May 2010 Archives

Yes, there is also chess being played out there, and quite a bit of it. With Bazna still a few weeks away with Carlsen, Gelfand, and Radjabov, we are tided over with a wide variety of tournaments. The 18th Sigeman & Co Tournament is headed into its final round. The two young top seeds have run away with the show and the pairings have blessed the event with Hammer and Giri meeting in the final round tomorrow tied with 3.5/5. A quartet of Swedes follow them. Always nice to see Hector in action. He's one of those players with a distinct style and it often results in entertaining games. But as wild as his games often are, he wasn't involved in the tournament's real anvil-on-the-head game, which was Giri's sacrificial demolition of Hillarp Persson. Rule: When your opponent has two pawns on the 6th rank by move 22 things are Not Going Well.

Zhao Jianchao and Bu Xiangzhi are leading the Chinese championship with 4.5/6. Top seed Wang Hao was knocked back by one of the lower-rated veterans with an unusual sac. Li Shilong's 16.Ne5 was good to shake things up but Black held the balance well. It wasn't until White's second knight sac of the game with 32.Nxe6! that the curtain came down. While we are wantonly, um, wontonly, discarding our steeds, young underdog Lu Shanglei played the Cochrane Gambit against Zhou Weiqi and resigned on move 25. I'd still like to see it more often. Topalov put the mid-19th-century knight sac on f7 back on the map very briefly when he played it against Kramnik at Linares in 1999 and got a decent game. It promptly disappeared again, with only half a dozen GM games since then, with mixed results. It definitely gives a more interesting game than anything else against the Petroff.

Speaking of Openings That Are Killing Our Will To Live, the ACP World Rapid Cup just ended in Odessa with a final match between Karjakin and Jakovenko. This meant alternating Berlins and Catalans and six consecutive draws leading to everyone's favorite, a sudden-death draw-odds blitz game. Karjakin proved in this event he's harder to kill than Dennis Hopper Keith Richards. He was in must-win situations three times and with white in the armageddon game he won with R+B vs R+B with three pawns each on the same side. Jakovenko missed the last easy draw with 53..Bxc3 54.Kd3 Rxa2 55.Rxa2 Bxb4. Of more entertainment value is the official site practically turning into a tumblr of loopy pictures of Ivanchuk wearing different baseball caps. Why ask why?

There are also a few computer events going on, with many eyes on the first new version of industry leading engine Rybka in a long time coming out now. Short computer tournaments are sort of weird when you often have the same engines playing thousands of games against each other at home, but it attracts attention and allows the programmers to meet and greet and to test things out against the other guys' latest versions. Despite a surprise loss, a Rybka running on a machine with 128 cores is leading the 10th ICT tournament in the Netherlands. It would be interesting to be able to fiddle around with a machine like that to see what practical difference so many cores make. In his post-match interviews, Anand seemed to imply relative computer power was on his mind. I believe that Rybka and maybe others are going to offer a cloud computing version of the engine so you tap into a massive cluster (or maybe a distributed one someday, so you could use a few cycles from any other participating Rybka user's machine when it's idling) online for your analysis instead of using your own puny hardware. There might be security concerns for the pros, though. And for casual users it's not like a cluster machine that is rated 3000 is in some way more useful or entertaining than one that's 2800 on your home machine. But it's a logical step.

While looking for info on that event I wandered into another machine tournament, more of the homebrew variety. Stockfish, the open source engine I touted a few months ago when it was moving up the computer rating lists, blasted Rybka 4 in a very nice Grunfeld game, after the jump. Not making a case for individual games meaning anything in particular, especially after saying even tournaments and ratings are mostly academic in comp chess at this point. I'll just take a nice game wherever I find it. I'm not a believer in the "computer chess today is the best chess ever" argument, but if more comp-comp games looked like this one I might begin to wonder. Fun.

I'm so busy these days that unless someone pins a note on my chest about something going on in the chess world I'm likely to miss it entirely. I used to be able to get up to speed by glancing through recent comments here, but nowadays most of them are still caught up in world championship fever and bickering. And apparently this means the 2005 San Luis tournament, or the Elista 2006 match. Whatever keeps you people off the streets, that's all I have to say.

The fly in the soup du jour is Topalov's latest interview, in the Times of India. (Slightly longer and more poorly written for your convenience here at Chessdom.) There's an old saying, "you are the slave of what you say and master of what you don't say." Or we can go with the ever-trusty Oscar Wilde and "Questions are never indiscreet. Answers sometimes are." Or go with the real classic, Publilius Syrus, who gave us "It is not every question that deserves an answer." This is perhaps better known today for being the foundation of Bill Clinton's legal defense.

The paragraph that has gotten the most attention is Topalov's response to Anand's revelation that he was aided by Kasparov, Kramnik, and Carlsen.

I do not think Anand should be very proud of this. Especially by the fact he accepted help from the first two. I have been among the chess elite for 15 years and perfectly remember how Kasparov treated Anand for years. And not long before the World Championship match in Bonn 2008, Anand had to stand the arrogant statements of his opponent in the press. I would never accept help from people who humiliated me for years even for free. But it seems Anand is different.

Yes, well, "different" is a bit passive aggressive -- be brave enough to call a chump a chump if that's what you think -- and I'm willing to chalk this up to the pettiness that comes of frustration. Interviews with the loser are rarely going to produce pleasantries and it's a little surprising they give them at all. Anand and Kasparov have been on good terms for years -- Kasparov's offering assistance is the only real proof needed. The wounds from Sofia are still fresh and I don't feel the need to make much of this unless Topalov plans on going Full Korchnoi and coming up a with a reason to hate everyone for competitive reasons. He's a fantastic player, a straight talker (to a fault, since he often doesn't think first), and he's going to be around at the top for at least another 4-5 years. So let the nationalistic and partisan passions die down a bit, guys. If he's still taking cracks at Anand a few months from now, we'll revisit the topic with the scorn turned up a few notches.

The rest of the interview is interesting, and I'm actually in favor of the sting at the end of the combination, where Topalov jabs Anand for not being able to put together any events in India. It's a valid topic, if not a valid conclusion, and one that the comments on the Times of India site address a few times. Aside from the simple fact that organizing tournaments is hard and not every elite player wants to get into that line of work, every country has its own challenges. Last time I checked, nobody is taking shots at Ivanchuk for not putting together a supertournament in Kiev.

Anand's high status in India (if not as high as many outsiders seem to think, judging from the media) doesn't negate those other factors. Maybe he just likes to play chess. Sure, you can call it apathy if you want to be critical, and I have also chastised Anand in the past because I think the WCh and other elite players should have some sense of duty toward promoting the sport beyond playing it well. (A debatable assertion, I know.) Maybe Topalov would be the same way if he hadn't hooked up with someone as ambitious as Danailov. Together, and only because they are together, they have achieved some very positive things in chess -- 2m euros for this match only being the most recent. The MTel, Bilbao, the Sofia Rules, these things represent more positive action in chess than Ilyumzhinov (to pick a name at random) has contributed in 15 years. I don't know how well they compensate for the Elista catastrophe, but as with all ambitious figures (Kasparov, Napoleon) you can only hope for more good than bad knowing at the start you're going to get both.

Speaking of achievements, I'm okay with the term "Sofia Rules" when they refer to those specific conditions and not just all anti-short-draw rules. But when it comes to patenting the concept, we have to be fair to the Corsicans and organizer Léo Battesti. We even used the term "Corsica Rules" for a while for the blessed policy of banning agreed draws, even though it was a rapid event. This is a little like people crediting Fischer with inventing shuffle chess instead of doing what he indubitably did do, which is popularize it at a high level with his codified Fischerandom version. That may even be the greater accomplishment, but it's still the Najdorf Defense and not the Fischer Defense or the Kasparov Defense.

