Greengard's ChessNinja.com

Linares 2007 r6

| Permalink | 106 comments

Zowie, what a wild tournament this is turning out to be. Round five contained another pair of amazing games. Magnus Carlsen defeated Veselin Topalov in very impressive fashion, except that the final position was a draw. Incredibly, Topalov had to see just two moves to reach what looks like a plainly drawn position and instead he resigned. (64..Qd5+ 65.king anywhere or f3 65..e5 66.Qh7+ Kf8 67.Qh8 Qg8.) Absolutely bizarre, though not unprecedented. It wasn't undeserved because as many have pointed out, 55.Nd2! would have won by force and turned this game into the stuff of legend. Regardless, it was a powerful effort by Carlsen, who again showed the aggression that was largely absent from his play in his first supertournament appearances. His first win over Morozevich seems to have given him the "hey, I can play with these guys" confidence he needed to take it to them.

The other win was scored by Aronian over Anand and this one was an even richer game. Aronian kept finding clever ways to keep Black under pressure and to advance his pawns. Really a beautiful effort all the way through. The concluding rook sacrifice to promote the pawn was a tasty layer of icing on a spectacular cake. Anand didn't have to let his knight get trapped on the final move of the game but that endgame looks lost anyway. A definite short-list game of the year so far for Aronian, at least in cumulative surprise value.

Those results put Carlsen back into the clear lead of the Linares supertournament on 3.5/5 with wins over Ivanchuk, Topalov, and Morozevich. Read that sentence again. Tremendous stuff even if you ignore that he's only 16. No more questions about whether or not he's ready. The question is whether or not everyone else is ready for him!

Svidler couldn't make any progress against Leko's Marshall and they split the point without coming to blows. Sad. The Berlin Defense in Morozevich-Ivanchuk also stopped short of violence. Lame. Was there a People for the Ethical Treatment of Pieces rally on the off day?

I'm back on ICC Chess.FM Saturday for round six at 4:30EST. My GM co-host will be none other than fellow blogger Susan Polgar. It's Carlsen-Leko, Morozevich-Svidler, Aronian-Topalov, Anand-Ivanchuk.


Would love to see video of the Topalov resignation against Carlsen.

Would a creative soul out there please risk a joke about Topa's resignation and Danailov's presence in the audience?!

Aronian's defeat of Anand is quite impressive. Anand is always a tough nut to crack. Indeed, Anand's play has become more conservative, which has resulted in fewer wins, but very solid positions.

It could have been easily predicted that the Svidler-Leko game would "Peter out" to a draw. Peter = "Rock", and the name is quite fitting to their style and results.

Let's see if Topalov has another 2nd half comeback in him. Where are all of those pundits who predicted a Topalov tournament victory, with a final score of + 4?

Topalov is such a fighter--it's amazing that he didn't bring himself to play one more move before resigning.

Carlsen is dangerous now that he has confidence, and he is no longer playing just for the draw. Sometimes, it is easier to avoid defeat by simply winning....

Still, with 9 rounds to play, I think that he'll drop back to 50%. That will be a huge accomplishment for him. Magnus is a year or two away from being at Radjabov's current level.

we see the real Topalov and his performance when he is not signalled.

back to 2700 where he belongs. Still a great and admirable fighting player.

Only susan will find words to defend like "both kramnik and topalov should not be signalled"

susan polgar regular bias technique.

hashish: Would love to see video of the Topalov resignation against Carlsen.

It was a handshake and a smile -- what do you expect?

DOug: Where are all of those pundits who predicted a Topalov tournament victory, with a final score of + 4?

They're around, having fun. Topalov winning with +4 was a peerfectly likely outcome to predict, look at the polls. That's why the games are played.

ellrond: we see the real Topalov and his performance when he is not signalled.

You're a moron. Sorry to have to tell you this.

Jeez, why is it that once Topalov looses all of the creeps crawl out of nowhere. Such a turnoff...


Agree with Mig that Aronian-Anand is a serious candidate for game of the year. To beat a player of Anand's stature the way Aronian did is quite an accomplishment. Very few players can claim a brilliancy against Anand. Aronian is definetly world champion material.

Topalov brought this on himself with his ridiculous behavior in the World Champion match with Kramnik. It was insane for him to accuse Kramnik of suspicious activities.

Now the Kramnik fans are attacking back!

However individuals closed connected to Kramnik were spreading rumours of cheating against Topa prior to the Elista match. Tit for tat.

closely in my previous post instead of closed. sorry.

