Greengard's ChessNinja.com

Amber at Last

| Permalink | 73 comments

And the last Amber. The elite reassemble in Monaco to save us from this fallow stretch. This 20th edition is the final one for the Melody Amber rapid/blindfold tournament. It's been a remarkable series with the elite coming in to enjoy amazing conditions and play without risking rating points. Round 1 is the 12th and I hope by then I'll be done with first draft book edits and able to blog, sleep, and reacquaint myself with my family if they'll have me.

Tata Steel champion Hikaru Nakamura joins the event for the first time, and just in time. He's as fast as they come and has been critical of the qualify of the blindfold play in Amber in the past, so it should be interesting to see him in action. First-timers not named Kramnik or Morozevich usually have trouble in the blindfold. The field is incredible, as usual. World champ Anand, Carlsen, Kramnik, Aronian, Topalov, Grischuk, Ivanchuk, Karjakin, Gelfand, Gashimov, and Giri. Can't say much more than 'wow' to that line-up.

Ivanchuk has played in all 20 events and shared first last year with Carlsen. Games begin at 1430 local time, 8:30am NY.


When was the last time Kramnik and Topalov played in the same tournament?

The Olympiad, perhaps?! But they didn't play against each other there.
And if I remember rightly, the last time they faced each other over the board (last Amber, maybe?!), they still didn't shake hands, just gestured (draw or resignation) to the arbiter.
It'll be interesting to see if - now that he's married - Topalov might act more civilly than he has in the recent past. I'm guessing he will.

I think you are right about the Olympiad.
What will be interesting is to see whether the new and improved (let's hope so) Topalov will extend his hand to Kramnik before their first game. And then whether Kramnik will shake it (my guess: yes, with a little smile).

Kramnik, I believe, is a very good guy and I'm sure he will accept Topalov's handshake if it's offered. It's well passed time to let the past be and forgive and forget.
I'm very happy Topalov is finally willing to play again. The big question is what sort of playing form Topalov will have after such a period of inactivity.

Just wondering - did kasparov ever play in the amber tournament ?

Does anyone know why the Amber tournament is coming to an end?

yes, because some greedy US guys ruined the world economy.

Didn't - disliked blindfold chess.

For the record, some other interested parties had a stake (steak) in it as well.

Can't wait for this!!!

I can't remember the last time we had a tournament with the top 8 players in the world, 10 of the top 11 players!! To bad it's not a regular standard tournament but still Amber is always fun.

I predict Naka, Giri and Grischuk will get beat up the most. Maybe Gelfand and/or Gashimov too. Hard to believe any of the rest will do poorly.

The last rated tournaments where Kramnik and Topalov played each other were Corus 2007 and 2008, both postdating their Elista WCh match. As far as rapid (and blindfold) goes, Amber 2008 and 2009 and Zurich Champions rapid in 2009.

@Jim from Sudbury: I am not sure about Topalov being "unwilling to play". He did play Nanjing, then maybe he just wasn't invited to Tal Memorial (Russian-Bulgarian chess relations ...), London (fixed field) and Tata (six other top10 players participating).

The Tata Steel organiser explained why Topalov wasn't there: http://bit.ly/f1KwWX

"We invited Anand and Topalov before the start of the World Championship Match in Sofia. The result wasn’t yet known so we offered them identical conditions. Anand agreed immediately, while Topalov’s manager Danailov said: “No”. He wanted better conditions. Then the match took place and we didn’t come to an agreement with Topalov’s manager."

Perhaps Danailov took a bit of a gamble - if Topalov had won the match he'd have held out for (and might have got) better conditions, but losing it you'd assume Tata Steel probably offered less. The other thing might simply be that Topalov did want to take a rest/extended honeymoon.

I doubt Nakamura will suffer much, he's a beast a blitz and I'm trusting his self-confidence will get him at least an even score in the blindfold.

Grishuk, who knows, but yeah I bet Giri gets knocked around a bunch.

In my opinion Naka has the potential to win Amber.
But it won't happen. I guess he's still stuck in party mood after Tata. So, his potential to underestimate EVERY opponent, will dominate this time and he will end somehow shared 5th to 8th.
I hope he proves me wrong!

I think there is now more in chess to follow today than when Kasparov was active. Today we have Carlsen, Nakamura, Anand, Aronian... and so many more exciting stars, so I think it's a golden age of chess right now!

