tournament on an even score, i suspect he'll be bloodthirsty at the London Classic. The unevenness of that field would make for real slugfests. I am salivating already and it's a good job I can see some of it live.
I also thought "I don't miss him" had a strongly negative feel to it, and the Russian original definitely didn't have that. Just to put my two cents in, I think the translations offered focused too much on translating word for word, but this may be one of those rare cases where it is best to express the idea without necessarily looking for the exact word-for-word equivalent. Moro basically said he is just as excited about playing in Moscow (or any other tournament) regardless of whether Topalov is playing or not.
If one must emulate Keef, it's a healthier obsession than heroin.
To better translate Moro's comment, let's examine
http://rustones.narod.ru/Lyrics/Miss_You.htm
"Oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh
Oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh
Oooh oooh oooh
Oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh
Oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh oooh
Oooh oooh oooh oooh"
(a terrible transcription even in the English: the vowels are elided) is translated as
"Ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу
Ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу
Ууу ууу ууу
Ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу
Ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу ууу
Ууу ууу ууу"
Something is irrevocably lost.
Idiomatic question: can "пуэрториканочками" be innocent & pure like "Guajira Guantanamera"?
This is a priceless site, a real labor of love.
But in the footnotes to "Satisfaction," doesn't "мне не удаётся взять девушку силой" butcher "I can’t get no girl with action"? Our prancing rooster is sexually frustrated, but he's not a beast.
It is good for some funny comments but I have trouble with my understanding. But better than always insults from some.
Go Chucky! Tough opposition for him in the last two rounds though, black against Aronian followed by white against Kramnik.
Keep wearing the mask and winning the last two rounds might trigger maskgate, mind you.
For Aronian & Kramnik, one needs both the mask & Tony Miles's gurney.
The almost biblical scrutiny to which Morozevich's utterances are being subjected is quite beautiful.
Thanks, this might indeed be the "best" translation, exactly because it is not a literal one - but there seems to be no precise English equivalent for what Moro really said and/or meant? Should one then even attempt a translation?
Am I the only one who considers the question ("Why isn't Topalov playing?") somewhat odd? Hardly anyone would ask the same to the London organizers (who have just two players from the top5 or top10), the question is also not as ubiquitous for six-player double round robins - by definition, at most six top10 players.
While they of course don't mind coverage in English language, the Tal Memorial organizers and sponsors seem to cater primarily to a Russian audience - because there is little if any English on the tournament webpage (mishanp has to translate things all the time ... ,:) ). Nothing wrong with that IMO. I wonder how many Russians really "miss" Topalov - given things he/they did to Kramnik in Elista (of which they are still proud of) and ongoing anti-Russian brabbling on Chessdom.
BTW, who is actually sponsoring the tournament? Is it government, private or corporate money?
Salient detail: In the meantime, Chessbase also has the Moro interview ... and chose the 'other' translation: "Personally, I do not find it boring to play without Topalov either in Moscow, or in any other tournament."
As both versions are "possible", it then depends on which impression one wants to convey to the reader?
Manu, I am saying this because its evident to me and many people on this blog you need some help. The illusion of illiteracy combined with a very low IQ is not a good look, in case you were trying for the 5 year-old impression. If it is your sad reality, self improvement takes many forms, but the first is acknowledging the reality.
In fairness, the "illiteracy" charge is unjustified, given that English is not his native language.
I bet Kramnik goes for Leko today. He seems to be struggling and I think the others smell blood in the water. You Russians out there, is 13 a lucky number in Russia (wasn't it for Kasparov), or is that a myth?
What is it but illiteracy when you say something, and when called out on it say you said something else?
I quote clubfoot: "Still, the way he runs screaming from his own words is remarkable, like an embodiment of the old T-shirt:
I KNOW YOU THINK YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I JUST SAID BUT WHAT YOU HEARD WAS NOT WHAT I MEANT. "
>I always thought that in idiomatic English "I don't miss X" was a euphemism for "I hate X's guts."
Exactly, that's what I was trying to get at when I said a native English speaker would perceive a substantial difference which a perfectly fluent foreigner might not.
I don't miss the prison cafeteria.
You attack me every day without provocation , the other genious fakes his id to insult me , and i am the one who needs help?
Shut up , kid.
Rather than dwell on possible hidden meanings or Freudian hatred...
..isn't a charitable translation something like:
"Even without Topalov here, this is a very strong and interesting/challenging event -- no reason to be bored (or missing him), though millions of chess fans may disagree!"
