Final Standings
1 Karjakin,S 6
2 Carlsen,M 5.5
3 Nakamura,H 5.5
4 Svidler,P 5
5 Aronian,L 5
6 Anand,V 5
7 Wang Hao 4.5
8 Topalov,V 4
9 Radjabov,T 3
10 Hammer,J 1.5

I have a open invite ready for someone to accept.

i have a second open invite

another open invite

I have a open invite

CHESS anyone? open invite for someone.

Sens it to me if you want...

Merci.

to be in Madison, WI. http://uschess.org/tournaments/2013/usopen/

Will the two play for blood or just quick draws in the Norway Chess Tournament?

The combatants:

Viswanathan Anand (2783)
Magnus Carlsen (2868)
Veselin Topalov (2793)
Levon Aronian (2813)
Hikaru Nakamura (2775)
Peter Svidler (2769)
Sergey Karjakin (2767)
Teimour Radjabov (2745)
Wang Hao (2743)
And the shark bait: John Ludwig Hammer (2608)


Excluding Hammer, the average rating is 2784!
7 of the top 10 players in the world are competing.

Here is their first encounter. Carlsen plays 3 Bb5+ in the Sicilian and Anand responds with Nd7 instead of Bd7. They fought it out for 59 moves till no mating material was left.

The game:

[Event "Norway Chess Tournament"]
[Site "0:39:33-0:51:33"]
[Date "2013.05.09"]
[EventDate "2013.05.07"]
[Round "2"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[White "Carlsen"]
[Black "Anand"]
[ECO "B51"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "2"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.Bb5+ Nd7 4.d4 cxd4 5.Qxd4 a6 6.Bxd7+ Bxd7 7.c4 e5 8.Qd3 b5 9.Nc3 bxc4 10.Qxc4 Be6 11.Qd3 h6 12.O-O Nf6 13.Rd1 Be7 14.Ne1 O-O 15.Nc2 Qb6 16.Ne3 Rfc8 17.b3 a5 18.Bd2 Qa6 19.Be1 Nd7 20.f3 Rc6 21.Qxa6 Rcxa6 22.Ned5 Bd8 23.Nb5 Rc8 24.Bf2 Kh7 25.Kf1 Rcc6 26.Rac1 Bg5 27.Rc3 Bxd5 28.Rxd5 Rxc3 29.Nxc3 Rc6 30.Be1 Nc5 31.Nb5 Nb7 32.h4 Be3 33.Ke2 Bc5 34.h5 Bb4 35.Bd2 g6 36.a3 Bxd2 37.hxg6+ Kxg6 38.Kxd2 h5 39.g3 f6 40.Na7 Rc7 41.Nb5 Rc6 42.Ke2 Kf7 43.b4 axb4 44.axb4 Ke6 45.Rd3 Rc4 46.Rb3 d5 47.Kd3 Rc6 48.exd5+ Kxd5 49.Rc3 f5 50.Nc7+ Kd6 51.Ne8+ Kd5 52.Rxc6 Kxc6 53.Ng7 Nd6 54.Nxh5 e4+ 55.fxe4 Nxe4 56.Kd4 Kb5 57.g4 fxg4 58.Kxe4 g3 59.Nxg3 Kxb4 1/2-1/2

interesting, I would suspect that Anand sidestepped some Carlsen home cooking.

And they don't want to reveal too much (preparation) now...

He's cutting a swath through the competition at the FIDE Grand Prix in Zug, Switzerland. His victims include Peter Leko, Hikaru Nakamura, Alexander Morozevich and Fabiano Caruana.

Meanwhile, Boris Gelfand and Maxime Vachier-Lagrave lead the Alekhine Memorial in Paris/St. Petersburg, with a resurgent Viswanathan Anand 1/2 pt behind with Michael Adams and Levon Aronian.

For anybody, who is interested for any reason...

   there are free Chess learning openings... 

Improve your game with real chess lessons when you join the "Chess4Fun Club".

meet new people who are friendly and love to play Chess...join the Chess Team...or just play...

                "We have all levels of play".   
              

                we are the Original Chess Club   

                here at "Gold Token" and still going  strong.  

          we have people who play chess daily.          

               Come by and look around...ask any of our Club Officers any questions you have...
    
                or ask me...  
            Knight Jarlynn    

some of you know me.
SOME OF YOU DO NOT .
I am Knight Jarlynn..<><>




T AM ONE OF THE VICE PRESIDENTS OF THE "Chess4Fun Club".

I AM HERE TO ISSUE A CONTEST OF SKILL IN THE GAME OF CHESS.  

 YES...A CHALLENGE..WE CHALLENGE ANY CHESS TEAM TO A FRIENDLY MATCH OF CHESS. 

WE PLAY FOR FUN...WE PLAY ALL THE TIME...THIS IS A TEST OF COMPETITIVE SKILL/
OF CHESS TALENT AMONG 'GOLD TOKEN PLAYERS' FROM THEIR CHOSEN CLUBS.


WE ARE READY FOR BATTLE...BRING YOUR BEST SELECTED WARRIORS...WE CAN PLAY MORE THAN ONE CLUB AT A TIME/ WHAT SAY YE...

YOU CAN CONTACT ANY OFFICER OF , "The Chess4Fun Club" at any time/ day or night.

            A  COMPETITIVE CHESS COMPETITION OF SKILL    

               or you can contact me...Knight Jarlynn...<><>  
             on my game page/ profile/ or at "Chess4Fun Club".  

I thank you for reading this Invitation of Friendly Competition of Chess.

someone please take my CHESS invitation.

another open invite

I have another game open someone please take.

Is taking place in Paris and St. Petersburg from April 20 to May 1. The players are World Champion Viswanathan Anand, Vladimir Kramnik, Michael Adams, Levon Aronian, Boris Gelfand, Peter Svidler, Nikita Vitiugov, Ding Liren, Laurent Fressinet and Maxime Vachier-Lagrave.

Adams sits atop the table, defeating Anand and Svidler in the Closed Ruy Lopez (with both colors).

Here is his win over Anand, who began to go wrong with 24 Re3?! Anand eventually ended up in a bad rook and pawn endgame, resigning instead of playing 57 Kf6 as Black would play the not so obvious Kg4/h5/h6.

[Event "Alekhine Memorial"]
[Site "Paris/St Petersburg FRA/RUS"]
[Date "2013.04.21"]
[EventDate "2013.04.21"]
[Round "1"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "V Anand"]
[Black "Mi Adams"]
[ECO "C88"]
[WhiteElo "2783"]
[BlackElo "2727"]
[PlyCount "112"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 O-O 8.
a4 b4 9. d4 d6 10. dxe5 dxe5 11. Qxd8 Rxd8 12. Nbd2 Bc5 13. Bc4 Ng4 14. Re2
Na5 15. Bd5 Rb8 16. Nb3 Nxb3 17. cxb3 h6 18. h3 Nf6 19. Nxe5 Nxd5 20. exd5
Rxd5 21. Bf4 Be6 22. Rc1 Bd6 23. Bg3 Re8 24. Re3 c5 25. Nd3 Bxg3 26. fxg3
Red8 27. Nf4 Rd1+ 28. Rxd1 Rxd1+ 29. Kh2 Rd2 30. Nxe6 fxe6 31. Rxe6 Rxb2
32. Rxa6 Rxb3 33. Rc6 Rc3 34. a5 Kf7 35. a6 Ke7 36. a7 Ra3 37. Rxc5 Rxa7
38. Rb5 Ra4 39. Rb7+ Kd6 40. Rxg7 Kc5 41. Rc7+ Kd4 42. Rd7+ Kc3 43. Rc7+
Kd3 44. Rb7 Kc3 45. Rc7+ Kb2 46. Rc6 b3 47. Rxh6 Kc3 48. Rb6 b2 49. Rxb2
Kxb2 50. g4 Kc3 51. Kg3 Re4 52. Kh4 Kd4 53. Kg5 Ke5 54. Kg6 Re2 55. g5 Rxg2
56. h4 Kf4 0-1

Final Position

anyone interested in playing chess?

