PREVIEW: It's underway, ahhhhhh! Kramnik-Anand the big one. Radjabov-Ponomariov and Topalov-Navara the potential highlights. I'm on Chess.fm live with GM Gregory Kaidanov until 12:30.
UPDATE: Another day with one great game having to compensate for an overall low level of play and an equally low level of fighting spirit. Radjabov's spurt has deservedly created a lot of interest but it's masking some pretty bad chess and an overabundance of short draws. Today he started slowly and my Chess.fm co-commentator Kaidanov predicted a peaceful game, but things livened up suddenly with the sharp 11.Ne5 leap. Ponomariov escaped most of the pressure with 13..0-0 when the capture on f6 doesn't work. It doesn't look like the white knight can ever be corralled in the final position but they agreed to call it a day on move 17. (17..Rc7 18.Qxe8 Rxe8 19.Rd6 Rec8 20.Rad1 and Ne8 is coming.) Ban the draw offer.
That half point meant it was guaranteed Radjabov would still be the clear leader at the end of the day. The question was who would be chasing him. David Navara again showed his defensive accuracy and stamina by holding off Topalov. He got to a R+4 vs R+3 and held it easily. Drawing inferior positions against Kramnik and Topalov shows Navara's potential more than his rating does. The other player on +2, Anand, had to emulate that task and hold Kramnik in yet another Catalan squeeze. In an amazing control game Kramnik turned his center push and bishop pair into an endgame win. Vintage Vlady all the way and it put Kramnik into a tie for second with Topalov. It will take quite a while to figure out if, when, and how Anand could have saved this, but that's pretty much standard in Kramnik's classic wins of a thousand cuts.
The other decisive game of the day was, tragically, Shirov's fifth consecutive loss. It looked like he might get kingside play after 22..Bd3 cutting off the white king, but Karjakin nipped that in the bud with 23.Bb5 and Black was left without counterplay to make up for White's passed a-pawn. This had echoes to van Wely-Karjakin in round four, when White pushed his pawn early and got hit by a nice sac for a repetition. Shirov tried similar but there just weren't enough checks to save the day. The computer tries 26..Rf5 first but this doesn't convince either after 27.g3 Qh3 28.Qe4 and White is safe.
Motylev-Carlsen was drawn but included several spectacular moments, the first coming on move eight! Carlsen offered a full knight in a Four Knights game, a remarkable positional sac played in last year's world junior championship. The MegaBase churns out a few earlier games between relatively weak opponents and no one had the courage to take the knight. White is practically immobilized if he does. Motylev is a time-troubled player to begin with and considering the sac, declining it, and continuing cost him dearly on the clock. But Carlsen seemed to be more affected by this and he started playing just as quickly as Motylev to push him on the clock. This method landed him in a worse, probably losing position by move 28, but Motylev had just a few minutes left. Had he found 28.Re1 Carlsen would have been taught a lesson about blitzing in your opponent's time trouble. As it turned out that lesson came only later, and with less severe consequences. Carlsen netted the exchange after several further misses by White but Motylev had a pair of bishops and the sang froid of a former Russian champion. Carlsen still had over half an hour but he was keeping up with Motylev, who had just seconds. This cost the Norwegian excellent winning chances when Motylev bashed out 39.Bxf6!! to win the exchange back and save the day. Kaidanov showed us the beautiful mirror-image repetition that occurs if Black takes with the pawn. As it was, White had enough activity to draw without fanfare. Brilliant save.
Svidler was trying to preserve one of his extra pawns and winning chances against Aronian when he blundered the exchange and had to scramble for a draw, which came a few moves later. (I'll be stunned if he says he did this on purpose, something I've seen suggested elsewhere. He went from winning chances to only losing chances.) He must have just missed the sneaky 25..Bb7. It's funny because early in the show Gregory and I were talking about typical blunders and how "backwards" moves are famously hard to see. van Wely-Tiviakov was an uneventful draw.
