March 2004 Archives

Speaking of political issues, with Tony Blair going to Libya the door is wider open for the 2004 FIDE KO championship to be held in Tripoli this summer. I'm all in favor of Libya coming in from the cold, making reparations, and selecting a new, sane, leader in at least a vaguely democratic fashion. But if they don't let the Israeli players participate it's a joke, especially considering the FIDE motto is "Gens Una Sumus" or We are One Family. Maybe someone who had more than one semester of Latin can tell us how to amend the FIDE motto to "We Are One Family, Except the Jews." At one point the FIDE site said that they were hoping for a special dispensation to allow the Israelis to play, but the latest FIDE reports on the event don't mention this.

I'd love to go cover the KO like I did the last one in Moscow (2001). But since my passport shows I have visited Israel I won't be allowed into Libya to do so. While I have disagreed with most of the directions Ilyumzhinov has pushed chess (time control, KO, political instead of corporate sponsorship), I believe he thinks he is helping chess with his actions. I also think FIDE can be worked with and transformed and doesn't need to be discarded and/or replaced, as many suggest. But is this really the best we can hope for? Places that radically restrict event attendance for profane racial, religious, and political reasons? Background and current status of Libya and its relations with the US here.

I hope someone out there understands what went on with this chess tournament in Karabakh. The Petrosian Memorial recently finished in Stepanakert, Karabakh. I can't say exactly where that is, which seems to be the problem. This story at an Azerbaijani news page doesn't help much. Apparently the Azerbaijanis are annoyed that a Georgian played in an Armenian tournament because it was being played in a region that is claimed by both Azerbaijan and Armenia. Got that? (More on the conflict here.)

FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov apparently warned the Armenians that the tournament wouldn't be recognized. 21-year-old Georgian GM Jobava was caught in the middle of all this and has been punished by his national federation (although I somehow doubt he will really be forbidden from playing, as if that were possible).

I bet if the Armenians were putting up, say, 1.5 million dollars for a FIDE event Ilyumzhinov would have no trouble overlooking any troublesome political issues.

It has become commonplace to hear references to how playing chess improves kids' performance in school, helps them concentrate better, and does just about everything this side of eliminating cavities. Data to back this up is important when it comes to things like getting funding for chess clubs or adding chess to the curriculum. Groups like America's Foundation for Chess and Chess-in-the-Schools know that school districts prefer thick piles of charts and test scores (that they will likely never read) to mountains of anecdotal evidence from teachers, parents, and students. (I speak as a former teacher and the son of a teacher. School systems are just like any other bureaucracy.)

This recent Press-Enterprise story is a typical one, although it actually mentions two studies instead of just acting like it is an intuitive step to say that playing chess improves student performance in other areas. That site requires a rather onerous registration process, so an excerpt:

"The connection between chess and math, reading and critical-thinking skills is well-documented. In the 1980s, researchers studying chess in Pennsylvania schools during a five-year period showed that critical thinking skills improved by 17 percent for students in chess classes, compared with a 5 percent improvement for students in other classes.

Similarly, a study in 1996 by educational psychologist Stuart Margulies showed a marked improvement in reading skills for students learning chess in New York schools."

The Margulies study is mentioned in more detail here. An interesting summary of that and many other findings regarding chess and thinking is here. The evidence is strong that regular chess play improves cognition in various ways, likely differing from child to child. One problem with several of the studies, at least at first glance, is that old bugbear correlation vs causation. Kids who take to mind games like chess seem likely to have greater aptitudes for other mental disciplines, including test-taking, problem solving, reading, etc. Even if selection is random, kids who stay with a school chess program are likely to be ahead of those who drop out of one.

Of course it's not a coincidence that many of these experiments were created and conducted by chessplayers, who would have at least a mild interest in putting a positive spin on the game. Someone with no knowledge of chess is unlikely to come up with the idea. (Margulies was co-author of Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess.)

But when the rate of improvement increases with the introduction of chess into group, you've got something, and this happens consistently with high correlation. And I'll take the word of teachers, parents, and kids over statistics any day. Hundreds have testified to the many positive effects on individuals and groups.