...I'm all for the kids, but it's a little disappointing to see Carlsen there instead of, say, Ivanchuk or Polgar (or, or, or). Carlsen went a winless -4 ...February 9, 2007

It's not an attack on Carlsen. .... I would personally prefer about a dozen other players, that's all...at February 16, 2007

What do you think now about Carlsen...
El muchcacho esta creciendo (y esta creciendo rapido)... Hay que verlo en todos los torneos que se pueda..
He will be in Dortmund...no es cierto??

closely in my previous post instead of closed. sorry.

When Topalov resigned with "a handshake and a smile," was Carlsen confused? Did he think Topalov was acknowledging the draw? Do GMs tip their kings, or is that restricted to us non-elites?

Ellrond: Only susan will find words to defend like "both kramnik and topalov should not be signalled"
susan polgar regular bias technique.
LOL, I remember a couple of her postings right here in this forum defending herself as being "neutral" that way

Dainalov will soon find a cable in Carlsens bag and accuse him of cheating. Note that Carlsen signed the letter supporting Kramnik in the WCC-match. Carlsen is not only a good player, no, he also fights on the good side ;-) Lommedalen rocks!

One of my first thoughts as Magnus won last night was of Mig and his statement about Magnus not belonging at Linares. It actually made me feel for poor Mig accidently being on the wrong side. I was wondering if anyone would give him a hard time over his statements.

Mig we all appreciate you more for times like these. This is what memories are made of.

I was thinking of the popular little jingle.

Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa

being applied to your statement that Magnus does not belong in Linares.

If anyone does not know what it means then google it. it will come up. some spell it "mia" but I think "mea" is more correct.

Topalov & Kramnik are history. Both of these guys had their 15 minutes of fame after Kasparov left. The chess world has a new hero: Magnus. And Anand has someone he can be second to.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone here know for a fact whether this tournament employs anti-cheating measures to separate players from spectators? Also, is it the same for both parts of the tournament?

Before this tournament, I was always reluctant to all theories of cheating and conspiracies. However, the bizarre way Topalov has played in Morelia (a strange blunder against Ivanchuk and this defeat against Carlsen), shows certain insecurity or irregularity that looks very unusual to me.

I wonder...

(a) Is the paranoia and controversy a factor to make Topalov nervous by feeling that there is a conspiracy against him, even if he has never cheated, so he is cracking under pressure? (In other words, have the tactics of opponents or some biased media worked out?)

(b) Did this controversy changed Topalov's team strategies (for example, is reported Danailov is not very close to Topalov in this occasion), giving more doubts to the "conspirators", if there is anyone. If the team changes strategy is because they have paid attention to the controversy and they are not indifferent to it.

I congratulate again Aronian, although I have always been a fan of him since the beginnings of 2005, so my opinion is not very impartial, but what a game against Anand (even if Anand shortened his defeat with innacuracies at the end)!!

On Carlsen, he has been very lucky (Aronian too) in two of his wins, but luck is something you have to look with complications, especulation, calculation and tactics. Guys like Carlsen, Aronian and Radjabov have this as part of their styles ... is not that "clean", or "elegant", or "correct", as people might think about Kramnik, Anand or Kasparov, but this style seems to be the natural reaction to the consolidation of the computer era in chess, this is a more human play in my opinion. More than welcome!!

An Aronian win over Topalov tomorrow would be satisfying on many levels.

I feel like Svid is trying to hard to actually avoid the reputation...he overpushed his advantages at Corus after beating Topalov...

I have seen no evidence whatsoever that Topalov is cheating. He had an amazing tournament at San Luis. All of his other results are within ordinary GM performances. If he is cheating, same accusation can be made against Aronian, Leko and anybody else you want.

Poor Vesselin. Now if he plays badly, it is because he can't cheat. If he plays well, it's because he is cheating. And people making these statements don't even know which tournaments have anti-cheating measures, which ones allow managers into playing hall.

Topolov and Danailov put themselves in this situation with their overbearing and asinine actions in Elista. If your're going to act the fool, there will be consequences...there always are.

Not "more correct", just "correct", Frank H. And web searches are entirely irrelevant, or I might have had to spell that "irrelivant". "Definately"!

Using Google (not the best of search engines, but any other will serve for my argument) to determine anything can lead to utter nonsense, if you do not check the source.

It would be nice if this was caused by Team Topalov making similar claims in Elista, but it's not. This started before then (though on a much more minor scale) and is now being carried on by fanboys, pseudojournalists and everybody else who doesn't care to look at the facts. I suppose we could find some solace in knowing that Topalov is guilty of it too, but to me, this is clearly "an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind" situation. Chess world suffers when reaction to any player doing well is "Well, is he cheating?"