Big thanks for Mig, Garry and folks@chessbase for popularizing the game of chess. It has also been very educational to just to follow the movements of chess players, because it reflects the state of the world in a different level like reading a book where events are happening in a very different places around the world.

The internet has been key to the expansion of chess, because as an example, in North america if not for the internet i wouldn't be able to follow any of this. The newspapers, tv, etc. simply don't give adequate coverage. You're lucky to see an article on a world championship match let alone a regular tournament or game postings.

What I'm on unclear on though is whether the growth of chess through the internet has led to better financial conditions for players, organizers, etc. Since the only money I'm capable of lending to chess is my ICC subscription, my national chess federation dues, and any (rare!) local tournaments I may play in or visit. But none of that really helps financially with major chess events does it?

I may be wrong, but what I think is this:
You are interested in chess, and follow events. The sponsors of events want people to watch these events - so you are convincing them that what they are doing makes sense.

However (a big however!), I fail to understand why Tata Steel (just as an example) profits from having people like you and me watching Wijk aan Zee. We are hardly going to order a few thousand tons of steel from them because we found a game very exciting.

I would be very interested in comments!

I would like to make a statement about these scurrilous rumours that have been going around.

I am not (I repeat NOT) the boyfriend of Thomas. I have been in a monogamous relationship with Richard for several years and I am very happy. I respect Thomas very much and always look forward to reading his postings here. Which men he has relationships with his is own business.

Now back to chess. I think Hikaru Nakamura has a great chance to win Melody. His confidence will be high and I think he will play well.

*Sings* the Simple Minds song 'Beko', but replaces 'Beko' with 'Leko'.


Visions of Leko drawing game after game after game for months and months then go through my mind. Striving for equality in all his games no matter what happens.

Let not us dwell on him being cast out into the wilderness of 2700+ super GMs and invitations to high profile events no longer appearing on his doormat! Leko, it is time for you to join the 'journeymen' and participate in such events as Gibraltar, Capelle, and all other manner of open tournaments!

*LIGHTBULB* an idea comes to me. Leko and Morozevich should come together and learn from one another. Together as chess brothers they could regain their power and places on the throne!

"However (a big however!), I fail to understand why Tata Steel (just as an example) profits from having people like you and me watching Wijk aan Zee."

There is no profit to be had from such sponsorships - at least not directly. It's more for the purposes of strenghtening the profile of the brand and/or generating goodwill in the local community. I don't know exactly how the value of such deals is determined, but for a chess tournament I guess a high number of internet kibitzers is a measure of success as it shows that people are interested in the event you're sponsoring.

@Rasputin: That's "Biko", and it was originally written and performed by Peter Gabriel (whose version is very much the preferred one, as it doesn't have any windy bagpipes or Jim Kerr in it).

I don't know, Harold. Do you think Naka is her type? That her on the right - Melody, I mean - and Naka's going to be working hard to win her, methinks.

As for the tournament, yes - he's got chances. This is the year of Naka Surprises!

Blindfold tournament.Nobody seriously interested in a game of chess cares about such thing.Quality of games drops by 300-500 points..

Melody. I should include the link. Think Naka has chances, Harold?



Well, the top GMs go through blitz and blindfold games from their peers with a magnifying glass. So maybe interesting after all, elo.

Blitz and blindfold games (generally) are on a lower level than rapid, rapid has more blunders than classical games, classical games are "less perfect" than high-level correspondence chess ... .
The amazing thing isn't that some blindfold games end with one player blundering his queen, but that others are of rather high quality (one wouldn't think it's blindfold if it wasn't mentioned?). As to "[Nakamura] has been critical of the qualify of the blindfold play in Amber in the past": he first has to try it out himself ... .

I don't think the quality drops as much as you think. Maybe 200 points at the MOST. Maybe only 100 points.

I've been following Amber for many years and am always extremely impressed with how good they play blindfolded. Granted over the course of the tournament you'll see a couple of blunders where someone will drop a piece, but that's part of the fun - seeing who can keep it all in the their head the best.

There is still a huge untapped potential of internet for chess. For example: nowadays players might be obliged to appear at post-game press conferences and share their thoughts about the game, so why not oblige them to write a short comment on the fly after every move they make? (except first moves and under 5mins at clock). Would be hugely instructive and entertaining for the fans following online. And to provide incentive for the players, after every round a predefined pool of chess journalists would vote for the player with the most insightful comments, worth a few % of the prize fund.