Of course there is nothing new under the sun. Just as just about every world champion pops up with rule changes to rescue a dying game, banning the draw offer has a good pedigree. It's a modern problem, but the cure predates Corsica. No less a name than Mark Dvoretsky, long one of the world's top chess coaches and writers, seriously proposed banning the draw by mutual consent in the Russian periodical Chess Week back in 2003. As usual, GM Ian Rogers was ahead of the curve and on the ball, covering Dvoretsky's suggestion in a great column here (PDF). I don't doubt there are many even earlier examples of similar proposals -- as opposed to just whining about short draws, which has been going on since at least the 60s.

You'll be dazzled to find that this doubly segues perfectly into the next post on the ACP World Cup event I was completely surprised by. In it, Ivanchuk played on for a while with K+N vs K+N. The Ivanchuk Rules?

Great news. The longtime chess columnist for the Washington Post, GM Lubomir Kavalek, whose column was disappeared, has found a new home as the chess correspondent for the Huffington Post. His first column, on Kamsky's win at the US championship, is available here. Enjoy Lubos' resurrection while you can, as true chess columns are a dying breed, especially great ones like his.

What makes a good column? A knowledgeable and strong player, bringing his lifetime of experience with the personalities, games, and history of chess to bear on an event and with concise analysis of a game or fragment. In other words, a chess column -- emphasis on the chess and also on the column format, which isn't a news story or an essay or a blog post. This sounds simple enough, but there are fewer all the time and very few good ones, at least in English. Papers are cutting back radically and don't see the point of paying an online columnist to compete (as they see it) in a content area that has so many specialized websites out there.

The idea that a good and serious chess column is a relevant cultural item to have in a newspaper doesn't enter the equation, just like so many other things the papers have cut. This continues the trend of removing everything that isn't "essential" until you find out that you don't have anything essential at all, and that the value was in the sum of the parts. Not even counting the loss of Kavalek, the WaPo has gone from being one of the best papers in the world to a mediocre rag with an over-specialized focus in an incredibly short span. And don't even get me started on the C-list bozos they've added to their once-respectable op-ed page.

That's POW! as in this wonderfully visualized heavy-piece attack from Hou Yifan. (PGN after the jump. Still on the live page at the link.) The Chinese Championship is underway and most of the top stars are there. Nice to see Wang Hao, who always played the most interesting chess among his compatriots, moving his way up into range to get some elite invitations. The unwritten "one invitee per country, unless it's Russia or Ukraine" rule isn't fair, but it exists and I'd swap Wang Hao for Wang Yue or Bu Xiangzhi faster than you can say Free Tibet.

From the terrifying site Openbook, a simple search that reveals chessic democracy worldwide. Don't ask why, ask why not. Amusing to see how stupid quotes spread and mutate virally, too.

Gata Kamsky won his second US title, and his first since 1991, by outlasting Yury Shulman in a tiebreak game after they finished the final quad tied yesterday. Congratulations to my fellow Brooklynite!

If a tie is like kissing your sister, winning the title after drawing a draw-odds game is like necking with your cousin. But with a $30,000 prize it's a really HOT cousin. In an innovative tiebreak system, Shulman and Kamsky bid for how much clock time they would settle for in order to get their choice of color. And since just about everyone in these situations takes black and the draw odds, it was basically an estimation of how much the players thought that was worth on the clock. Shulman bid a crafty 39' 55", just in case Kamsky went with 40". It wasn't even close, however, and Kamsky bid 25' and chose black. (This single silent bid is more dignified, but it would be interesting to have an actual auction-style process where they can go back and forth to find the "fair" price between them. I bet the average would end up being lower than in the single bid system.)

So with the clocks set at 60'+5" for white and 25'+5" for black, they were off. Shulman played his usual steady game and had Kamsky under considerable pressure out of a hybrid Grunfeld from a Slav move order (Grun-Slav?!) that Kamsky knows well. (7..Qb6 is the offbeat move he's played before; he usually plays 7..Bg4. Anand, Kramnik, and other luminaries have played that, or 7..a6, ..e6, dxc4, etc.) When Shulman won a pawn and kept the bishop pair, it looked like we might have an upset in the making. But following the old "the more time you have the more you use" truism (a chess version of Parkinson's Law), the clock difference steadily narrowed and Shulman started to make second-best moves. Kamsky, a time-trouble addict of the highest order anyway, got his pawn back and even took the advantage as the material was whittled off the board. Kamsky eventually took the draw, and the title, in a superior position that should be drawn with best play. An impressive defense from Kamsky, who occasionally reminds everyone that he has as much raw talent as anyone in the world and can play technical positions with dazzling precision for long stretches despite (or perhaps because of) little time on his clock.

A rough end for Shulman, who confirmed he shouldn't be counted too far behind Nakamura, Kamsky, and Onischuk, who are much more visible. It seems to be an American tradition to have veterans who age well and refuse to cede the spotlight to the young stars. Kamsky, Shulman, and Onischuk were all born in 74-75. The thought a year or two ago was that the US team would soon be made up of peppy twenty-somethings with Nakamura and Akobian leading some arrangement of Lenderman, Hess, Shankland, Robson, and Naroditsky (not in St. Louis). Not yet, kiddos! Hess was the only one of the youngsters to reach a plus score, although it should be repeated this was the strongest US championship ever.

Meanwhile, veterans winners like Shabalov, Stripunsky, Christiansen, and Yermolinsky reeled in plus scores and played some excellent chess. They are all over 40 (or 50) and don't look eager to step aside for the short-pants crowd. This isn't the same as the remarkable achievements of the US veteran teams in the 90s, when there was no new generation to take their place. So those who generate the criteria and establish the teams have some tough choices. Strongest performers now or building for the future? A 2600 performance now or gambling that the young players will soon be able to reach that and surpass it if they are given enough work at that level? E.g. Shulman or Hess? Shabalov or Robson?

It's a tough call, but despite my own advancing decrepitude I'm in favor of promoting the kids as soon as they can get out there without wetting their nappies. Plus, we don't have to shove the old guys out on an ice floe just yet. I was impressed to see both Hess and Robson at the World Team event last January, in which they amazed everyone by winning silver. They only played two games each, both scoring 50%, but such experience is invaluable. Working with pros like Nakamura, Kamsky, and Onischuk, plus seeing the world's best players around every day, is a major dose of inspiration.

We know now that Kramnik would have been a superstar no matter what; he is just that good. But if the 16-year-old hadn't been allowed to jump the seniority and rating queue to make the mighty Russian Olympiad team in 1992 -- where he famously scored 8.5/9 and a 3000 performance -- we might not have heard of him for another year or two. (He turned 17 on the final day of the Olympiad.) This isn't to say the kids should get a free ride. The rules for making the team should be known well in advance and qualification by rating and/or championship performance should be paramount. But keeping a spot or two open for junior hopes puts an emphasis on building for the future and, critical in the US, keeping young talents in the game.

Radjabov drew in the final round of Astrakhan to lock up the second candidates spot from the GP and the 7th out of 8. Congratulations to him. It will be interesting to see if his King's Indian gets a match workout. It will be even more interesting to see if these matches happen before Anand is eligible for a senior discount to see Avatar VII. Last I heard next spring was as optimistic as anyone would be. That there can now be two Azerbaijanis can't hurt. The 8th spot is the organizer wildcard, which at least won't go to a patzer. Assuming, and this always risky, the organization comes off in Azerbaijan as announced, it's surely to come down to Mamedyarov or Gashimov. They've been taking turns in the top ten lately and a good case could be made for either player. This means it will come down to politics and who has a better relationship with the powers that be. From reading the tea leaves of occasional comments in the press, this would seem to make Mamedyarov the favorite for the 8th spot. He's also the higher rated at the moment, though as inconsistent as he is that might not last long.

