Corus 2007 r13

Whatever anyone says about Topalov, they can't say that he tries his hardest to win every single game, sometimes to his own detriment when other players, such as Kramnik, play for the draw and don't take any risk whatsoever...

People say Kramnik plays proper and perfect chess... maybe that's true, but that sort of play leads to 90percent draws and very boring games....

I'd rather have a champion like Topalov that fights and creates complications, sometimes giving himself an inferior position, in order to create imbalances and chances for a win.

Playing like Kramnik for a draw in every game is easy... i don't think he is brilliant for that, just lazy.

What, did he accidentally win twice at Corus? Tell that to Shirov and Anand. He plays for a draw with black, just like just about every other top GM on the planet. Anyway, let's not start the arguments about style and preference all over again. These discussions are as vulnerable to logic as creamy vs crunchy peanut-butter.

Thanks for reminding that they start earlier today!
Just one about style: to me, detecting these slightest inaccuracies in a game is not boring, but much more difficult for an amateur to understand than flashy attacks, which I like of course as well. Once I learned about it, a new galaxy of possibilties in chess opened up to me. Btw, turning 40 this year, I have learned that lesson from Karpov. And to me Kasparov is also the alltime best, because he was a universal player, marvellous in all styles. Guess he learned that from Karpov as well, sometimes the hard way. ;-)

The round 4 game in Gibralter between Akopian and Ippolito looks absolutely ridiculous. Is the score just wrong?

[Event "Gibtelecom Masters"]
[Site "Gibraltar Gibraltar"]
[Date "2007.01.26"]
[Round "4.11"]
[White "Akopian, Vladimir"]
[Black "Ippolito, Dean"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteElo "2700"]
[BlackElo "2397"]
[PlyCount "47"]
[EventDate "2007.01.23"]
[Source "MonRoi"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e3 e6 5. Nf3 Nbd7 6. Bd3 dxc4 7. Bxc4 b5 8. Bd3
Bb7 9. O-O a6 10. e4 c5 11. d5 c4 {Qc7} 12. dxe6 fxe6 13. Nd4 Nc5 14. Be3 e5
15. Nf5 Ncxe4 16. Nxe4 Nxe4 17. Qg4 Nf6 18. Qh3 g6 19. Bg5 gxf5 20. Bxf6 Rg8
21. Rfe1 {Qc6 Rxe5} Kf7 22. Be4 Qxf6 {Rxf5 Bxe4 Rxf6 Kxf6} 23. Qh4 {Kf5 Qxh7}
Rg6 {Re1 Rd8} 24. Qh5 {Rg5 Qf7} 1-0

I'm not hoping, but I'm predicting that Topalov, Aronian and Radjabov will share the first place.

If the three share first place, who wins on points ?

No rematch, we will not see interesting games and scandals between kramnik and topa

http://www.veselintopalov.net/article/no-rematch-topalov-kramnik

I hope that is not true and we see something different on fide website

Akopian,Vladimir - Ippolito,Dean Gibtelecom Masters 2007 1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nc3 Nf6 4 e3 e6 5 Nf3 Nbd7 6 Bd3 dxc4 7 Bxc4 b5 8 Bd3 Bb7 9 0–0 a6 10 e4 c5 11 d5 c4 12 Bc2 Qc7 13 dxe6 fxe6 14 Nd4 Nc5 15 Be3 e5 16 Nf5 Ncxe4 17 Nx4 Nxe4
18 Qg4 Novelty! 19…Nf6 19 Qh3 g6 20 Bg5 gxf5 21 Bxf6 Rg8 22 Rfe1 Qc6? Losing. 22…Rxg2+ 23 Kf1 Rxf2+ 24 Kxf2 Qb6+ 25 Kf1 Qxf6 unclear. 23 Rxe5+ Kf7 24 Be4 Qxf6 25 Rxf5 Bxe4 26 Rxf6+ Kxf6 27 Qh4+ Kf5 28 Qxh7+ Rg6 29 Re1 Rd8 30 Qh5+ Rg5 31 Qf7+ 1–0
Corrected score.

Rematches are bad by definition as they exclude all others from the title. Over and over again: we need a good qualification system!

So Beryllo, you suggest Topa should go to Elista for qualifications?