There are differences in Topalov's case:

1. He has been accused by fellow GMs of cheating.
2. Danailov has charged others of cheating "whoever smelt it dealt it".
3. Danailov Topalov have a strange relationship.
4. Cheating is obviously possible by signalling.

2 and 3 are not so essential here, the main focus is on 1 and 4. Regardless of who has cheated or not, signalling is a danger that needs to be dealt with. Topalov has proven himself capable of brilliant results recently, and whether out of jealousy or justifiable suspicion, a few GMs have spoken out and many more are whispering about Topalov specifically. We shouldn't jump to conclusions or even consider it probable, but there's a reason Topalov and not Carlsen, Anand or Aronian are being accused of cheating.

The focus should of course be on ensuring signalling couldn't happen at all and take proper steps. If Topalov didn't cheat he will eventually get his good results back again.

While the impending doom of Topalov is a big part of the storyline in Morelia, clearly the big story is Carlsen's performance.

Not that anyone seems to notice. Or care.

If the player that was self-destructing was ANYONE other than Topalov, everyone would just say, "Oh well, its a great shame for him. I wonder what happened.", procede to ignore it, and give Carlsen his due. Granted, Carlsen has been lucky, but his luckiness has paid dividends because of his great play, and not the other way around. He also has a long way to go, but at least he's proved that he deserves to be here with the big boys.

As for Topalov, I seem to recall that he started out in a similar way last year, only to come back and nearly win the tournament. I daresay he could certainly do it again (Cheating accusations aside).

Two closing questions: Why aren't more people talking about Aronian-Anand, and will Peter Leko ever actually WIN a game?

>> Just out of curiosity, does anyone here know for a fact whether this tournament employs anti-cheating measures to separate players from spectators? Also, is it the same for both parts of the tournament?

Posted by: yander at February 23, 2007 20:53 >>

Morelia the players can not see the audience. Topalov got 2.5/7 last year. he has 2/5 so far this year.

Linares he can see the audience easily.

He started with 3/3 finished 4 wins 3 draws out of 7 last year.

Do not expect them to stop Danailov in Linares this year. Danailov is founder of Grand Slam and Linares is part of the Grand Slam. So Danailov is like a partner to those who run Linares. There are excellent pictures of Morelia on chessbase early rounds. Basically it is a theatre for stage plays. Bright lights on the players. the audience sits in the dark. You can read more about it on Susan Polgar's blogsite.

Remember this is the 2nd year Topalov has played so poorly in Morelia. It is the only venue where he can not see the audience. He came roaring back in Linares last year by winning his first 3 games agressively and with great moves in his games. He made lots of weak moves in Morelia last year just as he does this year in Morelia.

The pattern does not look good for Topalov.


Actually, Topalov has only managed 1.5/5 so far this year, not 2/5. Basically, he draws with white and loses with black.


Anand-Aronian is just a plain old good chess game. Not exciting enough :-) I need lies, rumors, intrigue, strange relationship between two men *wink* *wink* etc.

BTW, I haven't quite figured out where Anand went wrong and whether there was a point where he could have saved the game... I'd be interested to find out...

You all do realize this is a good start for Topalov. 1.5 of 5 is prety good for him... He always loses early.

Pingy's comment about Anand was sad but true. He's going to be history's longest running member of the top 3 in the world.

Indeed, this year and the next one might be one of the last chance for Anand to reach #1 spot, before Aronian or Carlsen take over.

That's why I always call predictions a fool's game. But they're fun and can lead to interesting debates. The problem is when you're right nobody cares and when you're wrong you have people copy-pasting your prediction at you every day as if somehow you have lost all credibility. Carlsen failed to win a game at the Tal Memorial and just a month ago at Corus, where he finished -4 and played with a passivity that said he didn't yet know how to handle the shift to a new level of competition. Faced with the possibility of his being shut out again in Linares, I simply said I would have preferred to see a player we knew could fight at the top level instead of waiting for Carlsen.

Obviously the wait is over and I'm just as happy for him and for the tournament as anyone. I'm certainly not going to put my being right about something that trivial over quality chess and the coming of age of a great talent. Young players are nothing if not unpredictable. (I doubt he's seen the last negative score of his career.) It's not as if we didn't know he had the skills and that it would happen eventually. I was just worried that it wasn't going to happen now and I was wrong. Of course this is great news!

Not to feed the animals, but the players CAN see the audience from the stage. I wrote this the other day after talking about it with Ian Rogers, who is in Morelia. The house lights are on, but because the stage lights are brighter photographs don't show that very well. The stage lights are from above, not from the direction of the audience, so they don't have spotlights in their faces.