Radjabov got a long game from Wang Yue, who needed to win to have a shot at taking the candidates spot. Play the Petroff to win with black, awesome! Wang Yue actually had a tiny pull in the endgame, but Radjabov found the nice 48.f5 and put things in snooze control for the final 50 moves of shuffling. Gashimov threw the kitchen sink at Leko with black with predictable results, losing as Leko calmly pocketed the porcelain and sent Gashimov's chances down the drain. The other decisive game in a tournament that didn't see all that many of them was Inarkiev summoning some pride to bounce back after an incredible collapse to beat Svidler, whose name didn't really come in this event at all. Nine straight draws will do that to you. But don't miss his lovely sacrificial smash-up of Gelfand in the 12th round. Moves like 22.Bxd4! and 27.Rfe1 are the kind that give a player that warm, tingly sensation in his happy places. (When he's making them, of course. If you're in Gelfand's chair those moves give you that cold, sphincter-tightening sensation in your unhappy places.)

Speaking of happier places, in St. Louis at the US Championship, Shulman-Kamsky was a tense Grunfeld draw that forces a long-ish sudden-death game tomorrow. Full details on that in yesterday's post. I'm still a little squeamish about the roll-your-own time control dealio. Maybe it's partly because I can imagine the loser blaming the loss on a decision he made before the game even started. The players don't have any experience with this sort of thing and it might sound rational to take 15 minutes for black and draw odds but it might turn out to be wrong. Anyway, Kamsky and Shulman tied for first and one of them will take an extra 5K in prize money and get the official title based on the tiebreak game, so no biggie. Could be fun. It's certainly a lot better than if the four players had drawn all six games in the quad, which was a distinct possibility. (Reshevsky coming through the 1967 Interzonal tiebreak over Hort and Stein on better tiebreaks after making eight draws, anyone?! Gack.)

Some rim shots that didn't make the main article. By the way, the headline "Kremlin Invades the Chess Club" is good theater, but it's not accurate and gives the dangerous impression that the powers that be have taken sides. Dvorkovich is a presidential aide, yes, but those weren't government security forces that raided the Moscow Chess Club, they were private for-hire on his payroll. And while Dvorkovich surely has pull, he seems to be on his own here so far. Demonizing Kasparov was easy since he's been an outspoken critic of the Putin regime, but Karpov is nothing of the sort and is still a national hero to many. He's a chess legend running to lead a chess federation and Dvorkovich's attempts to paint the soft-spoken 59-year-old (yesterday) as a radical revolutionary or corrupt schemer really aren't convincing anyone.

Former Kirsan critic turned Kirsan attack dog Ali Yazici of Turkey shouldn't comment on the nomination vote for Karpov at the Russian Chess Federation on May 14. It was all recorded, but YouTube is blocked in Turkey, along with many other major sites so he must have missed it! Actually, I thought the world of Turkey and thought Yazici looked good as an energetic reformer type until he suddenly fell in love with Kirsan (as have other former critics, such as Leong). Orhan Pamuk is one of my favorite novelists, though it did come as a caution when he was charged with violating one of Turkey's stringent anti-defamation laws.

The Ilyumzhinov fallback position in face of all criticism is how much of his own money he's put into chess. In fact, this claim highlights a big part of the argument against him and his administration with one request: "prove it." What money? Where did it come from, where did it go? The lack of transparency -- and the implication that there is much to hide -- is a big reason commercial sponsors want nothing to do with Kirsan's FIDE. If you don't like people using the word "corruption," stop doing deals behind closed doors and taking credit for things we can't see. Your word isn't good enough for sponsors and it's not good enough for anyone else.

The center-right Russian political party Yabloko ("Apple"), admittedly rather minor these days, just released a statement saying an RCF nomination of Ilyumzhinov would be a disgrace. It went on to call Ilyumzhinov's rule in Kalmykia "one of the ugliest events in the political life in Russia, a mix of authoritarianism, corruption, and crime." Hey, sounds familiar... They also bring up one of the nastier skeleton's in Kirsan's large closet, no morbid pun intended. That would be the 1998 murder of Kalmykian opposition journalist Larisa Yudina, a murder a former Ilyumzhinov aide was convicted of. Yudina was a director of the local Kalmykian Yabloko branch at the time and had written several articles accusing Kirsan of, wait for it... corruption. And while killing journalists has become horribly routine in Russia, this one was still pretty big news.

If you're into meaningless quasi-poignant coincidences, Karpov's older sister is named Larisa.

From his occasional comments on the state of the chess world there is little doubt that world champ Anand would be, if not ecstatically pro-Karpov (honestly, I'm not even sure Karpov is ecstatically pro-Karpov), against more years of Ilyumzhinov. I don't expect Anand to invest a lot of energy in it one way or another, though he could be a very influential campaigner if he chose to be. I'd love to see him barnstorming his newly renewed title through the developing world for Karpov, flaunting his Spanish in South America, perhaps. Heck, if Kasparov and Karpov can unite on this, why not Anand?

I had more reservations about Kramnik's choice of horse in the race. He's also been critical of Ilyumzhinov over the years, but who hasn't? And there are rumors that Kramnik's pal and former second, Joel Lautier, was making a deal with Ilyumzhinov, just like another Kramnik friend and second, Bareev, appears to have done with Dvorkovich. But the post-title-loss, post-baby, post-spending-time-in-France Kramnik who has been delighting us in press conferences and devastating opponents at the board over the past year would seem to be a much more natural Karpov supporter. My fear is that he would let himself be defined by opposing Kasparov, which worked for a decade but wouldn't make much sense here. Adding a third Big K to the bandwagon -- fourth if you include Carlsen, whose name, we remember, starts with a K in Russian -- could be very big indeed if they commit to actually making an impact with the voting federations. So it was uplifting to see Kramnik make a tentative endorsement of Karpov, reported in the Russian press (New Times via 64). They give his quote as "I support Karpov, though I'm not sure what he would do differently."

Good point, and while the circus in Russia will probably dominate Karpov's time and the press for a while, it's about time for some serious policy papers from the candidates. Okay, from the challenger, since the phrase "serious policy paper" combined with "Ilyumzhinov" only makes you think of the dozens of "serious" proposals and partnerships Kirsan's FIDE has released over the past dozen years only to ignore them, break them, destroy them, or change them. I've been pitching the Karpov campaign on a plan to get GMs to commit to volunteer some time training or giving exhibitions with developing federations if Karpov wins and I've already heard from one high-profile GM volunteer, which is very cool. I'd also like to find a way for fans to have an impact with federations instead of the nice-but-useless signing of petitions and, umm, ranting on blogs. Would you pledge money to buy vouchers for sets and boards and to pay for trainers and travel for in-need federations in the developing world if Karpov wins? (If you don't think you're well-off enough to help out, go here for a second opinion.)

I don't watch much network TV -- I have two small kids and too much work and if I had time to do that I'd spend it sleeping. That doesn't mean I'm not up for checking out a series once it's available on streaming or DVD. Two I recently dropped into my Netflix streaming queue are Dollhouse and 24, which I've never seen and honestly don't much expect to like, but the real-time thing is a cool concept and I figured I'd give it a try. I was five minutes into the first episode of the first season of 24 and there was a chessboard between the lead super-agent character, Jack Bauer, and his teenage daughter. (Yeah, right.) And Dollhouse, a silly/sexy techno-thriller series that's already been canceled, also makes a feature of a chessboard in the same way. That way, of course, is the "establish the character as a braniac, especially if he's mostly an action guy who needs some quick and easy Sherlock Holmes cred via a prop in the corner of the room."

