|
Finally got the ChessBase report up. Going through 32 games for such briefly noted highlights doesn't seem like a very productive use of time. Like everyone else out there doing daily updates I'll be quite happy to see the field pared down to 16 so we can pay more attention to the chess. These first few rounds always remind me of election coverage, where they spend all their time talking about the polls and not the issues. Winning is what matters so that's all that is discussed. Certainly the KO format reduces everything to binary. There were many fun games today.
Tiebreak day. I just went through all the games at the official site to figure out the scores to post them at ChessBase. Full results, report, and second-round pairings are now there, along with some photos. Many of the pics are actually from yesterday because I didn't get the new ones until 5:40am Wednesday. I'll make a photo gallery of the rest later. Speaking of delays, FIDE just now, 13 hours after I put them up at CB, posted the results at the official site. Terrible.
The first underdog to come through the tiebreaks was USA's Yuri Shulman in a sudden death game against Zvjaginsev. (You may remember Zvjaginsev as the "American killer" of the first FIDE KO back in 1997. Not this time.) Kudrin was eliminated by Eljanov so half the Americans came through. Further south, Leitao joins his Brazilian compatriot Vescovi in the second round. Karjakin is out, Carlsen stays in.
Lots of heavyweight match-ups in the second round. Ivanchuk against the up-and-coming Cheparinov, Topalov's second, should be a hot one. Speaking of FIDE champions, here's another bizarre item that I missed about the candidates matches for the 2007 cycle, of which this World Cup is the start. From the regulations 2.2:
This explains why no one from San Luis bothered to play in Khanty-Mansyisk. They are already all qualified into the candidates or the final tournament by rating since FIDE is using the same rating criteria as they used for San Luis! (Kasimdzhanov is into the candidates as 2004 champ.) Insanity. Only Topalov should be seeded and everyone else should have to play. They should use much more recent rating lists so the players aren't yet sure if they will qualify by rating. Then if a qualifier is also in by rating, you take the next qualifier down the list. Actually I'd be delighted to drop all qualification by rating, or cut it to one or two spots max, not five. The point of a cycle is to play for the championship in a championship event.
Douglas Bryson has a nice little item for chess trivia fans in his column in the Sunday Scotsman. An Erwin Knopfler played in several Scottish championships in the early 50's. He turns out to be the father of musicians David and Mark of the band Dire Straits, as confirmed by David. Bryson may have had this tidbit cut for space, but I remember David Knopfler's active participation on the World team in the famous "Kasparov versus the World" event in 1999. I was on the other side of course :-)
[Update: Changed the link to a longer version of the article on the Chess Scotland webpage. This one mentions the Kasparov vs the World connection.]
Well, damn. Hikaru got knocked out by Ganguly in the first round after being unable to break through with white today. He was joined by Volokitin, the two biggest upsets of the first round so far. Lautier and Bruzon can still steal that honor. Of the eight Americans, three are out, three are through, and two are in tiebreaks.
Motylev's 25-move demolition of Roiz was the most diverting game of the day. Movsesian revived the ancient tradition of the spite check upon being eliminated by Paragua, if the score is correct. Neat, I just now stumbled onto a very cool stalemate trick that was missed by Miroshnichenko. I added it to my report at ChessBase, link above. White Belt #152 contained a puzzle with a very similar theme, so it was fresh somewhere in my mind. Check it out.
No official announcement yet, but it looks like all our positive vibes helped get Alex Yermolinsky into the 2006 US championship. His solid play at the American Open may have had something to do with it too. Kreiman, Goldin, and Tate are the other new qualifiers, the last two from the National Chess Congress. Kudos and cheers, gentlemen. See you and San Diego. It seems that Ippolito and Bercys are now tied for the Qualifier Grand Prix spot with only one qualifying event left, the North American Open, Dec 26-29 in Vegas.
Erstwhile (where have you gone?!) Ninja contributor Jennifer Shahade had an op-ed in the New York Times yesterday on what she calls the current crisis in American chess and how it can look to the success of poker for guidance. Some excerpts since the article will disappear into their pay archives soon. Dirt items on poker here and here. Jen has some comments here.
How can chess save itself? No doubt it would make purists protest, but chess should steal a few moves from poker. After all, in the past few years, poker has lured away many chess masters who realized that the analytical skills they've learned from chess would pay off in online card rooms. ...
Organizers of the 2006 American chess championship, to be held in San Diego, are moving in the right direction. They plan to split the 64-player field into two tournaments, and on the last day, the two winners will face off in a match for the title, guaranteeing a thrilling finale. But they should go even further, and run the championship as a knockout.
Of course, there are limits to how much chess can, or should, learn from poker. A Chris Moneymaker can come out of nowhere to win a poker championship, but an unknown will never beat Topalov in a single game. Because there is no luck in chess, gambling at tournaments is unfeasible - after all, why would an amateur with no chance to win contribute to a chess pot? ...
But if more exciting tournaments lead to more television coverage, big sponsors and money will follow. While chess may not have poker's illicit glamour, it does enjoy a reputation as symbolic of intelligence and good taste. With a few tweaks, chess can compete with poker.
But we need to move fast before we lose a generation of chess talent. An average poker professional can earn six figures and become a television personality, but Nakamura, the biggest American chess hope since Fischer, cannot. To raise the stature of chess in America, we'll have to do what chess players are best at - calculate many moves ahead.
No doubt chess can learn from poker and any other successful sport. The danger is confusing the advantages and disadvantages of different sports. Chess cannot compete with poker on poker's terms, or with a few tweaks. Poker's remarkable boom on TV, online, and everywhere else comes from one thing: money and lots of it in every aspect of the process. Not only can an amateur compete for serious cash, but all the PR starts with the massive gambling industry, which bankrolls everything from TV shows to books and magazines. Chess has no such sugar-daddy, or any wealthy party that will directly benefit from chess becoming more popular.
Chess is difficult and has a small base. Changes in format, scoring, and time control will not change this. (FIDE's "exciting" rapid knockouts got less publicity than San Luis, for example.) Poker is several factors easier to play and to understand for spectators. I've been watching the 2005 poker world championship on ESPN and even if you don't know how to play you know the odds and who won immediately. Bluffing and money keep it interesting.
This isn't to say chess TV is impossible, but the key isn't live coverage, it's top-quality post-production. The excellent poker events on TV are edited and voiced over to create an hour of action from hundreds of hours of mostly boring poker. The entire US chess championship could be similarly boiled down to two or three hours of fast-paced key moments with plenty of player personality and snappy commentary. (This also means burying the chess itself, its complexity and beauty. But we'll watch anyway.) But even this requires a large, risky investment and there's no casino industry for us. (I wanted to produce a video package of the 2005 championship for ChessBase Magazine or for DVD, but my video pro girlfriend dumped me shortly after the event, taking the footage and expertise with her. Oops.)