OK. I checked your Profile. We have not completed any games yet.

ok thanks

I'll play chess with you. Just hope you don't mind if I have my slow spells....

What time limits and so on? Please do not make it shorter than 3 days unless you use that sneaky add a day or more back feature.

New Game open invite.

The return of the now married former world champion Veselin Topalov to chess highlights this tournament. Also competing are Nakamura, Karjakin, Caruana, Radjabov, Ponomariov, Leko, Morozovich and Kamsky.

Here's Topalov's win over drawing master Peter Leko. Leko plays uncharecteristically aggressive, advancing his pawns, Topalov keeps Leko's king in the center till late, wins the exchange and carries home the win.

[Event "FIDE Grand Prix Zug"]
[Site "Zug SUI"]
[Date "2013.04.19"]
[EventDate "2013.04.18"]
[Round "2"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Veselin Topalov"]
[Black "Peter Leko"]
[ECO "D38"]
[WhiteElo "2771"]
[BlackElo "2744"]
[PlyCount "115"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Bb4 5. cxd5 exd5 6. Bg5 h6
7. Bh4 c5 8. e3 c4 9. Nd2 g5 10. Bg3 Bf5 11. Be5 Bxc3 12. bxc3
Nbd7 13. Bd6 Qb6 14. Bb4 a5 15. Ba3 Qc6 16. Be2 b5 17. O-O Rb8
18. f3 b4 19. Bb2 O-O 20. Rc1 Nb6 21. Ba1 Qe6 22. e4 dxe4
23. cxb4 axb4 24. fxe4 Nxe4 25. Bxc4 Nd5 26. Nb3 Bg6 27. Nc5
Qd6 28. Qf3 Rfe8 29. Na6 Rb7 30. Bxd5 Qxd5 31. Nc7 Rxc7
32. Rxc7 Qxa2 33. Qh3 Qd5 34. Qxh6 Nc3 35. Kh1 Qf5 36. Rg1 Ne4
37. Rc2 b3 38. d5 f6 39. Re2 Bf7 40. d6 Qg6 41. Qxg6+ Bxg6
42. d7 Rd8 43. Rd1 Kf7 44. g4 Nc5 45. Rd6 Ne4 46. Rd4 Nc5
47. Re3 Bc2 48. Rc3 Nxd7 49. Re3 f5 50. Bb2 fxg4 51. Rd5 Kg6
52. Re7 Ra8 53. Rdxd7 Ra2 54. Rd6+ Kh5 55. Bg7 g3 56. h3 Bg6
57. Ree6 b2 58. Bxb2 1-0

Final Position






Alexander Morozovich, never one to settle for the status quo, plays the King's Indian Attack...sort of, double finachettoes, then redeploys his bishops, sinks the knight on f5 strangling Kasimdzhanov, who, faced with the lose of a pawn and saddled with poorly placed rooks, will most likely also have to sac his knight to avoid immediate catastrophe. Rather than continue in this cheerless position, Kas resigned.

[Event "FIDE Grand Prix Zug"]
[Site "Zug SUI"]
[Date "2013.04.18"]
[EventDate "2013.04.18"]
[Round "1"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Alexander Morozevich"]
[Black "Rustam Kasimdzhanov"]
[ECO "A07"]
[WhiteElo "2758"]
[BlackElo "2709"]
[PlyCount "105"]

1. g3 d5 2. Nf3 Bg4 3. Bg2 Nd7 4. h3 Bxf3 5. Bxf3 Ngf6 6. d3
c6 7. Nd2 g6 8. e4 Bg7 9. Qe2 Qc7 10. Bg2 O-O 11. O-O e5
12. b3 Rfe8 13. Bb2 Rad8 14. Rfe1 d4 15. h4 Nc5 16. Bh3 b5
17. Nf3 a5 18. Bc1 a4 19. Bd2 Ra8 20. b4 Ne6 21. Rac1 Rad8
22. Ng5 Nf8 23. c4 dxc3 24. Rxc3 N6d7 25. Rec1 Nb8 26. a3 h6
27. Nf3 Ne6 28. Be3 Rd6 29. Qd2 Kh7 30. Kg2 Red8 31. Rh1 Qe7
32. Bb6 Re8 33. Rhc1 Qb7 34. Be3 Qe7 35. Qa2 Kh8 36. Qc2 Kg8
37. Qe2 Kh8 38. Kh2 Kg8 39. h5 g5 40. Ne1 Kh8 41. Ng2 Kg8
42. Bc5 Nxc5 43. Rxc5 Red8 44. Ne3 Qa7 45. R5c3 Rf6 46. Nf5
Re8 47. Qe3 Qxe3 48. fxe3 Bf8 49. Bg2 Ree6 50. d4 exd4
51. exd4 g4 52. Rf1 Nd7 53. Rf4 1-0

Final Position

In a book I saw that Hexagonal Chess with three colors and three Bishops on each side existed. Does it have world–wide standard rules? If more than one kind exists is one better than the others? If so, is it worth adding here?

I've seen three-sided chess with three players, and I've seen two different variants of two-player hexagonal chess.

The three-sided game has six edges to the board, and all the squares are trapezoids as best as I can remember.

I THINK Star Trek once had Spock with a three dimensional form of chess - now that WOULD be exiting! How about it, Mecir ?

I've actually got a physical set of Star Trek 3D Chess, as the rules were never laid out in the show they had to make up some rules to go with the game. It's been a long time since I played it.
I wasn't very good at it either... relative to how not very good I am at other forms of Chess.

2D chess is complex enough to keep me endlessly occupied.

I like the idea of having three-man chess available. (I saw a variant for four players which was not hexagonal in my book The New Complete Hoyle.) I thought its "squares" to be hexagons rather than trapezoids but was mistaken. http://www.mastersgames.com/cat/board/chess-3-player.htm has trapezoids.
I did not have the Star Trek set but rather one with three acrylic plastic boards held above each other vertically. I might prefer one board for ease of play generally and of display here.
I agree that 2-D Chess is plenty hard to master, but as owner of Down With Regular Chess I should be alert to new variants to add here.
Also, some of these might be fun to play.

Now here is some of my less-than-complete research on this. Please feel free to improve on this as I am neither the strongest Chess player here nor the smartest.

• Glinski's Hexagonal Chess http://www.chessvariants.org/hexagonal.dir/hexagonal.html
  1. was "Recognized Variant of the Month for January 2002" at Chess Variants;
  2. "was invented in 1936 by Wladyslaw Glinksi of Poland";
  3. is said to be played by over half a million people, mostly in Eastern Europe, according to David Pritchard;
  4. has or at least had a federation — the International Hexagonal Chess Federation; and
  5. has 91 hexagons with 3 colors and with 3 Bishops and 9 Pawns.

Each man — including the Knight — has enough room on the board to use its movement power fully. I like that.
It has many players and maybe a federation. http://www.chessvariants.org/hexagonal.dir/glinski/ihcf.html

• McCooey's Hexagonal Chess http://www.chessvariants.org/hexagonal.dir/hexchess2.html
  1. dates back to 1978-79,
  2. is much like Glinski's, and
  3. has three differences from Glinski's: "(1) the pawn capture, (2) the starting setup, and (3) the stalemate rule."