The other way is even more cliche, the "he's a geek" way, which is its use in Dollhouse. Slightly ironically, considering Josh Whedon's massive rep in the geek world, mostly thanks to Buffy (which I haven't seen either), the chessboard in the tech guy's room in Dollhouse is perpetually turned 90 degrees. I doubt anyone would bother with a joke that subtle, and since the position changes regularly I guess someone in the crew is quite sure that "black square on the right" is the way to go. It was correct in that 24 scene, but having established Jack's smarty-pants cred I doubt we'll see the board again after he gets busy shooting people in the kneecaps.

I usually take this opportunity to drop Tim Krabbe's theory that the black square on the right must be more aesthetically pleasing somehow, since it seems to be that way more than 50% of the time. I think it's more that we only really notice it, or at least blog about it, when it's wrong.

Hmm, first episode of 24 is half through and I already have no idea what's going on. I think Jack just shot someone he's working with in the kneecap.

After two draws in the first round of the US championship final quad yesterday, things got interesting with two decisive games today. 2008 champion Yuri Shulman beat 2009 champ Nakamura with black in a very sharp French thanks to a beautiful finishing move, which is for you to find in the diagram. Nakamura grabbed a pawn and allowed a vicious attack, but would have had decent chances to hold by bailing out with 23.Qf6. He tried to keep the fight alive and instead ran into a haymaker and resigned on move 26. Kamsky also won, taking out another former US champion, Onischuk, in a treacherous rook endgame with four passed pawns. It will take some time to ascertain Black's fatal mistake. It looks wrong to move the king away from the f-pawn with 48..Kc5. 48..c2 49.Rc6 Rxb5 50.Rxc2 Rxa5 51.f5 and Black still has to defend but it doesn't look too tough anymore. Kamsky actually offered a draw at some point, but I don't know at what point.

This sets up a perfect final pairing tomorrow, Shulman with white against Kamsky for all the marbles. Well, $35,000 should get you just about any this side of the Elgin Marbles. If they draw it's tiebreak time, though I don't see anything about the exact format on the official website. Ah, now I do, though I'm not sure it's all been updated for this year's new format since some of the language still refers to the 2009 championship. Assuming it's oll korrect, this is what will go down on Tuesday:

The base time for the game is 60 minutes+ 5 second increment. It will be a draw odds game (Black wins on a draw.) The Players will both bid on the amount of time (minutes and seconds, a number equal or less to 60:00) that they are willing to play with in order to choose their color. The Player who bid the lower number of time chooses his or her color and is allowed the amount of time they bid; the other side shall receive 60:00 time. If both Players pick exactly the same number, the chief arbiter will flip a coin to determine who shall choose their color.

That's the system Greg Shahade has touted for a while, if I'm not mistaken, with the players settling on a mutually satisfactory value of white. Most experience with such draw odds armageddon games is with blitz and the argument whether it should be 6-5 or 5-4. In a longer game, I assume both players will bid low and choose black and the draw odds. I don't doubt there are many who would go for 15 minutes vs 60 if it meant getting draw odds, even with black, but this may be delusional. Personally, I'd rather make a go of a pair of rapids before going to a draw odds game, but that's splitting hairs a bit. As the Book of Revelations says, let's hope for a decisive game tomorrow so we can all avoid Armageddon. Meanwhile, Shabalov's scorching stretch run of 4/5 netted him "best of the rest" honors and fifth place.

With not much action on the boards other than that of Pavel Eljanov, who is backing up a 2751 rating I previously considered to high for his achievements, the only interest coming out of this final Grand Prix event is who will get enough points to finish second in the GP standings behind Aronian and thus take the 7th spot in the candidates matches. Topalov just filled the sixth by losing to Anand. There are eight slots, and the last one will go to an organizer wildcard. Since Azerbaijan has said it will organize the matches, at least the ones not involving Aronian, it is generally assumed it will go to either Radjabov or Gashimov, depending on which one doesn't qualify tomorrow.

And who will that be? For such an important equation you would hope the otherwise excellent website would be tracking the hopefuls' hopes round by round. Radjabov comes in with the most GP points already under his belt, but that doesn't matter as much as whose score is "most improvable." That is, who has the best two scores at previous events to add to their third score here. So three good scores in the past gives you less potential than two very good scores and a bad one. This makes Radjabov the clear frontrunner, with a combined "two best" score of 303.3. Wang Yue's is 273.3 but he's down on the crosstable. Gashimov has 263.3, Jakovenko 243, Leko 240.

Astrakhan has seen a total failure to impress by any of the top contenders. Too cautious? Too nervous? It's a very strong event, like all the GP tournaments have been. The one contender with a track record of occasionally dominating fields this strong, Ivanchuk, fell apart early and hasn't recovered. The early leader was Inarkiev, who was on +2 after beating Gelfand in the sixth round. He then proceeded to lose four in a row and 5/6 to fall from first to last in record time. An amazing collapse. Eljanov, who started that losing streak, took over the reins and leads by a point going into the final round despite a pair of losses. There's a huge mob at 6.5/12 and two of our candidate contenders are among them. (Eljanov is next-to-last in the GP standings, so even his clear first place won't get him close.) They are Gashimov and Jakovenko.

After starting out with eight draws and then losing to Eljanov, Radjabov has won 2/3 and need only keep pace with Jakovenko and Gashimov tomorrow to guarantee his spot in the candidates. For it to even be interesting either Gashimov has to beat Leko with black or Jakovenko has to beat Akopian with white. The Armenian veteran has been off his feed in this event and has lost four games, so that's doable. Leko has been very wobbly, but he won't lose with white unless he's trying to win. There are so many players on +1, however, that if Radjabov draws and Gashimov and someone else move to +2, his 40-point lead over Gashimov could be squeezed. Gashimov would get 140 GP points for equal second. Radjabov could end up sharing 4-7 for 95 points, leaving him 5 points behind his Azerbaijani rival. Radjabov has white against Wang "Sleepy Panda" Yue, so drawing shouldn't be a problem. Of course, if Radjabov loses all bets are off. He could fall as far as a share of eighth in this tight field, though he still might qualify if Gashimov doesn't win. If Radjabov beats Wang Yue he's in. I'm not 100% sure, but even though Wang Yue is only on an even score with seven people above him, if he beats Radjabov with black and nobody moves to +2, he could well qualify. I hope that's true (that it's possible for him to qualify) so we have a good fight in that game.

The other candidates, for the record, are: Aronian by coming first in the Grand Prix, Kramnik and Carlsen by rating, Gelfand by winning the World Cup, Topalov by losing to Anand, Kamsky by losing to Topalov. With this logic, I say the guy who lost to Kamsky got screwed!

On May 14, the Supervisory Council of the Russian Chess Federation attempted to hold a meeting in Moscow. Things had already gotten weird, with Council president Arkady Dvorkovich, also an aide to Russian president Medvedev, coming out in advance for Ilyumzhinov. So far in advance, in fact, that he announced on his own three weeks earlier that the RCF was nominating Ilyumzhinov. He did this after "talking to several Council members on the phone" and writing a letter of nomination that didn't have the signature of Alexander Bakh, the only person in the RCF empowered to sign things.

Karpov protested and Dvorkovich backed down somewhat and both sides girded for the May 14 meeting in Moscow. Things got a little wild even before the meeting. Dvorkovich caught wind that Karpov may have lined up a vote and enough votes to gain the nomination. So he announced a postponement of the meeting, which was ignored by Karpov supporters since they knew the only reason for a postponement was to avoid a vote. Dvorkovich then tried to move the meeting to a new location, one under his control, suggesting his own office or the offices at a bank owned by one of Ilyumzhinov's supporters. When all that failed, Dvorkovich and other Ilyumzhinov supporters on the Council boycotted the meeting, where the now-famous vote took place with 17 of the 32 Council members staying and voting for Karpov. (Council members are elected from all over Russia.)

