Aronian, Gelfand, Leko to Mexico

"On Chess.FM Jon Speelman quite admired Kamsky's fighting spirit, deciding to play on in a simplified position a pawn down rather than take a draw and come back the next day with the nearly hopeless task of playing a must-win with black against Gelfand."

Here is what Gata himself had to say about the decision in the situation:

Q: Why, Gata? Why not try to beat him with black in the last game?
A: Why try, he is better prepared and I don't have [this is hard to translate] anything hidden debut-wise.

Now that was from Vasilyev's report at chesspro.ru. A slightly different version is given by Mikhail Savinov at russiachess.org as
A: "*dismissive hand wave* It's Gelfand. He is wonderfully prepared. And I don't have anything ready."

Might be two separate interviews.
Any idea how Gata managed to perform very well at last year's Mtel and Olympiad? Has he lapsed working on database since?

"It's a pity Anand, Svidler, and Morozevich weren't forced to qualify too."

It's a pity that the same format hasn't been retained for the remaining 8 players in Mexico too.

Indeed, sT, although I don't want to bang that drum in every single post.

Thanks Yuriy, that sounds about right. Fighting spirit can look a lot like suicidal tendencies at some point. Clearly he had better chances in just about anything with black in game six, prepared or not, than the simplified pawn-down position he had in game five. As Speelman put it, however, if he had managed to make a draw in game 5 anyway after all that provocation it would have put Gelfand under some pressure. But five games of agony takes a toll on anyone.

I want to add my voice to something I'm hearing from Mark Crowther and Mig and other fans.

I cannot believe that players in Candidates Matches, given a shot at progressing to the World Chess Championship, cannot get off their duff and prepare! Study!

I know MarkC is disappointed - I can hear the disgust in his commentary. Here is finally the format he wants, with Candidates Matches leading to a shot at a chess world championship -- how dare some players disrespect the situation by just winging it!

I'm not really old enough to remember it, but did players like Petrosian or Smyslov ever fail to prepare for what must be considered their most important games of the year? Maybe Tal would just wing it, I don't know.

Would not an Olympic athlete at least work on his starts, and run in warm-up meets beforehand? Lift some weights perhaps?

Seems to me an indication that players like Kamsky and Bacrot either don't believe they are good enough, or don't give a cr*p. I once respected Kamsky, but if he doesn't care enough to try to win, well, I don't care about him either. Wave bye bye, chess tourist. That seat is reserved for Gelfand, who fully deserves it.

tjallen

Should be fun to watch the Grischuk-Rublevsky battle tomorrow.

Mig, why do you say "Grischuk would add more flash and dash to Mexico City than Rublevsky."?

Rublevsky cannot play interesting chess also?

The whole system is somehow not correct. There should be a qualification for all participants in Mexico (without the title holder). Those were tough fights the players had to go in Elista, and what did they others do: walk in the park.

I think Mig is right about Grischuk having a somewhat flashier style than Rublevsky.

Still I was very impressed by how firmly in control Rublevsky was in the semi-final against Ponomariov. He was very successful neutralizing Pono's tactical skill. Rublevsky has excellent, precise technique and this virtue deserves to get a little praise every now and then.

I was just looking at the April FIDE rating list and I was surprised when I discovered that Rublevsky is only 33. There's something about his whole aura that makes you think of him as a wily, grizzled veteran.

LarryT, these days 33 IS a grizzled veteran!

I don't feel the need to pile on Kamsky's preparation, though. I remember that when Kasparov retired he spoke of how much more intense the opening preparation was in 2004 as opposed to 2000 when he squared off against Kramnik. That was 4 years, and even Kasparov was getting weary about the amount of work that went into preparation, and that was three years ago now. I get the feeling that the ten years Kamsky was (mostly) retired, the game changed much more radically at the top than one would think.

From another perspective, if Bacrot and Kamsky can win through to this stage without having done all the preparation of a Gelfand, then is that there fault, or the fault of those who couldn't beat them in the previous stage? For that matter, what was Bareev's excuse in not having prepared something for a must-win-as-Black situation?

Three differences between this candidates cycle and every previous one:

1. Amount of debut preparation required to be at this level is probably growing much faster than human intelligence capacity.
2. Previously, candidates matches featured top 8 players in the world. This one has 20. Do Bareev and Bacrot really think they stand a good chance of making it to Mexico and finishing in top 3? Probably not, and they play accordingly.
3. With a six-game format the pressure of "not making a mistake" is much higher than any other impetus. One decisive result drastically changes the match.

Nonetheless:

1. This is the best thing to happen in chess in qutie a while. I haven't been this excited about anything chess aside from maybe the Elista match early on.
2. I am disgusted that a GM would dismiss his chances in another game and openly admit that he has nothing prepared. It is even more disrespectful of the fans, the sponsors, other players than a short draw.

