Greengard's ChessNinja.com

Kamsky! 1.5-0.5 at the Half

| Permalink | 92 comments

Seconds ago Alexei Shirov resigned the second game of the final match of the 2007 World Cup. That makes the score 1.5-0.5 after Kamsky drew the first game on the black side of a Spanish. Today's game was a closed (anti-Sveshnikov) Sicilian that got sharp fast as Shirov attempted one of his patented ..g5-out-of-nowhere kingside attacks. Things got wild as Kamsky sold out his own king and even allowed doubled rooks on the seventh before he mounted a dangerous counterattack. It turned out Black had grabbed at least one pawn too many and couldn't defend. Probably the last best try to bail out was 31..Rhg2, although White's pawns still look like killers. (The computer tosses out 31..Nf7 or 31..Rh1.) Even the position where Shirov resigned takes some figuring out. Kamsky's precision in defense and then offense was astounding, even according to Fritz. Truly a wonderful game -- turn off your chess engine and savor the insane complications with that mass of evolved cells attached to your spinal cord (the top).

Kudos to both players for the show. Shirov will come back with the white pieces tomorrow and nobody doubts he's got the guts and the form to level the score. He's got to go for it in game three because there's no way he wants to be in a must-win with black against Kamsky.


After 22.-Qg4! 23.Qxg4 Rxg4 Kamsky would have needed his "astounding precision" in defence to keep the game level. The difference to the game continuation being that white has no pawn march.

It's great to see such good chess at the finals of this thing! Although I am not a fan of the format, I have really enjoyed this one so far.

Great stuff! They're slugging it out!

What a great game. I especially liked Nf3--covering all the important squares defensively, either directly or by getting in the way of a rook check from f2, and also opening up g1 for the white rook--it was this second front that black was unable to handle. Then the knight goes to g5 and f7, forcing resignation. Not a bad career.

So frequently, players do not play-out the positions because they do not want to risk losing. I am enjoying this match because they have demonstrated that they are not afraid to take it to the edge. Both players have dangling anatomy of solid brass.

No wonder Mrs Polgar's (or is that Mrs Truong's?) blog is getting 1/5th or so of the comments it was getting a year ago. I informed her that her analysis was wrong, and seemed to be based on quick computer evaluations, and the comment disappeared just as quick as I had posted it. Polgar thinks that Shirov went wrong with 31...Rbc2 and then 34...Rh6 while in fact he went wrong much earlier.

Sorry to rant, but it's not the first time it happens, and it has happened to many others too. You disagree with her over some chess politics thing, you disagree with her over her analysis and your comment is gone. You remind her of something she has said in the past that is in contradiction with her view of the moment, and the post is gone.

She seems to tolerate no disagreement, and has to protect this image of herself as "world champion" or whatever that should only be looked upto and never questioned. A queen complex of sorts.

What happened with that Truong/Polgar accusationt that they had impersonated other(s) on the net by the way?

Wow, anonymouse, way to hijack a thread for personal use. Please stay away from all airplanes and buses.

Its great to see Kamsky reaquire his defensive-counter attacking vision he had in his younger days. He reminds me of Capablanca with a touch of Lasker poison and grit. It fun to see someone play moves you don't understand but appreciate later when the position clarifys itself. I'm just hoping that his talent overcomes years of Anand/Kramnik/Topolov/Shirov opening preparation while he was taking a long vacation.
Good Luck to you Kamsky! :)

Yes, you are right. I should appreciate Mig's fine blog more, not to semi-hijack a thread, but I really have a problem with people like her. Now she has deleted it twice. She censors stuff like this:

"Those "+="'s for positions where white is probably winning are quite superficial, and seem to follow computer eval. patterns. 22...Qf6!? is perhaps possible, but only if followed by 23...Rh2+!. 22...Qg4 is the safer move and results in a small edge for black. after 23...Qxe5 white is already better, although this is difficult to see beforehand, with black getting so much visible activity. Later ideas with ...Ng4+ seem more stubborn, although these positions are more than just += for white. Try pushing those pawns against your program, and see how the eval. changes eventually. Only white can win, and the probability for this is very high in human chess. White might also be objectively winning there, so you need to look for those errors earlier. The plan with Kh8 and g5 was probably dubious, although a lot of analysis is needed to prove this but Kamsky either didn't make the most of his chances, even though it must be said, that it's nearly impossible for a human player (or even a computer) in such a highly complex position.