Dvorkovich and Ilyumzhinov immediately attacked from just about every angle. The vote was invalid because A) Dvorkovich already nominated Ilyumzhinov himself or B) Dvorkovich didn't attend the meeting so the meeting didn't count or C) the meeting was supposed to take place at Dvorkovich's offices (Ilyumzhinov actually wrote this in his letter of protest but it was pointed out that the original announcement -- with the location as the Chess Club -- was still up on the RCF website. Oops. Though my favorite part of the letter is when he made fun of the delegates for voting with a show of hands. Yes, Kirsan, that is what democracy looks like. Scary, isn't it!) or D) the recent (February) reformulation of the RCF's structure and statutes had not been registered with the government agency that manages federations and other NGOs, so the RCF didn't really exist and the entire vote was a dream sequence.

Remarkably, it's D they seem to have settled on now, which makes you wonder what exactly Dvorkovich was planning to do at the meeting before he tried to cancel it. If none of the decisions the organization takes are binding, what were they doing there? And the NGO registry is about tax and banking status, not about internal affairs of the federation, so who cares? In an impressive attempt to thread this needle, Dvorkovich is now saying that since he (along with Council Chairman Alexander Bakh) was appointed to his position by the Congress, his position and authority are real despite the lack of registration with the feds. Unfortunately, Dvorkovich's post was not given the authority to sign papers for the RCF, Bakh's was, and Bakh supports Karpov. (Though, and this is important, Bakh didn't try to nominate Karpov unilaterally, instead holding an open vote.)

When Karpov won the May 14 vote I wasn't surprised. What surprised me is that it happened at all. Most readers know my day job with Kasparov is largely dedicated to The Other Russia and related pro-democracy initiatives in Russia, so I'm intimately familiar with the way state power is flexed there, although I am safe in Brooklyn instead of marching in the streets or having my offices raided on a monthly basis, for which I am very grateful. And with Dvorkovich being a presidential aide, and not a disposable one -- he is in charge of the Skolkovo "innovation center," the Kremlin's comically doomed attempt to create an artificial Silicon Valley near Moscow -- I figured that if Dvorkovich were worried the building would be locked down and the delegates dispersed, or threatened and then dispersed.

When that didn't happen, I took it as another sign that Ilyumzhinov's shield of political protection in Russia wasn't what it used to be. The other signs were how Ilyumzhinov's tales of an alien encounter hit the Russian press and then were even brought up in the Russian Duma. The rumblings in the Russian chess countryside were also getting some traction and there were actually more than 17 Karpov supporters on the Council, though a few decided it was too risky to show up. (Note that some of the most politically vulnerable Council members, from Moscow and St. Petersburg, bailed. Many of the votes came from areas most distant from the center, where there is typically less fear of Moscow.)

But it turns out Dvorkovich hadn't really left old methods behind, he was just slow to put them into action. As detailed in Gazeta.ru, with excerpts and more up in English on Chessbase here, Dvorkovich sent in a private security team to secure the Chess Club, kick Bakh out, and also shut everyone else out of the RCF website and bank accounts. This, we recall, by someone who doesn't have the authority to sign papers on behalf of the RCF and whose chosen candidate just lost a vote. This lack of signing authority is mostly because he is a government official. After several scandals and, later, poor performance by Russia at the Winter Games in Vancouver, Medvedev called for officials to stop meddling in sports federations. Dvorkovich was appointed RCF president because his father was a famous Soviet/Russian chess figure, but old hand Bakh was put on watch with signing powers so they weren't giving authority to a Medvedev aide.

Dvorkovich's brute force tactics are tragic on several levels. The story has hit the news and the blogs in Russia, disappointing many who are still holding out a tiny bit of optimism for liberalization from Medvedev -- and especially a young minister like Dvorkovich who is supposed to be beyond the Putin/siloviki mentality. On a more immediate level for us here in chessland, it indicates how deeply Ilyumzhinov must have dug himself and many others into things they can't afford to let go. Otherwise it's very hard to imagine someone of Dvorkovich's position allowing himself to get dragged into this with a fringe figure like Ilyumzhinov. That is, things with nothing to do with chess. But we have enough scary stuff going on without getting into their motivations.

Now we have Dvorkovich sending out letters to federations saying Karpov wasn't nominated by Russia (see reasons A-D above, plus a few more tossed in, including actually accusing Karpov of corrupt motivations). Karpov won the vote, Dvorkovich has the force of arms, and both have mailing lists and plenty of time. Dvorkovich surely has the levers to manufacture just about any result he wants now that he has cracked down hard. He could have a friendly judge declare the vote for Karpov invalid or probably create an entirely new RCF council and appoint his horse and dog to it, or simply declare that his original nomination of Karpov Ilyuzmhinov [typo] is the law of the land. Dvorkovich is basically saying he is the RCF. Ilyumzhinov will obviously support him. Will FIDE's member federations believe them? Or believe the video of the May 14 vote? It seems like an ideal opportunity to remind federations that this sort of thuggery is exactly the sort of behavior we would like to see cleaned up, and that they have a chance to strike a blow for this in September. And while I'm not nominating Karpov for sainthood, he did get the 17 votes and he's not going to send the MiB to roust you.

It's all quite depressing. Ilyumzhinov will try to keep Karpov off the ballot or try to force him to run from France or Germany. Ilyumzhinov will claim forever that he has the Russian nomination. What is the procedure to deal with a rogue FIDE president, by the way?

The US Championship enters its second stage today Saturday, with the top four after seven rounds jettisoning the rest of the field to enter a four-player all-play-all while the swiss continues for the rest. Unless you are an inveterate upset lover, you got the final four you wanted. Top seeds Nakamura, Kamsky, Onischuk, and Shulman will battle for the title. That covers most of the recent champions, including the incumbent, Nakamura. He was under pressure in the final round as Larry Christiansen continued to show that just because he qualified as the US senior champion it didn't mean he wasn't going to fight for another title in St. Louis. But Nakamura held the draw, as did the other finalists. All four finished the first phase with +3 undefeated scores. So not much drama, but Elo has a tendency to be that way. And it does add to the tension that all four start with the same number of points (the players bring their scores from the first phase with them).

Nakamura and Onischuk "won the draw" in the final phase and will both get two whites from the three final games. [I didn't literally mean there was a draw; the colors are based on how many whites they had in the first seven rounds. I was trying to say they came out on top for the final, but the scare quotes weren't scary enough.] When the tension is this high, I don't think color disparity matters quite as much, but obviously it's a plus. With such a balanced field a single victory will likely make the difference. Somehow Shulman and Kamsky avoided meeting during the event, while Nakamura and Onischuk both faced the other three. Let's hope for more good chess. With the fighting reputations of these four and $35,000 on the line for first place that shouldn't be a problem.

Really horrid of me to be so buried with other work when the US championship and a Grand Prix underway. I promise new thread tomorrow. And I'm sure everyone has already read and discussed the fascinating interview with Vishy Anand at Chessbase, where he talks about getting advice and preparation from a few guys who know about world championship matches. It's almost rubbing it in to say you got close and personal help before and during the match from Carlsen, Kasparov and Kramnik! I do hope this serves as a rebuttal to the members of the commentariat who were skeptical of Garry's rooting interest in the match.

As much as it says about Anand's status as beloved nice guy, it probably says as much about how the chess community at large has rejected Topalov like an incompatible transplanted kidney since the insanity he and his manager Danailov created around his Elista WCh match with Kramnik in 2006. (Was it really that long ago?) Openly accusing your opponent of cheating brings shame and scandal on everyone. Certainly a lot of fans went from loving Topalov's sharp chess and uncompromising attitude to wanting him to die in a fire. Well, that 2006 match united the chess world in several ways, I guess. It unified the title and it unified much of the chess world -- against Topalov.