One question I do have is this: did Kamsky do much prep work since last year's Olympiad? It seems as though he's just been playing, with no prep before hand. (Which, as Mig indicates, makes his 2700 level performances all the more impressive.)

I guess the problem of professionell players is indeed the fact that some opening lines are known till move 25 or so. Not much to add it feels. But also in Capablanca days some lines in Queen's gambit were analyzed to this point. So, where's the creativity?
This tells me something: Chess is not art. In arts you will ALWAYS be able to create a NEW story.
But I'm also sure that some pros who began to play poker will shortly recognize that poker is a very dull game - even more than chess.

"Thus ended a Quixotic run at the world championship by the world's strongest lawyer Grandmaster."

Typically Mig ...

Leko in an interview yesterday:

"From a psychological point of view, my second game against Gurevich had great importance. It was annoying how easily he drew me in the first game. But then playing white, his novelty did not work out, which gave my confidence a big boost. I had enough time to prepare against Bareev; the first two games were interesting, he could've got a chance with ...Ne4, but only an engine would find this move in such a short time. We had both been calculating the sacrifice ...Rxf2. The loss shook him, so he went for a quick draw in the next game. I had no problems against his novelty in the fourth game, which I could've won as well.
There's not much time to prepare for Dortmund now, but this success gave me confidence for both this upcoming tournament and the World Championship."

http://www.origo.hu/sport/sakk/20070612jottett.html

Edit: not the first two games, only the first was interesting against Bareev...
To say that the second game was interesting would be too much even for Leko's style.

The thing I like about Leko is he is very honest. He knows he was better than Gurevich and Bareev and he has no problems to communicate this. But he also knows that the chance he had back in 2004 in his match against Kramnik will never come back. He was smashed through the ropes in the last game which was one of the finest games of this decade.

unstable this! garry kimovich. aronian is on his to mejico.

Do all 16 of these guys qualify for World Cup '08?

Not sure if anybody has mentioned this, but Kamsky had a bit of bad luck when his computer(s) crashed during MTell. In a Chessvibes interview he admitted he could not properly prepare for the candidate match with Bacrot.

The interview can be watched at http://www.chessvibes.com/?p=828

It seems a bit silly, but maybe this explains Gata's poor opening play.

2. I am disgusted that a GM would dismiss his chances in another game and openly admit that he has nothing prepared. It is even more disrespectful of the fans, the sponsors, other players than a short draw.

He's just being realistic. Kamsky would have been Black against Gelfand, whose great strength is his solid playing style. Gelfand doesn't tend to overreach with White in normal tournament games, let alone in cases such as this, when he has "Draw Odds" as White. Kamsky, as Black, could have created a dynamic position, but probably at the price of objectively ceding a big edge to Gelfand. Or, he could have played "correctly", and limited Gelfand to a microscopic edge in a static position. Either way, Kamsky probably had less than a 10% chance of getting his needed win in Game 6.

Still, it made more sense than playing for the loss.

What surprises me is that Kamsky wasn't satisfied in Game 3 to play for the draw (which would have almost certainly led to better clock management), and defy Gelfand to WIN as White. In essence, to play for a decision in the Rapid tie-breaks.
Unless things have changed, Gelfand doesn't have the reputation for having the best nerves among the Elite chessplayers, and things would have been a crap shoot.

I mean, was anyone who knew about chess really that surprised that Kamsky lost to Gelfand? The Russian's kicking, parental power days are over. You can't just take a massive break from chess and expect to compete at the top level. His ELO shouldn't even have been preserved for that long.

"If it's all or nothing you spray-paint some stripes on your raggedy leopard ass and go out like a tiger."

Amen.

I just looked at the last Bareev game, and I wonder why more isn't being made out of it. It looked like collusion, plain and simple. What possible benefit does Bareev gain from offering a draw there? Hell, if you are going to sell out, at least make it look good - exchange off those pieces and then lie down on the floor. The way he did it makes him look extremely bad, and Leko gets hit as well as someone who might have bought someone off.

I doubt I can ever take Bareev seriously again, he isn't just resigning the game there, he is resigning his career and manhood.

The vultures have been drawn to the DD... "chess tourist", "disgusted": strong words, one can only guess whether their authors can back them up with own skills... I mean the guy loses a game/match, gets dragged to the press conference in his current condition of disappointment and basically makes any statement just to get out of it. Watching game three (2nd round) I thought something (other than lack of preparation) must have happened, either illness or bad news from back home or the like. I appreciate what Kamsky has demonstrated to be possible to achieve with bare hands / otb work / talent. By contrast I consider everybody sitting in front of his database 12 hours a day in order to "surprise" each other on move 30 of what is coincidentally or after a fashion considered to be "theory" rather unimaginative / childish.

>His ELO shouldn't even have been preserved for that long.

After an initial downfall following his comeback he has regained more than 30 points since Apr 06. Being active and playing rated games, how can one/anybody "preserve" his ELO rating ?