"Two advantages of Glinski's and my setup over other variations are (1) side-to-side symmetry, and (2) all pawns are the same distance from promotion. In my setup, the pawns are all seven hexes from promotion, just like in real chess."

Apparently both of the above can be played online using a download (which might be risky). Both use the same board, have three colors, and have three Bishops.

• Hexes Chess http://www.hexesgames.com/ uses rotational symmetry rather than mirror symmetry yielding a smaller board.
  1. dates back merely to 2000 or 2003 and might not be available to use here without our asking very nicely;
  2. its inventor found that "using rotational rather than mirror symmetry in the game-board allowed a streamlined 54-hexagon design requiring only six pawns per player"; (This smaller board keeps the Knight from fully using its power even in the middle of the board which I dislike thinking that to be like Chess a variant should give a Knight in the center its full mobility rather than cramp it.)

Would an All–Chess–Variants Clubs Tournament including all interested clubs where Chess or its Variants are played work? Would we have at least six in each variant plus a few other games thrown in to get closer to 25?

My Pipe Dream would be to have at least ten in each variant to require a second round in each one. That might be worth Jay RAA 's time to set it up.

A forming up tournament – The All Clubs Site Checkers & Loco Ochos May 2013 Tournament – is offering all the Checkers variants here. Would doing that with Chess make sense?

“Levon Aronian and I can play an equal game against Magnus. It’s a different issue that he is young, full of energy and has a great desire to win. And if you consider only from the point of chess I think that he is not advantageous against us. I’ll say this way, Carlsen is the improved Karpov."

Given that only Kasparov could beat Karpov in his prime, that may be saying that Carlsen is the equal of Kasparov.

Yes Robyn! You did a hop skip and a jump but I agree! Quite a compliment for Magnus! Maybe he needs Judit to give him a woman's touch! One learns to never say never in this game!

I read in a recent edition of Chess magazine that Magnus Carlsen (graded 2872 - the highest ever!), "... played like a computer". Given Gary Kasparov's poor performance against Deep blue in 1997, and that present day computer processing power has increased exponentially since then, it would seem to indicate that Carlsen is much stronger than Kasparov. Come November we'll see.

Carlsen is actually a very positional player. That's what Kramnik was referring to when he described him as an improved Karpov. But Carlsen is also relentless in always fighting and looking for the best move in any position. That's why he's been compared to a computer: his sustained concentration and stamina. It's not because he sees farther ahead or is stronger with tactics and calculation than Kramnik, Aronian, and Anand.

I think the WC match will be a contest between Carlsen's tenacity and Anand's experience. Carlsen may very well be the best active player. Unfortunately we'll never really know if he's better than Kasparov in his prime, just like we'll never know how Kasparov would have fared against Fischer in his prime. But I do think this WC match will bring us some exciting chess!

I wonder what rating Fischer played at when he won the 1970 Interzonal with 18.5/24. Compare that to Carlsen's 8.5/5.5 in the recent Candidates. After the 1970 Interzonal Fischer defeated Taimanov, Larsen and Petrosian 18.5/21 in the Candidates. Add the Interzonal and Fischer shredded the top players in the world by a score of 37/45.

And then there was Fischer's 19/22 demolition in April 1970 in an unofficial blitz champion--a full 4.5 ahead of Tal. Korchnoi, Petrosian, Bronstein, Smyslov and Reshevsky were also in that tournament.

As for Kasparov, his career will always be associated with Karpov because of the five epic K-K matches. Kasparov lost to Deep Blue (playing anti-computer "over the horizon" style), but he had beat an earlier version. He has beat several computer programs since then. Just my opinion, but I don't think the players, like Kramnik, and others who have played programs are trying as hard as they would if it were a top match. Kramnik overlooked a one move mate against a computer--something he would never do against a player.

I think when they say Carlsen plays like a computer (like they said of Fischer) they mean he plays the strongest move possible, unlike Kasparov who might look for a more dynamic or speculative move. If you go over a Carlsen or Fischer game with a program you might see the moves are remarkably similar. With Kasparov, they wouldn't be till after the non-computer like move--but afterwards would be almost the same.

Here's Kasparov dismantling Deep Junior in 2003 in FIDE Man vs Machine.

[Event "FIDE Man-Machine WC"]
[Site "New York USA"]
[Date "2003.01.26"]
[EventDate "2003.01.26"]
[Round "1"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Garry Kasparov"]
[Black "Deep Junior (Computer)"]
[ECO "D45"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "53"]

1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.e3 e6 5.Nf3 Nbd7 6.Qc2 Bd6 7.g4
dxc4 8.Bxc4 b6 9.e4 e5 10.g5 Nh5 11.Be3 O-O 12.O-O-O Qc7 13.d5
b5 14.dxc6 bxc4 15.Nb5 Qxc6 16.Nxd6 Bb7 17.Qc3 Rae8 18.Nxe8
Rxe8 19.Rhe1 Qb5 20.Nd2 Rc8 21.Kb1 Nf8 22.Ka1 Ng6 23.Rc1 Ba6
24.b3 cxb3 25.Qxb3 Ra8 26.Qxb5 Bxb5 27.Rc7 1-0

Robyn and Fragile your points about these giants are well taken and agreed upon by me! I do believe that physical fitness has a Great deal to do with all of this! I don't know what Magnus does but I do know that Bobby F and "Bobbyb" were/are big table tennis buffs. (and what a way to keep in shape! I don't have to travel to China or N.Korea to meet my match in TT.(Thank God)! In Chicago the China men and Koreans seem to just keep coming up thru the man holes. At our downtown KILLER SPIN table tennis shacks you should see the competition. And you Can on you tube! You just might see me getting thrashed (to put it in Wilfred's terms.) And the Japanese keep me plenty busy in the martial arts! Well as for Kasparov he rows,shot puts and discus throws. All SUPERBLY. And as for Judy and Szuszu they bury themselves with Houdini and Fritz computers playing at 3000. Judy says "those things(computers)" drive her nuts! Well it's "those things" that may make her an International senior Super Grandmaster!!!!! So as for that boy that said that Judy was old news, she is actually burying herself sparring with Fritz 13 at nearly 3000 ELO. And we have to remember what my wife Cindy said and I quote "What they did to Gary in New York City was a crime! Yes in that IBM building where Kasp tangled with Fritz he had some company two floors up! 5 Intl.sr GM's navigating and "supervising" Fritz in some of Mr. K's favorite positions!! WELL!! There was quite a bit written about that on the Playchess.com news!! You don't think that Mr. K might have been fighting just a "little" bit more than just Fritz alone now do you? I plead the 5th.and will make no further comment on that issue! I certainly do agree with Gary just recently when he threw up his arms (Palms up of course)Kasparov style and said that now any GM playing Fritz or the other engines was like a runner trying to keep up with an automobile!! Well Magnus looks like he could run a few miles quite well! It will all be very interesting! God bless EACH and EVERY ONE OF THEM!!!!

When I was living in Beijing in 2002 they had table tennis rooms all over the city and whole families would go there in the evenings and play.

I played this game at the Alondra Park Chess Club in Southern California 26 1/2 years ago. At the time I played only the Reti and the Colle-Zukertort. It was an exciting game--probably one of the wildest OTB games I have ever played. I should have won but offered a draw with very little time left on my clock. (40/2) I think my flag was hanging. My opponent probably had only a minute more time left than me. We both made many mistakes. But what fun!

All annotations are by S. B---. I have altered my name and hidden part of my opponent's name to protect the innocent.