Marca, do you think that FIDE under Kirsan had or has a good qualification system?

I am not sure, but Mexico without Topalov will be half as good. He shows he is N1 and deserves the title. Not only the title but also a bit respect from chessbase.

The kid issues the Catalan. Is he kidding the great Topalov ?

lol :)
In the worst case this will probably be a draw for topa and a first place. It looks optimistic.

Svidler again in troubles very fast. This guy has collapsed after his "win" over Topa. Weird psychological effect.

Today's feature presentation is "Nightmares from Elista, Part 2: the Return of Game 10"! Spooky... and perhaps unwise on Topalov's part.

Most intesting games out of balance by Aronian and Berg (B Group). Would prefer Black already in Radja-Topa. Btw, a win is a win is a win is a win.

"No rematch, we will not see interesting games and scandals between kramnik and topa"

Thank God! Well, I didn't think even FIDE would try to insist on this match to happen. But it's a relief now that the decision is actually taken.

yes, very strange, maybe Toplaov has improved something after that f6

Even without ..f6 Topalov could hope for no more than draw. Yeah, he probably would have got it, and now he has had plenty of time to look at the position. But he can't enter that if he wants to win. Is there really an ambitious alternative sooner?

Topalov said about 24..f6 ??, "Just a bad blunder. There were so many pieces on board. Really, I just blundered."... What did you overlook? Was it Nd7 or something deeper? - My oversight was a bit deeper, but it doesn't really matter. I think I had to take on b5, and there is nothing to worry about. This was my initial idea, but then I decided 24...f6 was interesting, too." ... "I decided that 24...f6 is a more complex move compared to taking on b5. After 24... Bxb5 White has certain pressure in the resulting endgame. I glanced at the clock, saw the opponent running behind on the clock, and decided to play the sharpest move. "

In the C Group, ctrl + v has fallen at the last hurdle. Kudos to Krasenkov for keeping the pressure on the whole way through (and of course to N Kosintseva for killing him off when he overpressed)

Can her sister do the same to Eljanov in the B group? There seems a huge gap to the A group (see Motylev & Carlsen) and it is difficult to see how any of the contenders could make an impression next year. Maybe (Betty) Bu would have the best chance.

Since no one else is commenting- there seems to be a Tiviakov playing actively alert! Seem to remember him doing this in last year's event too. Aronian seesm to have things under control.

am i correct on this? there is now just one world champ, kramnik. no more fide champ AND classical champ, just one.
kramnik has agreed to play in mexico and put his one and only unified title on the line. so, unless kramnik wins, the winner of the TOURNAMENT will be the new and only chess champ. after that we go to qualifiers to determine challenger who will play against the winner of mexico in a match.
although i hope kramnik wins so that he later retains or losses the title in a match, i'd never pick him to win a tournament.
is all this correct???

The Aronian-Tiviakov game is hilarious. Aronian is a genius - he beats Tiviakov by totally unbalancing the position and inviting Tiviakov to attack, and then showing Tiviakov that Tiviakov's vision is 20-100.

Topalov will be the exchange and a pawn down, or am I missing something?

well..well..so Topa had a novelty in store..chess is the art of opening preparation

Could someone explain why Radjabov declined queen for R+B ?

Exciting draw!!!!!!
And exciting tournament if you look at Topa's games. Howcome they will keep him out of Mexico? He brings all the excitement in chess.

Kramnik wants to impress with a fighting game in the last moment/round. Let's root for him for the sake of encouraging a character change.

Nepo finishes only second? Who would've thought.

Svidler lost in 32 moves. He was in difficulty right from the opening, another dubious novelty in Najdorf by Svidler.

Peace...

Marca, Topalov has not proven that "he deserves the title", because he clearly does not. He may have established that he is still the top tournament player in the world, but no, he does not deserve the title after losing the match for it. As for respect from Chessbase, he deserves more of this once he starts carrying himself with more dignity and stops acting like a foolish puppet of Danailov.

Hotep,

Maliq

Why didn't Shirov take the Knight at f5? Crafty says now that White has the advantage...

because Nh5 followed by Rg3

I don't get Svidler's resignation - there was Qxa8 and Qb1 and he still had passers on the queenside.

"I don't get Svidler's resignation - there was Qxa8 and Qb1 and he still had passers on the queenside."