Topalov has always been streaky and vulnerable to bad losses. His devastating performance at San Luis in 2005 is what we remember, but in his rise to #1 he really hasn't changed from his old self in that respect. He still loses a game or two in every event, unlike, say, Anand and Kramnik. (Anand went years and years without losing at Corus until this year, for example.) Topalov's openings got much better, especially in the TN! department, and that makes a big difference at this level. It also gives you confidence, a typical positive cycle. The signaling possibilities are troubling, but I don't think there is anything in Topalov's chess, results, or rating that requires cheating to explain.

This whole story line about Topalov cheating is like a food for the fools. Win or lose, the food is there… You can't win every tournament to prove to every idiot that you're not cheating.

Anyway, even if Topalov loses every game from now on, he has accomplished enough to please his fans. If he wins, even better. He has been written off many times. In the late 90's, in 02, in 04, after Elista, after Essent, and now again. And a few more times in between...

But win or lose, Topalov is Ok, he has money, his place in history is secured. One thing will not change though -- the sorrowful creeps will keep crawling on their bellies onto something else, but generally remain unnoticed except on some distant blog, somewhere. It is their problem, not Topalov's.


Once again, I'm not a Topolov fan (and certainly not Danailov's) but on the other hand, if I did have someone signalling me from the audience, I wouldn't play in Morelia to begin with. You can't see anyone in the audience and why put yourself (as the number 1 player) in a position where you might score 1.5/5? (not to say he isn't capable of scoring more on his own strength) or let's say 2.5/7? Plus who likes losing that often no matter the reason? Then you get to Linares and score 6.5/7, with much of the chess world watching and waiting to prove you're a cheat, and win the tournament (hypothetically).

No, I would pass this one by and play at other tournaments where these circumstances didn't prevail; and score more even handedly, so-to-speak, and less dramatically. If indeed they are cheating (and I'm not saying they are) then it's almost like their begging for the blade to fall.

Damn it Mig, I was typing mine out while you you posted yours. I thought it sounded good anyway.

I agree with Mig. From Carlsen's performance in the last tournaments you couldn't expect him to be a strong contender here. Surprisingly he did much better. Let's see how it works out.
To play for a win against Topalov is not that "difficult" because Topalov does not take draws. So, if he doesn't offer draws or rarely agrees to draws you have to fight yourself for the win and do not care much.

MIT for Carlsen: M = Morozevich, I = Ivanchuk, T = Topalov.

I doubt if he can win against Leko though.

Some of the comments show the people's stupidity.

As for Chess.fm: Give us more Shahade and less of an 1800 USCF Player.

Carlsen is surely having one of his best tournaments. Lets hope he does not sit on his +2 score, but continues to play fighting energetic chess.

Were can I see the moves being played for free? The Live link at the Official site is not working.

"susan polgar regular bias technique."

Yea! Next, she'll blame the conspiracy of media attacks and so-called mass-public scorn on his Morelia slump - come on, what a wimp! It's simple. He can't see Danailov. Amen to that! The evidence against Topalov is unbiased and concrete - that video speaks the truth, no decent person would make those kind of inhuman gestures, Chessbase concur, most of the right and better side of the chess world agree, and so does Mig - "Topailov" needs to be strung up. I'm sorry, but all you Topalov fans are need to see the light!

hafsbw, I have been following the Linares games at the chess-live server. They have been providing a live relay of the games each day. You should visit www.chess-live.com

Great games.
Susan Polgar has integrity!
Until charges are backed by true evidence, the fence is a good place to sit!

"3. Danailov Topalov have a strange relationship."

Yea, John Goes! As Mig says, "Topailov's" signalling is indeed troubling, but so is the relationship between these two strange bedfellows! Kramnik has integrity, Chessbase, ACP, Mig, Nigel, and the normal chess world behind him! Who supports "Topailov"? Polgar and a few myopic individualists.

At present Topalov's going to go down in history mainly for a toilet... I agree with you that most of the attacks on him are ridiculous, but if you're calling those making them "sorrowful creeps" you've got to accept that as a description of Topalov and Danailov for what they've said about Kramnik. You can't have it both ways.
But win or lose, Topalov is Ok, he has money, his place in history is secured. One thing will not change though -- the sorrowful creeps will keep crawling on their bellies onto something else, but generally remain unnoticed except on some distant blog, somewhere. It is their problem, not Topalov's.


Posted by: Dimi at February 24, 2007 02:38

"Amen to that!"