[Site "Lawndale, CA"]
[Date "1986.09.09"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Hode, Robyn"]
[Black "B---, S."]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "A12"]
[WhiteElo "1798"]
[BlackElo "1937"]

[Annotator ",B---"]

[PlyCount "51"]

{A13: English Opening: 1...e6}

1. Nf3 d5 2. c4 Nf6 3. g3 c6 4. b3 e6 5. Bg2 Nbd7 6. O-O Be7 7. Bb2 Qc7 $146 (7... O-O 8. Qc2 b6 9. d3 Bb7 10. e4 Ne8

11. Nbd2 Nc7 12. d4 Rc8 13. Rad1 g6 14. Rfe1 Bf6 15. b4 Ra8 16. a4 a5 17. b5 cxb5 18. e5 bxc4 19. exf6 Nxf6 20. Ne5 Rb8 21. Ba3 Re8 22. Rb1

{Bosboom,M-Vink,N/Wijk aan Zee 2001/CBM 81/1-0 (58)}) 8. Nc3 O-O 9. cxd5 exd5 10. d4 Re8 11. Rc1 b6 $2 $11 (11... Qd6) 12. Nd2 Ba6 $2 {loses a pawn}

13. Nxd5 $1 {relying on the pin} Nxd5 14. Bxd5 $1 Bc5 (14... Bb7) 15. Bf3 Bb4 16. Rxc6 Bxe2 $4 17. Rxc7 $1 Bxd1 18. Bxa8 Be2 19. Rxd7 Rxa8

20. Re1 Bg4 21. Rde7 Be6 22. d5 Bxd2 23. dxe6 Bxe1 24. exf7+ Kf8 25. Rxe1 {bal. 9 min 48 sec for 15 moves} Kxf7 26. Rd1 {Draw agreed, although White is winning--probably

due to White's time pressure}

1/2-1/2

Position after 16 Rxc6



Final Position

Magnus Carlsen	8.5/14	(+5 -2 =7)
Vladimir Kramnik	8.5/14	(+4 -1 =9)
Levon Aronian	8/14	(+5 -3 =6)
Peter Svidler	8/14	(+4 -2 =8)
Alexander Grischuk	6.5/14	(+1 -2 =11)
Boris Gelfand	6.5/14	(+2 -3 =9)
Vassily Ivanchuk	6/14	(+3 -5 =6)
Teimour Radjabov	4/14	(+1 -7 =6)

Magnus Carlsen wins on tiebreaks.

Incredibly, Kramnik played a Pirc in his last game.

Carlsen LOSES to Svidler. Ivanchuk has Kramnik on the ropes. If Ivanchuk wins, Carlsen will play Anand for the title.


Ivanchuk-Kramnik

I'm hoping Ivanchuk wins, just because I think it will be far more exciting chess in the world championship match.

Crazy Ivan will have both Carlsen's and Kramnik's scalps!

Kramnik resigns!

Magnus Carlsen will play Viswanathan Anand for the World Championship.

Ivanchuk won! Carlsen to face Anand.

Best result! This will be the best championship since Kramnik-Kasparov.

Do you know the date?

From instantly updated Wikipedia:

The World Chess Championship 2013 will be a match between the World Chess Champion Viswanathan Anand, the winner of the World Chess Championship 2012, and Magnus Carlsen, to determine the 2013 World Chess Champion. It will be held under the auspices of FIDE, the World Chess Federation, in October–November 2013.

22 year old Magnus Carlsen and 43 year old Viswanathan Anand. Wasn't Kasparov 22 when he played Karpov? Has there ever been anyone younger than 22 to play for the title?

Carlsen lost his first game, to Ivunchuk, but came back to grind out a win vs Radjabov. He is now tied with Kramnik but wins on tie breaks with one more win. Aronian is in free fall now with 3 losses. Kramnik, after drawing his first seven games has won four and drawn two in his last six games.

One more round to go.

Carlsen 8.5/13 (+5 -1 =7)
Kramnik 8.5/13 (+4 -0 =9)

Svidler was the best surprise, defeating Aronian's Nimzo Indian. Aronian's pawn structure was shattered and he was forced to enter a hopeless endgame. Radjabov, having a poor tournament, insisted on playing the KID (with c5) against the famous KID Killer, Kramnik , got his pieces tangled, lost the exchange without compensation and resigned. Carlsen played a Slav Grunfeld against Grischuk and accepted a 23 move GM draw. Gelfand-Ivanchuck was an even shorter 17 move GM draw in a Bf4 Grunfeld.

Carlsen 7.5/11
Kramnik 7/11
Aronian 6.5/10

Carlsen defeated Gelfand, Aronian defeated Ivunchuck and Kramnik defeated Grischuk.


Carlsen 7/10
Aronian 6.5/10
Kramnik 6/10


http://london2013.fide.com/livegames/flash/index.html

The table has remained essentially the same with Aronian and Carlsen atop at 5.5/8 with three wins each. Kramnik has finally won a game and is at 4.5/8.

Kramnik's win over Svidler in a Be3 Exchange Grunfeld:

[Event "World Championship Candidates"]
[Site "London ENG"]
[Date "2013.03.24"]
[EventDate "2013.03.15"]
[Round "8"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "V Kramnik"]
[Black "P Svidler"]
[ECO "D85"]
[WhiteElo "2810"]
[BlackElo "2747"]
[PlyCount "80"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 c5
8. Be3 Qa5 9. Qd2 Nc6 10. Rc1 cxd4 11. cxd4 Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 O-O 13. d5 Rd8
14. Kc2 Ne5 15. Nxe5 Bxe5 16. Bc4 Bd7 17. f4 Bd6 18. Kb3 f6 19. a4 Rdc8 20.
h4 Rab8 21. Bb5 Bxb5 22. axb5 a6 23. b6 Kf7 24. h5 Rxc1 25. hxg6+ Kxg6 26.
Bxc1 Rg8 27. g4 h6 28. Rh5 Kf7 29. e5 Bc5 30. e6+ Kf8 31. Rh4 Kg7 32. f5
Rd8 33. Bxh6+ Kg8 34. Kc4 Bxb6 35. g5 Bf2 36. Rg4 Kh7 37. gxf6 exf6 38. e7
Rc8+ 39. Kb3 Bc5 40. Rc4 1-0

Final Position



Svidler has the choice between giving up his rook to stop the passed e pawn (40...Bxe7 41 Rxc8) or giving up his bishop but eventually also giving up his rook, this time to stop Delroy (Black must get his rook behind Delroy but it's too late anyway).

Kramnik and Carlsen drew in Round 9 today. 41 moves.

Gelfand has apparently obtained a winning position against Aronian...



Carlsen poised to go into 1st place...

Lev Aronian resigns to Boris Gelfand. Magnus Carlsen takes the lead.

Listen to Carlsen and Kramnik analyse their game...

http://new.livestream.com/WorldChess/Round9

Kramnik very impressive in his analysis.

http://new.livestream.com/WorldChess/Round9/videos/14749444

Very interesting Robyn. Vladimir looks to be in fine health! Right now I'd push out a stack of chips on Carlsen though.

Me too. He seems nearly unbeatable. He hasn't been in trouble in any game--even games where it looks like he is worse.

I thought I'd start a new thread with this one ... scholastic tournaments are great things, and I'm always impressed by the ones we have here in Honolulu, where 100+ kids will spend their Saturday playing chess instead of going to the beach. I've helped direct these for several years now; it's at least a ten hour day and usually we have two or at best three adults to work with 100-150 kids, so it's tiring but very rewarding.