While I'm dropping Magnus's name, I had a chance to chat with him for a while at the Karpov2010 party and I'll be including those remarks in an article I'm told I'll be writing for Chess Life, of all places. There goes my reputation! Nah, should be fun. I can bring any publication down to my level in a page or two.

But this isn't the old Party. It's the Gala Kickoff Fundraiser for Karpov2010 here in NYC! It's being streamed live online, btw. Should be quite a show. Been to busy this week for proper, or even improper coverage of the US Championship and Astrakhan, but thank goodness they both have excellent web coverage, from the little I've seen. Karpov's response to Ilyumzhinov is up too, btw.

Pics and more from the party coming soon...

Elo in the house!

[Crap, had this saved as a draft last night and didn't notice it hadn't published when I finished it this morning. I'm bumping the time up from the original 10:48am so you can find it.]

It starts today in St. Louis, round begins at 3pm ET, which I think is 2pm local time in my grandmother's old home state of Mizzurrah. Live coverage here. It's a prize fund that deserves the field and a field that deserves the prize fund. There are also some twists to the format, so do read the fine print. It's a 24-player swiss system event. After seven rounds the top four are teleported into a three-round all-play-all (aka a quad) for the title, with their swiss scores intact. Those Left Behind continue the final two rounds of the swiss with fifth prize as the goal. Considering that fifth prize is $10,000, richer than most first prizes on the circuit, that's not too shabby. First prize is $35,000 from a total prize fund of over $170,000. That's Rex Sinquefield coming through big time again.

There are downsides and upsides to every format, balancing the size and strength of the field against the desire for drama and rigor, with these things often in conflict. At least this avoids scheduled rapid games. As we have discussed many times here, I'm not nearly as interested in rigor in national championship and other non-world championship events in general since the priorities can be quite different. Trying to promote chess in the US has unique challenges and experimentation should be encouraged. Two players in the quad will get 2/3 whites, which hurts the rigor, but going to six rounds would be brutal and color disparity is better than rapid.

What we do know for sure is that this is one of the strongest fields in the history of the US championship, with a good claim on being the strongest. A few elitists out there may say that a field with Fischer, Reshevsky, and ten well-trained baboons would be stronger just because of the world championship class of the legends. But this is nonsense since it takes great competition to have a great event -- and the top end of the 2010 field is also world class. Nakamura and Kamsky are confirmed elite stars on the global stage and the rest of the Olympiad team are proven contenders, with several former US champions as well. Veterans like Onischuk, Akobian, Shulman, Shabalov, and Stripunsky will have to fight off top young stars Hess, Lenderman, Shankland, and Robson. Hall of Famers Christiansen and Benjamin are also there. Christiansen qualified as the US Senior Champion, which makes me feel old, if not as old as Christiansen, heh. Go LarryC! Should be great stuff.

All the Russian news agencies are reporting that 17 members of the 32-member Supervisory Council of the Russian Chess Federation have nominated Anatoly Karpov for the FIDE presidency. This is huge news, especially after Ilyumzhinov and and Council president Dvorkovich tried to hijack the nomination without a vote a few weeks ago. Even in today's meeting in Moscow they tried first to postpone this meeting when they realized the votes were against them, and then some last-minute shenanigans to move the meeting to a closed-door location at a bank and further delay proceedings. But the delegates held firm and raised their hands, 17 getting over the line for a majority regardless of what Dvorkovich and Ilyumzhinov try. There are still various technicalities to quibble over, but the bottom line is that the delegates showed up and a majority voted for Karpov.

This means Karpov has put Ilyumzhinov into a clearly losing position, though I doubt he'll resign it. Without the support of his own country, and without the international support of a legend like Karpov, he'll have to do something tragic like have his own presidential board nominate him. And without Russian Federation support, the rest of the old CIS is unlikely to show him any love.

For some reason the number that went out on the wires is 18, not the 17 my source on the scene is giving me, and he's holding the list of names. Selivanov, Krjukov, Bakh, Beshukov, Ertel, Afromeev, Titov, Giljazov, Khasin, Zinder, Kazakov, Goncharov, Razuvaev, Fedorova, Sapfirov, Shaidullin, Ivakhin. Apparently Dvorkovich and other Ilyumzhinov guys went for a last-second boycott of the meeting, but it wasn't enough to prevent the quorum. No matter what they do now, the 17 votes are on record. Also, Selivanov was today nominated as VP of FIDE and voting delegate. Krjukov as the director of the Khanty-Mansiysk Olympiad. (Ilyumzhinov had tried to appoint his own guy for this, but it's the right of the Federation to do this and they exercised that right.)

Well, let them say 18, or 38, but it's a done deal. Fantastic street-fighting politics in Moscow and the good guys won for once!

Astrakhan, which means "place of sleepy goats" in the Mongol language, is hosting the much-delayed final Grand Prix tournament. So far it's not exactly a thriller, coming off two rounds with a combined one decisive game. Things were a little spicier in the first two rounds, but after four there still isn't anyone with two wins to rub together. The only standout in the field is standing out for the wrong reason. Fan favorite Vassily Ivanchuk, who still had a chance to make it to the candidates matches if he won first place here and Radjabov wasn't in the top three, has lost twice in the first four rounds. Ouch. The other players who have a chance to qualify, Leko, Gashimov, Wang Yue, Jakovenko, and Radjabov, are all on even or +1.

Despite the gloomy stats, it hasn't been all pathetic short draws. In fact, some of them are veritable miracles of creative equality and piece exchanges. Watch in amazement as all the pieces are hoovered off in Mamedyarov-Jakovenko. After the thrills of the Anand-Topalov match, it's a bit of a comedown to see Petroffs and Berlins again. (Although there was a 25-move win for Black in a Berlin, which is probably close to unprecedented. Ponomariov hit Svidler with a nice two-mover right out of Reinfeld's 1001 Tactics.) Akopian-Mamedyarov was exciting but somehow despite various sacs it ended in a draw regardless. Event the Benoni has fizzled, although I'm not sure what Jakovenko was hoping for before offering a draw to Gashimov on move 25. Svidler-Radjabov was looking exciting and just like that they found a forced repetition. Ivanchuk-Wang Yue was another abrupt repetition after fireworks.

The short list of decisive games include Gashimov's impressively smooth build-up and breakthrough against Ivanchuk in a Ruy and the Ukrainian's loss today to Inarkiev after trying too hard to win an endgame. I'm sure things will heat up eventually. Anyone notice that in three tries, everyone has played g3 against Radjabov, not allowing a King's Indian? Coincidence? Naturally, all three were drawn. The leaders on +1: Leko, Ponomariov, Gelfand, Inarkiev, Eljanov, Gashimov.

In a tremendous clutch performance Anand took charge with black against a dithering Topalov and whipped up a crushing attack with remarkable speed. The pretty retreat 34..Qe8! was the final nail in the Bulgarian's coffin. Well, not quite. That would have made a tidy story, but in fact it was still quite sharp and Anand wisely took his time to work things out while Topalov maintained desperate hope of reaching an endgame like R+N vs Q. He found every desperate chance but there just wasn't as much fight in the white position as there was in Topalov. He even got his endgame after the time control, but with an open king it was hopeless. Anand maneuvered his queen precisely and Topalov eventually resigned game and match after move 56. Anand renews his title and takes home 1,200,000 euros, minus the 20% FIDE tax they charge for not getting in the way. Topalov gets 800,000.

What a game, what a match, what a world champion, Vishy Anand!

Suitable for framing:

(Click goes to giant version.)