News clips about chess are often incorrect and are usually stilted at best. The difference between a game and a match confounds most wire services, although it's quite similar to the same terms in tennis. Then there's the fact that they are usually getting incorrect or contradictory information from various so-called official sources. FIDE politicians are rarely willing to admit they don't know or, more to the point, that they have no authority on a matter. Then things trickle down to regional politicans who further mangle the news before issuing a statement, which is then picked up by the news services. Argh.

Still, you have to wonder how many mistakes can be crammed into a single small item when you see things like this. The first paragraph: "HANOI: Russian chess king Garry Kasparov has agreed to play his countryman and official world number one Ruslan Ponomariov in Vietnam, the Vietnam Chess Federation said Friday."

About the only thing they got right was that Kasparov is Russian. He's not going to play Ponomariov unless the Ukrainian (not his countryman) wins the 2004 KO in Libya. This is unlikely since Pono has already said he won't play in the next FIDE championship, considering himself king for life a la Fischer. Nor is Pono the number one anything, although I believe he officially retained the FIDE title after dodging a Kasparov match last year.

(See March 16, 04) From America's Foundation for Chess: "America’s Foundation for Chess (AF4C) and NTC Foundation have set the dates for the 2004 U.S. Chess Championships. The national title tournament will take place from November 24 through December 5, 2004, at the Hilton Torrey Pines in La Jolla."

"This will be the fourth year that AF4C has hosted the annual tournament and its first year doing so with a co-sponsor. Expected to maintain its $250,000 prize fund, the 2004 U.S. Chess Championships will be held over 12 days and is expected to attract attention from around the world. Chessmaster® is returning as a 2004 corporate sponsor."

Allow me to say "Yay!" More good chess, more good money, more of a good thing. It would also be nice to see some serious live coverage of the event this time around. I'm sure their sponsors would appreciate it. Thousands of Americans get up early to watch the top European events; I'm sure many more would love to watch the US Championship live with commentary at a decent hour!

Instead of having sponsor-free rebroadcasting by the ICC, Playchess.com, et al, they could have a nice page with information and links for their sponsors and their own agenda. The design wasn't the most subtle thing I've ever done, but you can't deny that X3D got their money's worth of name recognition from this!

Or we could show all the games at Playchess.com and have audio commentary like we did during Linares. I'd promise to mention the AF4C, the sponsors, and a mission statement every 30 minutes or so on the air. And now for these messages from our sponsors....

The China View news service is reporting that 2001 FIDE Women's World Champion Zhu Chen is involved in a battle to retain the rights to her name. Apparently a foreign (non-Chinese) company tried to register the rights to the 28-year-old's name without her knowledge.

Maybe she should also have a talk with a Mr. Carlos Moreno, who registered zhuchen.com a month ago! (Earlier here I mistakenly identified the registrar as the registrant due to fine print and laziness. My bad. Thanks for the corrections.) It can take time, but it is now fairly routine for well-known individuals and brands to get their name domains taken away from other people. Carlos would have to make a good case for having zhuchen.com for something other than reselling it to prevent a court from handing it over to Zhu Chen. (Loads about this in the case regarding sting.com here.)

The unsavory practice of cyber-squatting also popped up in the chess world in several places. When we started work on KasparovChess in 1999 one of the biggest behind-the-scenes battles was about how some nut was squatting on kasparov.com. He'd met Garry years earlier, done nothing with the project, and ended up causing no end of trouble until it was finally awarded to Kasparov in a long and expensive court battle.

We went on a domain-buying spree back then and many of those I registered for the now-defunct company still show the old contact information. Back then I noticed that a Spanish chess group had registered the domains of the names of many top players.

There are some other curious ones out there. vishyanand.com, vladimirkramnik.com, and peterleko.com are owned by my friends at the London Chess Centre (who also have the coveted chess.co.uk). kramnik.com is owned by his friend Miguel Illescas's chess school in Spain. KasparovChess offered big bucks for chess.com, but in the net madness of the late 90s the fellow at Chess Mentor turned down enough to retire on. Whoops.

It's interesting that the LCC has registered so many full names, which could likely be taken away by their namesakes in court. (Even if they make peterleko.com into a Peter Leko fan site a court could still call him the rightful owner as a public figure in need of protecting his name and earning power.) Meanwhile, paulmorphy.com is still available!