And, given that the players range from pre-school to 12th grade, and often are accompanied by their parents, sometimes we get the most interesting questions and comments. Here are a few of the ones I've heard, and I'm sure anyone involved with scholastic chess can add their own.

"How do I know if it's checkmate?" (very common)

"I don't like the move I made. Can I take it back?" (at least once each tournament)

"My opponent wasn't the person I played." (more common than you might think, ranging from someone sitting down at the wrong board to downright impersonation!)

"He made an illegal move!" "When?" "I don't know, about 15 moves ago I guess."

"What happens if neither of us want to play this game?"

"I have to go to the bathroom, can I stop the clock?" (actually in real emergencies we do let them stop the clock even if that's not quite legit)

(from a parent to me) "How come you let my son lose?"

(from a parent to me) "My boy is a new player, can you help him make his moves?"

Famous last words
(i.e. last words in the chess game)

1. So you think you're Paul Morphy?
2. I got your rook!
3. This game's mine.

My favorite incident at a scholastic tournament, which I was directing, was when a player resigned in a stalemated position. As they were getting up, the captain of the player who resigned pointed it out.

My decision was controversial, but I ruled that the stalemate ended the game, and thus the resignation was not legal and the game was a draw.

Don't ask me what I would have said had it been discovered two hours later. This was 1971, so any decisions made since were not available to me.

I think your ruling was correct --- that the game was already over --- but on the other hand, in scholastic tournaments, it's common for checkmate (or stalemate) not to be recognized and have the game continue on with the players completely oblivious.

The worst example for me, though, was when one player claimed checkmate, the other accepted the claim, but it wasn't checkmate. I ruled that the win stood and that it was if the second player had resigned. The other TD supported my decision.

About ten minutes later I had a parent in my face. He looked and sounded angry and potentially violent and was about twice my size. He finally got himself under control, but it was pretty scary.

Sounds worse than Little League baseball.

The question here reminds me of the time I was playing in a tournament at the Santa Monica Bay Chess Club (same place Fischer lost to Spassky in 1966--The Piatigorsky Cup). Of course this was just a club tourney...and at a long table the person sitting next to me suddenly looked up and said, "It's a stalemate. I can't move my king!" To which his opponent calmly replied, "You're in check."

Excuse me...??

What "question here"??

I appear to be a pawn short of understanding!!

Below here...(no subject) heading.

isnt this checkmate game over game# 8134772

Neither king is in check.

Or this, heard at least once per tournament in the Hawaii Scholastics (and no doubt everywhere else scholastic chess is played):

"Mr. Director, is he in checkmate?"

(Asking the player who asked me the question) "Well, what do YOU think?"

"I don't know."

(Asking the opponent) "OK, What do YOU think, are you in checkmate?"

"I don't know."

Parent comes over and says about the first player, "It's his first tournament and he doesn't know the rules yet."

I reply to parent, "We welcome and encourage all scholastic players, but we do ask that they at least know the basics of how to play."

Parent says to me, "Oh really, then what are YOU here for?"

Well...they did have a point...

Has begun in London, UK. The winner of this double-elimination tournament will face World Champion Viswanathan Anand.

Here is the current table.

Levon Aronian	3.5/5	(+2 -0 =3)
Magnus Carlsen	3.5/5	(+2 -0 =3)
Peter Svidler	3/5	(+1 -0 =4)
Teimour Radjabov	2.5/5	(+1 -1 =3)
Vladimir Kramnik	2.5/5	(+0 -0 =5)
Alexander Grischuk	2/5	(+0 -1 =4)
Boris Gelfand	1.5/5	(+0 -2 =3)
Vassily Ivanchuk	1.5/5	(+0 -2 =3)

Very bad start for Gelfand, who unsuccessfully challenged Anand in 2012 after winning the 2011 Candidates tournament.

Here is Gelfand's lose to Carlsen in a QGD Cambridge Springs:

[Event "World Championship Candidates"]
[Site "0:02:33-0:41:33"]
[Date "2013.03.17"]
[EventDate "2013.03.14"]
[Round "3"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Boris Gelfand"]
[Black "Magnus Carlsen"]
[ECO "D52"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "114"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Nbd7 5.Bg5 c6 6.e3 Qa5 7.cxd5
Nxd5 8.Rc1 Nxc3 9.bxc3 Ba3 10.Rc2 b6 11.Bd3 Ba6 12.O-O Bxd3
13.Qxd3 O-O 14.e4 Rfe8 15.e5 h6 16.Bh4 c5 17.Nd2 cxd4 18.cxd4
Rac8 19.Nc4 Qb5 20.f4 Rc7 21.Qxa3 Rxc4 22.Rxc4 Qxc4 23.Bf2 Qc7
24.Rc1 Qb7 25.Qd6 Nf8 26.g3 Rc8 27.Rxc8 Qxc8 28.d5 exd5
29.Qxd5 g6 30.Kg2 Ne6 31.Qf3 Kg7 32.a3 h5 33.h4 Qc2 34.Qb7 Qa4
35.Qf3 b5 36.f5 gxf5 37.Qxf5 Qxa3 38.Qxh5 a5 39.Qg4+ Kf8 40.h5
Qc1 41.Qe4 b4 42.Be3 Qc7 43.Qa8+ Kg7 44.h6+ Kh7 45.Qe4+ Kg8
46.Qa8+ Qd8 47.Qxd8+ Nxd8 48.Kf3 a4 49.Ke4 Nc6 50.Bc1 Na5
51.Bd2 b3 52.Kd3 Nc4 53.Bc3 a3 54.g4 Kh7 55.g5 Kg6 56.Bd4 b2
57.Kc2 Nd2 0-1

Final Position



Gelfand resigned as he would have to sac his bishop on b2 to stop the connected passers and this would allow Carlsen to capture the remaining white pawns and eventually queen his f pawn. The winning line would continue something like this...

58. Bxb2 axb2 59. Kb2 Nc4+ 60. Kc3 Nxe5 61. Kd4 Nf3+ 62. Ke3 Nxg5 63. Kf4 Kxh6...

Thank you - appreciated

Yes, thank you, Robyn. Some exciting chess going on. Even though round 5 was all draws, the players were going for it with aggressive play.

Here's the official page: http://london2013.fide.com/en/main-page

Carlsen even played a Bogo-Indian vs Aronian and poor Radjabov's KID failed against a Svidler Samisch (not sure why he went for Nc6-a5 line in the Declined variation).

Here's another good link with all games.

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=80233

Carlsen has flattened his opponents on both sides of the Ruy.

Tense game right now between Gelfand and Aronian!



Can Gelfand win this? If so, Carlsen goes to the top of the table.

http://london2013.fide.com/livegames/flash/index.html

A chess puzzle:
How many knights can we put on the chessboard such that no knight attacks the other (as knights do)?

I could make 16. (Four clusters of 4 knights each: on b7,c7,b6,c6, f7,g7,f6,g6, b3,c3,b2,c2, f3,g3,f2,g2.)

Then my friend suggested 17: (shift all the above 16 knights in one diagonal direction, and put the 17th knight at the isolated corner square. (a8,b8,a7,b7, e8,f8,e7,f7, a4,b4,a3,b3, e4,f4,e3,f3, and the 17th one on h1)

Another friend claimed 24. I wonder how.

Yet another friend claimed more than that.

And yet another friend claimed still more than that.

What do you all think?

64.

If you only use black knights, none of them can take any of the others.

Deja vu

Yes, big giant head. That is the answer I was expecting. But what if colour does not matter?