Ur name says it all. If ur thinly-veild homophobic innuendo, ur mobish accusations, ur dodgy list of supporters, & that diaritic diatribe u just spewd part of the "normal chess world's" mindset, count me out, u old testament-stamping, pitchfork-waving, new-born Kramnik evangelist!

Sorry, but I blieve in a different God from u - so "Amen" that 1 in ur bible, buddy!

I never been in favor of the conspiracy theories about cheating at this level (I believe all top players are in the same conditions of doing it if they want, so there is no reason to differentiate between them), but the point of those allegations and biased propaganda is probably not to find the truth ... is to affect the ones who disagree with it.

Of course, this is a win-win situation for these people, even if they are completely wrong ... criticizing the ones who work harder than you to achieve results has been always a good "consolation" business.

- If Topalov wins, he is cheating.
- If Topalov loses misteriously, is because he got insecure for not being able to cheat in the moment.

Unfortunately, this is a situation that sportsmen cannot avoid. Nowadays, performing at top level does not only requires talent and hard work, it also requires emotional strength and stability to overcome the crappy accusations of some people, the unclassy behavior of the opponents or the pressure of performing well when you are the #1 and everyone is watching and judging you, especially if you want to be the best. That aspect is what made Kasparov so great in chess, even if he was surrounded with so many talented players of different generations.

I believe the way Topalov's team has replied all accusations in the last months and the performance so far in Morelia does not show evidence of cheating ... it shows an evidence that they cannot be indifferent to the situation, that all those things are probably in Topalov's head when playing, damaging his play and his confidence. I hope he can revert this situation and deal with it ... I am sure even the "anti-Topalovians" would enjoy a display of fantastic chess the guy can offer in his best days.

On the lighter side ... unfortunately for Topalov and despite my previous comment, today I hope to see him defeated (doing a "Shirov" or a "Morozevich" in Morelia), just because I´ve been rooting for Aronian ...

"There are differences in Topalov's case:

1. He has been accused by fellow GMs of cheating."

Do you really want to use that as standard? It seems to me that these days whenever a player does really well one or two are going to raise that question.

And there have actually been very few players who have specifically accused Topalov of cheating.

"2. Danailov has charged others of cheating "whoever smelt it dealt it"."

So you think that the players who accuse Topalov of cheating have cheated themselves?

"3. Danailov Topalov have a strange relationship."

A lot of people have strange relationships. That hardly means they are cheating in chess.

"4. Cheating is obviously possible by signaling."

First of all, the questions about how effective and helpful a hand-signaling system would be have been raised by numerous people without a satisfactory response. But even if it were...

So? That's like saying cheating is possible--therefore cheating is taking place.

And http://www.topalov.com doesn't look convincing either.

ICC down for anyone else?

I wonder if Danailov was giving Topalov any special hand signals after he resigned against Carlsen. Maybe the middle finger?

TomHanker - You have to log on to the queen server. I got this message when logging in : "Please be aware that the main server is currently offline for repirs. You are connected to the backup server. You can play games and chat normally on the backup server. Look in the event-list for current tournaments and other events. We expect main to be back online by 3PM, server time."

ICC seems to be down.

Yes, I received an email from them, saying the server will be down till about 1500hrs. (3PM)....they say log on to queen.chessclub.com to be able to play. This has happened a few times in the past, but any rating points you win or lose does NOT tranfer over once the main server is back up.

Anand's first inaccuracy seems to be 18. ..e5. Then White played the inaccurate b3 allowing Nf4 for Black.

I think Anand chose a passive plan - probably because his position was slightly better - with his 24. ..Ra7 trying to defend the b-pawn, thereby also giving up the advantage of the strong f4 Knight.

Instead, a simple 24. ..cxd5 would have put the question to White to reveal his intentions against the b-pawn. If 25 Rxb7, a d4 push creates a passer for black while also attacking the White Knight. Whether White chooses to exchange his Knight for the f4 Knight or the d7 Knight, the White a-passer needs to be given up for the Black d-passer and Black is slightly better because of White's fractured king side pawn structure.

Yes, ICC is down. Maybe the chess thiefs who messed with Radjabov are now going after ICC!

Try the chess-live server. They are up an running fine (www.chess-live.com)

Aronian-Anand. What a Masterpiece of chess! Congratulations, Levon!

Hey Yuriy Kleyner, you want to try to read what I wrote in context? I never accused Topalov of cheating. I explained why the accusations have made headlines and have attempted to explain the interest and suspicions from what I know. As I said, the most critical point is that fellow GMs have been talking about it, making it newsworthy, and that signaling is a danger and should be put to a stop. Don't put words into my mouth.