The FIDE World Cup in Khanty-Mansyisk, Russia (Siberia) is underway. It's a 128-player knock-out, two-game mini-matches with tiebreaks on the third day. Time control is a speedy 40 in 90' then g/15'+30". Apart from the $80,000 first prize (after the 20% FIDE tax) 10 players will qualify for the second stage of the new FIDE world championship cycle, the 16-player candidates matches. As scheduled those lead to four players going to a final world championship tournament where they meet the top four finishers from San Luis. Yes, this last stage is as idiotic as it sounds. 128 players battling it out for four spots while four get a free ride? Tough qualification that ends in a trivial round robin? Welcome to FIDEWorld.
Anyway, the first round was full of the upsets that fans love and hate. They give us something to chatter about but cutting the best players out early is depressing in a world championship event. Shirov gave up a half point, Ponomariov did so with white. Mamedyarov, fresh from winning the world junior, was the first upset loss, taken down by the Kazakh IM Ibraev. The underrated Chinese flexed their muscles with a win by Li over Vallejo Pons and Hungary's Cao beat Volokitin. Ganguly beat Nakamura to put the hurt on US (and Ninja) chances. Kamsky smoothly beat Zhao. Akopian forfeited against Lane in a no-show.
Games are up in PGN at TWIC. The youngest participant, Magnus Carlsen, beat Azmaiparashvili. Is Vaganian the oldest player at 54? The only female player, women's world champion Antoaneta Stefanova, lost to Ivan Sokolov. The eight American players made an even score on the day. It wasn't much of a day for the LatAm underperros. Granda Zuñiga, Lima, Milos, Vazquez, Matamoros, Needleman, and Flores all lost. Bruzon and Vescovi won. Early contender for move of the day was 32..Be6! by Pantsulaia in his win against Milov. Ugliest loss was probably Minasian blowing a drawn "wrong bishop" endgame against van Wely after inspired defense. 70.g4 was a simple draw. (72..h6! was sweet though.) Damn fast time control. Inarkiev-Khalifman was a wild one to check out (34.Ra1?!?)
Only eight months behind the curve(s), the de facto chess guy at the NY Times, Dylan Loeb McLain, has an item today on women chessplayers and physical attractiveness. Nothing new if you survived the epic thread linked to above started by an item by Jen Shahade, who is quoted in the Times piece. The beauty contest site run by several GMs, which I thought defunct, is brought up again.
Men like looking at pretty women and combining it with chess is just an excuse to do so. Many women enjoy being admired by men and throughout history many of them have managed to make a buck at it too. In other words, nothing new. I'm not a fan, but it only bugs me when it gets in the way of the chess. It's an old and interesting discussion, but please read through Jen's item and the comments to it before reinventing the wheel here.
This allows me to drop in an item four people sent in last week from a Chilean news site. There's a new cafe in the middle of Santiago with scantily clad women who wait tables and occasionally dance. Nothing new so far. But they are also available to play board games, including chess, against the patrons. If the customer loses he has to buy an overpriced drink or two. If he wins she, dances. (From the description, this wagering system allows them to avoid some types of blue laws about caberet clubs.) One of the women is described as being quite strong. In case you can't read Spanish, here's the link to the photo gallery you were looking for.
The chess blog of Clint Ballard is new and brief and incorporates the provocative, the interesting, and the erroneous. The modestly named "Ballard Antidraw Point System" would be just another suggestion on the high pile of ways to make chess more "exciting" but Ballard, as he puts it, is putting his money where his mouth is by putting together a tournament using this radical scoring system. Dec. 10-11 on Bainbridge Island across the Sound from Seattle.
There was an article on the event in his local paper, the Bainbridge Island Review, with more info. The direct link doesn't seem to work, but if you go to the paper's homepage and search for 'chess' it's the first item on the results page.
None of the slugfest articles seem to address the main problem with using such heavily weighted scoring systems in open events: cheating. A three point swing makes arranging results very tempting in the final rounds when thousands of dollars are on the line. It also makes pairings crucial because a player with more blacks has more potential points, a dramatic imbalance. Beyond that, giving black draw odds in every game turns chess into a circus, which is exactly what Ballard wants, boasting that White will have to "play like a madman." The less mad suggestion of giving black .6 for a draw and white .4 has been mooted many times.
I'll file this under the "fun variants that trivialize the game" along with shuffle chess. I'm still very much in favor of move minimums, which eliminate short draws (the real problem) and also produce more decisive games. Corsica/Sofia rules are a good place to start. There's nothing wrong with fooling around with goofy systems like "BAPS" in amateur events, especially if you're going to run your own tournament. I wouldn't want to see anything this radical widely implemented, but most of us would be entertained by seeing it as a side event at Melody Amber or Mainz, for example.
Happy Thanksgiving to all, even those who only consider it a weird American thing. It was always interesting to explain to friends around the world why we have a holiday based on food. Not that most American holidays aren't. (Okay, Valentine's Day and Halloween aren't really holidays.) So take a break from the gluttony and give some chess thanks in the comments.
I'm thankful that despite all the political BS we've had a ton of good top-level chess. Instead of the usual three, maybe four, top events, we'll have had seven or eight by the end of this year. Linares, the Mtel and San Luis were all memorable. And all topped by Topalov, including a fitting shared first with Kasparov in Linares. We can be thankful someone stepped up and picked up the slack with The Garry away from the board. Thank you, Veselin!
And I haven't hit the potent eggnog yet, but I probably won't have time to post after festivities begin so I'll get maudlin now. Thanks to all the subscribers, contributors, readers, comment crazies, and everyone else out there. There are now over 200,000 visits here every month. You have turned this blog into a tool for turning public knowledge and opinion into real change. I raise my roast turkey leg in salute. (But keep your mitts off the stuffing.)
First off, the official site for the Morelia International Chess Festival is now up in Spanish and English. Have they been taking web design classes with the wizards who put this up for the USCF awhile back? (¡Señor Cuchi, estoy a su servicio, llámame!) Anyway, it works. The festival, as previewed last week, includes the first half of the Linares supertournament. The seven confirmed players listed are the same as guessed at except with Aronian for Akopian, not that we'd notice. Kamsky, mentioned in at least one report, isn't there. They have one spot left. Who will it be? If they don't have Anand or Kramnik already it's because they can't afford them, which is sad for the first Linares of the post-Kasparov era.
Then there is the nine-round swiss international open. It has a prize fund of $158,000 and runs Feb. 20-28. The first prize is $50,000. With so much cash in play - and with travel and hotel being offered to some players - and the dates so close to the US Championship, clearly something had to be done so the players who really want to play in both events can do so without HG Wells.