Is there an upper boundary on the absurdity of chess blog comments ?

There is a huge difference, in terms of theoretical preparation needed, between playing 2600-level opposition and 2700-level. As I recall, Kamsky primarily made his comeback by playing against the former, where his better understanding of the game allowed him to shine despite his lack of prep.

However, not all 2700-level performances are alike.

"Is there an upper boundary on the absurdity of chess blog comments ?"

Yes there was, but you broke those limits with some of your K-T posts so now every one feels they can post nonsense too :-) [half kidding]. But in your post above, I agree with your sentiment---"appreciate what Kamsky has demonstrated to be possible to achieve with bare hands / otb work / talent." I don't particularly like Gata-let's-settle-this-like-men-Kamsky, but I wouldn't kick him when he's down although I imagine another GM might be tempted ;->

"Hell, if you are going to sell out, at least make it look good - exchange off those pieces and then lie down on the floor. The way he did it makes him look extremely bad, and Leko gets hit as well as someone who might have bought someone off."

Berating Bareev for a lack of fighting spirit is one thing, but spouting nonsensical collusion accusations is quite another. And just how does 'making it look good' by exchanging off the pieces change what was really going on, unless you consider formality an able substitute for sincerity?

"I doubt I can ever take Bareev seriously again, he isn't just resigning the game there, he is resigning his career and manhood."

The outrageous dramatics of a soap opera will cost Bareev exactly zero hours of sleep.

DOug, of course Game 6 on paper would not look like a very good proposition for Gata. Everything that happened in the match up to this point put things in Gelfand's favor. But that's why you play actual games. Heck, if you are gonna act based on realistic forecast, Gurevich probably shouldn't have even showed up to play Leko. At least see that it's a draw or that you have no advantage and then you can leave.

"Bareev's (---) Caro Kann't in a must win situation." Mig the Word Wizard at his best! Very entertaining reading as always!

But, considering "must-wins", isn't Shirovs draw against Aronian in last game also worth some pondering? I like Shirov A LOT and would have preferred him to play on until a Sofia rule-situation was on the board. Am I too critical? Was the draw simply too obvious for players at that level that Shirov couldn't resist to offer it?

Candidates high points: Aronian's 2 matches especially aganisy Shirov closely fought top class chess, Grischuks matches same thing

Low points: 1) Kamsky's performance against Gelfand - what does this guy do all day every day?? Clearly he cannot even spend 30 minutes going online looking at Bb5 c4 line on a free database and what black players over 2650 or 2700 have been playing against it. Oh yeah I forgot his laptops not working... anyway this Gelfand bloke is, like, too well prepared man... 2) Mr "Im a chess trainer now" Bareev taking a pounding in the same variation of the caro - twice! Then opting for a please give me a draw variation so I dont lose anymore rating points caro line. I wish there was a better word than Mig's description of "pathetic" I imagine Kasparovs thoughts on these guys would be unprintable.

Cynical Gripe : “Berating Bareev for a lack of fighting spirit is one thing, but spouting nonsensical collusion accusations is quite another. And just how does 'making it look good' by exchanging off the pieces change what was really going on, unless you consider formality an able substitute for sincerity?”
Man are you really still that angry that I called you a dummy, even by low, low Canadian standards of intelligence, that you are going to pick a fight over this? You really need my obvious points explained to you - like a child – or are you purposefully being obtuse just so you can find some way to salve your hurt feelings and lash out at me?
I’ll humor you, just like the US humors Canada in general and pretends we are international equals. Bareev gets a prized place in what is the de facto candidates process and a chance to be called World Champion of the game he’s devoted his life to, and, in a must win situation, plays 19 moves and *he himself* offers the draw? (From Chessbase: Having completed his development, Bareev offered to his opponent a draw - and the qualification for Mexico.) You don’t see why that makes no sense and why it LOOKS like collusion? I know the education system is terrible up there, but I had no idea the extent of the lameness. Perhaps you need a diagram breaking it down for you. If your reading comprehension weren’t already proven to be poor, you would have noticed the sentences I wrote preceding the one you quoted: “It looked like collusion, plain and simple. What possible benefit does Bareev gain from offering a draw there?”
You don’t see that even if no collusion existed (and it is by no means a wildly illogical conclusion that collusion was a factor, given the facts), it would do Bareev a great deal of good for his reputation to fight on beyond move 19 with two rooks, the queen, two minors, and six pawns apiece still in play? You really don’t see why it matters that offering a draw here, at move 19, versus offering a draw when a lot more pieces have come off and when the majority of observers can see the draw coming would make a difference to Bareev’s future as more and more tournaments of interest or invite-only (or of course the most logical choice- NEVER offering a draw and playing until bare kings)? If Bareev was resigning the match to Leko in his own mind, even without any hint from Leko, you don’t see why his career takes a hit by the manner he chose? So with all those downsides to what Bareev did, and no logical upside whatsoever, the very logical question is why would he offer the draw on move 19 - in a must win game - for a shot at every chess player’s dreams - with all of the heavy pieces still on the board in an opening Bareev is very familiar with?!? “Collusion” never enters your simple mind, given all this, even as just a suspicion?
Can it be proved? OF COURSE NOT, but there is the court of law, and the court of public opinion. With invite-only tournaments, both surely matter.
Cynical Gripe : “The outrageous dramatics of a soap opera will cost Bareev exactly zero hours of sleep.”
If he wants to be a professional chess player, it will cost him more than you think (or are capable of thinking, apparently). Then again, you are the guy who thinks the CAD is 113x more respected than the Yen because of some dumb conversion chart, so it is no surprise that you cannot think beyond this level. Now go back to watching American programming on CTV before I get angry and convince America to steal something else like Curling for you like we took Hockey away effortlessly and now control it.