"Kramnik has integrity, Chessbase, ACP, Mig, Nigel, and the normal chess world" ... it is funny, and fitting, that you say these people and institutions have integrity. It would've been more difficult to prove my point but now that you add Nigel to the list, it just becomes a joke in anyone's eyes. i don't think anyone in your list has any integrity but that's just the easiest to point out. You should've also added Yasser and the great John Nunn haha, i'm sure they are included by association.

If popularity was the measure of "integrity" the world would be in dire straits indeed.

All that us "sorrowful creeps" are trying to achieve by keeping the discussion going about the possibility of Topalov cheating are the following two things:

1) Cheating is clearly possible in modern chess, so all top tournaments must have means of isolating the players from the outside world. This should include scanning for electronic devices and not allowing players to see the spectators. As long as tournaments are run without such measures, any player can be suspected of cheating, which is clearly not good for chess.

2) No one has proven conclusively that Topalov has not been cheating. I personally believe that there is a realistic possibility that he cheats, although quite probably he doesn't. Thus, we are entitled to examine his results in situations where he can or cannot cheat and based on that make our own conclusions. Also, by accusing other players of cheating Topalov himself has opened the door for accusations against him. He can't possibly claim now that one needs airtight proof to voice suspicions.
Again, this would all become a moot point once all of the top toournament adopt anti-cheating measures.


After reading your last 3 or 4 posts on this and other threads, I think you should take your meds and relax. It's not that big of a deal, all the conspiracies that you spew forth are all in your head. Give it a rest.

I haven't bothered to get an exact count, but I think it's just a few trolls here, that enjoy repeating anonymous derogatory comments about people they know nothing about.

While watching the Carlsen/Topalov game on ICC, most the comments from the audience had Carlsen either worse, or maybe equal. His final attack on Topalov's king seemed almost like desperation. Too me as well, I didnt have my computer running, but it did seem like Topalov might have been able to grab that pawn on b3 with his queen and create threats against Carlsen's King as well. That's quite a contrast to the analysis on various sites made after Carlsen won, everything seems put in a more positive light towards the winner.

Great, now every thread is about cheating. At least one could familiarise oneself with the arguments and refutations already discussed here


in order to keep oneself from talking rubbish like this

>Also, by accusing other players of cheating Topalov himself has opened the door for accusations against him.

(as has been said many times, this started after San Luis (Barskij article), long before Toiletgate).

Let's not go round in circles !

In conjunction with the above suggesting to someone to take his medicament has become tremendously hackneyed and only proves the authors lack of originality (in addition to poor taste).

Who ever said that someone has to always show originality in telling someone to buzz-off?

John, I didn't put any words in your mouth--everything was an exact quote. I interpreted your post in the context of the ones preceding it which argued over whether or not Topalov brought this on himself and whether accusations against him are more warranted than against other GMs. It seemed from your post that you were arguing why accusations against Topalov are more warranted. I don't think that the four standards you proposed warrant "interest and suspicion". Or even if they do, they certainly do not warrant public accusations.

Perhaps it would be helpful if somebody were to provide a list of which GMs have made public accusations against Topalov, complete with links and dates. There is a difference between Leko saying he didn't like Topalov getting the same seat, Short saying the situation might well warrant investigation, and Kramnik's close friend saying that about Topalov in the months after Elista.