I will spot you your one passer on the queenside for my 4 connected passers on the kingside, in your Qxa8 line. Material matters.

Kramnik wins! Tactical, but very, very clean as well...

Of course Black was better - but the point of chess is to fight, not to give up immediately one gets the impression he is worse.

Did Shirov just blunder with more time in the clock?

it has been self punishing from Svidler in his last 2 games, guilt over the undeserved point he got in the game with Topa

"And exciting tournament if you look at Topa's games. Howcome they will keep him out of Mexico? He brings all the excitement in chess."

Yes, his chess is exciting. They do not keep him out of Mexico, but he did so by signing the contract for the Elista match before it started. Would you complain that Kramnik won't be there, if he lost the final rapid game? Btw, did not like this passage in the contract, but well, it is FIDE...

Topalov may or may not deserve the world title but he does keep the No.1 position in the FIDE rating list. I think after Corus he has also distanced himself even further from Anand and Kramnik.

I think we may enter for 2-3 years a period as 2000-2005 when Kasparov had no world title but he was considered by all as the No.1 player based on rating.

Is Carlsen going to get his first Win in this tournament or can Shirov hold?

Now it is getting hotter!!!!!! topalov's site says danailov will send fide to the court?

Update 2:
Silvio Danailov’s response came immediately after the game of Topalov finished. He said, as reported by the Bulgarian NTV, that the decision of FIDE will be seen one more time in the international sports court in Lozana.

Excellent chess by Aronian! He needed to win and he did it, after unbalancing the position. I also believe the tiebreak criteria by using SB favours him, so he will take the trophy (unless they use more wins as criteria).

People don't talk a lot about him (he keeps his low profile image) but he is slowly consolidating his place in the top. He wasn't grandmaster at 14, or 15 like other guys out there, but he wins titles; he was a World Champion U20, he won the World Cup in 2005 (that in other circunstances would be the FIDE World Championship), he is the "unofficial" Chess960 champion, he won the strongest classical tournaments last year (Linares and Tal Memorial), the Olympiad with Armenia and now Corus ... I hope he keeps his image, his personality and works hard, because this is the kind of players that chess needs, less talking, less conspiracy theorists and more playing.

This confirms once more how ill conceived is the FIDE system for Mexico. The fact that he does not have a fixed place in the tournament, when he has been the one (together with Topalov) who has had the better tournament results and deserved his place more than any other player who is "qualified" to that tournament. Svidler, Morozevich, Anand places in the 2007 Championship, because of results in a tournament (not matches) of eight people played in 2005 (!), but the tournament was invitational based on ELO ratings from 2004 (!). Instead, the best players from the last two years don't have a place on it... (at least Aronian, needs to do twice the effort of the above three to be there)

"Silvio Danailov’s response came immediately after the game of Topalov finished. He said, as reported by the Bulgarian NTV, that the decision of FIDE will be seen one more time in the international sports court in Lozana."

Lausanne, must be. But what the...? If FIDE _had_ decided on a match, Kramnik would have had reason to sue, since that would have violated the regulations. What on earth can Danailov possibly point at to his favour in a legal battle? Ridiculous and provocative, only threatens more chaos...

I HAVE MADE THE CALCULATIONS AND EFFECTIVELY, ARONIAN WINS IN TIEBREAK CRITERIA (based in SB, which is the standard Corus uses), regardless of the results of the remaining unfinished games (Carlsen-Shirov and Ponomariov-Motylev), so congratulations to him for getting the trophy and congratulations to the three players: Aronian, Radjabov and Topalov for sharing first place.

How do the post-Corus elo ratings look like?

What he will point to probably, acirce, is that they were willing to back the match up into March..FIDE asked for this nonsense since they don't have 6 month rule after the previous world championship match from what I read on their website at least. Therefore, as Mark Crowther pointed out here once half in jest, according to the rule, any 2700+ player with the backing can technically say 'see you in sofia/anywhere next week' and be within the fide 'rule'. One world title match a year should be enough for any real sporting organization.

March? But it would have had to start in February. Anyway, it's the 6 months rule coupled with the 45 days rule that makes it the case that since several weeks already the match can't legally take place.