Much of the chess that pops up in the chess news searches at Google and elsewhere is of the scholastic variety. Most is of the little Timmy wins first prize in the Sasweego Elementary tournament variety. This one on America's Foundation for Chess is more interesting.

The AF4C is the Seattle-based group that has sponsored the last three US Championships. The 2004 championship will instead be in San Diego and there are rumors that the organization itself might head down to the border too. The dates for the championship have been in flux due to some construction and scheduling messes at the originally announced venue in San Diego. (Moving the Championship from Seattle was apparently contingent upon a commitment from the mayor to introduce chess in schools.)

It's now looking like it will run through Thanksgiving and into the first week of December, almost two years after the last championship (Jan. 03). Official announcement is expected this week.

Speaking of the US championship, I am again hearing things about controversy around the 04 US women's Olympiad team selection process. The rules seem to change weekly, for one. The main question is still whether or not Anna Hahn will be given an automatic spot as reigning US champion. It seems the rules have recently been altered to say that the champ does get put on the team EXCEPT in 2003-2004! The Anna Rule?

In both national and world titles, whenever the winner isn't one of the top-rated players there is controversy. Basically, if you're going to whine about the results, don't play the tournaments and just go with the rating list. "That's why they play the games" is the wholly correct platitude.

For the second year in a row we see two powerful rapid tournaments scheduled for the same week, this week. This will be the 13th Melody Amber tournament in Monaco and as usual it includes most of the world's top players. Anand and Kramnik top the list. The Spaniard Vallejo gets his first invite to this pleasure cruise of chess tournaments. Fantastic conditions with every need catered to, a $200,000 prize fund, short work days, and no rating points in play so you are free to take risks and bomb out.

Each day you play a match consisting of one rapid game and one blindfold chess game against the same opponent. The blindfold game allows us to chuckle when the world's best players make foolish mistakes and occasionally marvel when they play a grand conception without sight of the board. But I've never seen the point of watching 2700s play like 2400s with a 1400-style blunder tossed in every once in a while. "Ooh, you could barely tell this game was blindfold!" isn't a big deal when we have plenty of such games. At the end of the day it's just a dancing bear show. But with such conditions the players certainly aren't going to complain.

The other rapid event is in Reykjavik, Iceland, and it boasts Garry Kasparov's participation. Kasparov has never played the Melody Amber (named for the daughter of the tournament's patron: the rich, amiable, and charmingly eccentric correspondence chess GM J.J. van Oosterom). Kasparov considers blindfold chess a sideshow not for serious competition. Karpov and Short are also playing in Reykjavik, making it a sort of 80s-early 90s reunion. I don't think they have played against each other in the same event since Linares 1992. Showing that talent ages well, they are the top seeds in Reykjavik.

I'm still on the fence regarding FIDE's announcements that they are planning to hold their 2004 world championship tournament in Libya. Money to chessplayers is good. A tournament that could move us toward unification is good. Using sport to encourage the opening of political doors is good. Being a sport USED by a dictator to fool people into thinking he is opening doors is bad.

Imagine this press release: "As a gesture to the global community and to chess, Libya will welcome players from Israel and those who have visited Israel to the 2004 world championship. These restrictions will henceforth be lifted in the spirit of FIDE's motto, gens una sumus."

Great! Let's go to Libya! I'm still not shaking Khaddafi's bloody hand, but it would be an achievement of sorts. Still ridiculous, still damaging to the sport's reputation, still harmful to bringing serious corporate sponsorship into the game, but progress.

But it appears that instead of that, FIDE may stick its head in the sand. They are prepared to split the event into two: one in Libya and one in Malta where the Jews will play. How nice of them. So chess concedes morality for a few bucks yet again. Right now FIDE is asking for three special visas to let Israelis into Libya to play. No word about those who have visited Israel, who are currently forbidden entry as well.

Many countries are now making moves to welcome Libya back into the fold despite Khaddafi's continued control of the country. (In other places at other times they might have demanded the dictator in question relinquish control at least symbolically.) In light of all the movement inside and regarding Libya I'd be willing to support the tournament in Libya if they lift the visa restrictions for the tournament. Without even that tiny concession, what's to support?