Even Paris Hilton doesn't get this level of scrutiny. Don't you guys play any real chess of your own -- sheesh!
'Even Paris Hilton doesn't get this level of scrutiny'.
Oh yes, she does!Or did.
chesspride, I think people were just having fun with it. No need for charity.
As a footnote to the whole missing/bored debate, this is from a Kramnik interview with Vasiliev - http://www.sport-express.ru/newspaper/2009-11-18/8_1/
- Морозевич недавно в одном из своих интервью сказал, что ему не скучно играть без Топалова ни в Москве, ни в любом другом турнире. А вы не скучаете по игре с Топаловым?
However you translate "Morozevich recently said in one of his interviews that...ему не скучно играть без Топалова...either in Moscow or any other tournament" the question to Kramnik at the end is 100% definitely, "And do you miss playing with Topalov?"
For the record his reply is (similar to what he's said before):
"I'm already used to playing in tournaments without Topalov. Tournaments which, let's say, are under the control of his mananger, Mr. Danailov, don't invite me, and Topalov avoids taking part in the tournaments where I play. But, as I said before, I'm happy to play with him. I've got no grounds for avoiding him."
"Tournaments which, let's say, are under the control of his mananger, Mr. Danailov, don't invite me"
That is a lie , he himself talked in another interview about his invitation to the Bilbao final , and Mtel claims to have invited him after Elista too...
Someone should explain him that he still needs to win the candidates tournament , and qualify for a WCH final for the first time...
"That is a lie , he himself talked in another interview about his invitation to the Bilbao final"
Actually he said he was asked which of two dates he'd prefer for Bilbao - and then the organisers chose the other date he couldn't make (in this interview he also called this year's Bilbao "a parody of a super tournament" & said that if you want a real Grand Slam you'd have to have objective criteria rather than politics and the personal influence of men like Danailov - though he did say he's sceptical only "for now").
But anyway, I agree the whole Topalov and invitations thing doesn't entirely make sense. I just posted the question to show that at least one native Russian speaker understood Morozevich's comment as being about "missing" Topalov!
" in this interview he also called this year's Bilbao "a parody of a super tournament "
That is a very stupid thing to say , specially since Topa and Danailov were not involved, and such remarks would only be insulting to Grishuk , Karjakin , Shirov and Aronian.
And is even more idiotic to complain about this year edition politics for invitations since every player clasified by winning a major super tournament ,
same tournament he participated and lost ...
A person with such a high IQ as him must have huge issues to be so disrespectful with players and organizers that did nothing to him , he just need a real manager and pronto.
Manu, come on - trying to make an issue of everything Kramnik says even vaguely related to Topalov/Danailov is silly. Of course it's nothing like a super tournament if you only have four players (whatever their ratings) - that's not an insult, just a fact. He was talking about the Grand Slam so discussing the "final" seems reasonable enough to me, whatever Danailov's involvement. Kramnik didn't say anything about invites and Bilbao - you came up with that, though of course there were politics involved: Nanjing counting after the fact & Topalov's subsequent withdrawal & of course who played in each tournament etc. etc.
" Of course it's nothing like a super tournament if you only have four players (whatever their ratings) - that's not an insult, just a fact"
You said he called it a " parody " of a super tournament , and that is and insult.
" Kramnik didn't say anything about invites and Bilbao - you came up with that"
You don't even read what you write , do you?
" & said that if you want a real Grand Slam you'd have to have objective criteria rather than politics and the personal influence of men like Danailov"
I'm very busy right now , don't have time to argue with the great "nonsense" defense , maybe tomorrow see u @
Just for the record, though I don't want to get involved in a pointless debate, this is the full question:
- If the Tal Memorial was part of the "Grand Slam" system you, as the winner, would automatically be invited to the final "Masters" tournament in Bilbao and there, more likely than not, you'd meet Topalov. What do you think of that prospect?
- If the Tal Memorial organisers decide they need it, then why shouldn't they enter the system? But it seems to me that the Moscow super tournament is already in terms of strength, organisation and financial support one of the most prestigious tournaments in the world. Which you can't say about the final tournament of the "Grand Slam": the "Masters" in Bilbao this year was cut down to four players and looked like a parody of a super tournament. Besides, the whole organisation of the "Grand Slam", it seems to me, is under the influence of Mr Danailov, and subsequently there they invite "their own". Who plays, who doesn't play, it's not completely objective. If they want to perform the role of a real "Grand Slam" then politics and personal bias should be set aside and have no influence on objective criteria. For the time being I'm sceptical about the "Grand Slam".