From what I understand, they moved the Morelia event up one day and the opening ceremony of the US Championship has been moved back a day to March 1 with the first round now on the second. No date changes for the event, but the school visit day (Mar. 8, now the 13th) has been moved to the end of the tournament to make room. (Players can choose to do the schools thing on the 1st or the 13th.) So rounds 4-9 are played consecutively. It wasn't precisely a free day anyway since the players have to get up early to visit schools, although meeting kids is less tiring than another game. This is doing a good thing for American players at slight harm to the event; I'd say it's a good move. This way there is a day for travel from Morelia to San Diego, although it will have to be snappy. Let us know if you figure out a good travel plan because I expect to be making the trip myself. The official announcement will come out after Thanksgiving weekend and the US Championship website will then be updated.
Of course this bumps the Morelia Open further into the massive Aeroflot Open, which runs Feb. 8-16. There should be a special Phileas Fogg prize for anyone who tries to play in all three, apart from the frequent flyer miles. Shabba?
I just updated the US Championship website with the semifinalists of the "State Champion of Champions" event. On December 3-4 the final four will play for the golden ticket to San Diego (actually you pay your own air fare). These matches are two games at g/60 and are played on the ICC. See the event page link above for game times. The four finalists are Ginsburg of Arizona, Zilberstein of Northern California, Denton of Mississippi, and Florean of Michigan. Kudos, gentlemen.
We all know that chess programs play brilliantly in tactical complications and not nearly as well in other phases of the game. For openings they rely on databases of human games and professional opening book makers. For endgames they access tablebases, dozens, even hundreds, of gigabytes of databases that allow them to play simple endgames perfectly and improve overall endgame play significantly.
Great strides have been made in recent years in addressing middlegame blind spots as well. Closed positions are still problematic, as are openings with many exchanges. Both of these trends were on display in the second round of the Bilbao Human-Machine tournament in northern Spain. The most notable game by far was Ponomariov-Fritz, which exhibited progress against some stereotypes before reaffirming others.
As this on-site ChessBase report mentions, Fritz had a winning position against Ponomariov before blundering into a lost endgame. (This preceded by Ponomariov forgetting the en passant rule?) A passed pawn was beyond its horizon and it happily won two pieces for a rook before realizing the pawns were too strong to stop. What I don't understand about the ChessBase item is that it misinterprets the start of the game and leaves out some interesting information about Fritz's blunder.
The report says that Fritz sacrificed its b-pawn in a position where it got no compensation and that White's win should have been "just technique" before Ponomariov's blunder on move 31. I'll agree it was a dubious sacrifice, but they don't credit how incredibly well Fritz played the position. Even before Ponomariov's slip, which should have lost, it would have been one of the more remarkable computer games on record. White was left practically without moves and the position was probably not worse for Black before the double blunder. Fritz's play with the h-pawn and on the c-file were very human-like. No less a computer chess aficionado than Garry Kasparov was very impressed with Black's play in this game.
As for the blunder, Fritz has long had trouble with passed pawns, like most programs. One that has far fewer such difficulties is Shredder, the undisputed endgame king of computer chess. I'm always impressed by how well it evaluates endings – for a computer, although like all machines it is entirely baffled by blockades. Shredder barely considers the losing move Fritz and Junior evaluate as one of the top few moves even after five minutes. After just a few seconds Shredder drops 39..Bc2?? in favor of 39..Qxg3 or 39..Nc4 and never comes back to the bishop move.
Of course you can always find positions that some programs play well and others don't, but this one is more notable than most. The ChessBase explanation is the calculation horizon, so it's interesting that Shredder does not play this move, even viewing it as a bad, in a few seconds. It doesn't see the full winning continuation, however, for over a minute. The key move 43.a5 is what they all miss at first.
I rather lost interest in this when it became apparent that FIDE wasn't involved from the start, but just for the sake of completeness I'll polish off a good weekend away from the blog with links to the latest from Kramnik manager Carsten Hensel and a short reply from FIDE's Makropoulos. I lost interest because I'm interested in combining the resources of FIDE with the classical title of Kramnik with the current top player status of Veselin Topalov. In short, unification.
Kramnik was attempting to poach the FIDE title holder Topalov, which make sense. Why pay 20% to FIDE if you don't have to? Just get Topalov to break his contract with FIDE and you have a ready-made challenger. Topalov, for his part, figured he'd hear what they had to say before talking with FIDE. He could use FIDE as a bargaining chip with Kramnik, saying he needed extra guaranteed money to make it worth his while to break with FIDE and a possible lawsuit.
I'd like to see a match, but FIDE stabbed us in the back with the change to another final tournament instead of a match at the end of their announced cycle. Without that change I would be much less patient with Kramnik not wanting to play under FIDE. But it's more than the change itself, it's the illustration of how this FIDE cannot be trusted. It also shows, again, how short-sighted they are. That Topalov scored +6 in San Luis and is also the world #1 does not mean a double round-robin is a good format for a classical championship. San Luis was a quickie unification attempt and fine for that. But the obvious danger is having a tie for first at +2 and rapid tiebreaks. Boring, inconclusive, and no way to end what is described as a fairly rigorous cycle.
To sum up, life goes on without a Kramnik-Topalov match. The most pressing need is for new leadership at FIDE, a team that understands the importance of a strong world champion and that has the business savvy to reward and keep such a champion in today's commercial world. (The first truly post-Soviet championship immediately fractured FIDE.) We also need players to stand up and take sides and take action. Professional shoulder-shrugging is costing them all money in the long run. Greater prestige for the champion means more publicity for the sport and more sponsors around the world.
Ah Morelia. The beautiful capital of the Mexican state of Michoacan was one of the first places I visited in Mexico before spending a few years in Guadalajara. The twin spires of the cathedral are hard to forget. I was en camino to the smaller Uruapan and then the tiny town of San Juan Nuevo to visit a friend. (And to climb the famous Paracutin volcano.) Chess wasn't much to be found, although I later became the two-time blitz champion of the Tlaquepaque Chess Club, membership 13. (Yes, that's me on the right with long hair and unfortunate-if-wispy moustache. Blame the tequila.)
Morelia is soon to be put on the chess map in a big way, as San Luis, Argentina was last month. As rumored for months, the 2006 Linares supertournament is going to be divided between Linares and the Mexican city. I first heard that perhaps the Morelia phase was going to serve as a qualifier, but that is not the case. Leontxo Garcia, muy macho Spanish chess journalist for El Pais, recently reported the details. The first half of the eight-player double round robin will take place in Mexico Feb. 17-26, the second at its traditional home in Linares, Spain Mar. 3-12, no doubt at the trusty Hotel Anibal.
Mexican contacts tell me there will be two other tournaments running alongside the elite show. One is a GM open, which I've heard has been recruiting American Grandmasters, which may complicate things for the US Championship because of the dates. (Run by Jose Cuchi of New York Open fame?) They say they expect over 100 GMs and a prize fund of 165,000 euros with a 50,000 first prize. Yow. We've been scoping out plane routes and there are flights to LA and Houston, but not direct to San Diego. (As far as I have found online, but a travel agent is a good idea.) There will also be a Mexican Open for players rated over 2300.