31...Rbc2 isn't "??" as black is already lost there. I would bet a high sum on this. If you look at Susan's ...Nf7, white just exchanges and plays e4-e5-e6, and although the computer first gives +1.5 or whatever, it will soon give +3.xx and then +7.xx when the white rook penetrates down the d-file. Black will fail to sack his bishop for both those pawns, and white just wins."

My excuse is that it is to do with this game, but if and when that is her attitude towards disagreement I feel for the future of USCF.

I agree that Susan's blog has gone downhill since she became Mrs. Truong and moved to Texas. If it were my blog, I would not delete those comments, because they are part of a reasonable dispute about the analysis. However, the blog is ultimately her forum, and she can decide what to publish.

As you point out, it will take a lot more analysis before it is clear where Shirov made the fatal mistake. You could argue that 31...Rbc2 is at least a '?', since it it made Kamsky's task easier. Black certainly couldn't have won at that point without Kamsky's help, but perhaps there was a draw to be saved somehow.

Quality of the games by Kamsky and Shirov in this tournament has been astounding. And whoever wins will be a worthy challenger for Topalov and the World Title.

Both of them have been there before; Shirov taking out Kramnik and qualifying for a WCh match with Kasparov that he never got. And Kamsky beating Anand only to loose against Karpov in the WCh match.

Which is the next elite tournament for Kamsky ?
Any game with Anand soon ?

Susan's analysis is quite weak at times. It is hard to keep a strength of 2500 FIDE if you stop competing regularly, but some of her comments are just plain. She annotated a game I lost to Abby Marshall and criticized a move I made which any database shows was played by Ivanchuk in the past. Ivanchuk makes mistakes ( once in a long while) but not that move. He is statistically 20th all time. But her analysis criticized the line as if it was the novelty of a novice. Her site applies thought control under the guise of " only nice comments allowed." But her idea of nice comments are those that agree with her.

Bad luck for Alex. He was obviously misinterpretating the position after the exchange of queens. His rooks cruising on the second line like "blind pigs" were heading to nowhere, just forcing the white king to go to f4 which was the best place for him on the board!
It looked like Alex was knocking himself out cold.

Enough comments on the Polgar blog already.
I never read her blog, for various and good reasons. Don't care to read bitching about it here.
If you have such a problem, take it to the chess newsgroups! ...hehe...

Ok guys, leave Susan alone. It is her decision how to lead the blog. For those who do not like it there is Chessbase, Chessdom, Chessgames.......

Daniel i assume youre the one i know in person
as bad as Susan can be, if she can make analysis that promotes her girl events then she will do so because her backers follow blindly, Abby beating someone of your rating is just one example.

It would be interesting to see he try the world open as a player instead of a speaker. She gets off to a good start in the slow section, then they merge with Smirin and Yudasin and whoever else is there and she would struggle.

Gata's play today was not the usual. His style of play is not to enter into a complicated melee. He was on Shirov's turf today and one could say he entered into Shirov's fire and then iced him. A remarkable game. I believe this is the first time Alexei has been down during this whole knockout. With all that's at stake, it will be ineresting to see how he responds.

I see that Susan (or Paul) has responded to the comments here and has posted a defense on her blog. Essentially, she says [loose paraphrase], "It's my blog, and I only want nice comments. If you want discussion go to Mig's blog. If you want analysis, go . If you want news, go . If you want instruction, go . If you want other chess information, go . If you are interested in me and what I'm thinking about, then this is the place for you!"

I wrote a response (under "anonymous" because I can't seem to get the registration thing with google to work right) of the sort I sometimes see briefly at her site before they are erased--mildly critical, but raising an issue that warrants discussion. To wit:

"I love the blog, Susan (and Paul), but there does seem to be an unusual intolerance for dissent. Simple questions and disagreements are routinely and rapidly purged from the comments section. You certainly have the right to delete anything you want, but if you do it such a heavy-handed way, you will lose readership and support. There is nothing that quashes good discussion faster than rapid and effective censorship. When a few 'negative' comments (read: disagreements) are censored, a great many interesting, well-reasoned ideas and discussions are stifled because people become less and less inclined to join in the discussions.