It's always easier to criticize. Until we play a candidates match, we won't fully understand the pressure and everything that goes with it. They are just being honest, give them a break.

Frankly, I think we are lucky that none of the lower-rated players went for the draw every game and take their chances in rapid and blitz. Of the matches that went to play-off, none of them was reached by outright intention to draw every game of the match.

"Is there an upper boundary on the absurdity of chess blog comments ?"

No, there is no upper boundary.

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

"I’ll humor you, just like the US humors Canada in general and pretends we are international equals."

Children do like to pretend, don't they?

Stern... I am having trouble, with my deficient Canadian education and with reference to you, spelling N-O-R-O-M. Oh, wait a sec... I see it now! Oh, silly me - I spelled the word backwards! Pardon me for stooping to your level, but your comments deserve no less (and no more). Now go back in the boat to where your name suggests, eh. Eh?

Stern,

Haha...if Bareev played out as many moves as lines you fill up on this blog when you get upset, he might have worn out his opponent to the point of resignation in a drawn position.

If you keep babbling about Canada being such a terrible and worthless country, you just might convince a few people. But I'm sure you'll manage to convince more that you've got some serious biases and inferiority complexes to work out. Good luck with that. All I see is an ignorant fool lauding the status of his country while his only contribution is a few anemic rants on a chess blog.

For all your huffing and puffing, your collusion theory is still quite lame. Honestly, if they were colluding, don't you think they'd make more of an effort to make it look realistic, maybe by trading off those pieces as you so desperately craved? Or maybe even maintaining some complications as Leko slowly builds up an advantage in the endgame? An equally plausbile theory would be Bacrot throwing his match against Kamsky. A dreadful performance for a 2700 rated player including a loss on time. I wonder why you're not chirping away about that?

Your 'more respected' in reference to currency is a bit puzzling. If you look back, you'll see you initially called the Canadian dollar 'worthless', not disrespected. That's a stock American joke that even the likes of Mig and Homer Simpson don't mind using. But then you changed your mind and started harping about GDP, implying that's what your comment was about. Now it's the world's 'respect' for a given currency that counts. Forgive my stupidity, but I get the impression you're not even sure what you're trying to say.

"Now go back to watching American programming on CTV before I get angry and convince America to steal something else like Curling for you like we took Hockey away effortlessly and now control it."

Yes, there are more viable franchise locations in the U.S. simply due to greater population and lower taxes. And we thank you for supporting teams based largely on Canadian and European players!

Guys, probably Bareev thought he had already missed his chances. He was down 2 games, so he needed 2 wins in a row, and then he wouldn't qualify yet, he would have still to win the tie-breaks. And in the event such a miracle occured, he would have been a serious contender for finishing in last place in the upcoming Mexico tournament. Remember that Leko himself finished (shared) last of the recent Morelia-Linares 2007, so it was even more discouraging to be 1.0 - 3.0 against him.

Likewise for Kamsky, he played on, but with the queens on the board. There was a real chance of a missed tactical shot on Gelfand's side, until the very end.

"strong words, one can only guess whether their authors can back them up with own skills..."

Obviously, we are fans. If we could "back it up with skills" then I'd be sitting there looking at Grischuk's mug myself, and you'd be asking why he resigned to me.

Do you expect soccer fans to make penalty shots? Make em or shut up? Then there'd be no fans.

And the comments made were regarding preparation, practice and study, not individual chess moves. We are talking about motivation and making the best of life's chances, not whether Bd3 was good enough.

In the Chessbase Kramnick interviews, K suggests that Mexico and other major tournaments will start to have a time delay on move transmission.

But won't the audience defeat this by phoning the moves to others? We see today whenever the feed from important games goes down, someone in the audience relays the moves. (like Valentia this morning?) Won't this same practice undermine the delayed transmission of moves?