Eljanov is the new leader in the B Group after Jakovenko and Bologan both lost. Nepomniachtchi won again in the C, this time in just 23 moves. He leads by a point and a half with 5.5/6. It's starting to look like when Kmoch congratulated Evans on "winning the tournament" at the 1963 US championship and then congratulated Fischer on "winning the exhibition" 11-0. (I'm sure I've heard this line put into the mouths of others and about others, and it's probably been updated and repeated countless times. I think Anand said it about Kasparov once.) Tiny tots Negi and Hou Yifan also won to move into the distant chasing pack. Scary children. Run, run for your lives.
I'm back on Chess.fm tomorrow, this time joined by Bill Wall. My Corus trivia questions today, following the usual formula of increasing difficulty: 1) Name the only world champion who never played in Wijk aan Zee since the invitational event began. 2) Who was the winner of the shortest decisive game in the history of the Wijk aan Zee invitational top group? 3) When Larry Christiansen beat Anatoly Karpov in just 12 moves in Wijk aan Zee, Karpov still went on to win that match and then the tournament in that KO year. Who did Karpov beat in the final match?
#3 was supposed to be a segue from #2, but I noticed only after asking #2 that it wasn't the shortest of all time. And I had already announced the winner (it's "first to type the correct answer into the chat channel") who had said Christiansen. It had turned up in my database, but for some reason I thought Petrosian-Ree, 1971 (eight moves!) was from a different event. Nope. And someone, "iltigretto", had answered "Petrosian" very quickly. So we pulled a Toys 'R' Us and awarded two prizes. I remembered the Petrosian game from an article somewhere that talked about repeated blunders. Quite a few players, mostly amateurs, have followed in Ree's fateful footsteps, although he was the only one to resign immediately. One guy even won with black!
Damn,
Anand already looking worse agains Kramnik.
Nepomnyashchy +5 !
I feel Kramnik is winning this one (after move 30).
"I feel Kramnik is winning this one (after move 30)."
Luckily it seems lige the big guy started thinking a bit too much about the french apple of his eye.
Seems I was a bit hasty. I dont like the endgame for black.
4 words for Motylev: Tick Tock Tick Tock.
Can anyone explain why Shirov resigned?
Thanks.
Bubba
@Bubba
41...h2 42.a8=Q Kh7 43.Nf6+! followed by Qag8+ wins
Bubba,
Just a thought, 41..Qxa7 42.Qc8+ Kh7 43.Qxh3+ Ke6/g6 44.Qe6+ will pick up the e4 pawn -- I guess you can keep playing on after that, but at Karjakin's level it won't be too hard to win.
Also, for what it's worth, 41..Qe1+ 42.Kc2 Qf2+ 43.Kb3 stops any perp attempt.
Allright,
please some endgame afficionado put me out of my misery. Is Anand lost in that endgame ?
Beautiful, beautiful game by Kramnik. Shades of Capa. Extremely passive set up by Anand.
Kramnik won and in typical style! Squeeze, squeeze, leave no counterplay, win. I need to look at the game more closely, but this game goes straight into my teaching notebook for positional play...
This is correct Chess as Kramnik said
does anyone know what's going on with either carlsen or karjakin
Big news!
I'm always rooting for Kramnik. Often his advantage is too tiny but this time he went for a more complicated game and was therefore able to pose severe problems.
The catalan opening still lives!
Vlad!
Impressive play by Kramnik.
Vishy needs to shape up. Cut down on the curries and leave Aruna at home.
Very Capa, I agree. Great game: looks so simple. That and Topalov-Shirov have shown the two of them at their absolute best in their very contrasting styles.
Amos; Carlsen drew, Karjakin won.
Poor, poor Shirov. One has to start wondering if there is something wrong with him.
Anand shape up? Actually, he didn't play that badly that game, did he? How many other people on the planet could have squeezed out that win against him?
There's been something wrong with Shirov for a while - that rapid event he scored 0/9 in, losing to Peter Wells in 12 moves at Gibraltar this time last year - this isn't how 2700 players usually carry on.