The friend of mine who claimed 24, told me that the knights could be put thus:

Eight knights on rank 8 (i.e. a8 to h8)
Eight knights on rank 5 (i.e. a5 to h5)
Eight knights on rank 2 (i.e. a2 to h2)

Another friend of mine claimed 32. I wonder how?

How about putting all the Knights on only the dark coloured (or light coloured squares).

Yes, Man of Steel. Correct.

Caracao Candidates, 1962

The game. Fun to watch Fischer work the Keres back rank.

[Event "Curacao Candidates"]
[Site "Willemstad CURACAO"]
[Date "1962.05.12"]
[EventDate "1962.05.02"]
[Round "7"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Robert James Fischer"]
[Black "Paul Keres"]
[ECO "C96"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "81"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3
d6 8.c3 O-O 9.h3 Na5 10.Bc2 c5 11.d4 Nd7 12.dxc5 dxc5 13.Nbd2
Qc7 14.Nf1 Nb6 15.Ne3 Rd8 16.Qe2 Be6 17.Nd5 Nxd5 18.exd5 Bxd5
19.Nxe5 Ra7 20.Bf4 Qb6 21.Rad1 g6 22.Ng4 Nc4 23.Bh6 Be6 24.Bb3
Qb8 25.Rxd8+ Bxd8 26.Bxc4 bxc4 27.Qxc4 Qd6 28.Qa4 Qe7 29.Nf6+
Kh8 30.Nd5 Qd7 31.Qe4 Qd6 32.Nf4 Re7 33.Bg5 Re8 34.Bxd8 Rxd8
35.Nxe6 Qxe6 36.Qxe6 fxe6 37.Rxe6 Rd1+ 38.Kh2 Rd2 39.Rb6 Rxf2
40.Rb7 Rf6 41.Kg3 1-0

This game is featured in Fischer's book "My 60 Memorable Games" and is extensively analized there in. 11...Nd7 is a Novelty that Fischer refutes at the board. Neither Keres or anyone else has been able to rehabilitate the line since. Impressive victory by the 19 year old Fischer. Keres was among the worlds top 8 players for 25 years his games are well worth playing through.

11...Nd7 is officially known as the Keres Variation (sub-variation of the Chigorin Spanish). GM Davies recommends it in his 2005 repertoire book Play 1e4 e5: A Complete Repertoire for Black in the Open Games. I'll look up this game's line in the book when I get home today and see what it says. The Keres is not my cup of tea. I'm currently enjoying the Petrosian, another Chigorin line, as recommended by GM Marin in A Spanish Repertoire for Black, half of his superb Black 1.e4 repertoire, the other being Beating the Open Games 2nd Edition.

Davis is well known for recommending little known but dubious lines in his books. lately I have been playing the Breyer it is solid as a rock.

In John Watson's review of Davies' book, he says (my emphasis):

He begins ambitiously with a labor-intensive main line of the Ruy Lopez (/Spanish game), i.e., Keres' Variation, which has come back into fashion in a big way.

and (again, my emphasis):

I don't know what's going on in the Keres Variation, which is the main line, but at least strong grandmasters are still playing it, and you can always use the earlier stepping stones he provides and then pick up another high-level Spanish Game if you like (the Zaitsev or Breyer, perhaps?).

Maybe it's had a revival of sorts with some new ideas?

The Zaitsev and the Breyer are too theoretical for me OTB (OTB is all I really do nowadays). Some of the sharpest lines are crazy!

I have Megabase 2013 and there are only 18 games between GMs in this variation in 2012 and none in 2013. Has it fallen out of fashion again in a big way? Blacks play in the Keres variation looks awkward to me and from the results I am seeing in GM play Black has less than average winning chances in this variation and in fact needs to work very hard just to get a draw.

I have never found any of Davies opening books very helpful.

I have two Nigel Davies opening books: The Dynamic Reti and Alekhine's Defense (neither opening I play much anymore). The first book is almost completely useless. It's an anemic 141 pages, offering 10 chapters and 60 games of examples. Despite this, there are several opening lines White might face that are not covered...and most games have brief and not particularly insightful analysis. One could probably do better simply consulting online databases. The latter book is 158 pages with 10 chapters and 62 games. I did learn quite a bit from this book--some unintentional. Chapter 1 is simply unplayable. What I did learn from this book were two things---do not play cxd6 in the Exchange Variation because of the Veronezh Variation and download every Bagirov Alekhine game you can find because his games are probably the best examples.

So, overall I'd have to give Davies a 6 on a scale of 10. I prefer John Emms and of course John Watson.

Some other good opening books:

Play the Grunfeld, Yeleno Dembo. Solid. Have only found perhaps 2 recommended lines I would not play. I have played well over 100 games using this book. For the serious Grunfeld player, one should supplement this book with Understanding the Grunfeld by Jonathan Rowson (the seminal book).

Play the Caro-Kann, Jovanka Houska. Excellent. Extensively covered with very useful information. Not just variations but why to play the lines. Pawn skeletons, good piece/bad piece, ideal positions, etc.

Play the Najdorf: Scheveningen Style, John Emms. My Sicilian Bible. Not one bad line recommended. This book taught me how to play against the English Attack. Haven't lost since I bought it. Was getting manhandled previously. One drawback: his suggestion against 6 Bg5 leads to drawish positions (and White almost always chooses that line). I have another Sicilian book that I no longer use because of this one.

Play the French, John Watson. Still the best single opening book on the French. There is a one line that I've never found a solution to. Got crushed and gave up the Winawer for the Classical. Still, the book stands up even in 2013.

The Scandinavian, John Emms. Good book. Only one chapter that isn't satisfactory.

Play the King's Indian, Joe Gallagher. Good book. Theory may have left some of this book behind and his insistence on playing the ...Nc6 variation and excluding many modern treatments may leave some readers wanting.

The Philidor Files, Christian Bauer. Very good. Has a lot of stuff you'll never use though. He covers just about everything possible. Suggestions are worth exploring.

Play the Open Games as Black: What to do when White avoids the Ruy Lopez, John Emms. Excellent book. Vienna, Ponziani, Scotch, Scotch/Spanish Four Knights, King's/Goring/Belgrade Gambits. 5 separate chapters on the wild Two Knights Defense. Fun stuff for the adventurous. This book gave me a special line that I can play against those Petroff players who just want to draw. Won't say what it is. Punish the player who doesn't know Double King's Pawn games.

A Killer Chess Opening Repertoire, Aaron Summerscale. Openings like the excellent Colle-Zukertort (not enough here on this opening) Barry Attack, 150 Attack, etc. Openings that avoid the usual main lines against Indian Defences. Also an Anti-Dutch. Decent chapter on Queen' Indian.

As for the Ruy Lopez. Used to play the Breyer. Now I only play the Old Steinitz. Solid but passive. Wait for White inaccuracy.

As usual, I've said too much. I've always liked to experiment with openings. Not good advice. Listen to Grim.

Robyn we all like to experiment a little too much in the opening.

a good endgame book is worth more than a dozen opening books.

Guilty. And great advice.

The problem with publishing a gazillion chess books and DVDs is that some are going to be real duds. I've seen DVDs by Davies where he seems to sleepwalk through some lines, suggesting some moves off the top of his head while missing vital tactics. I think he has some decent instructional material every now and then, and his presentation style is good for multimedia, but you have to weed your way through the good, the bad, and the ugly. Certainly not the caliber of Watson or Marin, but some of his stuff is decent for many club players.