The lively, interesting, but oft-times rancorous discussion and debate in a free society is preferable to the nicey-nice but empty pabumlum of the 'idealistic' police state.

[And, yes, I wholly expect this 'mean' post to disappear within minutes.]"

Susan's perspective isn't going to change. If you want the real deal, the dirt if you will, then blog here. If you want chocolate and roses wrapped in lace, then blog there. Let's move on.


It was great fun watching this game. It should be a pier 6 brawl again tomorrow. It's a good day to be a chess fan regardless of the final outcome.

Chesstraveller, I'm with you. The discussion of chess is better here, even though it sometimes requires filtering out irrelevancies and the occasional rudeness and insults.

Probably FIDE officials get a little nervous right now. If Kamsky wins, with all their backroom dealing and match-reshuffling, they have to deal with a lawyer this time.

Nowadays, it's probably a smart move to have some legal background if you want to get a piece of the big World Championship cake.

Actually, if FIDE were quietly rooting for someone, I should think it would be Kamsky. Any significant success by an American player increases the potential to attract American dollars to the sport.

An interesting comment was made upstream about opening prep with the elite. Wouldn't Kamsky be a nice counterpoint to Kasparovian opening prep? Might it change things a bit? Of course, it might be a different game at a 'normal' t/c but still....

S. Polgar's site is VERY well done.
My compliments.
And gives a very bad taste.
It is a money and marketing machine.
Under cover of idealism.
To booster her business.
It is all about image and the number of hits on her site (carefully organized).
The number of hits is an important sales point.
When she is commenting live, has anyone observed the number of kibitzers making systematically references to her site?
Her live comments are not interesting.
She suggests the next move as her opinion(the engine's move) to make herself clever. You do not need live commentary for that.
She does not miss one occasion to explain her readers about every moment she is the focus of media.
The Susan Polgar site has presented 4867 photos of Susan Polgar.
Tomorrow we will se more photos of Susan Polgar.

" I believe this is the first time Alexei has been down during this whole knockout. With all that's at stake, it will be interesting to see how he responds."

It is: Shirov scored 8.5/10 during the first 5 rounds, playing a around a 2900 clip. This was his first defeat, and the first time he's trailed. Kamsky has yet to lose ay all.

There is little chance for Shirov to win as Black in game 4, in a game which Kamsky is content to draw.

Therefore, it is likely that Shirov will play "va Banque" in Game 3, and play sacrificially. If Shirov loses, then the match will come to an Early end.

Back when Shirov faced Anand in the FInals of one of those KO World Championships, the Match was scheduled to last for 6 Games (then Tie-Breaks, if necessary). Shirov lost an early game, and then tried desperately to catch up. He ended up with -3=1, and the Match was already clinched for Anand after just 4 of the 6 games had been played.


Your right about the rudeness and insults (I've certainly provided my share) but if your skin is a little thicker than average, in addition to being informative and insightful, this blog can be fun too. A good combination if you will.

For instance: No stany, tomorrow you will see more pictures of Susan Polgar.

To Marc Shepherd, Naw, they couldn't care less about American dollars...heck FIDE couldn't wait to force Bobby out when they placed the shield around their guy Karpov in the 70's. Look how much money has been lost to Professional Chess in the last 30 years or so! Matches with Fischer playing in the mid 70's would have been million dollar matches. They choked the golden goose.

Can anyone comment on Kamsky's opening strategies at the moment? I seem to recall someone -- a few months ago (was it Kasparov?) -- denigrating his games as obviously rooted in the 1990s. Others have commented that he apparently tries to survive the opening, then let his innate talent and technique take over. Still others have suggested that he try out side-lines or little-known offshoots of main lines, in a bid to level the playing field.

Do people get the impression that Kamsky is avoiding well-known theory? Is he still hanging on for grim death in the openings and hoping to come out alright? Or is he now apparently up to speed (at least in the lines he chooses to play)? In short, I'm wondering: what sort of Kamsky are we seeing?