This could be the last big tournament we see him at - I hope not, but it easily could be. He played really, really badly today, truly like a 2200 player.
As to Anand, I guess sometimes when you're Black playing against one of the seven or eight greatest players ever at the peak of his form, you lose. Doesn't exactly make a crisis.
Perhaps Vishy got himself a bit psyched out by receiving the "Gift Point" from Svidler yesterday.
It's been a while since Kramnik has beaten Anand, right?
Shirov is really collapsing. I hope that it doesn't end up as bad as Keres Memorial Rapid event in Tallinn, Estonia , where he finished with a score of 0.5/9
Maybe he can get tips on how to cope, from Kamran Shirazi...
Organizers will probably be hustling to find space in their events for Nepomniachtchi. His rating is currently "only" 2587, but within a year, he could well be approaching 2700.
How are Chess fans going to cope with these names, though? Even the most dedicated fan is sure to botch them badly...
Vachier-Lagrave had a nice win over Bologan. He's now at + 2.
Poor Shirov, lost at sea and surrounded by man eating sharks, and that rescue boat on the horizon is looking smaller and smaller.
"Poor Shirov, lost at sea and surrounded by man eating sharks, and that rescue boat on the horizon is looking smaller and smaller."
As Micheal Ray Richardson once said about a dreadful NY Knicks team, "The ship be sinkin'".
http://www.coruschess.com/year/2007/gallery/round610.jpg
"As to Anand, I guess sometimes when you're Black playing against one of the seven or eight greatest players ever at the peak of his form, you lose. Doesn't exactly make a crisis."
It has been ages since he lost a "classical" game to Kramnik and his performance at the Olympiad...
At least comparing to when he crossed 2800 he is looking bad, and too heavy by the way. Perhaps crisis would be exaggerating, but it's getting closer with his standards.
Worst thing is that it might affect a potential match between them at Mexico. If... etc.
About Shirov: I simply think he is tired of chess.
At the post mortem with Svidler he looked truly uninterested. When was his last good tournament result ?
I have tons of sympathy for Shirov. His creative style and Kasparovs filthy trick. I sincerely hope he will bounce back eg. at the "candidates" against Adams.
I think we should wait till the end of the event before crucifying Anand. Last year he lost 1 game to Kamsky and yet finished with +5.
"There's been something wrong with Shirov for a while - that rapid event he scored 0/9 in, losing to Peter Wells in 12 moves at Gibraltar this time last year..."
(Strictly, it was 0.5/9 and 13 moves.) That's what I had in mind too, yes. One bad performance doesn't prove much, even when it's really bad, but when it happens time after time I'm getting very worried. Just shouldn't happen to such a great player.
The results of Shirov aren't my problem, but the moves he makes. Today he saced the a-pawn and gave Karjakin a free a-pawn on a5 which was supported by the rook. This pawn is nearly unstoppable. If white manages to hold his king position (which didn't seem to be the biggest problem) the game is easily won.
Maybe someone can tell me when they left theory. Thanks.
Huge victory for Kramnik. Just when I felt that despite the bad schedule so far, Anand has emerged unscathed. This is getting more interesting by the minute.
I do not use Fritz and stuff, just try to analyze on my own when in the mood and time is available. Anyway, didn't see any hints of a possible win in Topalov's game today.
D.
I think Kramnik had a big advantage today because he prepared the Catalan lines for his match agaínst Deep Fritz. Maybe Vishy should have chosen another opening.
Kramnik's bishop on a5 looked strange to me, and especially so after it's locked in with the pawn on b4. It just seems like an odd pattern, not something you would have seen previous generations of GMs play. Was Kasparov the first to put bishops on the fourth or fifth rank at the very edge of the board? I think of that as signature move of his.
Round review update in the main item. Now includes trivia!
@r the bishop on a5 was very active, securing white is in posession of the d-file because Rd8 is not possible. Black's black squares are very weak (the white queen was mainly observing the diagonal g1/a7 which made c5 impossible). A good example for Bangiev's theory of square strategy.