Ultimately I'm happy that Kamsky played in the candidates matches. The end result might be disappointing (I admit I didn't think he could get past Bacrot so I as pleasantly suprised), but he was the only representative from the U.S. and I'm from the U.S. so that's who I cheer. There were other American players who had their chance to make it to the candidates matches but unfortunately didn't make it, but I'm glad Kamsky did. As for saying that Kamsky doesn't like people speculating about his career, that applies to almost every sports player too, but people are going to talk about it anyway.

In a way, I can understand Kamsky and Bareev. They were completely demoralized. They could not pose the smallest problem to their well-prepared opponent so they prefered to end their suffering as soon as possible.
Do you know that Bacrot asked for his return ticket before his last game with Kamsky (which he duly lost)? He played in the French league a few days afterwards.

macuga, you appear to have forgotten Kamsky's result in Sofia last year, where he was the only player under 2700 in the tournament, but came second with a 2831 performance.

Tjallen,
if they delay the transmission of moves, then they will also forbid the use of mobile phones by the audience.
A possible rule can be that if a spectator leaves the tournament hall, then he may only enter again after 30 minutes.

Neither in calculating his plans nor in executing tactics did Kamsky have a lot of trouble. His only problems seemed to be lack of time and opening preparation. He blundered only in time trouble, and while he wasn't able to generate good ideas on board nonetheless defended quite well against those of his opponent (who probably, btw, played the most error-free chess of all the competitors). Which suggests that he is is still capable of terrific chess and just needs to work harder getting prepared. Childish (?) and unimaginative as it might be, chess requires hard work and not just dubious otb sacrifices.

So Anand, Kramnik, Morozevich, Aronian, Leko, Svidler, Gelfand and Grischuk will play in Mexico. What a great tournament!

And yet... imagine these eight instead playing knock out matches for the title:

Quarter finals - Anand beats Grischuk, Kramnik slowly breaks down Gelfand, while fire and water meet in two completely unpredictable matches, Morozevich vs. Svidler and Aronian vs. Leko.

Semi finals - Anand goes trough some trouble to beat either Aronian or Leko. Meanwhile, Kramnik patiently grinds down either Morozevich or Svidler.

And finally - Anand and Kramnik battle it out in a 16-game match for the title of undisputed World Champion!

Just dreamin'...

Sweet dreams are made of these...

Could someone bring me up to date on the championship rules (and I realize they could change next week)? If Kramnik doesn't win in Mexico, does he still get to challenge the winner? And the rule where if someone raises $1-2 million they can challenge the champ, is that still in effect?

I don't think the current system is perfect (I think Topolov should replace Kramnik and this should be a Candidates Tournament), but it's a helluva better than what we had before.

So the exclusivity of traditional chess1 is causing some popular players to QUIT CHESS EARLY: a sad and avoidable loss for us all.

So many of the comments in this thread are equivalent to what advocates of chess960 (FRC) write:

----------------
{MIG wrote:
... how well Kamsky could play when he got a chance and knowing he'd rarely get those chances without the opening work required at the highest levels. It was as if Gelfand started every game with a big plus

The speculation around Kamsky's chess career, or lack thereof, will now begin anew.
}

--------------------
{TJALLEN wrote:
... I'm hearing from Mark Crowther and Mig ...

I cannot believe that players in Candidates Matches, given a shot at progressing to the World Chess Championship, cannot get off their duff and prepare! Study!
}
// GM: My how easy it is to slam a professional player for having a life beyond the dull tedium of memorizing openings (or memorizing his understanding of them).

------------------
{MACUGA wrote:
... [Kamsky's] better understanding of the game allowed him to shine despite his lack of prep.
}
// GM: Now that is chess!

Thanks.

**************************
*** QUESTION FOR MIG ***
**************************

? Was the large time and effort needed to keep up with openings information a factor in Kasparov's decision to retire from chess as early as he did?

{ICEPICK wrote:
I remember that when Kasparov retired he spoke of how much more intense the opening preparation was in 2004 as opposed to 2000 when he squared off against Kramnik. That was 4 years, and even Kasparov was getting weary about the amount of work that went into preparation,
}

Thanks.

Everybody is ragging on Kamsky for his supposed lack of home preparation.

Curiously, Aronian has said in more than one interview that he "never studies chess".

Apparently no one here takes Aronian at his word. Is Aronian a clown? A braggart?

Or, could it be possible? Is he blessed with gigantic intuition, a natural feel for the board and the pieces?

'Curiously, Aronian has said in more than one interview that he "never studies chess".'

Well, he said that in the past, but that's clearly not true anymore. He said in one interview that he would increase his preparations at the elite level, and he has. Even if his seconds are doing most the work, he's absorbing it. He wins several games on prep.

He does have the talent too though.

"Even if [Aronian's] seconds are doing most of the work, he's absorbing it. He wins several games on prep."