I have read many times here that Karpov said he does not belive Topalov is cheater. I have never seen these intervies or letters myself, but I have never read Karpov's statements where he says the opposite.
Yesterday Karpov gave a new interview, and here an excerpt:
Q: What is your opinion on the recent scandal with Danailov being suspected of giving hints to Topalov?
A: It seems to me that if the fact of hints will be verified as proof, this is veary unpleasant. In general, all this ballyhoo (hints, computers, Topalov as cheater, bathroom problems in Elista) terribly hurts chess and it's greatness. Just terribly. I want to believe that players stop to bring this theme up to indecency, and journalists, who are interested in chess having some image and mystery, wrote less about this nonsense.
Q: Is somebody interested in this ballyhoo?
A: This is not impossible, but I'd like not to bring names here. You know, some short term interests can not cover the long term problems brought to chess with such campaigns. Of course, you can get 2 more paragraphs in some newspaper. But in a perspective this is very harmful for the game. Such scandals harm the chess image, it's place in the society. I guess, top players should think about this first. They destroy their own professional future.
Q: How do you, as a 12th Champion, personally perceive Kramnik as a king standing in one line with you, Kasparov, and other historical predeccessors? Or, may be, you accept Kramnik as Champion with provisions?
A: Form official point of view provisions can exist, but... He really won in 2000 in very serious, sufficiently long match vs. Kasparov (though 16 games - I almost never played so short WC matches, there were more games usually - but this was still a big match of full value). And did this definitely, no questions can be asked. You can argue for a while the Kasparov's shape, was he ready or not, but he did not manage to develop and had lost. And while at that moment he did not own the official title, it is obvious that a human who managed to win +2 vs. Kasparov, has the full right to be named as a 14th Champion.
Q: What to do with official FIDE knockout CHampions?
A: Alas, the federation organized very frivolous championships. With such background, Kramnik's victory over Kasparov is much more influencial than Ponoi triumph in 2001. Though Rulsan played excellent, importance of these two successes is incomparable.
Q: Since that Kramnik behaved like a Champion only twice in six years by defending the title vs. Leko and wining vs. Topalov
A: If Vladimir had no psychological issues releated to participation in tournaments and the title confirmation, nobody would question his supremacy at all. But Karpov and Kasparov accustomed the chess world that CHampion wins all competitions he participates in. But in the history of chess, if talking about long standing champions, many of them did not win tournaments, also! I can name Capablanca, Botwinnik, Petrosian, Spassky as example. I do not name Tal and Smislov because they were champions too short time, and it is hard to track dependencies for them. All of the players above prepared for a single match, the main event in their life, won, confirmed their title, and nobody asked questions. Let's look at Fischer. On his way to the title he defeated everybody, and the general public believes by inertion that after wining the title he continued to win everywhere. As a matter of fact, he won only once after that, Spassky 20 years later. May be, I was the first CHampion who won in almost every big competition fror years. Then it was continued by Kasparov. As a result, the world got used to supremacy of the best player in every single tournament.
Q: Why don't we see this during the post-Kasparov epoch?
A: May be, there are objective reasons for this. Chess continues to develop, times change. No matter how strong you are, it becomes harder and harder to beat everybody. And there is no such single outstanding player now. Why? I don't know. It is up to you to analyse.

Here is the interview in full in Russian:

2) No one has proven conclusively that Topalov has not been cheating.
Posted by: yander at February 24, 2007 14:01

What sort of clown logic la-la land have we been transported to?

No one has prove conclusively that Carlsen, Kramnik, Svidler, Karpov and Korchnoi have not been cheating either.

In the world inhabited by grown ups, if YOU accuse someone of cheating then the obligation is on YOU to provide the conclusive proof, not the other way around.

Yander, it is my belief that you think of naked gerbils when you play chess. As no one has proven conclusively that you do not - j'accuse. See how it works?

I have a slight presentiment Leko is winning today against Magnus "The Kid" Carlsen. Don't ask me for reasons ;)

Looks like Chucky is pulling another Andersson (losing with time) after move 11 (!).

Looks more like Carlsen and Leko will have the day off.

Yes, Leko is disappointing again. Why was he invited to this tournament? A question that has to be posed.

Carlsen and Leko played tennis yesterday.

Perhaps they needed a good lie down.

Leko never plays black for win. Blame Magnus, if you wish ;-)

You may think the rest days are to rest, but it shows the other days are also not bad to make a pause.

Rather surprisingly Aronian - Topalov is also drawn. Topalov seemed to be doing quite well until he inexplicably (to my eyes) took on d5 with the c-pawn. Topalov must be short of confidence to have played liked this.

Go Chucky, go!
Vassily can lose on time if he does not force exchanges...


Have I ever accused Topalov of cheating? In fact, in all of my postings I am saying that it is more likely than not that he is not cheating. However, until someone proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Topalov is not cheating, we are all free to examine the facts to see if this is a possibility.

My involvement in this thread started with me asking those who have first-hand knowledge whether Morelia and/or Linares had anti-cheating measures in place. Knowing this and Topalov's results, I can make my own conclusions about his innocence or guilt, which I will certainly not force upon others unless I think that these conclusions amount to a definite proof. But if I see Topalov repeatedly performing 200 rating points stronger in situations where he can cheat, I will personally believe that he is a cheater, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Many thanks for the translation, Vlad!

Am I right in reading chesspro.ru 's site as saying that 3 games are already drawn? Aronian-Topalov, Carlsen-Leko, Morozevich-Svidler, is that right? That leaves just Anand-Ivanchuk, what's the story here? I'm at work right now and don't know Russian...

Am I right in reading chesspro.ru 's site as saying that 3 games are already drawn? Aronian-Topalov, Carlsen-Leko, Morozevich-Svidler, is that right? That leaves just Anand-Ivanchuk, what's the story here? I'm at work right now and don't know Russian...