If you can play a novelty at move 9 and win, you must be doing *something* right with your opening prep. :)

While I don't care much for Towell's historical revisionism (it wasn't FIDE that closed the door on Fischer in '75 - blame either the man himself, or the Soviet team, or both, as I do - but not FIDE), it's preferable to Mark Shepard's clueless assertion that FIDE may be quietly savoring "the potential to attract American dollars to the sport."

Yeah, they brought Kok into the fold. But Kirsan still runs - and funds - the whole show, doesn't he? Or did I miss something? Kirsan wants "American dollars" raining on his empire the way Israel wants Iranian nukes.

Theorist, Kamsky finally got a second who takes care of all the opening theory for him, so it doesn't matter if Kamsky lacks in opening knowledge. In any case, in Game 1 Kamsky was in home prep till at least move 28 and introduced a novelty that Shirov said was a super strong improvement and made him worry.

stany, Susan also presents a lot of photoshopped pictures of Gata Kamsky. What do you make of this?

I can't say that FIDE's was complaisant in the Fischer debacle of 75. I believe it was the 9-9 tie champion retains title provision, FIDE rejected, that brought that WC to an impasse. Cerainly not an unusual request when one considers prior world championships. Lets not forget that 3 years later, they granted it to Karpov. Yes, the "soviets" had much influence, but it was FIDE that finalized it.

Huh? FIDE granted the 9:9 tie clause to Karpov? That's interesting.

Ah, since that match was to 6 games up, draws not counting, and the match would not be over if the score was 5-5, I find the claim that FIDE granted the 9-9 tie clause to be dubious...especially if we remember that Karpov won the 1978 match by a score of 6 to 5.
What FIDE did give Karpov, was the rematch clause.


I apoligize for giving the impression of 9-9. What I meant was 6-6 with Karpov-Korchnoi, but it looks like I'm wrong about that too. I know I'm not wrong about the 9-9 clause. I thought I remembered an Evans article pertaining to the unfairness of Karpov getting what Fischer couldn't...my bad.

One of the most interesting things I recall from that period was a long article by Charles Kalme (a top US player in the 50s, who was also a mathematician) proving mathematically that Fischer's 9:9 tie clause actually favored the CHALLENGER, IF the alternative was keeping the same system used in all prior WCC matches (play a set number of games with draws counting, champion retains title if score is tied after final game - 24 game matches were the norm then I think).

Nevertheless the Soviets (well, not them alone) kept pushing the propaganda line that Fischer was demanding a BIGGER advantage than champions had always enjoyed, by requiring the challenger to win by TWO games. (FYI, the reason it's statistically easier for challenger to win with 9:9 tie provision - that is, to score at least 10/18 - than to score at least 12.5 / 24, is because draws count in the latter but not the former.)

I don't recall how soon FIDE went back to WCC matches with a fixed number of games and draws counting. I do recall wins-only was used for Kasparov's first WCC match ('84); so there probably was an interim period between Fischer and Kasparov, when draws again did count.

My god, this thread is about the final Shirov-Kamsky, not about Fischer and Susan Polgar (who the hack is she to be important?

Alexei had bad luck today (or Gata fortune if you prefer)..white emerged better from the complications after merely defending with normal moves.

One also gets the feeling that against Alexei you only have play equal moves and wait since he will self-destruct anyway rather than play an "action-less" game.

those darned 2700+ players that self-destruct.

"...after merely defending with normal moves" (Ovidiu). Compared with: "Kamsky's precision in defence then offense was astounding, even according to Fritz" (Mig).

Perhaps the effect of "normal" moves needs to be calculated very precisely -- which, of course, makes them far less mundane.

Sure, Ovidiu... I bet you'd beat Alexei blindfolded. That's why he's 2750, because you can beat him by just playing normal moves.

>"...after merely defending with normal moves" (Ovidiu). Compared with: "Kamsky's precision in defence then offense was astounding, even according to Fritz" (Mig).>

Well now, they were so simple and self evident that even Fritz won't differ, for Kamsky it was as when playing forced moves. All the burden was on Shirov.

PS- using the engines too much leads to thoughtlessness, thing which, in turn, makes one even more dependent on the comps evalution for uttering "opinions". Vicious circle, down spiralling.

Ovidiu: " PS- using the engines too much leads to thoughtlessness, thing which, in turn, makes one even more dependent on the comps evalution for uttering "opinions". Vicious circle, down spiralling."