What?! Suggest a slightly larger think on that one, chief. Have you ever read a chess book with game annotations?

Suggest a bit more goodwill when reading the stuff of others. Try to ponder how such a think might actually work (e.g.: on-the fly short comments would typically not contain detailed annotation, but general impressions/feel of position, maybe hint on plans, emotions about goodness/badness of moves etc)

300+ points is not what I think but what experts estimate.It was found that an average IM playing strenght roughly corresponds to blindfold average GM strenght.I am not sure how does that extrapolate to average GM playing strenght vs blindfold superGM playing strenght.Slippery.

Something similar was actually tried in Germany many years ago (don't remember when exactly, but I left the country in 1998) and broadcast on TV (a third regional channel): Players were _talking_ about their games in progress - "logistics" presumably included sound-proof headphones so you couldn't hear what the opponent said. This, as well as chess on TV in general, was discontinued at some stage.

For top players and an internetional (typo intended ,:) ) audience, there may be two problems:
- comments have to be in English, which isn't the first language of most players (and even if they speak it fluently in post-game interviews and press conferences, it interfers with their thought process?)
- players may not want to reveal too much about their thought process anyway, as "general statements" might help future opponents.

So, while interesting, I wonder if your suggestion would gain wide acceptance among the players.

Err, just to point out the obvious, the difference between an "average GM" and an "average IM" isn't 300 points. It's more like 100-150.

Contrary what one might assume by only reading comments from ICC, many influential people do follow chess and play chess, not seriously but just for fun.

Having your name tied with chess tournament can be an excellent way to get your company known by the people who make bigger decisions than just whether to buy Zero or Max today.

Just my style. I might be the resident hammerhead. And I whack myself on occasion.
I understand that what you proposed was well intentioned. There were just too many reasons for it to be a viable suggestion, but I didn't mean to bunk your high.

"comments have to be in English, which isn't the first language of most players": I see no problem with players commenting in their mother tongue if they wish, translated on the fly to EN by courtesy of google, the organisers, or kind souls like mishanp.

"players may not want to reveal too much about their thought process": of course, this is the tough one. However, they'll reveal at least as much as they do at post-game press conferences, and that's already very interesting. Plus, I hope that in addition to the prize incentive, supposed-to-be-smart chessplayers will recognize the promotional value for themselves in genuine, insightful commenting. Supposed-to-be-dumb linebackers certainly do at the sideline interviews, as well as football coaches at halftime interviews. I'm sometimes surprised how much they reveal about planned second-half tactics, giving info that can be quite useful for the opposing team.

The BBC did this sort of thing a long time ago with "The Master Game" which ran from the late '70s until the early '80s.

It was a very good series. Listening to Tony Miles berate himself after overlooking a strong move my Short, hearing the comments of Short as a schoolboy (he lost, and said something along the lines of "Crumbs, well at least I got a day off school".

Karpov, Larsen, Spassky and many others playes - including Fischer/Spassky ref Lothar Schmid. The only real failure of the pre computer game display was in a final between Miles and Karpov which got down to a pawn race with no time. Karpov had no time, queened a pawn, muttered "Queen" and proceeded to mate Miles with it. They were moving so quickly the moves could not be reconstructed.

Here's Robert Byrne vs Korchnoi in 1980 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1x_JPxrI3c

Wow- I knew of the old BBC Master Game programs, but didn't realize that they were available on Youtube. A whole bunch of them, too. There goes my weekend. Damn you, BabsonTask! :)

toiletov again crushed by anand.
danailov should be asked to provide his expert comments now. [old players like anand look for draw as per team toilet]

anand is becoming luckier with age

Wow what a game Anand-Topalov blind fold! Long game with many moves played over the board. The quality of this game must be higher than may be many past regular time control world championship games.

one thing very interesting is that kramnik has not
defeated any one in regular games of match (except kasparov)

1> lost to shirov
2> lost to gelfand
3> lost badly to kamsky
4> some how drew with leko
5> drew with topalov (how ever one game was forfeited by him so this could be termed as match victory)
6> ripped apart by anand
would be a favorite to win the candidates and challenge anand?
today he is facing anand ....

you missed out loss to adams...

Anand seems to grows stronger with age, like a fine wine.