DaneDude what do u mean filthy trick? what filthy trick did Kasparov play on Shirov?
Mig,
Nice work on Chess FM. I enjoy your chess anecdotes very much but you need to give the B and C groups a little love in the coverage. I think they are showing more fighting spirit.
And please do keep going on and on about banning draw offers. It may be repetitive but it is necessary. Draw offers (and Pono) deserve the Gas Face!
Btw, the winner of the first trivia contest today was absolutely a pre-guess. I'm too modest to say who actually won...though it was just a guess. ;-)
DaneDude, Amos: You can read the entire Shirov/Kasparov/Kramnik/Anand World Championship saga here: http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/9899gkix.htm
Please discuss it elsewhere, however. It's way off topic in this thread. Thanks.
Hey Petroff. The first few questions are always going to be vulnerable to quick and/or random answers if they are names. But it levels the playing field. If they are all mind-benders the same uber-geeks are going to win all the time. So I'm happy to toss up a few lobs into the crowd to make it more fun for everyone. The third and most difficult question will usually require two or three names.
Yah, I know many are tired of my "ban the draw offer" rag, but what else can you say? I definitely want to poke them before moving on. If we don't have anything interesting in the A Group in the final hour we usually look at the lower boards, but that's only happened twice, I think. Personally I think they should put Nepomniachtchi on the main stage at this point!
Amos, he's probably referring to the match that never happened between Kasparov and Shirov in 1998 to contest the "classical" world championship. Shirov beat Kramnik in a qualifying match but then the big event was called off, supposedly because they couldn't raise enough prize money. A lot of folks think that Kasparov simply welched on the deal and ran away from Shirov's challenge.
Me, I'd play for $1, but someone said on Chessgames that Shirov needs what he can get from chess to support a large family. I don't know about that myself.
Maybe they should hold the B and C groups at different times of the year, they deserve a lot of coverage on their own in my opinion.
According to banning draw offers. I guess Topalov is wasting a lot of energy playing draw games till the doctor comes ;)
Eljanov is the new leader in the B Group after Jakovenko,and Bologan both lost. Nepomniachtchi won again in the C, this time in just 23 moves. He leads by a point and a half with 5.5/6. It's starting to look like when Kmoch congratulated Evans on "winning the tournament" at the 1963 US championship and then congratulated Fischer on "winning the exhibition" 11-0. (I'm sure I've heard this line put into the mouths of others and about others, and it's probably been updated and repeated countless times. I think Anand said it about Kasparov once.) Tiny tots Negi and Hou Yifan also won to move into the distant chasing pack. Scary children. Run, run for your lives.
Regarding Carlsen's knight sacrifice on move 8, it is a novelty from a Turkish FM in 1993. Here is the game:
[Event "TUR-ch"]
[Site "Turkey"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[Round "13"]
[White "Basoren, Halil"]
[Black "Bayram, Yakup"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C48"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. Bb5 Nd4 5. Ba4 Bc5 6. Nxe5 O-O 7. Nd3 Bb6 8.
e5 c6 9. O-O Ne8 10. Kh1 d6 11. exd6 Qh4 12. d7 Bxd7 13. Ne5 Be6 14. Nf3 Nxf3
15. Qxf3 Bc7 16. g3 Qh3 17. Kg1 Bg4 18. Qg2 Qh5 19. Re1 Bf3 20. Qf1 Nf6 21. d4
Ng4 22. h4 Qxh4 0-1
Recently a similar game to Motylev-Calrsen was played by FM Citak - GM Shanava in Turkish league, i'll post that game if i can find it.
Kramnik gives a lesson. It shows us why he is the world champion.
http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=502#more-502
"Kramnik gives a lesson. It shows us why he is the world champion."
Yes, it is indeed awesome.