And phrases such as "emerged better from complications after merely defending with normal moves" is a thoughtful, engaging piece of analysis how exactly?...

Garry disagrees with my impression and bets Kamsky is playing too solidly to lose now. He said he'd be a big underdog against Topalov though, which I think most would agree with. He pointed out that Kamsky is one of only three people to have beaten Anand in a match, albeit it in rapid tiebreaks. The others are Karpov and Kasparov, of course. That stat doesn't really mean so much since there have been so few matches in the past ten years.

Garry pointed out Carlsen's miscue in the Scotch against Kamsky in the semis. He developed that line and the important move is h3 with kingside expansion to follow. He gave his game against Leko at Tilburg 97 as the one to look at.

As for Kamsky-Shirov, game 2, White's defense was by no means trivial. Black's attack was sound until he took the f-pawn and gave up his e-pawn. But even after that legitimate blunder, it was by no means easy. Giving up your g2 pawn with check against Shirov isn't a walk in the park.

It's one of the modern tragedies of our sport that fans armed with computers have become oblivious to how difficult chess is. Games like Svidler-Grischuk in Mexico City and this one involve a profound level of calculation and intuition in positions so complex either side could lose with a single plausible move. Shirov has been winning such wild positions with regularity for the past two weeks in Khanty-Mansiysk (and his whole career for that matter). So outplaying him in such a position is a double accomplishment.

White's main achievement early on was not panicking. Recall how quickly Onischuk was blown away earlier in this event by a similar Shirov attack. The sang froid to play d4 is hardly natural. Then 18.h4! and taking on e6 when Kh1 must have been very tempting. Even 23.Qxe5 was dangerous when you have to consider a shot like 23..Rh2+!?! and the rook is immune from all three captures! White survives after 24.Kg1 Rg8+ 25.Ng3. And 29.Ng1 is hardly natural, putting the knight out of play. Black has 29..Ng4+, swapping off the e5 knight and threatening ..Rg3+ after Nxg4 Bxg4. White has to play f5 and then worry about an endgame in which Black can create a queenside passer to go with his outside h-pawn. A comp slices through all this in seconds, but easy it ain't. In short, there were many attractive continuations for Black and a very narrow rope for White to walk. That we can now prove conclusively within minutes that White was always better after 23.Qxe5 doesn't mean it was easy to prove at the board.

Shirov is so weak... that's why it's Ovidiu playing in Khanty-Mansiysk and Shirov acting like a random shmuck that just got an internet connection for Christmas and is trying to make people send him viruses.

If Kamsky does defeat Shirov, I too think that Topolov will end Gata's comeback surge. Hope I'm wrong. On the other hand I believe I currently hear Kramnik and Anand expressing their dismay with...Heeee's Baaaccckk!?

Kamsky is looking super. Not just the games with Shirov, but he also devoured Carlsen, Ponomariov, and Svidler. Topalov is certainly a great, great player, but Kramnik proved that Topa can crash against rocks. Kamsky is a rock. If he makes it through the next two games, the next match will be a great one.

On another note, is Anand improving? Or does he play at about the same level he did when Kasparov leveled him in 1995?

I think that Kamsky is a quite serious candidate in a match against anybody on earth. He's probably not yet 100% back to his previous level (and I don't think he will ever be able to catch back all those years) but still he has a huge talent. His 2740 rating 15 years ago wasn't less than crossing 2800 today.


Public auction on Ebay.com for Bobby Fischer's brand new chess book, "My 61 Memorable Games", published in 2007, all new!


(Sorry Mig about the off-topic post.)

I call shenanigans.

I could not blame anyone who suspects this book thing is shenanigans. I admit I have not held a copy in my hand, but I have good reason to believe it is for real.

I was however slightly wrong in my comment, in that it is Ebay.CA, not Ebay.com. (My link is correct.)

If you REALLY think it is real, then *I* have a book to sell you as well... let's see.... how about... "My 62 Memorable Games" ...I have the 1st copy (VERY special edition), and it was signed by Bobby himself. Coincidentally, it has a personalized inscription, to whomever bids the most! Yeah...that's the ticket.

Also...Capablanca signed it, if that will make you bid more.....