The queen sac Topalov offered in the Catalan was analyzed in the German magazine Schach after the Elista match (game 10 was the stem game) and both players get the magazine, sooooo.... Alexander Onischuk, one of Topalov's seconds in Elista, dropped me a note lamenting they hadn't found it in time for Kramnik, who went on to win that game and level the score. The draw allowed Aronian to catch them when Tiviakov showed his first sign of life by playing a wild rook sac. Unfortunately for him it didn't work and Aronian played very precisely to get the win. Radjabov, Topalov, and Aronian tie for first on +4. Probably the least exciting ménage à trois imaginable. Officially there is no tie-break system in the A Group. I talked to tournament director Jeroen van den Berg on the air during the round. It's officially a three-way tie for first. Any tiebreaks you care to apply are only in your mind! Another great Wijk aan Zee event, kudos all round.

Kramnik pounded van Wely in a pretty game to move into clear fourth when Svidler was torched by Karjakin and Anand was held easily by Navara. (Who drew Kramnik, Topalov, and Anand with black!) Eljanov won again to lock up the B Group and a pass to the A next year. Nepomniachtchi got wiped out by N Kosintseva, his first loss, and was actually passed by the streaking Krasenkow, who won again to take clear first. Unbelievable. Nepo's first day out of first place is the last day.

this just posted at Susan's site. Apparently picture of Danailov signaling

You just have to see this picture. Tooo Much

http://wcn.tentonhammer.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1127&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

The first picture is really good.

The effect of all this pushing by Danailov against FIDE will be that Topalov plays in Mexico City, as Kramnik gracefully vacates his place :-)

Topalov will then get his oh so worthless second FIDE tournament world championship title :-)

According to Fide's own regulrations, World Championship Tournament is _projected_ for Sept-Oct 2007. There is nothing in the regulations specifying firmly that it has to start on any given date like on Sept 12th; hence, it can start on Sept 30th.

The players (read Kramnik here - others dont care) would not be able to protest/contest any changes in that respect since no invitations were issued to them yet (or any contracts signed in that respect).

Howbeit, ony an idiot can expect a WC title match to be played on a month's notice. And if Topalov doesn't care, Kramnik certainly does - and rightfully so!

So 2cents, there can actually be no legal objection against the match? Seems like if FIDE and Kramnik play by the rules they signed to play the match should take place. I don't care Andrei if Drawmnik can't prepare in a month's notice (and he should be able to). If he was dumb enough to sign to play under such rules he should go ahead and do it.

P.S. Congrats to the three winners of the tournament. The most drawish world "champion" in history finally woke up in his last game but his efforts were too late. Fourth place at Corus and fourth place in the rankings - at least nothing unexpected here.

Of course there can. The tournament WILL start the 12th. It's not specified in the rules but it's been specified since. Jeez. Even if it starts the 30th, the money is already either too late or will be in a couple of days.

Peace...

Miguel, Vladimir Kramnik is the World Chess Champion, and indisputably so. There are no quotation marks to be placed around "champion" when referring to him. If you do not like his style, that is your problem, but that does not take away from his clear status as champion of the world. He defeated the #1 ranked player in a match (twice, as it turns out!), and he remains the toughest opponent to take the point from in the world today.

Hotep,

Maliq

Shirov also deserves a prize in this tournament for "the best saved games" (against Aronian and Carlsen). Not everybody has the nerve to try wholeheartedly to save a game against such odds (from such bad positions).

Kramnik even more so, the prize for trying hard and succeeding when it couldn't make any difference at all.

Tiviakov for being the dullest of them all.

Navara for his autistic smile.

Here's a link to vote for the most beautiful game of Corus 2007 on the message board:

http://www.chessninja.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=001446

Maliq - what is the value of that "world championship title"? Does it mean the best player in the world? Clearly not - the ELO rankings are a better measurement of chess strength.
Think about how tennis does it - have you ever heard of a "world tennis championship match" between say Roger Federer and Rafa Nadal, best out of 8 5-set matches? If the match is tied, they play 4 tiebreakers? No because the ranking system they have in tennis to help them seed players combined with the ATP tournaments which are capped by the four grand slams is the perfect way to go. And last time I checked tennis was A LOT more popular than chess.
My point is that if a player wins a match he was better than his opponent at the time, but is he really still the best a year or two or three after the match? Well, no - chess stregth varies -as tennis prowess does too - and a ranking system gives a better indication as to how chess players compare to each other at the moment.

http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1230

"...for his autistic smile."