One Mexican report even gives a potential field for the main event, not confirmed. They list Topalov, Leko, Svidler, Ivanchuk, Bacrot, Akopian, Kamsky, Vallejo Pons. [Gata posts below that this is the first he's heard of it so this is a very tentative list indeed. And why no Anand, as several ask?] It's weird to see even a hypothetical Linares field without Kasparov's name in it. I'm loving the LatAm surge going on these days and I hope even more strong young players result. I'll definitely be headed to Morelia if I can figure out the flights to the US Championship. It killed me not to be able to go to San Luis in my old home of Argentina, but this time I shouldn't have any books to finish writing. Viva Mexico!
America's Foundation for Chess (AF4C) and the Internet Chess Club (ICC) have teamed up to again bring a special US Championship qualifying event. It's the State Champion of Champions online blitz tournament with the winner going to play in the 2006 championship in San Diego starting Feb. 28. It's being played on the ICC this weekend (Nov 19-20) and next (Dec. 3-4). Here's the announcement and the event rules are lower down on that page. At the bottom I just added the list of players. Three participants were in the 2005 championship: Zilberstein, Kraai, and occasional Black Belt contributor Cyrus Lakdawala, who lives in San Diego.
This event is a terror to organize even though it's online. Just finding out who is a state's champion can be difficult and sometimes there are disagreements about who should go. But there is room to accommodate conflicts because several states never responded. What's up with that? No state federation? No champion? Just lazy? Yeah, I'm talking to you, Kentucky.
The official site of the 2005 FIDE World Cup in Khanty-Mansiysk has been updated and populated with rather unhandy Excel files with the participants list and pairings. Marky-Mark has an html version of the first round pairings on the TWIC homepage. It's 128 vs 1 pairing style (instead of 128 vs 64) so there are plenty of heavy favorites and a few dozen people who will have plenty of time to enjoy the local scenery and the balmy -20C weather. For those unfamiliar with the Celsius scale, -20 is the exact temperature at which your yak freezes.
The first round starts Sunday, Nov. 27. Nobody from San Luis is playing. The top seed is Ivanchuk, followed by Bacrot, Aronian, Grischuk, Shirov, and Gelfand. The time control is the evil FIDE semi-rapid 90'+30". The USA has a remarkable eight players, trailing only Ukraine's 10, China's 9 (!), and Russia's 23. Argentina notches three, dale! Adams isn't there and Short had earlier obligations and couldn't accept his substitute spot, so there are no players representing England. Based on favorites winning, Kamsky would face Zhao Yun, Smirnov, Asrian and Nakamura would face Ganguly, Milov, Gelfand.
New rule: You're not allowed to pick first-round upsets on boards higher than 30; those aren't really upsets. Of course we have to root for everyone who has posted to the Dirt, so we've got the top three Americans (Kamsky, Nakamura, Onischuk), plus Shirov, Sutovsky, Macieja, and Charbonneau. We can toss in Lautier and Needleman by proxy to improve our chances. Go team, go! This makes my upset pick easy: Charbonneau over Dreev. Seeing his name here I realized we haven't seen Shirov in action for a while. If he shakes off the rust he should at least reach the final eight, when the longer matches begin.
An article on an interesting study about a possible cognitive relationship between music and reading skills.
It's that last bit about the brain not being immutable that is most relevant to chess. We usually attribute scholastic improvement in chessplayers to discipline and concentration, as well as "life lessons" about consequences and planning, which are no doubt factors. But the heavy lifting of calculation, memorization, and visualization in chess may improve those skills in a sense deeper than practice. It also lends weight to the conventional wisdom that chess "keeps you sharp," especially as the aging process slows our mental reflexes.
Of course any chessplayer can tell you that the game can temporarily rewire your brain in odd ways too. Playing a lot often leads to imagining completely unrelated interactions (personal, news, etc.) as chess. These brief daydream flashes usually go away after a few weeks of not playing.
The last of the three parties involved is heard from. First we had Kramnik's group the UEP (Universal Event Promotion) saying Kramnik was ready to play Topalov and the money was in place, but FIDE had interfered and screwed things up. Then Topalov's manager, aka KCM (Kaissa Chess Management), said that the match had fallen through because Kramnik had refused to play for unification under FIDE.
Now Makropoulos, Deputy President of FIDE writes in with "match, what match?" (see below) They never saw an official proposal, proposed that the match should be under FIDE (and reminded them about the usual FIDE 20% cut), suggested a ménage à trois meeting and didn't get one, and two days later were informed that Kramnik's side had rejected both the meeting and the idea of holding the match under FIDE. It's not for nothing that the anagram of these three organizations is "Impede, Fuck!" (Or you may prefer "me pick feud" or "if deep muck.")
So Kramnik/UEP want a London/Brissago-style match – outside of FIDE – using the FIDE world championship in San Luis as a qualifier but not played for unification. I guess this really shouldn't surprise, but somehow it does. Unification has always been more of a fan obsession than anything the players or FIDE care about and we forget that sometimes. But Kramnik did say, after San Luis, "Is the long awaited reunification of the chess world finally going to happen? My position is absolutely clear on this: in accordance with the Prague Agreement of 2002 I am prepared to play in a reunification match. I am looking forward to some clarification from Topalov and I hope everything becomes clear in the coming weeks." (This provides a nice doppelganger of Topalov first saying he would only play Kramnik if it wasn't for the title and now saying the exact opposite.)
I'm sure there are some holdouts who would be happy to tell FIDE to take a flying leap and have Topalov – the world (active) #1 and dominant winner of San Luis – play Kramnik in a long match outside of FIDE. This would give the winner decent credibility, but would only widen the schism and do nothing toward building a true classical cycle, one that lets everyone in the world have a shot and that virtually guarantees that the winner has a strong claim to being the world #1.
But I don't think that's what most people want to see. FIDE has announced a classical cycle, although they later screwed it up by swapping the final matches for another San Luis tournament. If Kramnik moves in with FIDE, the long-match tradition goes into a coma. Remember that FIDE has said they will accept challenge matches from 2700+ players, adding a London Rules flavor to the whole mess. This allows the long match (assuming it's long; no formal rules have been issued yet) to survive if a challenger comes up with enough money. It's weird, but what I'm thinking is that if one or two of these matches happen and are big enough, FIDE may ditch the final round-robin, which is doomed to irrelevance.
Or does Topalov think that as things stand now people will remember him any better than Khalifman and Kasimdzhanov? Unless he stays #1 for a while, his FIDE title will prove as flimsy as theirs. We can say similar things about Kramnik. His drawn match with Leko can't be considered more impressive than Topalov's win in San Luis, even if this is apples and oranges. Kramnik hasn't been able to put a cycle together in five years and there is no reason to think that will change now, when FIDE's title is the most credible it's been since 1993. I'd say it's time to come in from the cold, cash in his remaining cred and play this match under FIDE for the unified title. Who cares whether FIDE wants to admit that on paper or not?