Also, I have Kasparov's new book, "How Hoaxes Imitate Life" ...and so forth....


It was funny seeing this question posed at the press conference:

Question: Gata, did the idea to play Qh5 threatening mate in one occur to you after observing Nakamura's play on the ICC?

Kamsky: (laughing) No, actually this move was suggested by Emil Sutovsky.

>Mig : The sang froid to play d4 is hardly natural

we differ in interpretations, the normal, standard, reaction to a wing attack (g5) is to reply by striking in the center (d4)

That the seller of the Fischer book has not yet sold a single item on ebay, or for whatever reason just made a new account, would definitely give one pause. I live about ten minutes away from the guy (Kanata is right next to Ottawa), maybe I could go ask him what the deal is in person. You never know though, maybe Fischer is in need of funds.

Hmmm....from the item description:

"The book is entitled "My 61 Memorable Games", a new book released by Bobby Fischer. The "cover price" of this book is $24.95 but as a collector's item of limited production run, they can obviously sell for much more. You are bidding on THE FIRST 50 COPIES OF THIS BOOK to be released! Only bid if you intend to be in receipt of all 50 copies. ..."

Seriously, the guy is trying to offload all 50 copies at once? Not too sure about this as I've never sold anything on ebay, but isn't it somewhat suspicious that there has been 1 bid so far, yet the "reserve not met" message is not there. You'd think he'd be using a reserve if he was expecting the (50) books to sell for a good chunk of money - which he must be based on the claimed value of $24.95 each. Setting a reserve costs the seller extra money (around $40 or something?), so if you were running a scam you obviously wouldn't use one (not saying no reserve implies a scam...some items just aren't expensive enough to bother).

To GeneM, would you care to share your "good reason to believe it is for real" with us?

Kamsky draws. Wow. A tough customer.

Shirov-Kamsky now drawn. It must be a disappointment to Shirov, who looked like he had a clear advantage at one point, but couldn't convert.

"Kamsky draws. Wow. A tough customer."

No, Shirov is Anand's customer and Anand is Kamsky's customer.

Difficult to understand - for this Shirov fan, at least - why he would agree to a draw in the final position of the 3rd game, with those connected passers on the q-side, instead of continuing with, say, Kf1. Did he see some winning attacking prospects from Black, or was he just short of time...(but I thought the time control was at move 40)? Sure, it must've been depressing that Kamsky'd fought back to give himself counterchances in game 3, but that's to be expected; and now Shirov's in the position of having to win with Black, a tough prospect. Plus he'll have to wonder what would've happened if he'd continued instead of agreeing to the draw. A disappointment to his fans, I'd say; unless there's some concrete reasons/variations someone can show for the draw, seems like a psychological letdown on Shirov's part...but in that event maybe he's not prepared to be the challenger to the challenger [Topalov] anyway. Kudos to Kamsky for his tenacity under fire, and here's hoping Shirov can recover and give his best (which it seemed like he was doing until the end of this game) in game 4.

>Difficult to understand - for this Shirov fan, at least - why he would agree to a draw in the final position of the 3rd game, with those connected passers on the q-side, instead of continuing with, say, Kf1. >

at Kf1 follows Re8->Re1#...Alexei did well psychologicaly by accepting ( or proposing ?) draw.
Kamsky didn't crack under-pressure, equalized, and now "turning the tables" would have been the next stage.
Up to now Kamsky appears clearly as stronger player, as one in control of the match.

>> "Kamsky draws. Wow. A tough customer."

>> No, Shirov is Anand's customer and Anand is Kamsky's customer.

>> Posted by: cotdt at December 15, 2007 10:17

Anand is Kamsky's customer? Kamsky might have won a couple of games against Anand but may you want to check his overall score against Anand once again!

Beware!I'm 99.9% sure that fischer book is a scam. First time seller with very curious product nobody's heard of..and one can only buy in bulk...its certainly a chessplayer out to grab a few quick bucks. Just in case anyone is gullible enough...

"Anand is Kamsky's customer? Kamsky might have won a couple of games against Anand but may you want to check his overall score against Anand once again!"

Kamsky 2.0 is 2.5/3 against Anand in Classical, and 1.5/2 against Anand in blitz!