One possible, partial explanation of Kamsky's results? He was one of only 3 players out of 16 in the matches who did NOT have second, wasn't he? I understood that tome players have seconds not just for a specific event but for long-term preparation and assistance; even large teams at times. I don't think Kamsky does. That would present a large handicap that would present itself primarily in openings, I would think.

Just a thought. *shrug*

Cynical Gripe:

I almost always enjoy your posts. This is just a shout out to one of the five or six posters worth reading!

Guh.

Very disappointed Kamsky didn't take the 1/2 point and live to fight another day. Has Gelfand NEVER lost as white? Even if he hasn't, there is always a first time. He gave up, and for that reason I am disappointed.

tjallen: Kamsky was unable to fully prepare because his laptop died on him. It is not from a lack of effort, but more from a lack of resources.

I don't think it's fair to say Kramnik "gave up". He was feeling a bit down about things and when you are feeling a bit down your judgement is affected.

It might have seemed to him that he had a better chance of hoodwinking Gelfand somehow with queens on board in game 5 than overcoming his lack of quality preparation with Black in game 6.

Whether that is a good judgment or not is open to question, but it is not "giving up" in my book.

You can call what Bareev did giving up if you want; which makes what Polgar did in the previous round when facing the same situation even more admirable.

justice on the end!grischuk got the final spot.he dominated the match till that stupid novelty in the 4 th game.still,he got sweet revenge in scotch today.ofcourse he 'll bring more flash then rublevsky and pono,couse his atacking skills are great.good job!

Oops... Obviously meant Kamsky in the first paragraph two comments ago. Sorry to Mr. Vlady, he has no reason to feel down on himself at all. :-)

Maybe Aronian had some weaknesses in the openings a while ago, it doesn't really seem to show very much lately. (Maybe someone like Kamsky can actually say this with any truth behind it.)

Statements like this are also a form of psychological battle: the opponent will be thinking "He doesn't know any openings or study chess and I still can't beat him!" Very demoralizing. If you really believe this. Of course; the subconscious mind is a tricky thing (why did you think you bought _that_ soft drink/snack/useless gizmo and not another?), maybe it still has an effect no matter what you tell yourself.
Being the underdog is usually the best position on the psychological battlefield: nothing to lose, the other one _has_ to win, underestimation, if you lose (as the underdog) it was only normal, etc etc.

In a way, I am sad Rublevsky didn't make it. Call me a sentimental old fool, but he is so evidently a chess player, and nothing but a chess player (as his shirt in the last game shows). For him, Mexico would have been the chance of a lifetime; Grischuk would always have the EPT to fall back on.

Rublevsky reminds me of Geller and Kholmov: seriously inelegant Grandmasters of very high rank.

If I have not made myself clear, I am not in any way making fun of GM Rublevsky. I admire his devotion to our game and his impressive accomplishment in playing it.

I thought it would be fitting for him to go to Mexico and for Grischuk to catch a plane to Las Vegas, where there are still lots of events in the WSOP that might interest him.

Tried to find news on Grischuk Rublevsky match on the fide website, instead stumbled on the following:
"http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1377"

Now that's chess news... NOT!

That's the kind of news you get with cult of personality: our leader achieved a great success, people all over his kingdom rejoice. That includes the chess world, apparently.

Maybe someone should tell mister Ilyumzhinov that nobody outside Russia takes him seriously (except for Nigel Short maybe :-) )

Re the news at http://www.fide.com/news.asp?id=1377
Maybe that has some bearing on chess. Possibly as a result of increased revenues and profits from the deal, the illustrious leader Ilyumzhinov can continue to sponsor chess for a few more years. :-)

Ravi

I prefered Topalov (or even Ivanchuk or Radjabov) instead of Gelfand or Grischuk :)) ,- in this case truly we could say: "What a great tournament!"

And yet more... imagine that will be playing knock out matches for the matche against Kramnik for World Champ!
:TOPALOV and ANAND - allowed to eight candidates without qualifying.
Another 6 must be desided from approximately 24 equals players to which alongside those 16 dwellers of Elista we was lacked Ivanchuk, Radjabov, Mamedyarov, Akopian, Jakovenko...

Just dreamin'... :)) Goods olds days...

*******************************
*** ANSVER FOR bondegnasker ***
*******************************
{So Anand, Kramnik, Morozevich, Aronian, Leko, Svidler, Gelfand and Grischuk will play in Mexico. What a great tournament!

And yet... imagine these eight instead playing knock out matches for the title:

Quarter finals - Anand beats Grischuk, Kramnik slowly breaks down Gelfand, while fire and water meet in two completely unpredictable matches, Morozevich vs. Svidler and Aronian vs. Leko.

Semi finals - Anand goes trough some trouble to beat either Aronian or Leko. Meanwhile, Kramnik patiently grinds down either Morozevich or Svidler.

And finally - Anand and Kramnik battle it out in a 16-game match for the title of undisputed World Champion!