[FBF translates a quickie 64 interview with Kramnik here in the comments. But isn't Kramnik the one who has been giving lip service to unification and now refuses to play under FIDE? This is what happens when both sides believe they are champion and that the other must bow down. Nothing we haven't seen before.
I read with surprise the announcement of Universal Events Promotion, together with the statement of GM Vladimir Kramnik, which were trying to hold FIDE culpable for the collapse of the negotiations for a match Topalov-Kramnik.
I would therefore like to clarify the following:
1. FIDE hasn't received yet any official proposal concerning such a match.
2. When we were informed by Mr Danailov, the manager of World Champion V. Topalov, that negotiations were starting I immediately expressed the view that such a match should be for the World Championship Title and it should be organized under FIDE's auspices and in accordance with regulations which everyone should agree.
3. To this direction I suggested a meeting with all parties concerned.
4. To the question of Mr Danailov about FIDE's financial demands, I referred to the relative FIDE regulations which state that FIDE receives a 20% share of or above the prize fund.
Two days ago I was informed by Mr Danailov that the Kramnik side rejected the idea of holding the match within FIDE's authority and the proposal for a meeting of all sides was rejected as well.
After all these developments, it's strange how FIDE can be accused for the collapse of negotiations between UEP, Topalov and Kramnik.
Before today I believed that Kramnik was willing to play a match for the World Championship under FIDE's auspices. Unfortunately, recent developments show that he might not want to return to the official World Chess Championship cycle and is, at the same time, trying to hold FIDE responsible for his decision.
Georgios Makropoulos
FIDE Deputy President
Hoo-boy. Rather remarkably, considering the leak I got two days ago about money from FIDE, this press release (below) from Topalov's manager Silvio Danailov doesn't mention filthy lucre at all. (This backs up Koth's point about the money being FIDE's issue, not Topalov's.) But this is not good news because it turns out they are arguing over something sillier. Unless I'm mistaken, they are saying the match isn't being played because Kramnik wouldn't agree to have the match under the auspices of FIDE.
I don't even understand what that means. Why would Kramnik care? What would he have to give up, a classical title that FIDE hasn't recognized for ten years -- excepting the blip of Prague? What does he care if FIDE doesn't recognize it now? Point #1 of the release doesn't have any content unless they are saying the match didn't happen because Kramnik wants to have a "world champion" sign on the table next to Topalov's and FIDE won't allow it. If he wants a sign that says "Mack Daddy Vlady" on the table, give it to him. Who cares?
#2 says Kramnik's side rejected making the match "an official one under the auspices of FIDE." This requires some explanation. If they play such a title match and Kramnik wins, the lines are unified under FIDE with Kramnik as champ. If he loses, Topalov and FIDE have the whole enchilada. So is this posture because Kramnik wants to keep the classical title out of FIDE's hands at all costs and not put it on the line? That is, no unification? I thought that was the point. My head hurts.
As VladKo mentioned in the comments to the item on the UEP release, Topalov said he would be willing to play a non-title match against Kramnik (why or why not, why would that be a big deal?). "I do not believe we can play for the title because I’ve already won it here in San Luis. A Topalov-Kramnik match for the title is out of question, because FIDE has organised a two-year cycle for the world championship..." But now it's the opposite? Kramnik won't put up his title and Topalov won't play otherwise? I need aspirin.
There's no point in their playing outside FIDE unless Topalov just wants to write a new chapter in the book of schism. He could jump ship for a pile of cash and few would blame him, but it wouldn't be unification. Meanwhile, what is Kramnik's definition of unification if it doesn't include playing under FIDE? Or was he just looking for a money match? (Something fans don't care about, naturally.) It would be a nice show and all, but if it's not for unification, pffft. This brings into relief the paragraph in the UEP doc that reads: "With regard to a possible reunion of both titles the draft contract contained a clause that would have made the unification under the umbrella of the FIDE after conclusion of the contract possible." What, after the match was over? As my Grandma Nita says, that's bassackwards.
We regard Mr. Kramnik as a challenger, and nothing more.
In regard to the UEP press release, we would like shed clarity on several points:
We shall not accept the offer for a Match against Mr. Kramnik due to several reasons:
1. We do not recognise Mr. Kramnik as a champion. The World Champion’s Title belongs by law to FIDE and after his refusal to participate in the official World Championship in San Luis, Mr. Kramnik automatically lost his right to be designated the World Champion. However, by the looks of it, he has decided to seize the title for the rest of his life. Let us remember that he’s only 7th in the World Ranking List, scoring quite mediocre results recently. At the same time, in addition to being the official World Champion, Veselin Topalov is Number 1 in the World Ranking List of 1 January 2006.
2. We proposed to UEP the match to be an official one under the auspices of FIDE. According to the new rules of FIDE due to be published very soon, each grandmaster with ELO of over 2700 can officially invite the World Champion to a match for the title if he provides an appropriate prize fund and pays a 20% charge to FIDE as designated by law. Of course, our proposal to the organizer UEP was rejected.
3. We have never made any preliminary arrangements with UEP. Agreement exists only when there are signed papers; everything else is just words.
In conclusion, we would like to stress once again that the World Champion Veselin Topalov is ready to play the challenger Mr. Kramnik, as well as any other grandmaster with a rating of over 2700 in an official match for the title under the auspices of FIDE.
Silvio Danailov, Manager of the World Champion Vesellin Topalov
A quick look at the list of participants at the Istanbul World Junior Championship confirms that those rich in chess talent get richer. India sent 12 players, two coaches, and four other escorts. Russia has 12 players and four coaches. China, 11 players; Georgia 9; Azerbaijan 7. The Ukraine only sent two, oddly. But that's two more than the United States sent. I've sent out a few emails to find out why; any information out there? (There are six Poles, a girl from England, and an Aussie, so we can't speak of a coalition of the willing to ignore junior chess.)
After six rounds the event is led by Mamedyarov, who won in 2003 and who must be the highest-rated player ever to participate in this event at 2674. I guess he has a lot of free time, or wants to pick up some of the chicks ChessBase keeps running photos of.
Garry Kasparov just left New York for parts west. When the news came out the negotiations for a Kramnik-Topalov match had broken down I mentioned that many have suggested that Kramnik might now come after him. I can see it now: "Garry, I found my to-do list from 2002, it had fallen behind the refrigerator. Right there after "get milk and cigarettes" is "offer Garry Kimovich a rematch". Sorry about that. What are you doing next November?"
Topalov has also expressed interest in a match with Kasparov. Garry's only reply was to joke that there would be no trouble finding sponsorship for either match because someone in Putin's entourage would be glad to put up the money to get Kasparov out of politics and back into chess! He's making a lot of noise lately and in the next week or two will have articles in the Wall St. Journal and Newsweek.