I just got Houska's Caro-Kann book in the mail yesterday! I really like her presentation, and it actually has me considering taking up the opening. Right now I'm playing 1...e5 to 1.e4 (largely based on Marin's two-volume set, but probably more honestly because I can fake the lines more easily OTB!), and it feels like too much to keep up with for OTB play (and my decrease in chess playing overall). However, I really want to return to my first love, the French. I think Watson is brilliant, and his books on the French are the best. My only reluctance is that he packs so much into each French book that I feel like the onus is on me to wade through every line in detail to determine which one I want to play, and understand the strategic ideas each step of the way. If only he presented the French like he did in his excellent A Strategic Chess Opening Repertoire for White (and Houska's Caro-Kann book). I realize I have to ultimately dig deep and "own" it, but I do like to be handheld along the way to get a jump start.

I may have told this story before, but I once played IM Martha Fierro in a simul. This was when I briefly played the Sicilian Najdorf. I even looked through Emms's excellent book for how to face Martha's favorite line against the Najdorf. Sure enough, that's what we played. Of course she mopped the floor with me, but what I noticed only after I went home, was that if I had read Emms's book just a little further, he showed how to get a strong edge for Black with a novelty. If only...! Not that she still wouldn't have outplayed me, but I would have made her worry.

I was impressed enough with "play the Caro-Kann" that I used it as my exclusive opening against 1.e4 for a couple of years with outstanding results.

Now you've gone and done it. With an endorsement like that, how can I not make a serious go with the Caro?

I agree that it feels awkward.

Looks like the relative surge in popularity started around 2002:

Year	# Games	White Score
2002	13	57%
2003	12	50%
2004	31	48%
2005	22	50%
2006	13	57%
2007	17	58%
2008	17	61%
2009	7	57%
2010	14	75%

But looks who's tried it: Kramnik, Ponomariov, Adams, Nakamura, Mamedyarov, Short, and Ivanchuk.

Apparently Graf did a lot to revive the line and Davies pulled from his games as well as his own.

Davies says:

The big new idea for Black in the Keres Variation is to meet 12.Nbd2 with 12...exd4 (rather than the traditional 12...cxd4), after which 13.cxd4 Nc6 14.d5 reaches a kind of Benoni position. [Damljanovic-Ponomariov, 2003]...is an important game for this line as it features the correct way for Black to get counterplay against the 15.Nxe5 and 16.f4 plan (17...Bh4!).

Regarding the line from the above Fischer-Keres game, Davies says:

Practical players have often chosen 12.dxc5 against the Keres -- conventional wisdom claims that White gets an edge without having to know much theory. But thanks to Mr. Graf it seems that black is doing well after 13...Bb7, which prevents White from maneuvering his pieces round at leisure.

seems humorous to consider a hand full of games per year as a surge in popularity. Fortunately, white can not force black to play this opening.

Leipzig Olympiad Final 1960

[Event "Leipzig ol (Men) fin-A"]
[Site "Leipzig"]
[Date "1960.11.01"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Fischer, Robert James"]
[Black "Tal, Mihail"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C18"]
[PlyCount "42"]
[EventDate "1960.10.16"]
[EventType "team"]
[EventRounds "11"]
[EventCountry "DDR"]
[Source "ChessBase"]
[SourceDate "1998.11.10"]
[WhiteTeam "US of America"]
[BlackTeam "Soviet Union"]
[WhiteTeamCountry "USA"]
[BlackTeamCountry "URS"]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. e5 c5 5. a3 Ba5 6. b4 cxd4 7. Qg4 Ne7 8. bxa5
dxc3 9. Qxg7 Rg8 10. Qxh7 Nbc6 11. Nf3 Qc7 12. Bb5 Bd7 13. O-O O-O-O 14. Bg5
Nxe5 15. Nxe5 Bxb5 16. Nxf7 Bxf1 17. Nxd8 Rxg5 18. Nxe6 Rxg2+ 19. Kh1 Qe5 20.
Rxf1 Qxe6 21. Kxg2 Qg4+ 1/2-1/2

Was Tal a leftie?!

I am a righty and I often move the pieces with my left hand and hit the clock with my right. or vice versa depending which side the clock is on.

Michael Tal.

he is not here right now can I take a message?

Isn't is USCF and FIDE regulation that you have to hit the clock with the hand you move the pieces with?

that is the rule, but few people really care about it except for blitz games or when someone is in time trouble. Since I let my hands rest in my lap while thinking then move the piece return that hand to my lap then reach over and hit the clock I have never had anyone complain. I don't play blitz except with close friends for training purposes.

Did Tal play the French often?

A search on chessgames for Tal playing the French turns up 13 games. He went 3+/3-/4= up to 1961, then later in life lost 3. I think in this game he was playing with Fischer. He had beaten him several times already.

The grossmeister looks serious.

Not surprising. The one thing you don't associate with Fischer is a sense of humour.

Why is Fischer an grossmeister and Tal a weltmeister?

weltmeister is German for World Champion

Ah, I thought for a minute Mikhail was just a guy who liked to hit people and leave big welts.

That would have been Floyd Patterson back in 1960.

Is that Erich Hoenecker in the gallery, seated in the center?

I think that in 1960 he had a bit more hair.

WOW! Very fine photo there Robyn! At first I had only scrolled down to the top of the Chessboard and said to myself "I never thought Fischer ever played Kasparov,I must be dreaming!" Then I scrolled all the way down. I (in my own opinion) thought Tal had a stunning "look alike" to the King of Chess! Ironically this historic game took place just two short years after our own legendary Classical pianist Van Cliburn of Fort Worth Texas stunned the world when he won the 1st. place Gold Medal in the 1st.International Tchaikovsky Piano Competition in Moscow. The historic event smoothed relations between the two super powers and brought on vibes of peace among nations! (I met Van when I competed in the 4th. Van Cliburn piano competition in Fort Worth) Just a couple of weeks ago Van left us at age 78 of Bone Cancer. He was visited for the final time by 1400 of us including Texas Governor Rick Perry and Former President George Bush both of whom gave touching eulogies. (Russian President Putin sent his condolences). So many people think Bobby was from Brooklyn but he (and myself) were born in the same hospital! Michael Reese on the outer edge of downtown Chicago.

Thanks Bobby.

Sorry to see Van Cliburn pass on. The Tchaikovsky Piano Competition was such an historic event.


As for Fischer. Imagine if he had somehow been able to overcome his demons and continue to play chess after he won the title in 1972. Kasparov first played for the world title in 1985. If Fischer would have defeated Karpov/Korchnoi or whomever his opponent was in the 70s and early 80s he would have been 42 in 1985 when he might have played the 22 year old Kasparov. The current world champion, Anand, is 43.


What a match Fischer-Kasparov might have been.

Ever feel like you've gone through life trading off your dark squared bishop and then placing all your pawns on light squares?

I have.

you don't know the power of the dark side Robyn.

you know how Ophrah as people, well Robyn has pawns.

Grim has frightened me...

I'm puzzled. Despite having just won a game, my rating has dropped from 1802 to 1789.

When you win against a player with a significantly lower rating, the resulting score can be negative.

Yes, your last win was against a player rated 1255.

Shouldn't that only happen while your rating's provisional though?

His rating is provisional, so that explains it. But it's still, well, not very pleasing to win and lose points!

Some people avoid playing low rated players when in provisional status so as to obtain a high initial rating.

Sad really that they should have to do that.

And there are people who lose on purpose to keep their ratings low, then enter class tournaments to cash in. Sandbaggers.

It may look like I'm one of those, promise I'm not. It is the instant action in the other games I play here on the site that robs me of the chess pulse..then I wake up some days ;)

I think Robyn's talking about OTB tournaments with significant cash prize funds.