Classy.

Not a bad prediction eh guys? I said Radjabov or Aronian would win Corus...

Miguel,
Following your logic, there's no sense in the WC title at all, and the rating is everything. If so - why having a World Chess champion and why is Topalov so desperate to get this title, if it carries so little value? Finally, comparing chess and tennis is simply silly: these sports have different histories and different traditions.

People who talk about tennis in conjuction to Chess World Championship should really not talk at all. Chess World Champion's title is about history and prestige built into it since the 1800's. The title you win by beating the World Champion in a head-to-head to match (and before that proving you are a worthy challenger). Who cares what they have in tennis... They don't have anything like the Champions' legacy we have in chess. Why try to diminish this legacy with the ELO rating (that is many times the main cause for short and fightless draws anyway -"I will play ultra solid, not lose any rating!")? Besides, ELO doesn't indicate really who is the strongest player at any given time (and definitely not in the future events!). It rather points out the fact who has played strongest up to that certain point in the past. So when Topalov plays the next event with his #1 rating it doesnt automatically mean he is the strongest in that event or even strongest entering the event. He will be just loosely called as the strongest due to his past performances - although this is not accurate. In Wijk aan Zee there were two other players that were exactly as strong as Topalov and that can be said even after checking their ELOs with magnifying glass. (Maybe player's new ELO should be his previous TPR? Then ELO would reflect the player's most recent 'chess shape'!? - Nah, I actually like the ELO system, but just dislike the fact that people put too much weight on it.)

Kramnik has shown in this tournament exactly why he's the world champion. No-one's come close to laying a glove on him; the three winners were all lost in at least one game; it was only Navara's wonderful defence and perhaps the fact he had seven Blacks (haven't checked if this is also true of the winners, though I'm fairly sure Topa had seven Whites) that stopped him joining the winners. Although of the winners Topalov has enjoyed the least luck; he's shown why he's rightfully regarded as the second-best player in the world. He pressed Kramnik the hardest (not that that was all that hard) and showed that hes the only one who would have a chance in a match against Kramnik (at any rate at his best). It's such a shame they can't get a grip and sub Topa into Mexico for Kramnik. I still think that's what'll happen, one way or another. Do the Mexico people really care so much, I wonder?

Miguel, don't talk such tosh. The difference between chess and tennis is the draw. The best player is the one who can beat all the rest heads-up, and at the moment that's Kramnik. Topalov came close and if he gets another chance he'll make another match close, but I've seen nothing in this tournament to suggest he's cured the weaknesses that caused him to lose last time, and one or two things to suggest that Kramnik might have addressed the problems (opening repertoire and preparation, mainly) that brought him close to defeat last time. Have you?

Topalov had seven Whites, Radjabov and Aronian seven Blacks.

Impressive that Topalov managed to place ahead of Kramnik this time, even though the organizers were even more biased against him than in "godforsaken Elista". There he only got one extra White and one free point, which was bad enough, but in Corus he only got the extra White and no free point at all! Well, winning the tournament in spite of this monumental injustice shows you who the real World Champion is.

Time for me to mention that "Elo" is a person who devised a rating system (Arpad Elo), and "ELO" is a rock group (Electric Light Orchestra).

Of course, the usual reply to that is "whatever".

To which I say "for cough".

acirce,

You are wrong. Topalov hand only one extra white, but he had Cheparinov preparing his openings for him (while he was sleeping!), Danailov signaling him Fritz moves, and he was also taking doping.

In fact if you check the games you will see that Topi played twice as many games as Kramink did, and probably 3 times as many moves. And still could only manage a shared first… Ts, ts, ts

Marca,
I agree, Raja-Topa is an exciting draw!!!! 25 moves of theory with draw agreed at the end!!!! Of course, the Kramnik-Anand does not even stay close to this exciting game.
Let me, guys, tell you one story which looks like 99% of arguments in the Topa-Kramnik war happening here:
A husband does a room renovation with his father in law. Father in law gets down from ladder and hides in a bathroom, while leaves an electric drill on top of ladder. At this moment, the wife comes in. The husband moves ladder aside to let her through, the drill falls down and knocks his head.
Wife, looking at husband: "What an idiot somebody should be to leave the drill on top of ladder!" The returning father in law: "Well, you know, it was me who left the drill there..."
Wife, after a 10 second break: "What an idiot somebody should be to move a ladder with drill on on top of it!"