It certainly wasn't easy. Anand's gaff in the first game started him off with a loss and in need of an alternative defense to Topalov's 1.d4. The sturdy Slav came to the rescue, but the long grinds he had to defend cost him on the endurance side of the equation even though he quickly took the lead with wins in games two and four. Topalov's tremendous fighting qualities allowed him to level the score after being outplayed badly in two consecutive Catalans. Anand's strategic decision to slowball Topalov, playing like Kramnik with slow positional whites and, after the Grunfeld went into the shop, ugly passive blacks, paid dividends early. It clearly wasn't as easy for Anand to do as for Kramnik, however, and he got into trouble in several long defenses, including the loss in game eight.

Against Kramnik in 2008 Anand forced very sharp play whenever possible and was a very successful fire to Kramnik's ice. In Sofia the Indian chameleon went the opposite way, illustrating why Topalov doesn't have very good results against the Catalan. Anand did look very uncomfortable on the black side of those ugly queenless Slavs, however, and Topalov is a formidable grinder. The only real problem with the match, and right about now I'm sure at least one person (Topalov) would agree, is that it needed to be around six games longer. Topalov proved himself worthy of everything but the title in the end. And though it was by the narrowest of margins, Anand showed he's a cut above the rest even at 40. Or, as a fellow 1969'er, especially at 40.

In today's final game, Anand went with the ultra-solid Lasker QGD, which is about as close to the Petroff in spirit as things get against 1.d4. A slight exaggeration, but let's just say Anand was happy to take a draw and head into rapid tiebreaks on Thursday. Topalov had other plans, of course, and went about trying to stir up trouble. This he managed to do, although they did follow book for nearly 20 moves. Black had an isolated c-pawn, but Anand defended actively and the pawn mostly served to distract Topalov enough that he forgot about his own weaknesses. Anand did not. With several pieces offsides, Topalov's king came under fire after he played not the first over-committal pawn pushes of the match. The end couldn't come quickly enough for Anand's cheering section in the comments -- 36..Qd8+ was the preferred computer execution -- with nearly 25 minutes on both clocks at that point there was little doubt that it was a case of the white king being dead and long live Anand the king. Anand didn't even rush in the endgame, playing zugzwang games with his queen instead of grabbing the b-pawn. It was almost like he was enjoying himself, but I'm sure he just wanted to make absolutely sure there were no miracle perpetuals.

The official site has been great getting the moves out without crashing and the compliments have been high on the webcam as well. Kudos to the organizers. One blackout, no shenanigans, no rapid tiebreaks. Topalov lands in the group of eight candidates along with Aronian, Kamsky, Gelfand, Kramnik, Carlsen, the organizer wildcard, and the Grand Prix second-place finisher, who will be known in a dozen days in Astrakhan.

BIG thanks to everyone in the comments who turned this into a real live and post-game event coverage site despite my near-total abdication on several days due to work and the new baby (who is doing great). Analysis, translations, links, really fantastic. It's an honor to pay your hosting bills! mishanp in particular gets a gold star, or green clover, or whatever lucky charm he likes for his ceaseless posting of good material.

From the Preview Dept from Harish in the comments: "Ok next match Anand-Carlsen 7-5." Yikes! The man is probably still post-morteming game 12!

And then there was one. Topalov takes the white pieces into the final game of regulation on Tuesday. A win and he's the undisputed world champion. A draw and they come back on Thursday for rapid and maybe even blitz tiebreaks. Not a fun thought, but 12 games is just too short to give the champion draw odds even if you agree with the old "the challenger must prove his superiority" philosophy given by Botvinnik and Kasparov, who, coincidentally, both drew world championship matches.

Last games are much like first games, as much about nerves and conditioning as anything else. Topalov should play this as aggressively as possible. Obviously because he has white, but also because Anand will be a heavy favorite in rapid chess. Not the same as having draw odds, but it's no surprise that Anand has a huge plus score in rapid chess over Topalov, who has never shown any particular flair at fast controls. (I believe Anand has nine wins and one loss, though all of their recent rapid games were drawn.) All that said, there is still a game 12 to play. Does the tired Anand go back to the solid but passive Slav and allow Topalov to squeeze him for hours or does he come back with another Grunfeld and force Topalov to consider playing for three results? The Bulgarian has a well-earned reputation for summoning tremendous energy in the final rounds of events and I imagine a long game with a slight plus would suit him fine.

It's a very tough choice. Give Topalov the sharp game he wants or pray you can maintain a high enough energy level in a slow grind to ward off a blunder? The extra rest day Monday can't hurt. A draw is always the safe bet in top-level chess, but my feeling is Anand can't just muddle through this last game on class. He should play the Grunfeld as much for self-motivational reasons as anything. Allowing himself to be subjected to 5+ hours of Topalov's destructive power without much counterplay with the title on the line is a lot to ask, no matter how much he's tried to play like Kramnik. Official site.

It's crunch time! It's all tied up with two games to go. Can Anand finally land the knockout blow or will he continue to falter against Topalov's relentless energy? Official site.

Update:The third draw in a row and least interesting game of the match, at least up until the end when Anand either made a winning attempt or a losing attempt in an equal endgame. Anand tried to change things up with an English opening but most of his progress looked superficial. For once Topalov matched the world champion's quiet maneuvering handily, even getting a slight pull as the pieces came off. The ending looked like it should have been drawn without adventures, but Anand again decided to test his fans' heart conditions. Technical endgames have never been Anand's happy place, especially defending them, but it was still surprising to see him dump his b-pawn for counterplay with 49.Rd2?! when the passive lines of defense look perfectly adequate for White. Maybe Anand was entirely confident that the rook endgame after 50..Rf4 51.Rd5 is drawn? Looks very unpleasant. Things started to look okay for White as soon as Topalov skipped that and allowed the white king to get to h5. 56.Nxe7 was the most forcing draw, but Anand calculated 60.g6 well.

It's 5.5-5.5 and Topalov takes the white pieces into the final classical game on Tuesday.

The tension getting to you yet? Anand managed to right his Grunfeld ship and fend off Topalov to set up a winner-take-all finale in the final two games. Anand has pressed but hasn't won since game four. Topalov is a famously strong finisher but nerves must be affecting him as well. Both players have world championship match experience.

Thanks to a last-minute intervention by the Ministry of Magic, the final FIDE Grand Prix tournament, much delayed and nearly forgotten, has hastily been arranged to take place near the famous prison of Azkaban from May 9-25. Not being present at the board the moment your clock is started will be punished by the player's soul being sucked out by a Dementor. Wait, what? Astrakhan? Is that near Azkaban? In Russia, you say? No Harry Potter? Well, all right, but I think this was a major missed opportunity.

So, Astrakhan it is, "situated in the Volga Delta, rich in sturgeon and exotic plants" and former home of the Golden Horde. It follows the GP events in the other yaktropolises of Nalchik and Jermuk, the last, way back in August. But the chess has been good to great in most of these events, and there is hot competition for the final qualifying spot in the candidates in this final event. Aronian is already in from the GP and isn't participating. Radjabov and Wang Yue are the frontrunners with Gashimov and Leko close behind. Jakovenko and Ivanchuk are longshots in for a chance if the others all falter. Game on!

Update: As Thomas points out below, since only the top two previous performances are likely to matter for the contenders, the relevant scores going into the final event are: Radjabov 303.3, Wang Yue 273.3, Gashimov 263.3, Ivanchuk 245.0, Jakovenko 243.3, Leko 240.0. He adds that Wang Yue will go through if he's clear first even if Radjabov is second. And that Ivanchuk will be the candidate if he wins clear first and Radjabov is lower than third. Doable. Go Chucky!

The players: Akopian, Alekseev, Eljanov, Gashimov, Gelfand, Inarkiev, Ivanchuk, Jakovenko, Leko, Mamedyarov, Ponomariov, Radjabov, Svidler, Wang Yue.