You're right. Those 3 games are drawn.

Thanks Martin, I now know a word in Russian: НИЧЬЯ (Drawn game). Sorry for the doppel-post.


I too thank you for the translation. Always appreciated!

Any comments on the Anand - Ivanchuk game ? All others are drawn.

Vlad Kosulin! Vlad Kosulin! Vlad Kosulin!

Looks like Vassily, having time troubles, is playing for a draw. He could try to play for win with 26...Rxd5.

Anand is an hour up! 1:11 vs. 0:11 after 26 moves.

Chucky seems to suddenly be slightly better (more in terms of opportunities and development) but is way behind on time, if I am following this correctly. Can't say much more, but Notkin should be paying more attention to this now that Aronian-Topalov is over.

While I was writing that, forgot to press "post". Chucky has positional advantage which is about to become material. However, he is virtually out of time, I think roughly a minute per move or so.

I closed both crestbook and chesspro windows, they do not dig deep on this game. Just watch the transmission on playchess.

And they got opposite colored bishops. But my blessings are with Vassily, I love him ;-)
Honestly, it looks like poor Anand this year forces his opponents to play their best games agains him. Remember Corus? And now Aronian and Ivanchuk. I am really upset Magnus felt afraid of Vishi having so promising attack :-(

I am not such a good player but couldn't Ivanchuk play something like 28 ... N * C3 instead of 28 ... Nf6?

Anand - Ivanchuk draw.

Anand's time advantage doesn't count, because he is blitzing just like Ivanchuk does.
I wonder why Anand keeps doing this, he did it against Karjakin (if I remember correctly), at Corus. He almost blew a winning position there with playing too fast.


It's not so much Anand's time advantage as Chucky's lack of time--his strategy led him to an advantage, which perhaps with more time he would have found a way to materialize.

Why is Anand blitzing? To keep Ivanchuk from going to the bathroom, of course.

good point, but are there clothed gerbils?

Ivanchuk does not need to go to the bathroom, he has a port-a-potty.

With one more extra hour on the clock against Chucky's 5 minutes for 10 moves Anand almost blew it. His Nd4 in Chuck's time trouble is unexplainable. Is that the kind of move Leko was supposed to play against Chucky when he played Nf6+?

Chucky probably smelled something fishy and played Qc5 delaying the capture of the d5 pawn. We need analysis to show if Chucky could have won the game...

Too bad Aronian didn't insist like Carlsen against Topalov, even in a drawn position, he wasted an opportunity to make Topalov blunder again. And I think this is going to be very costly, because he face Ivanchuk (his nemesis) tomorrow

Would the person who stole Svidler's balls please return them? There is a €100,000 reward.

Have I ever accused Topalov of cheating? In fact, in all of my postings I am saying that it is more likely than not that he is not cheating. However, until someone proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Topalov is not cheating, we are all free to examine the facts to see if this is a possibility.
Posted by: yander at February 24, 2007 18:30"

Once again you are using clown logic. Your argument is flawed. To give you an example in your own words....

Have I ever accused Yander of cow-molesting? In fact, in all of my postings I am saying that it is more likely than not that he is not cow-molesting. However, until someone proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Yander is not cow-molesting, we are all free to examine the facts to see if this is a possibility.

You are free to argue and believe whatever you want. The point I am making is that you cannot argue in this particular form if you want to be taken seriously, because the form is logically invalid.


What is invalid about my logic? Yes, you are also free to examine the possibility about me cow-molesting. If you can come up with some facts that support your theory, please feel free to post them here.

But according to you, Yander I do not have to provide any facts. It is YOUR responsibility to prove conclusively that you are NOT cow-molesting.

I'm sorry you cannot see this simple point and I now leave you to your bovine Bacchanalia.

Chuky has got the pawn and the compensation...

Arriba Ivanchuk!


Statistical evidence is facts. If Topalov were to consistently perform better in situations where he could cheat, that would be an important fact. I am not saying he does, but this is worth exploring. If you believe he is not cheating, there is nothing that his fans should be afraid about.

I am sorry that YOU cannot see this simple point.

"Statistical evidence is facts."

Facts where? What stats? You gave Babson your logic, now you give him your cajones!

Worth exploring, Topalov cheating? Let me laugh. It is not worth exploring in the least. It's ridiculous.

Twitter Updates

    Follow me on Twitter



    About this Entry

    This page contains a single entry by Mig published on February 23, 2007 4:42 PM.

    Russia for Russians was the previous entry in this blog.

    Linares 2007 r7 is the next entry in this blog.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.