Vlad,

That was a good one.

FIDE denied the rematch, I'm predicting they will include Topalov in Mexico. If Topalov the No 1 player not involve, FIDE World Champion and their ELO rating system will not have any credit.

Joe B.,
BS.

Excellent prediction on my part. I predicted over at chessgames.com that Aronian would be the surprise and Magnus the disappointment. I would have been right on the money if Shirov had not lost 5 games in a row.

Aronian is still UNDERRATED. If he had converted that winning endgame against Shirov in round 12, he would have won Corus outright!

And Magnus'combined Tal Memorial plus Corus record of speaks for itself: OVERRATED.

Kramnik has shown in this tournament exactly why he's the world champion. No-one's come close to laying a glove on him; the three winners were all lost in at least one game; it was only Navara's wonderful defence and perhaps the fact he had seven Blacks (haven't checked if this is also true of the winners, though I'm fairly sure Topa had seven Whites) that stopped him joining the winners.

-- Posted by: rdh at January 28, 2007 17:05

You'll have to ask the World Chamion why he can't win with Black. Radjabov won 4(!) Black games so it didn't bother him at all.

The Kramnik fans are drawing a line now between "tournament chess" and "matches" in order to defend Kramnik's poor results.

How pathetic...

They seem to forget that real World Champions like Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov dominated many tournaments as World Champions. Their continuation in creative chess is Topalov, not Kramnik.

Kramnik is just the worst World Champion we ever had during the last 30-35 years... But OK, you can take out Kasimdzhanov and Halifman if that makes you feel better... :-)

Giannis,
Can you remind me in which "many" tournaments Bobby Fischer dominated as World Champion?
Thanks in advance.
I shall agree with you, Topalov shows the bravest continuation in what Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov brought to chess. I am sorry to say, this is not creativity, but paranoia instead.

I shall agree with you, Topalov shows the bravest continuation in what Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov brought to chess. I am sorry to say, this is not creativity, but paranoia instead.

-- Posted by: Vlad Kosulin at January 28, 2007 22:44

Absolutely Vlad. Topalov showed zero creativity winning Linares 2005, M-Tel 2005, San Luis 2005, Corus 2006, M-Tel 2006, and Corus 2007.

"Peace" Maliq,

Due to the way in which Kramnik conducted "himself" in the Elista match (remember all the toilet "trips"), and thus the suspicions he "foolishly" drew upon himself, it is a valid opinion to call him "champion".

I agree with gmnotyet. Kramnik is probably the weakest world champion in recent (and not so recent) history. He defeated Kasparov in a match and then never had the guts to play him again.
A truely dominant player who wants to call himself world champion should be dominating tournaments too, not come up with the excuse that it's the world championship matches that count. Kasparov was dominating everything and that's why he remains the greatest player in history.

rdh,
Maybe Kramnik didn't come cose to losing a game(remember he is know as Drawmnik) but this is not a sign of greatness. In chess it is victories that count. If someones draws all of their games and soomeone else loses 1 and wins 7, who will be the better player in your opinion?
I agree that it is unfortunate players did not have equal number of games with black and white. Was it so hard for the organizers to invite 15 player instead?

"Navara for his autistic smile."

Ovidiu, disgraceful. You should be embarrassed.

Miguel could you name anyone in the history of game who would be a favourite against Kramnik in a head-on-head match?

Topalov, if they played outside Russia...

You are wrong, Miguel. Remaining unbeaten is the surest sign of class. Chess is a war game, and just like a real war, the true test is not victory but avoiding defeat. This is a hard truth to accept about the game, and many players fail to progress by failing to recognise it. Topalov, for example. If he doesn’t mend his habit of overpressing, then probably he’ll lose again if he ever gets another chance. Alekhine recognised this and it enabled him to beat Capablanca. I suspect Topalov won’t realise it. He is surrounded by too many sycophants and is too interested in seeking the good opinion of people like you. He lost in Elista for certain fairly well-defined chess reasons, and if he doesn’t address those then in all probability he’ll lose again. I doubt if he has the ability to address them; his approach so far has been to try and compensate for them by working harder in other areas and making his opening preparation so dominant that he can avoid his weaknesses. That came close to working in Elista, but – if Kramnik chooses – he can easily close the gap in this area by work for a match. To close the gap that exists in Kramnik’s strong areas between him and Topalov will be much harder.