Just dreamin'...}

I prefered Topalov (or even Ivanchuk or Radjabov) instead of Gelfand or Grischuk :)) ,- in this case truly we could say: "What a great tournament!"

And yet more... imagine that will be playing knock out matches for the matche against Kramnik for World Champ!
:TOPALOV and ANAND - allowed to eight candidates without qualifying.
Another 6 must be desided from approximately 24 equals players to which alongside those 16 dwellers of Elista we was lacked Ivanchuk, Radjabov, Mamedyarov, Akopian, Jakovenko...

Just dreamin'... :)) Goods olds days...

Now that Spassky has a house in Elista, will there be Fischer-Spassky III in Elista too?

zero they seem to be happening every 20 years so 5 more till Kirsan sponsors one

Top candidates to the title world chess champion

( foreign matadores):

**** from Armenia *****

i) Aronian ( El Cheap Tactician and his hot señorita )

**** from Russia ****

ii) Morozevich ( El Charada )

iii) Kramnik ( El Captán D´Armada Russa )

iv) Grischuk ( El Texas Hold~ Señor )

Serious Candidates to the title Moral World Chess Champion:

******* apacible matadores *******

i)Anand ( a chess-brahmin, he is well above the selfish mundane motivations to become World champ)

ii)Gelfand ( ready to draw against any 2700++ matador, including Deep junior ).

iii)Leko ( a too logic player and mighty remis seeker ).

iv)Svidler ( co-star champion and Kortschnojs successor).

It will be an interesting tournament. Every participant is capable of scoring +2 which might be enough to share first place, although I think that someone will score +4.
For me, Anand, Aronian and Kramnik are the favorites for first place. Grischuk and Morozevich are favorites for last place.
I made an rough estimate of the betting odds:
Aronian : 5.3
Anand : 3.1
Morozevich: 20
Kramnik: 6.2
Grischuk: 30
Leko: 8.4
Gelfand: 17
Svidler: 14

I'd make Kramnik strong favourite to win Mexico

mefisto's betting odds are stupid.moro finished in 4 th in the last world ch.ahead of lets say leko.now you see him last!!!i guess you have the most talented players favorites 4 last,only because they play too ambitious(optimistic)you don't crap about this game

mefisto's betting odds are stupid.moro finished in 4 th in the last world ch.ahead of lets say leko.now you see him last!!!i guess you have the most talented players favorites 4 last,only because they play too ambitious(optimistic)you don't crap about this game

eigis wake up please!!ivanchuk,radjabov,mamedyarov played in the last cycle of world ch(world cup 05)and they lost big time.mamed in the first round!!radja 2nd round.they suposed to play ahead of grischuk who was the big gun of world cup 05,only because you like them?????

dan cimpy,
that's why I have won so much money with betting against Morozovich. The expectations of his fans are not realistic. The guy is very talented, but so are the others too. Leko has already won Wijk aan Zee (clear first), Linares and Dortmund (shared first). Moro hasn't won any supertournament yet.

mefisto i was talking strictly about world ch not about any comercial tournament.moro was ahead of leko and others at the 05 world ch,this is the reason he qualified directly and leko had to play 'canidates'.though he didn't win linares nor dormund moro won more tournaments than leko(see biel-3 times,pamplona07etc)cause he realy can play when is in good mood.by the way drawko was in last place at the last super tourney.i don't know how you made your fortune,not in the chess world anyway.

eigis wake up please!!ivanchuk,radjabov,mamedyarov played in the last cycle of world ch(world cup 05)and they lost big time.mamed in the first round!!radja 2nd round.they suposed to play ahead of grischuk who was the big gun of world cup 05,only because you like them?????

--Posted by: dan cimpoiasu at June 15, 2007 08:15

Yes, I too would much rather watch Ivanchuk, Radjabov, or Mamedyarov playing at Mexico City instead of Grischuk but Grischuk EARNED his right to play there by winning when the games mattered most whereas my preferred players all failed at the World Cup '05 when they had the chance.

Everyone at Mexico City deserves to be there because they earned it the old fashioned way: they won when the pressure was on. That's the one thing I really admire about Kramnik. Even though I am not a fan of his, Kramnik is a tremendous important-game player.

gmnotyet,right to the point buddy.the8 earned big time.topalov is got a point to play there,but he sign a contract,he lost to kramnik and HE IS OUT!!!so is between the G8 now.

Mexico City amounts to another Super GM tournament, along the lines of Linares. I don't think we'll see a +6 result, as at San Luis 2005. This event is therefore not as likely to be as compelling, for 2 reasons:

1) There is likely to be a close race for first, instead of a runaway, with a winner who has clearly established dominance. By the end of San Luis, most of the chess community was convinced that Topaliv was the strongest player--so Topaliv's victory in the tournament meant something. Even if there is a clear winner in the Mexico City event, it will probably be at +3, by only half a point....