Watching this is like a chess equivalent of reading a Serre classic on spectral sequences.
r, Ba5 in this line is a common manoeuvre which I think may have been introduced by Kramnik's hero Smyslov (who incidentally left a message at chessvibes congratulating VK on this game, or at least someone purporting to be him).
Ernest Tomlinson, I don't think too many people think Kasparov was afraid of Shirov exactly. I think the true explanation is the simplest - he indeed couldn't get the money to make it worth his while.
Really great stuff, that Kramnik lesson. I think, I have to watch it again.
The main theme there was to avoid fortresses. Kramnik was aware of a lot defense-ideas and so his task wasn't that easy.
Thanks for the link.
rdh, it is almost too good to be true that it is The Real Smyslov congratulating Kramnik. But I like to think so, too!
Regarding Carlsen's knight sacrifice on move 8, it is a novelty from a Turkish FM in 1993. Here is the game:
[Event "TUR-ch"]
[Site "Turkey"]
[Date "1993.??.??"]
[Round "13"]
[White "Basoren, Halil"]
[Black "Bayram, Yakup"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C48"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nc3 Nc6 4. Bb5 Nd4 5. Ba4 Bc5 6. Nxe5 O-O 7. Nd3 Bb6 8.
e5 c6 9. O-O Ne8 10. Kh1 d6 11. exd6 Qh4 12. d7 Bxd7 13. Ne5 Be6 14. Nf3 Nxf3
15. Qxf3 Bc7 16. g3 Qh3 17. Kg1 Bg4 18. Qg2 Qh5 19. Re1 Bf3 20. Qf1 Nf6 21. d4
Ng4 22. h4 Qxh4 0-1
22 Qxh4! leads to the BLACKBURNE MATE 23 gxh4 Bh2#.
Rather cheeky annotations at Chessbase explaining how Kramnik could have played better and pointing out where he lost the thread. Pity the author didn't explain all this to Kramnik during the press conference.
It's interesting to see which lines Kramnik looks at are the same ones we analyzed live. Plenty of things we didn't consider, but a few things we were wondering about were skipped as well. We really thought Black had better chances overall if he brought his king to the center quickly. But the 41..Nd3 idea Kramnik showed is very interesting.
Reading Is Fundamental. Actually, Shirov and Kasparov couldn't get the money to make it worth Shirov's while. Kasparov didn't need the money and would have played for nearly nothing to "renew" his title. Shirov hadn't been paid for his win over Kramnik and rightly expected a major payday for the WCh match. But there was no sponsorship and one offer that came was quite low and Shirov rejected it. That was a valid decision but it didn't turn out well. The criticism of Garry comes from 1) he was one of the people organizing the Kramnik-Shirov match and can be held in some way accountable for anything that happened and 2) whether or not you think he waited long enough before pursuing the Anand match. Which, of course, never happened. Had money come in for a Shirov match at any time before the Kramnik match was confirmed Kasparov would have had no reason not to play. He just needed to play someone asap because the usual three year defense plan had expired. So yes, Shirov got screwed, but it wasn't as easy as saying he was screwed by Kasparov or anyone else in particular, as you'll see if you actually read the story. Playing in a match with no signatures on the contracts for your payment is a risk.
Such is the overall low level of quality of play and fighting spirit that I think the participants must have a subconscious wish to bring Kasparov out of retirement - by making it as tempting as possible for him!
And why on earth don't they have the Sofia 'no draw offers' rule?
Your first sentence echoes what Garry said after he saw the first round here. He was joking, but it really does look that way sometimes. "Maybe if we play a bunch of blunders and short draws he'll get so cheesed off he'll come back." He's been pretty impressed with Navara so far at least.
Low quality of play? And "overall" even?
You are very exacting.
Of course, there have been very remarkable gaffes, more perhaps than one would expect. But surely these are offset by some very fine games?
More than a few non-game draws, true. But with seven games a round, there is always something interesting, often even exciting, to watch.
I suppose you would like a God vs. Jehovah duel, twenty paces and no wounding?