The conventional wisdom of "Anand better, Topalov tougher" seems to have been borne out fairly well so far, which is handy for cliche shufflers like myself with no time to read, let alone do, any proper evaluation of the games. Anand had Topalov on the ropes in game nine but the Battling Bulgarian once again showed how hard it is to get the stake through his heart, chop off his head, and set the remains on fire. Which of Anand's seconds was in charge of bringing the holy water? As Topalov himself put it before the match, his advantage consists of five fewer years.

A wonderful duel so far, despite, or perhaps because of, a lack of accuracy in the last two. Consider how rich the games have been, one after another. Now, just for comparison, flip through the Kramnik-Leko match games from 2004. Wait, don't, you'll sleep right through today's game 10. Topalov now has two whites in the final three games and Anand's Slav is looking more fragile than a new Tory coalition government. The match is tied 4.5-4.5, Topalov has white in game 10. Official site.

A bit swamped here with work and new baby, sorry for not keeping up with the match. Especially since it took a dramatic turn in game eight, with Topalov leveling the score in a game that got a little wild on both sides. But Topalov ritually wins chaotic games and if you do it all the time you can't call it luck. The pressure got to Anand and he blundered in a difficult endgame just when it looked like he had found a miracle draw with a little help from his opponent. The world champ had a free day to get his wits back and we'll see if he can again bounce back from defeat with a win with white. Things have gone from great to so-so to trouble for him with his Catalan, so his choice today is an intriguing one. Official site. The match is tied 4-4 with four games to play.

Update: Another incredible back-and-forth game, this one ending in a draw after Anand missed various wins. Topalov earned a perpetual check with a queen versus knight and two rooks and the match stays even at 4.5-4.5. The comments were on fire with wins for White, but nerves and several spates of time trouble prevented Anand from finding them against Topalov's never-say-die spirit. Anand is going to need all his spiritual reserves to hold things together after yesterday's blunder and today's missed opportunities.

If there's such a thing as momentum in a match, you'd have to say Topalov has it. He just held with black two games in a row and sprang a fierce novelty in the last game. But in baseball they say that momentum is tomorrow's starting pitcher, which in chess would equate to your next opening. All the momentum in the world can crash on a nice piece of prep or a time-trouble blunder. Topalov might well believe he'll break through eventually in one of these queenless Slavs, playing with good chances and with little risk of losing. He has three whites left, so no need to panic and perhaps run into an entirely new Anand surprise. Unfortunately, this is very reminiscent of what Kasparov thought about Kramnik's Berlin in 2000. "These positions are so good for White! Even if they aren't my style, I'm sure I'll break through eventually." Well, he did, but it was in Astana 2001 instead of London 2000. Topalov won't much care if he beats Anand's Slav at Corus next year if he can't do it in Sofia this week.

The main thing for Anand is that he knows he is playing very good chess and doesn't have to fear any type of position. The lead can weigh heavily and I don't think Kasparov is the only one who thinks Vishy needs to win another game to avoid tiebreaks or worse. Topalov is the most dangerous player in the world and he showed us why in game seven. But Anand is the World Champion and he also showed us why. So I'll put the psyche crap and prognosti-guesses on ice and just hope we continue to get such wonderful chess. In a just world, if they're tied at 12 they'll just extend it another eight classical games. Official site here.

Sure, he skipped the opening ceremony and decided he could miss the first few Anand-Topalov games, despite being scheduled to arrive on the 24th. Maybe he thought Anand's volcano delay request would be granted.

He is in time for the second half and has been officially born into the Obama/Anand era. As he enters the world, Stieg Larsson tops the fiction lists, Rihanna the pop charts, and US unemployment is still over 9%. Hardly auspicious signs, but many of the greats were born into periods of crisis.

Or maybe he was a week late because HE'S FREAKIN' HUGE. Must be that giant brain that tipped him over ten pounds (10lb 2oz, or 4.6kg in the civilized world). Mother and child are healthy and doing fine. Big sister is delighted with her new toy, though we'll see how long that lasts when she realizes he can't be turned off and put in the toy box.

The second half of the match begins on Monday. Anand has the lead by a point after six games and white in game seven. Topalov is a notoriously strong closer, though only six games with three rest days will hardly have exhausted Anand and the quality should remain high. After Topalov held against the Catalan in game six the question is whether or not Anand tries something else. On the other hand, 2.5/3 with it ain't bad, and if it allows him to get positions he's more comfortable in than Topalov he doesn't have to swing for the fences with the lead in hand.

Anatoly Karpov is the new guest of honor at the match in Sofia, according to the official site. This is just a few days after his rival for the FIDE presidency, Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, fled Sofia for Moscow to fight for the Russian nomination. He'll make the honorary first move of the match tomorrow. Has he done this before? Must be a little odd for him to do it while Anand, whom Karpov beat in a 91 candidates match and a FIDE KO final match in 98, is making the non-honorary first move.

Update: Another fantastic game, this time with Topalov pushing the action and Anand rising to meet the challenge. Topalov finally caught Anand in the opening, another Catalan, and out of an exchange sac (seen at Amber this year) he sacrificed a piece for two pawns and a tremendous initiative that lasted pretty much the entire game. Anand defended very well and It eventually ended in a dynamic draw, with both sides unable to make any progress. White's extra knight is tied down defending the passed d-pawn and the white queen can't achieve anything on her own.

Update 2: Great job in the comments from folks aggregating analysis and adding their own. The crux of the debate at the moment is whether or not Anand missed a forced win, which is very different from "clearly better" and not at all the same as "better than what was played." And in games with queens and passed pawns and not much else, all computer analysis must be quadruply qualified with "but the chance of a human playing all of these forced moves in a row is roughly the same as Mig winning the Kentucky Derby."

Quoting GM Shipov at Crestbook, perhaps via Dana MacKenzie's blog where he is translating Shipov: The computer demonstrates the incredibly subtle play by the queen not allowing Black to put the pawn on d2 42.Qa4!! Qd5+ /42. ..d2? 43.Qc2+/ 43.Kf1 Qe6 44.Qa2!! /with the threat of capturing on d3 with a knight/ 44. ..Qd5 /44. ..Qc6 45.Qa1! Qd5 46.Qe1!/ 45.Qa6+ Kg7 46.Qa7+ Kg6 47.Qe3 and Black has difficulties. White is ready to activate his knight. And d2 is answered by Ke2!."

Anand with white and a 3-2 lead as we near the halfway point in Sofia. Official site. Will Topalov avoid the Catalan? Can Anand go 3/3 with white? Will the lights stay on? Will the Dirt stay up? I hacked the templates up a bit to reduce the database load, will see if it works. If it goes down again I'll redo them on the off day.

Update: Topalov holds with black for the first time. It was another Catalan and the Bulgarian defused it with very active play, typical of his style. Anand's knights had to work overtime, covering half the board to hold the balance and avoid being trapped. They played down to next to nothing before Topalov again went to the arbiter to formalize the draw by repetition (but with handshake this time). For some reason having the players at the board a little longer than absolutely necessary enrages some commentators. Sure it's not relevant to the sporting result, but this is a spectacle, too. If it's so trivial, play it out quickly. It's not as if it's degrading to go from a drawn position with five pawns to a drawn position with three. Fun game. 3.5-2.5 Anand at the half.

Since before the match started I'm hearing a lot of how Anand's famous proficiency at rapid chess gives him close to draw odds in the 12 classical games. Dunno about that, but it's clear he's in the driver's seat. Topalov hasn't been able to lay a glove on the champ since the first game. Anand comes back with white in game seven on Monday.

It is absolutely prohibited to bring swords, ice axes and ice picks, or scissors aboard the aircraft. ChessBase is violating this prohibition.