Before Kamsky can get to Anand, he needs to win this match and then beat Topalov. A look at Kamsky 2.0's record against Topalov shows this won't be an easy task.

Yes the "new" Fischer book is a scam. How do I know? Well, I have the new Fischer books that I will be selling on ebay with his new and much more appropriate title: IF I GO THERE, HE GOES THERE. Obviously Bobby's book since he uses only the masculine vernacular. Please don't ask about any deals on the side, this will be ebay only.

"Before Kamsky can get to Anand, he needs to win this match and then beat Topalov. A look at Kamsky 2.0's record against Topalov shows this won't be an easy task."

You can say the same about Kamsky's record against Shirov -8+2 including his loss against Shirov in Tal Memorial only a month ago. Yet now he is the favorite to win his match against Shirov. Shirov said that a player's current form is much more important than past record, and I think he is right (unfortunately for himself). So I have hopes that Kamsky can topple Topa.

Presumably in the course of the subprime crisis banks of Switzerland have united (it's "Union Bank of Switzerland", besides: the stated amount is in CHF not USD). But does this also justify someone marrying his (alleged) underage daughter ?? At least they got the kidney part right (43 bottles of sake).

Assuming Kamsky wins thie match with Shirov, when will he play Topalov? Has that date been set? Location? Prize fund?

Kamsky held Shirov today. What is Kamsky's score with black against shirov in normal time controls ?\
With the form that Kamsky has shown, it appears that going for a win with black pieces is going to be one h*** of a task. But the you never know. He's up against Alexei "Fire on the Board" Shirov. Its good for us, its a guaranteed, nerve-wracking last classical time game. Will Shirov throw his Dishwasher along with his kitchen sink ? God, can't wait to see this game !

Kamsky/Shirov vs Topalov: in 2008, but after Kramnik-Anand (which according to the rules will take place within the period May-September, and according to Kramnik most likely in September). It will have "a minimum net prize fund of 150,000 USD". Details at http://fide.com/official/handbook.asp?level=DD106 under "4. World Championship Matches 2008-2009". Location, apparently Bulgaria (!), according to various sources.

I agree with Ovidiu that most 2600+ players would have defended the position just as Kamsky did. I didn't really see any tempting alternatives, despite Mig's valiant efforts above. It seems to me Shirov got carried away and self-destructed; the worst way to lose and especially in this situation.

Kamsky-Topalov - if that's what happens - will be a fascinating match. I think Kamsky, like Kramnik, might be a different proposition under match conditions, and judging by his bravado after Elista, Topalov hasn't yet learned much about matches. I don't think I'd make Topalov such a big favourite as Kasparov apparently does.

I think any talk about whether or not Kamsky can make it back to the big time should be put to rest. Eight years away from elite chess in this age only to come back and be in the thick of things with his old rivals is a great accomplishment. What he lacks in current theory he more than makes up for in fighting spirit. Congratulations Gata, wether you win after 4 or not, you're a great player in my book and have already achieved more than what I thought possible after such a long hiatus.

Sadly, I agree with Garry more than with rdh. IMO potential Kamsky-Topalov match has all the chances to be a blowout win for Topa. It will be Kamskiy only glaring weakness (opening preparations) against Topa's strongest point. In a match play openings is one of the most important parts (if not the most important). It's impossible to compete at this level if you are consistently losing the opening battle. Just recall Gelfand-Kamsky. Even today against Shirov Kamsky looked shaky. If that match were just a bit longer you get the sense that Shirov would level the score. I'm afraid that Topa-Kamsky would be the rerun of Gelfand-Kamsky, just more lopsided.

Kamsky's opening preparations have been very strong actually. Just ask Shirov, Ponomariov, or Svidler. He has a second now, so he is prepared. Kamsky said that against Gelfand he did not do any preparations whatsoever. He still did decent, only lost 1 real game against Gelfand. His 2nd loss was actually a dead draw, but Kamsky tried to force a win and lost. It was hardly a "lopsided" match.

Of course, Kamsky-Gelfand was a lopsided match. Kamsky never had any winning chances, not in a single game. The whole match he defended worse positions, sometimes successfully, sometimes not. True, the match situation played a role in the outcome of the last game. Still, Gelfand had decent winning chances in some drawn games. Overall, the score was just.