I dunno, the "very fine game" quotient is rather low by supertournament standards. The excitement factor has been spotty as well. We have two very nice Kramnik squeezes that are high on the quality, low on the excitement. We have an accurate Topalov win. But it seems like even the exciting ones have left the most interesting lines for analysis, such as the Motylev-Anand game and Motylev-Carlsen. When you have three games per round barely getting off the ground you simply aren't going to have as many good/interesting games total. Then we have poor Shirov, who is responsible for so many of the decisive games, falling apart. Carlsen is playing poorly, Ponomariov unambitiously, and the average number of moves per game is a full six below last year's. If it weren't for the kid and his KID we wouldn't have much to talk about!
Speaking of cheeky, rdh, that Chessbase report also says Svidler "sacrificed" the exchange instead of blundering it. Eh? White went from trying to keep an extra pawn to having two immobile pawns for the exchange. It was enough to draw rather easily but I can't imagine he did it on purpose!
Well, Mig, you do have a point. (I love Kramnik squeezes, I find them strangely exciting, so I am biased.)
I suppose I am so happy to see so many top players competing in one tournament that I am unduly enthused.
It's good to know more about the Shirov-Kasparov situation than just a bit of hearsay; thanks. It all happened back when my interest in chess was at an all-time low, I should add; I don't think I played more than a half-dozen games of chess between about 1995 and 1999, and I scarcely followed any chess news.
Mig: "The excitement factor has been spotty as well."
Try rugby perhaps?
Actually these Corus games get pretty thrilling once you reach a certain level of playing strength. (And unless you are a retired Kasparov or Fischer of course, which makes it impossible to enjoy chess.)
Ernest--
"...whether or not you think [Kasparov] waited long enough before pursuing the Anand match..." is NOT the real question.
Kasparov hardly "waited" at all. Only Kasparov and, perhaps, his manager, could believe Garry waited "long enough." Even Mig doesn't believe that Kasparov waited long enough.
A person with more kindness, patience, or diplomacy would have made determined and well-publicized (but doubtless futile) efforts to secure replacement funding for a Kasparov-Shirov match. Had Kasparov done so, Shirov would have had no grounds for complaint.
But almost immediately, Kasparov killed off any (theoretically existent? non-existent?) sponsorship for a Shirov match by saying, basically, that nobody would pay to watch him beat up a punching bag and that he was thus forced to look for another opponent.
I believe Shirov took offense not because he Kasparov "screwed him out of a match" but because of the way Kasparov handled Shirov's "non-marketability". I don't believe Kasparov ever intended to insult Shirov. I do believe that a more patient, considerate and diplomatic Kasparov would have taken more pains to inter the Shirov match in a way that did not insult Shirov.
>> Ernest--
>> "...whether or not you think [Kasparov] waited long enough before pursuing the Anand match..." is NOT the real question.
Well, OK, but since I didn't write the words you quoted there, I'm not sure why you're addressing this response to me.
I agree rdh..Chessbase comments were idiotic on Kramnik game...real classy to be pedantic to the WC. Esp. in a position where it seems like it was definitely a difficult choice: e5 or Bh3.
Ernest,
Mig is thoroughly sick of talking about this topic so I addressed my comments to you, who seemed interested in it.
"At the climax of the struggle, Peter, who isn’t in perfect health at the moment (“I seem to make one bad mistake in every game now” -- Svidler) blundered the exchange with 25.Be3?, (see diagram 3) trapping his own rook on a7. Luckily for him he had just enough time to consolidate, and with his previously gained material was in no real danger. With both sides ready to bring their kings to the center, and without any realistic aspirations for progress by either side, the Armenian offered a draw which was accepted at once by the Russian. Svidler: “if we had started from the final position, I might have played on, but considering how we got to it, I thought it was a good time to call it a day”." http://www.coruschess.com/report.php?year=2007&report=6
Speaking of pedantic and worse, at what playing strength do these Corus games become thrilling, Linux fan? I've been covering every minute of them live alongside a GM analyst and in the company of dozens of GMs and IMs and discussing them post-game with that same Garry Kasparov you mention. (Who, by the way, greatly enjoys chess.) What's the magic strength for thrilling? 1400? 2674? Apart from the obvious fact that thrilling is in the eye of the beholder in everything from chess to naughty pictures, I've commentated enough elite chess over the years to be able to compare event to event and round to round. I'm not talking about some objective measure on the Khrintenstopervantzanten Thrill Scale. I'm talking about my impressions and those of the people I'm working with compared to recent events and previous years in Corus. Less fight, more blunders.