Reviews continue to multiply of the new book on the Fischer-Spassky 1972 match, "Bobby Fischer Goes to War". I wrote some comments on early British reviews at ChessBase here. Now that the book is out in the US we've been inundated with reviews and commentary, all of them rehashing the already stale hash that the book covers. The New Yorker even weighed in. Here's the NY Times review at a site that doesn't require registration. (I used to deliver that paper, the Contra Costa Times!) Then the SF Chronicle, and NY Newsday.

I didn't have my hopes too high, but it seems like fears have been confirmed. Judging from reviews, respected authors David Edmonds and John Eidinow have produced little new and, even worse, have used just about every old canard and urban legend that Horowitz and Chernev ever saw fit to confabulate.

The long-debunked bit about Morphy being found dead surrounded by women's shoes is dusted off, as is the ancient and untrue tale about a 300-page book for chess spectators with 300 blank pages and "SHUT UP" at the back. Har har. These are all funny anecdotes but there are plenty of good chess stories that also happen to be true. I don't blame them too much for repeating a good story from a book, no one has limitless sources. But it's still sad.

The book may well be useful to bring an interesting old story to a new general, audience. But chess fans and Fischer fanatics who know the story are unlikely to find much of interest. I'm still waiting for my review copy so I shouldn't be so categorical. Non-chess reviewers are likely to repeat the same "sensational" bits and make the same errors.

After more than two grueling weeks, the Linares supertournament is over. At least it was grueling for me. Live radio commentary and analysis during the rounds and then a report at night after analyzing the games. The real problem was that in the middle of the tournament I moved to a new apartment. It was only across the river from the East Village in Manhattan to Brooklyn, but packing, moving and unpacking during the middle of event coverage wasn't the best timing.

Now it's over and from looking at the crosstable it was one of the most boring supertournaments on record. 79% of the games were drawn, likely a modern record at this level. I remember the 98 Groningen Festival, a respectable category 16, had only seven decisive games out of 30, or 81% drawn. But the crosstable doesn't tell the whole story and it wasn't that boring for the most part.

The worst part for chess fans is that the worst culprit of the short draws, Vladimir Kramnik, also won the tournament. This tournament success at the expense of the game and the fans and the sponsors can only encourage other players to imitate this style, what Kasparov deprecatingly calls "stock market chess" because of the way Kramnik plays the percentages. If you offer a draw the moment you have a roughly equal position against a strong opponent, even if it's at move 18, you save your energy for when you get an good edge out of the opening and/or are playing someone weaker.

Kramnik played four non-game draws to start Linares. In the fifth round he was pressed by Kasparov with black and had to work for 44 moves for the draw. The he caught Topalov out in the opening and won a nice game for his first win. Another short draw followed, then a real game draw with Shirov and an attempt to beat the lowest seed, Radjabov that finished drawn. In the 11th round he was close to a loss against Leko only to find an excellent tactical shot to turn the tables in time trouble and notch his second win. He concluded with two more non-game draws.

Kramnik averaged 26 moves per game in Linares, and that must be close to a record too. Leko averaged 31, Kasparov 39. With opening theory running into the middle teens on the average this made for seven games in which Kramnik played maybe five original moves. This philosophy can be summed up as "if the game is probably going to be drawn anyway, why not get it over with early and save your energy for a better chance?" The answer, one that doesn't seem to occur to most of these guys, is "because you are ripping off the fans and sponsors and destroying the game and its future as a serious sport." They whine about lack of events and sponsors; do they think people will pay to watch 26 moves? To not know if they'll get to see a real game or not each day?

It's not fair to single Kramnik out; he's only the top exponent and happened to win this recent event, which on the whole just happened to epitomize this philosophy. The table shows Kasparov as the drawing master of the event with one win and 11 draws. But if you watched the tournament or look at the games you see Kasparov drove the event round after round with aggressive play and long, hard-fought games. He missed three clear wins (documented in Black Belt #64) and got into time trouble in just about every game. He had two short draws, one on his account against Leko and one with black against Kramnik in round 12 when Vlady was trying to force a draw from the start.

Kramnik again lived up to the "Mister Plus Two" sobriquet I gave him years ago. He won the tournament, but hearts, minds, and sponsorship aren't going to follow. 26 moves per game!!