Kasparov also has his column in New In Chess coming up and of course it's about San Luis and the state of the chess world. (I help polish the English of these articles so I get a free preview.) This one tackles world championship history and why Kramnik is no Petrosian. He also goes after FIDE for abandoning the long match, which is perhaps the first thing Kasparov and the ACP have agreed on.
That might not be enough for you to subscribe to NIC, but Kasparov also annotates the wild Leko-Topalov game, the first time he has annotated one of his old rivals' efforts since he retired. Some truly great stuff. I annotated that game for Black Belt and while I didn't do a horrible job, seeing these hundreds of lines and hearing Garry discuss the Najdorf was humbling to say the least. At least I got him to pose in a ChessNinja.com t-shirt, but it was late at night and the poser had eleven o'clock shadow and doesn't want the picture published. Prima donna!
A long press release from Vladimir Kramnik's management in Germany blames Veselin Topalov and FIDE for the breakdown of a proposed match between Kramnik and Topalov. It's a predictably partisan document and there is no way to be sure how closely it resembles reality until we hear from the other side (if then, considering the other side is FIDE). The tone of the credited author, Dortmund organizer Stefan Koth, is to diplomacy what George W Bush is to, umm, diplomacy. I'm expecting replies from FIDE and Topalov's manager Danailov, although I don't expect them to be any less harsh.
Unless there is actual cash on the table (as there apparently was, see below) it would be silly to agree to anything if you are negotiating from a position of strength, as Topalov/FIDE are. (i.e. Kramnik's guys are chasing Topalov, not vice-versa.) The undersigned organization "Universal Event Promotion GmbH" doesn't seem to have any prior existence and uses Koth's address. It's always nice to invent a company or organization so things sound official and respectable. (Kasparov's "World Chess Council" comes to mind.)
Update: Stefan Koth replied quickly below with the following:
My thanks to Stefan. This is going to get more interesting than I thought. The first (brief, off the record) response to me from a FIDE exec said the money mentioned in the UEP press release was "not available" and they would make things clear in a statement. Being FIDE, this is suspect. But after Mr. Koth's confirmation that the funds were available I will retract my statements until hearing details from FIDE and Topalov. I still don't understand why they didn't name the sponsor.
I would like to see a Topalov-Kramnik match just to tie up the loose ends. It would be nice if Topalov and/or FIDE responded with a release that spelled out exactly what would be required for them to accept a match. If not precise dollar amounts (why box yourself in if there might be bids?), at least the guarantee requirements and other details.
Dutch businessman Bessel Kok and Turkish chess federation president Ali Nihat Yazici have formed a ticket for the May, 2006, FIDE presidential elections. (More info on them at ChessBase here.) It's certainly a well-qualified team, and they provide a list of initiatives instead of just saying (note to A. Karpov) "Ilyumzhinov sucks," which, while true enough, is not the best platform.
I'm not in the "anyone but Ilyumzhinov" camp, especially since FIDE has done a few decent things in 2005. Unfortunately, those things were mostly made up of undoing harmful policies started by Ilyumzhinov in the first place. (Disposable champions, semi-rapid time controls) And FIDE has lost interest in commercial sponsorship since the horribly mismanaged FIDE Commerce debacle. To aid your memory, that's when they put a buddy thug in charge of rustling up money and he promptly attacked traditional tournaments.
That I would vote for Bessel and Ali isn't relevant since I don't have a vote; only federations do. If I could vote perhaps I could score some of the boodle the current administration is supposedly laying out around the globe. Sources in Argentina say deals were made all over Latin America in exchange for delegate votes around and during the San Luis championship. Vote buying in FIDE elections is hardly new and wasn't invented in Kalmykia. Nor is it limited to the poorer federations or done purely in cash. Caviar and vodka have proven effective in the past. So can Bessel Kok rally up enough votes to end the Ilyumzhinov era? If yes, you can bet the next world championship won't be held next to a toilet-paper expo in Vegas.
And take Ilyumzhinov with you! This Spanish article in Marca talks with Anatoly Karpov about chess politics and the world championship. Some excerpts edited for brevity:
I'm seriously considering a run for the FIDE presidency. There are two other possible candidates apart from the current president, one of whom is Dutch millionaire Bessel Kok (former president of the Grandmaster Association (GMA)), with whom I share the idea that we must radically change both professional and amateur chess.
The first change that needs to be made is to create a system of competition in which all the best players always participate. Sponsors want big names like Bobby Fischer, Garry Kasparov, Anatoly Karpov... Do you think anyone outside of the chess world knows the names of the players who have won the last few world championships? I think not. The latest systems used to determine the title have been catastrophic and the professional players are paying the consequences: fewer tournaments, worse prizes, etc.
Regarding Topalov: It's hard to know what the best system is to find the champion. The double round-robin with eight players is better than what we had before. Topalov was a deserving winner in San Luis because he had the ambition that the others lacked, he played to win from the start, and he also had a bit of luck in his first game against Peter Leko.
All sounds good, but what about action? I suppose it's too much to ask for concrete proposals when he hasn't formally tossed his hat into the ring yet. But I spend too much time on non-chess politics to have much patience for people who just talk about how the other guy ruined things and how he'd make it all better.
Several people sent this in, and I'd probably have mentioned it even if it were the first time I'd heard it. But this rumor was going around GM chess circles less than a week after San Luis finished, according to a review of my inbox. A GM wrote in then to say that several friends had listened to a San Luis participant suggest that Topalov had received assistance during the games. I discarded this rumor of a rumor for what I should hope are obvious reasons. Now it's back in a form only slightly less scurrilous, in a Bulgarian report of a Hungarian report. The worst of it is the pathetic anonymity of the accuser, if indeed there is one.
An unnamed participant in the World Chess Championship in San Luis, Argentina, has accused Chess King Bulgarian Vesselin Topalov of using unallowed measures to win the title, index.hu reported.
According to the article published on the site the allegations remained secret because of "games behind the curtain." Such allegations, however, are common for the chess world. It is not clear who has raised the allegations against the Chess King, but this man claims that during several games aide Ivan Cheparinov and manager Silvio Danailov have helped Topalov.
The site reports that after each move of Topalov, Cheparinov has used computer analysis of the game and has then secretly signaled the chess king for the next move. Peter Leko has also voiced his suspicions that Topalov has used unfair advantage by sitting on the same place during the entire championship. FIDE however, has not undertaken any measures due to lack of evidence.
Bizarre. I haven't been able to track down the original Hungarian report, perhaps because I can't read Hungarian. I doubt it offers any more information. [Below József provides a link and summary of the original. Predictably opaque.] Topalov's other excellent 2005 results make this rumor blatantly ridiculous. (Or he's the greatest cheater of all time, pulling it off in Linares and Sofia too. No.) As the SNA articles says, wacky allegations are hardly rare in world championship chess. That doesn't mean computer cheating shouldn't be worried about in general, however. As others, including Kasparov, have said, it's worth much more attention than drug testing, if only to cut down on such foolish stories.