Thank god, acirce. I was still a teeny, tiny bit afraid I was going insane. Peter should take it as a compliment that the ChessBase guy thought it was a sac. And if he'd won, it would have been!
Bill Wall? Probably Brian.
Google: Your search - Khrintenstopervantzanten - did not match any documents.
Mig, you're right, it's not just the playing strength that allows people to enjoy this tournament. It's a disposition, a kind of humbleness towards chess and the players.
I believe your constant remarks about banning the draw offer are not helping the game.
It's as if you were saying: 'You super GMs just do the chess part, we'll make the rules for you, because you're not clever enough to see your own interest.' I don't think it works that way.
Mig: "I've commentated enough elite chess over the years..."
Exactly my point. If this was your first tournament and first commentating, you'de be burning with excitement. And why? The games would still be the same. It's the disposition that is different.
Seems in Kramnik-Anand even after 30. f4 and 36. e5 White is winning. If you think about it, those moves win just as sure as the others, yet seem the more forcing, since there are no better moves for black until 41... g5 which was ?! while 41... Ne2 deserved a chance.
Linux fan, obviously the players are "clever enough". The problem is that each player will tend to do what is best for himself instead of what is good for the game. The idea behind anti-draw rules is to force the players to do what is best for chess, and that is play good games without phony draws.
wow, Topa plays the KID.. he wants this one badly..
Sorry, r7 thread up now.
Morrowind - Anand didn't have to enter the endgame with ...Rd7; as Kramnik himself showed it was more resilient to play first ...Kf7.
Linux fan: good post. Returning to chess recently after a while away I am shocked by the shrill, disrespectful and ignorant clamour one sees on these websites, and not only from the masses. Whether it's computers or what it is I don't know, but some of these people could do with playing through all the games of some of the 1960 or 70's supertournaments.
You don't get many Kramnik-Anands to the pound. Anyone who can't appreciate this game should definitely think about trying WWF wrestling instead. Mig complaining about it not being very exciting is pathetic.
Regards to Bill Wall. We miss you in Palo Alto.
Linux fan: You are right, the tone on the forum is sometimes a bit shrill. But the issue of agreed draws is a real problem. I've talked to several professional and semi-professional chess players, all of whom are frustrated by the lack of earning opportunities for chess-playing (as opposed to teaching). Yet some of these same players have an amazingly fatalistic attitude about supporting the kind of changes to game rules and tournament structure that would improve the situation. Some resist under the banner of being artists, who should not and can not be forced to be creative on cue. Well, there is a reason for the term "starving artist"!
If you want art and perfection in chess, there's always composition. The sole object there is to create art and beauty.
The object of a chess game is, at its core, to defeat the opponent. Draws are a part of that process, absolutely; but abuse of the agreed draw is antithetical to the spirit of the game.
I'd like to know why there is so much animosity and hostility to the possibility of some rules modifications. Why do you take this so personally? Is any change at all only for the worst? If we had it your way, castling would not exist, you'd have to call "Gardez!" at the board when appropriate, and Elijah Williams would STILL be choosing between 2 Nf3 or 2 Bc4.
I'd appreciate it if those supporters of the status quo would not characterize those with the opposing view as ignorant wrestling fans. It's uncalled for. Of course, if the name-calling persists, it accomplishes nothing but reveals one's total disregard for the free exchange of ideas.
Peter,
I am still here and trying to contribute what I can in chess. See Bill Wall's chess page.