Of course there’s a bit more to it than that – recognising how much risk you can take to give the opponent a chance of going wrong is a part of the game even in matches. Like Petrosian, Capablanca, Smyslov or Karpov before him, Kramnik prefers not to play that game. But the ability to make a big score against the likes of Tiviakov or van Wely has nothing, nothing at all, to do with true greatness at the game, and everything to do with winning tournaments like Corus.

They said the same sort of thing about Petrosian. And who remembers now who was winning those tournaments ahead of him? Geller? Larsen? Stein?

All footnotes. Petrosian was the champion, it is him we remember and his legacy we celebrate. If Topalov doesn’t stop posturing and start working on what he needs to work on to be the best, he’ll be another Larsen.

As to your stuff about Kramnik wanting to call himself world champion, it’s drivel. You can win every tournament you like, but that doesn’t make you world champion. It’s not reality television: to be world champion, you have to beat the champion in a match. Not boast on your website about your wonderful fighting spirit and giving money to charity.

I’m not sure Kramnik will ever be beaten in a match; either FIDE will succeed in killing the tradition and/or he’ll get tired of the politics and abandon the struggle, but if he does, at the moment my guess would be that it will be by Aronian.

Well said, rdh.

Somethign else: there is a poll at chessvibes.com about draw offers. After 657 votes the percentages are:

A draw offer should be:

* allowed at any stage of the game (current FIDE rules) - 38%
* not allowed at all (Corsican rule) - 18%
* allowed after 40 moves of the game are completed - 18%
* allowed after 50 moves of the game are completed - 4%
* abstain - 2%

...and I left out this one:
* allowed after 30 moves of the game are completed - 20%

Thanks rdh, couldn't say it better.
Miguel, you must admit that fanboyism and objectivity are almost always mutualy exclusive. Kramnik dominated (absolutely) Kasparov when the latter was in peak form (or was very close, that actually doesn't matter), was playing better chess against Leko and was clearly superior to Topalov, either on board and off the board.

Point well taken, rdh, but c'mon: many a GM would give their f-pawn to be "another Larsen."

Yes, Larsen is the perfect analogy. Although his achievements fall shy of Topalov's, he did dominate the world's top tournaments for many years, and played in several World Championship match cycles -- always being eliminated in the early going (by Spassky I think was in 1968, and then famously shut out by Fischer in '71).

More to the point, you could always count on Larsen to annihilate the bottom half or 2/3 of the field in any given tournament...but break even at best against other Candidate-level GMs who made up the top of the field.

Judging from recent events, maybe you could say Topalov would MOVE his f-pawn to be "another Larsen."

"Kramnik ... was playing better chess against Leko..." Was he really? I thought the match was tied. If anyone, I'd think Lékó was strictly speaking PLAYING better, because he agreed to draw in two games where he was at least slightly better in the final position.

Anyone know the ELO changes from Corus? Thanks.

Judging from recent events, maybe you could say Topalov would MOVE his f-pawn to be "another Larsen."

--Posted by: acirce at January 29, 2007 10:31

When it is Topalov's turn to move, Danailov should stand beside the chess board and if he sees Topalov reach out to move his f-pawn, Danailov should tackle Topalov to prevent him from moving it and losing.

A few pictures of Corus - Wijk aan Zee 2007
Taken the rounds 11 and 12.
http://www.jmrw.com/Chess/Wijk_aan_Zee_2007/index.htm

A few pictures of Corus - Wijk aan Zee 2007
taken the rounds 11 and 12
http://www.jmrw.com/Chess/Wijk_aan_Zee_2007/index.htm

So, eventually Aronian was the moral winner of the event? He tied first, didn't lose a single game, was best comparing results of three best players against each other (Topa-Radja-Levon) (+1). Radja has one point better rating-performance, but he lost to Aronian.

Do you think that Radja's result shows that he's truly joined the super-elite (top 5)?