2) The Champion (tournament winner) will either be Kramnik (I would expect the winner would come from the rest of the field, though), or will have to face Kramnik in a few more months. Either way, the Champion's crown awarded by the Mexico City event must necessarilty be deemed to be less valuable--therefore less prestigious.

One other comment: I think that the Candidate's matches ought to have been organized along the typical lines of having the 2nd Round of Matches be comprised of MORE games than the 1st Round. So, in the Elista event, the 2nd round of matches might have been scheduled for 8 games, then any tie-breaks. I don't think that a slightly longer match would have changed any results--the 4 qualifiers to Mexico City would have been the same. However, it is a logical thing to do, in order to denote the increasing importance of each round of matches, as the Candidate's cycle progresses. FIDE used to do it that way.

I pretty much agree with Mefisto's bets, except that I'd make Anand and Kramnik equal first. In fact, I expect these two to finish a full point ahead of third, who would probably be Leko or Aronian.

Moro's low position makes a lot of sense. It's not about how high a position he will end up, it's about his probability to win the tournament and this is close to zero.

Kramnik has not been performing exceptionally well in super-gm tournaments lately, but Aronian has, sharing first at Wijk an Zee. Therefore, I would place Aronian in the group to win.

I think that absence of Ivanchuk really plays into Aronian's hands. Probably Anand and he are the favourites, together with Kramnik. Kramnik is not the ultimate tournament player, but he said he wants to win it and Kramnik is Kramnik.

DOug, i agree that as you go deeper in Candidates Matches, they should be more games to reflect the growing importance, but from when Fischer got his title, all CMs were best of 10 games. He beat Taimanov 6-0, Larsen 6-0 and then Petrosian (forgot the score). Maybe in CMs in 1974 or later they increased but that's what I remember off the top of my head.

What I would like to see is round of 16 matches go 6 games, quarterfinals be 8 gamnes, semis go 10 and the finals go to best of 12 games. The winner would then face the World Champion in a best of 16. I like having all the CMs in one place but they should break it up into two tourneys. The first two rounds in one location and the semis and finals in another.

But I doubt anything like this would ever get implemented.

Danailov officially says that FIDE broke a contract they had with Topalov:

http://interviews.chessdom.com/silvio-danailov-interview

Ah yes, I see that Silvio thinks Kramnik 'reacted hysterically' in game five but in his next response thinks that Kramnik is lying when he says he was 'emotional'.

I can't quite make Danailov out. It's tempting to think he's simply a complete charlatan, but experience in litigation (my day job) leads me to believe that both sides usually persuade themselves of the truth of what they say somehow; the cold-blooded liar is rare than one imagines. I suppose he must just be one of these people who always remains a child in some ways, while being able to behave in a perfectly adult, even unusually competent, manner in others. Not so uncommon. You see those a lot in litigation as well.

jcm

If Danailov would be 100% sure FIDE broke the contract, he would have protested far sooner and more vehemently, I think. We have exactly the same situation as 5 months ago: Topalov is out, and he does not get a rematch before Mexico. See http://www.veselintopalov.net/article/the-sports-court-in-lausanne-will-decide dated 29 January.

Even if Danailov is right, the contract would not give Topalov what Danailov wants now: the right to play in Mexico, as the 9th player. It would have given him the right to play 1 player. Why this change?

Let's suppose Danailov is right. What to do? Do what he protests against, changing the rules in the middle of the cycle, and let Topalov play Mexico? That would also be against the contract Topalov signed before Elista - the loser of that match was out.

Another piece so full of demonstrable lies, falsehoods and misleading statements that you can't take anything he says seriously, not to mention the childish insults - and of course cheating accusations. (They are fairly direct in this interview - he says he went from just having suspicions to actually realizing that "something was wrong".)

Just a sample...

"When Veselin lost the match in Elista we immediately made this challenge and presented to FIDE this bank guarantee of USD 2 million."

Yes indeed, if "immediately" is Bulgarian for "three months later, when it was too late."

Ok, take a deep breath..

http://www.chessdom.com/news/topalov-wcc

So, because Topalov did not get his rematch, he gets better treatment than the number 2 of the next World Championship in Mexico? That poor fellow has to work his way through the World Cup, whereas Topalov gets his match against the winner of that tournament for free.

Radjabov was denied a match as well. I think he should make some threats as well, who knows what it might bring him.

, we knew FIDE would cram in Topalov one way or another.
I heard other version, even crazier than this one before the Candidates: for example, convince Gurevich to withdraw in the last minute due to "illness" and have Topalov jump in against Leko who would be unprepared for him.

Kirsan said in a Chessbase interview last October when asked about Topalov's dropping out of the cycle: "What we have is what we have. Sadly, but sport is sport." So it seems that chess is not a sport for FIDE...

The first word, acirce, disappeared by magic from my post above.