Better late than never is the Russian team's new motto. The star-studded, if often underperforming, squad turned things around on the final day of the World Team Championship in Beer Sheva, Israel with a 3.5-0.5 win over the Chinese team that had led the entire way. This gave Russia a half-point victory in the event. The coincidence of scheduling made it more exciting and made China look better than its performance. Russia didn't lose a match; China also lost to Armenia. They use board points instead of match points in this event and China padded its total with a 4-0 win over the Chinese women's team and a 3.5-0.5 win over the US senior team. (Also 3.5-0.5 over Cuba and Georgia.)
For those who were ready to bow down to our new Chinese overlords, the Chinese team scored a combined -3 against traditional powers Russia, Armenia, and Ukraine. If you make a crosstable of just the top four finishers, it's Russia +5, Armenia +1, Ukraine and China -3. Individually the Chinese went +0 -3 against the 2700 club. It was still a great result for the Chinese team, but I'm not ready to give up Chigorin for Sun Tzu just yet. Great results for Bareev (5.5/6) and Morozevich (5.5/7).
As with most team events, this one was marred by several sets of agreed draws. It's tough enough to regulate short draws in individual play, but when team score is more important (not strictly the case here since they used board points, one thing in their favor) than individual scores another layer is added. Another good reason to legislate minimum move rules. Either that or officially allow arranged draws in team events so they don't have to play these 12-move farces.
It has gone unremarked as far as I can tell, even at ChessBase (which I'll fix in a bit if they are snoozing on the job). 20 years ago to the minute, at 21:55 Moscow time on November 9, 1985, Garry Kasparov became World Chess Champion. That officially began a new era that his exciting chess had already began to usher in. I remember not finding out until seeing a small note in the paper the next day. I'll put up some pics and games in an item on ChessBase in time for 9:55pm NY time at least...
Just talked to Garry for a while. He sounds both proud and melancholy remembering those days. Amazing he was only 22. He doesn't seem much older than me now, just six years, so it's strange to remember when he was the new champion chess god and I was still in high school. I'll include his comments in the ChessBase.com item I'll put up if Frederic doesn't do something. Freddy has all sorts of great materials to use so I hope he's doing something.
Links to coverage including video and game notes in the comments. Thanks everyone.
The important culture and news magazine The Atlantic has a nice piece on Garry Kasparov's political life in Russia this month. He's been out stumping in the hinterlands off and on all year, no small task in a country with 11 time zones.
Low-budget film about a small-time faux Fischer making a comeback. Looks dumb and it will probably never be at a theater near you, or anyone, but hey. At least they could have avoided capitalizing F4. [Tip from Kat.]
A knock-out, actually. Swiss #1 Vadim Milov scored a big upset in the Corsica event when Vishy Anand melted down against him in the blitz playoff final. Before that they swapped wins with black. It's not to be chalked up to luck as Milov took out Polgar, Naiditsch, and Almasi on the way, not to mention qualifying from the Open in the first place. This broke Anand's streak of winning the event every year since the island of Corsica was formed from lava.
But Anand played one of the most remarkable games of the event when he knocked out Mickey Adams with a tremendous sacrifice. In the diagram, seven moves after a knight sac on move 28, Anand played 35...Bf5!, leading to two rooks versus a queen endgame he won. Brilliant stuff.
It says much of Anand's hierarchy that his losing in the final of a KO looks like a setback. Same goes for his equal 2-3 in San Luis. His high-quality play is so effortless that it looks like we should expect +2 as a baseline, which isn't really fair. It will be interesting to see if he can keep pace with Topalov, who has yet to prove such consistency. Corus will be quite a show.
A new 500-page book by researcher José Antonio Garzón names Valencia, Spain, as the cradle of the modern game. The book is titled ""El regreso de Francesch Vicent. La Historia del nacimiento y la expansión del ajedrez moderno". ("The return of Francesch Vicent. The history of the birth and expansion of modern chess.") The author's premise is that Valencia is where the queen's powers expanded at the end of the 15th century, changing the game forever. Vicent published his treatise on the game in 1495.
This comes on the heels of Yalom's "Birth of the Chess Queen" though I can't say how much their conclusions jibe, having only thumbed through the Yalom book. Karpov writes an intro to the Garzón book - saying that the new evidence is overwhelming, putting an end to 500 years of waiting and conjecture - and will appear at the launch with the author next Monday in Valencia.
Apologies to Cheers fans. We can welcome the US's newest International Master. Welcome him back, that is. FIDE has rejected Ben Finegold's title application and his name does not appear on the list of titles approved by the latest board. There were several irregularities beyond his control with his norm from the Martinovsky Memorial. He says the norm will likely be tossed, so it's back to square two. Boo, hiss, weep.
The US Championship in February will be another chance. National championships get special consideration for norms since of course you don't expect to be facing people from other federations, usually a requirement. Making sure norms are possible is one of the format constrictions on the AF4C when organizing the championship. Last year six players got FIDE norms, including four IM norms.
[Yes, I know there are still errors in the commenting system. Going to take another shot at it tonight.]
I love writing headlines, really I do. Anyway, US GM Gata Kamsky has confirmed that he will play in the 2005 World Cup in Khanty-Mansiysk starting on November 27. This is good news and it's a shame FIDE saw fit to complicate things by radically changing the rules at the last minute. Kamsky has said he will file a formal protest.
The pairings won't be released until November 24. That's late considering that of the 128 spots the only ones yet to be filled are the two from the Chilean zonal (Nov. 13), five from the African zone (Nov. 15) and four more Ilyumzhinov wildcards. Since player contracts were due the other day they should be able to fill in from the reserve list now. Kasparov and Topalov aren't playing, Kramnik is almost certainly not, though for no good reason. I don't see why the classical champ can't try to poach in FIDE fields without abdicating. Anand, Morozevich, and Svidler have a free ride to the 2007 final but are free to play hors concours for cash and frostbite.
The latest volley in the world championship cycle rule change is a comprehensive summary from FIDE's Makro. It sounds like we're stuck with tournaments instead of matches, at least until they change their mind again. So we are once again without prospects for a traditional classical cycle. It's sad to see them give up on a long match without even trying. Their inability to put together a Kasimdzhanov-Kasparov match no doubt influenced the move, combined with the success (still not defined, though I'd like to agree) of San Luis. I still believe that a clear champ and a qualified challenger could find sponsorship for a long match, which would get more attention than any tournament. Trivializing the title wasn't successful with the knockouts and fans will turn on the round-robin the first time we see it decided by rapid tiebreaks.