Poor Karjak and Carlsen--people expect too much from them at their tender age. Radja would have gotten beaten up also two or three years ago. Chesswise and personality-wise there's a big difference between 16/17 and 19.

You guys act as if everyone can have a plus score.

Posted by Giannis "The Kramnik fans are drawing a line now between "tournament chess" and "matches" in order to defend Kramnik's poor results....how pathetic".

This line between tournament chess and matches has been around long before Kramnik. It was noticed that fighting players did better in tournaments but not as well in matches while drawing players did better in matches but not in tournaments. Game theory seems to validate this as well. And you should define what you mean by "poor results", otherwise you risk being misunderstood and having people think you don't know what you are talking about.

The importance of embracing risk at tournaments.

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3528

Ok, so Carlsen by and large failed in this Corus. I don't quite get why people put down Karjakin' play. To me it was very similar to Svidler's play both in result and quality. Very inconsistent, yes. Bad and unimaginative, no.

Let's see what Karjakin did: nice q sac to save a game against Radja. Then he completely outplayed Topa, got a won endgame and ... agreed to a draw. Still, he was playing alright afterwards, won a nice game against Shirov. In the middle of the tournament he inexplicably collapsed. For 4 games between Navara and Aronian he played like he doesn't belong, but then he won with black one of the best games of the tournament against Svidler.

Overall, his play was good enough for an even score, while he is rated 13th out of 14 players. Seems to me like a decent performance.

Make of this what you will ...

Number of moves: Van Wely (603), Karjakin (550), Navara (539), Radjabov (532), Topolov (531), Shirov (530), Carlsen (514), Aronian (475), Tiviakov (473), Ponomariov (470), Motylev (452), Anand (444), Kramnik (441), Svidler (418)

Average number of moves in drawn games: Van Wely (53.0), Shirov (41.9), Topolov (41.1), Carlsen (40.1), Karjakin (39.9), Navara (36.4), Motylev (35.3), Ponomariov (33.5), Svidler (33.5), Radjabov (33.0), Kramnik (31.4), Aronian (31.2), Tiviakov (29.0), Anand (28.6). (Van Wely's and Carlsen's averages are skewed high because of their 109 move draw.)

Without a win: Tiviakov, Motylev, Carlsen. In addition ... without a white win: Shirov; without a black win: Ponomariov, Kramnik.

Without a loss: Aronian, Kramnik. In addition ... without a white loss: Tiviakov, Anand, Topolov; without a black loss: Radjabov, Motylev.

Tal memorial and Corus showed that Carlsen's level is far below his rating.
Meanwhile, Karjakin plays good (for his age and rating!) chess in Corus for the second year! Radjabov shows he's to be dealt very seriously: his Linares second place last year and Corus shared first is a remarkable result.

"Tal memorial and Corus showed that Carlsen's level is far below his rating."

No, they showed that he had worse results than expected. Probably mainly due to his lack of supertournament experience, as he has scored well against top players in individual encounters before. I personally expect him to do better in Linares.

How did he reach his "too high" rating to begin with?

acirce,
ELO rating is gained by playing certain level against certain opposition. The more are the games within a group of players, the more precise is the rating. The more players are involved, the more precise the ratings are. The fact is that Carlsen had gained his 2700 rating playing much more games against sub-2700 players than 2700+ players. Now he is playing the rest of the scene(you can think of it as the missing part to make his rating more precise!), and you get the results. Carlsen is 2700 when he plays 2600s, and is 2600 when he plays 2700s.
This is mainly because of his style I guess. Think of Morozevich-he would be 2900 is he played only 2600s. Think of Kramnik-he would be 2650 if he played only 2600-s and 2950 if he played only 2900s :).

Indias Tata buys Corus:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6315823.stm

From my humble point of view a better choice for the future of the chess tournament than the Brazilian option...

"Think of Kramnik-he would be 2650 if he played only 2600-s and 2950 if he played only 2900s :)."

This is the most idiotic statement ever made in the history of man. Kramnik just posted a 2900 performance rating in the Olympiad playing these "2600's" Kramnik doesnt lose to 2600's, he doesnt lose to 2700's very often, and he wins matches against 2800 players. Kramnik is one of the strongest players to ever live.