Kamsky played very well in this World Cup and his victory will be well deserved. However, his opening preparations were nothing special. Perhaps they sucked a little less that we are used to. Shirov equalized with black, then was outplayed. Today Kamsky failed to equalize in the opening. Against Ponomariov, he also quickly got into close to lost position with black straight out of the opening. That quality of preparations is not going to be enough against Topalov.

People, people, let's remember here: for an actual match where every eye is trained on him and he has serious chances to miss out on invitations if he plays badly, Kamsky will do everything possible to avoid a repeat of the disastrous openings of the Gelfand match. Two or more seconds, the whole works. He'll even have a lawyer.

Topolov is and should be considered the favorite,
but Kamsky will be better prepared for Topolov then he was for Gelfand. Regarding Gata's play, back in the 90's when he was crushing opponents in match play, Garry never had much positive to say about Kamsky's play then either. I'll take his current assessment with another grain of salt. If Gata does indeed defeat Shirov, the Topolov-Kamsky match will be closer than most think at this point. Match play suits Gata's style and temperament and he's currently playing like he did before his hiatus.

A quick check, and I find Shirov with a +3-1=3 score playing black against Kamsky with long time controls.

Kamsky wins: Dortmund 1992
Shirov wins: Luzern 1993, Buenos Aires 1994, Tal Memorial 2007
Draw: Las Palmas 1994; Madrid 1994; Dos Hermanas 1995

Only one of those games is in the past 12 years. I don't know if I'm missing any other games (leaving aside blitz, rapid, blindfold).

Well Bobby's new book is up over 3,000.00..the book is real, folks. The seller answers questions from readers, right on the site! Bobby will not be bashing anyone in the book. There will be 100 First Edition books sold in bulks of 50 each. Then the book sold to the general public will be listed as 2nd editions. The printer, has also made "little" changes in the type settings for the first 100 copies, so those who have these will know they are holding First editions. I'ts too bad Bobby didn't want to sign any of the copies, they would probably triple at least in value. I know pretty much who the seller is and if I get permission from my sources, I'll be sure to post. Bobby's money is tied up with the UBS, and they only give him a fraction of the interest he earns. So basically he needs to do this, it's good for him too, to get back to writing. Also he annotates Game 1, from Fischer/Spassky '92. No hoax, believe me when I tell ya.

Didn't Kasparov say that Kamsky is one of the only "real" chess players in the world?

This so-called Fischer book seems an audacious money-spinning yarn to me. I wish anyone who buys the first 50 copies (and the following blocks) good luck. Just don't come crying if it turns out to be a dud. Ebay is ok but i have heard of several marketing shenanigans over there- people selling you 'the right to bid for' a product for example. A real book by Bobby Fischer should sell by the shedloads with hardly any marketing sleight of hand at all. Buyers beware!

"I know pretty much who the seller is and if I get permission from my sources, I'll be sure to post."
-Posted by: Bruce Towell at December 16, 2007 01:42

I have an idea of who it might be, but if he doesn't want his identity revealed I won't guess at a name. Would I be right in suggesting that he's an IM though? You know, couldn't the guy could have avoided a lot of this nonsense by showing a proper picture of the book instead of just a scan of the cover?

Kamsky draws again! A brave player. Bring on Topalov!

Congrats Gata! It's been worth weeks of bloodshot eyes and constant fatigue to watch you blaze through the field like a hot knife through butter.

Kamsky has a simple winning strategy vs. Topalov. (1) Make Cheparinov an offer he can't refuse, to serve as second. (2) Bring back Rustam to take out Danailov.

Probably FIDE officials get a little nervous right now. If Kamsky wins, with all their backroom dealing and match-reshuffling, they have to deal with a lawyer this time.

Nowadays, it's probably a smart move to have some legal background if you want to get a piece of the big World Championship cake.
I did a search on www.videosearchtool.info about the keyword susan polgar and found a video about a documentary of how even chess nowdays is starting to be setup since the beginning just as boxing was and is.


Twitter Updates

    Follow me on Twitter



    About this Entry

    This page contains a single entry by Mig published on December 14, 2007 8:34 AM.

    Kasparov Signing in NYC was the previous entry in this blog.

    Fischer Book For Real? is the next entry in this blog.

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