The USCF has had a "rating floor" for some time now. Round your highest rating down to the nearest 100, and subtract 200. That's your floor and you can never fall below that. So someone who reached a peak of 1756 would have a floor of 1500. While you may think a sandbagging strong B player (in this example) would have an easy time winning the C section (1400-1600), anyone's who faced opponents "playing up" (a section) will testify things aren't always so simple. Scholastic player ratings are notoriously deflated (they spend most of their time playing in a different "pool"), and many of those kid's published ratings take awhile to catch up to their actual playing strength.

I'm grateful for those responses. Everything has become so much clearer now.

I feel sorry for Joe Black! If I was president of the USCF I would simply try to put this into effect---- If a higher player beats a much lower rated player why not leave the higher player's rating stay exactly where it is? This would solve the problem of that minority group of higher rated players who simply pick on lower rated players to raise their ratings while at the same time not penalizing an honest higher rated player! I myself was surprised just yesterday when I was obligated to play a player who had gotten to my rung on the Camelot ladder(I was rated about 300 points higher than he was) We both had tournament ratings and my rating was boosted 4 points When I won! Very interesting as well as puzzling! Could anyone tell me why I was "blessed?" This same deal happened about 4 times in my USCF tournaments!

While your rating is provisional (in the USCF I think that's 20 games), the rating is determined by the average rating of all your opponents so far (and your performance score against them). So it's very possible you'll lose points if you win against a much lower rated player, because their low rating brings that average down. Similarly, it's possible to gain provisional rating points after losing to a much higher rated player. But it's no big deal in the long run. A provisional rating is just a way to get an initial rating, and it only lasts 20 games. Your rating will stabilize to what it's supposed to be afterward.

Most of the time in the USCF, players compete against other players in the general vicinity of their own rating (+/- 200 points), and they do so in a tournament with multiple games. In that case, your rating change is pretty much based on: 1) Your current rating, 2) Your performance score in the tournament, and 3) The average rating of all your opponents in that tournament. Once again, we're averaging the ratings of your opponents (but this time it's the opponents from a single tournament vs everyone you've played). So, in this (majority) case, you're not getting x points for beating player c. You're getting x points for having a certain performance score against a group of players. This seems much more "correct", doesn't it? Sure, if you get a bye and play another player with a bye for rating points only, then that game will be calculated by itself, and you could get 4 points for beating a much lower-rated player. But that's supposed to be the exception.

GT is using a rating system that wasn't designed for single player "one section" matches (your rating is adjusted after each game, rather than a group of games in a tournament, and you can easily be matched against players with a large rating difference). I suppose someone could exploit it by only playing much lower rated players and over a long period of time getting a high rating.

As I recall USCF also places limits on rating changes from playing individual matches. This stemmed from some fellow who was in prison (I don't recall his name but it's well known in chess circles) getting a master's rating by playing rated games with other prisoners.

For a site like GT it's next to impossible to come up with something that completely prevents rating abuse. The idea of having separate tournament ratings certainly is a good one, but given the length of tournaments on a turn-based site, calculating a new rating after each game seems fine.

One improvement might be using the Glicko method, which takes account of number and frequency of games played, so ratings don't change with so much volatility for active players. (USCF does not use Glicko and I think they should! A typical player who has an especially good or especially bad tournament weekend can see rating changes of over 100 points.)

I've sworn off G/45 tournaments. They affect both your quick and regular rating (and they're typically only one or two sections). I inevitably make silly blunders from time trouble against lower rated players in G/45, and my regular rating takes a huge dive.

As I recall USCF also places limits on rating changes from playing individual matches. This stemmed from some fellow who was in prison (I don't recall his name but it's well known in chess circles) getting a master's rating by playing rated games with other prisoners.

The name was Claude Bloodgood. He was an A player in strength, but had a master's rating. I played in a couple of tournaments (including one Virginia State Championship) where he played. There is a Wikipedia article on him:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Bloodgood

I knew a guy who was at least 2150 strength with great tactical skills whose rating was 1450. He cleaned up in some money tourneys in the LAX hotel area back in the late 80s. Don't know what happened to him. Probably sipping a Daquiri on the beach in Hawaii now.

Or someone decided he needed cement shoes.

Are there any clubs in the vicinity that would accept a player of modest ability as a member?

Answers on a postcard please.

The Chess4Fun Club - http://www.goldtoken.com/games/clubs?club=1 accepts players at all levels. We allow polite persons only. We do have our share of big egos though If you are interested invite one of our officers to a game.

Not a postcard, that's REALLY old now! http://www.goldtoken.com/games/clubs?club=378 takes on any chess people, from about 900 to 2800! Alsop one of the original teams here.

White is up a pawn and Black has just played Bd7? Find the shot.

The only thing I see upon a quick glance is 1.Bc4+ Kh8 2.Qxe4.

Close, but there is a more spectacular shot.

I await the answer. My guesses are no better.

1.Qxe4 right away seems to work. 1...fxe4? 2.Bc4+ Rf7 3.Rxf7 and Black will lose the queen soon. 3...Qc8? trying to control e6 doesn't work because of 4.Rf6+.

That's it! Well done.

Who were the players?

It was 10 0 game on FICS. I found the move after about 3 minutes. But I lost on time because there was only about 15 seconds left!

White Bishop under White Queen?

"open the h-file, sac, sac...mate!"

Theory moves on, now I believe at least three sacs are required - plus some help from Santa with the 4th one

and to all chess players some good knights

I knew you were going to say that!

Awesome

Cheers everyone!

to assign a points value to the pieces? This has been perplexing me since I started playing the game on GT. I think any reasonably intelligent person can figure out why a Queen is more valuable than a Pawn based on their allowable moves. Is there a variant though where a points system would come into play?

Here's a good explanation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_piece_relative_value

I should add that I usually prefer the Queen (because of her mobility) over any rook/minor piece/pawn combinations. But I'll take a white knight outpost on e6 over almost any rook equivalency or position.

One of the most famous positions, from Lasker-Capablanca, St. Petersburg, 1914


Lasker's knight dominates the position.

Dan Heisman shows and comments on GM Larry Kaufman's "The Evaluation of Material Imbalances", which is definitely worth a read, discussing the relative worth of the bishop pair, the "exchange", and much more.

http://home.comcast.net/~danheisman/Articles/evaluation_of_material_imbalance.htm

Andrew Soltis wrote a book called "Rethinking the Chess Pieces", that might be worth a look.

http://www.amazon.com/Rethinking-Chess-Pieces-Andrew-Soltis/dp/0713489049/

Positional sacrifices are also well worth studying once you're fairly strong in tactics. It can be a little scary giving up material. It requires greater accuracy, for if you squander a move or two and let your opponent untangle himself, suddenly you're just down in material.

The question was why are those values in the Goldtoken rules?

Chess was the first game coded for this site while Chad was building it. He probably also wrote the rules, or perhaps copied them from somewhere. They have never been changed since, and most players probably never look at them... It's true that the piece "values" are totally superfluous there.

They're in the rules as a helpful tip for beginners, not as an actual rule. I know of no variations where piece point values are used.

Yes Robyn I agree. A knight outpost can be deadly. Very DEADLY! By the way,who won that game?

white of course, this is one of the most famous games in Chess history.

Carlsen beat McShane and is now rated 2851.2 Kramnik beat Polgar (he's 14-0-11 vs. Judit),Nakamura beat Aronian,&Adams beat Jones. Anand=bye

Apparently the all-time high rating is 2856.7 Carlsen faces Aronian today.

Carlsen now has the highest ever live rating 2857.4

is Anna Ushenina.

cool