I wasn't blaming the ACP for the rule changes, only for not keeping its membership informed of its talks with FIDE. Perhaps most alarming is this Makro comment: "when the previous version of the regulations for the 2005-2007 cycle were announced, FIDE requested the opinion of the top players in order to implement any applicable suggestions during the congress in Dresden. FIDE received no reply or suggestion at all, except for the proposals of the ACP."
If true it reflects player apathy, last clearly seen when almost no one showed up for the attempts to set up a GM steering committee in Bled in 2002 under the Prague Agreement. If half-true, as I suspect, we're left wondering how they chose the players to ask and why these procedures can't be open and organized. I take their point that placing second or third in the final tournament should mean something, but it shouldn't mean automatic entry into the same level next time around.
Also, see below for Gata Kamsky's reply to FIDE's earlier statement, which I thought was going to be put up at ChessBase but can't find there. It looks like Kamsky may become FIDE's worst nightmare: a 2700 lawyer! Was FIDE within its rights to change the rules of an event after players qualified for it?
Dear Mr. Sand,
As far as where I stand, I have obtained a right to play in a world cup by virtue of qualification in officially announced qualification tournaments and neither you, nor FIDE can deny me this right to play as there was created an implied contract between FIDE and players once FIDE had announced the start of 2005-2007 cycle. When I sent back signed Player's Undertaking, I have only reiterated the original terms of the contract to which I've agreed long ago, by virtue of playing in the Argentina Continental Zonal. However, FIDE made significant and material changes to this contract by changing the regulations for the world championship cycle, and in doing so breached it. As a chess professional, I do not wish to accept the October 24th changes made by FIDE.
Unfortunately and as you're very well aware, chess players are not rich people who can afford legal costs of enforcing contracts, especially against such large and powerful entity as FIDE's Executive Board, and taken together with my limited resources, there is not much I can do. But I find your and FIDE's Executive board position a strong-arm and heavy handed approach.
Once again, I have sent my signed Player's undertaking to re-confirm my readiness and willingness to participate in the world cup under the original rules and regulations as were stated by FIDE, on their website, and published everywhere, before the qualification tournaments began for the 2005-2007 world chess championship cycle. AND, I do not accept changes made by FIDE on October 24th.
I have already bought tickets and made hotel reservations with the world cup organizers and fully intend to go play there, and as I stated before, any attempt by FIDE's Executive Board to remove my right will be met with fierce resistance on my part to protect my interests.
Respectfully, Gata Kamsky
For no reason other than that useful underpromotions in serious play make me happy. (See game below.) And to chastise the World Team Championship for dropping a team of 2300-2400 players into the event. Many of the world's best are playing Beer Sheva. A Chinese women's team has been put in with them. Even more bizarrely, the Chinese didn't even send their top female players. Of their top six on the rating list they sent one?! This instead of the Euro Team champion Netherlands? Wacky, even if they upset someone for a 1-3 loss.
Shen Yang (2326) - Zhou Jianchao (2516) [B92]
World Team Ch Beer Sheva ISR (1), 01.11.2005
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 e5 7.Nb3 Be7 8.Bg5 Nbd7 9.a4 h6 10.Be3 b6 11.0-0 Bb7 12.f3 Rc8 13.Qd2 0-0 14.Rfd1 Qc7 15.Rac1 Qb8 16.Nd5 Nxd5 17.exd5 f5 18.Qb4 a5 19.Qb5 Qc7 20.f4 exf4 21.Nd4 fxe3 22.Ne6 Bf6 23.Nxc7 Rxc7 24.c3 Bc8 25.b4 Ra7 26.Qc6 Be5 27.g3 g5 28.Rc2 Kh8 29.Bf3 Ba6 30.bxa5 bxa5 31.Be2 Bxe2 32.Rxe2 f4 33.Rf1 Rg8 34.gxf4 gxf4+ 35.Rg2 Rf8 36.Rg6 Kh7 37.Rxd6 Nf6 38.Rb1 Rg7+ 39.Kf1 f3 40.Re6 e2+ 41.Kf2 Ng4+ 42.Ke1 Bxh2 43.Kd2 Bf4+ 44.Kc2 Ne5 45.Qc5 Rg2 46.Re1 Rf7 47.Qd4 f2 48.Qe4+ Rg6 49.Rxg6 fxe1N+ 50.Kb3 Nxg6 51.Qxe2 Rb7+ 52.Ka2 Re7 53.Qd1 Ng2 54.c4 Ne3 55.Qd3 Bd6 56.Qd4 Nc2 57.Qb6 Bc7 58.Qf6 Be5 59.Qb6 Nb4+ 60.Kb3 Nxd5 61.cxd5 h5 62.Qd8 Rb7+ 63.Kc2 Rb2+ 64.Kc1 Rb8 65.Qxa5 h4 66.Qa7+ Kh6 67.Qd7 Ra8 68.Kc2 Ra6 69.Qg4 Rd6 70.Qe4 Kg7 71.Qf3 Rf6 72.Qg4 Rf2+ 73.Kb3 Rb2+ 74.Kc4 Rc2+ 75.Kb5 Rc3 76.Qd1 Rc7 77.Qg4 Rc3 78.Qd1 Rc8 79.Qg4 Rh8 80.Qd7+ Kf6 81.Qc6+ Kg5 82.d6 h3 83.d7 h2 84.a5 Rd8 85.Qg2+ Kf6 86.Qf3+ Ke7 87.a6 Rxd7 88.Kb6 Bd4+ 89.Kb5 Ne5 90.Qe4 Ke6 91.Qh4 Bg1 92.Qh6+ Kd5 93.Qh3 Ra7 94.Qg2+ Kd4 95.Qh3 Ke4 96.Qh4+ Kf5 97.Qh5+ Kf4 98.Qh4+ Ng4 99.Qh3 Ra8 100.Qh7 Bd4 101.Qc7+ Kg5 102.Qc6 Rh8 103.Qd5+ Kg6 104.Qe4+ Kf7 105.Qd5+ Kg6 106.Qe4+ Kg5 107.Qd5+ Kh4 108.Qg2 Rb8+ 109.Kc4 Rb1 110.Kxd4 h1Q 111.Qxh1+ Rxh1 112.Kc5 Ra1 113.Kb6 Ne5 114.a7 Nc6 0-1
I was hoping that if waited long enough ChessBase would post this press release so I wouldn't have to. French organizer Leo Battesti has been endorsed by the French chess federation in his run for FIDE president in the May 2006 elections. The rest of the release is pure happytalk, nothing concrete at all. Let's hope we see a platform of what he would do differently. As chessplayers know, change for the sake of change is playing without a strategy. Bad positions can always get worse, even if it's hard to imagine in this case.
This is the first formal hat toss I've seen. Has Karpov said anything committal? Don't think so. There are rumors that a certain Euro business-type with long-standing chess connections is considering a run, but you didn't read that here.