Naka critisizing anyones blindfold play makes me laugh,He drops pieces every game...lol

During the ICC live coverage, Seirawan (who played Amber himself many years ago) mentioned that he told Nakamura "how tough blindfold games can be".
Nakamura's reply: "oh no, for me it's easy - I play blindfold all the time and always remember where the pieces are".
Seirawan: "serious blindfold games [as serious as it gets] with the clock ticking are another story than casual ones between friends".

Chessbase notes Anand-Topalov blindfold a truly remarkable game! With annotations from Karsten Muller on the end game.


Nakamura played pretty well until it got down to short time on the clock. His positions were better out of the middlegame. At that point he let go of his advantage (to say the least), which is what Yasser was suggesting in his subtle way. And, of course, "friends" are probably not at the level of the Amber crew.
But give Hikaru time to step up and solidify his blindfold game. Anyway, I expect he'll get his wins.

Odd non-Amber chess story: Valentina Gunina and Irina Turova explain why the last round of the recent women's tournament in Romania almost didn't take place (and then didn't really take place!): http://www.chessintranslation.com/2011/03/farcical-end-to-strong-womens-event/

For enough money, I'm sure that Elite GMs would be amenable. As long as the terms were spelled out ahead of time, and the players knew what they were getting into.
So, it's a stunt--just like "Advanced Chess", or playing a chess engine, or playing correspondence chess vs. "The World", or playing FischerRandom Chess, or playing Tournaments with Thematic Openings, or....playing Blindfold.

Wouldn't it be novel playing Blindfold FischerRandom Chess against Houdini?

How about a Spanish opening thematic, @ the next Linares? Or, everybody plays the Dutch in Wijk aan Zee.

Some countries would be better suited for such thematic explorations (Italy, France), but sadly it might not be a spectator favorite to see many games with 1) c4 or the London System (but British spectators might be better served North of Hadrian's Wall), or worse: The Petroff.

Alas, The Yugoslav Attack would lack an appropriate venue.

The Volga Gambit thematic can be played on a Riverboat...

I wont mourn the passing of Amber. Sure its fun but to see Gelfand "waste" a great novelty on the black side of the Petroff in a blindfold rapid game - crazy. I think the format has past its time maybe a rapid 960 game instead of the blindfold would be more interesting seeing GM's drop pieces because they forgot where they were is not particularly entertaining.

I didn't criticize Nakamura's blindfold play, neither as a whole nor his blunders (which are typical and also happen to others). I did criticize his earlier statements on other world elite players ("[Nakamura] has been critical of the qualify of the blindfold play in Amber in the past") and the "for me it's easy", when he couldn't prove it over the board. Of course, and inherent to Seirawan's statement (which I paraphrased rather than remembering and giving his exact words) it gets increasingly trickier with limited time on the clock - this also holds true for everyone.

P.S.: I almost put a funny typo ("tickier" rather than "trickier")! ,:)

Great crowd at Amber also, the great Kortchnoi, the great Ljubo, and then you have the obvious photojournalists like Dirk Jan ten Geuzendam, Fred Lucas, Macauley Peterson, and John Nunn!

This is a very cool tournament, it's a shame it is the last. Great venue here in Monte Carlo also.

Naka said he needed NO Time and all the blindfold games at Amber were weak...or do you just ignore facts always????

Fernandez, you bastard! ;) You're hanging at the event?
Good for you, man. Enjoy.

So, Mr. Fernandez (or anyone else who knows): did Kramnik & Topalov shake hands when they played today (either before or after the game, or both), or just signal to the arbiter, or what?! Inquiring minds want to know...thanks.

No handshake today.

Source: http://amberchess20.com/RoundReport3.html

I'm embarrassed that I didn't even notice. Then again, it's sometimes hard to see handshakes with camerafolks in front of you. It honestly hadn't occurred to me to pay attention to the handshake situation.

As an FYI I got yelled at big time twice by Gijssen for using my iPhone to do some live commentary on ICC from the playing hall. Boo. Sorry guys.

I guess by now everyone got used to it ... . The first non-handshake games between Kramnik and Topalov (Corus 2007 and 2008) got lots of public and media attention, beginning and end of the games were documented in great detail. In 2008, I was watching live at the venue. At Amber 2008 or 2009, efforts were made and documented to suggest that the players end or downscale their feud. Now it's sort of business as usual, IMO the question "did they shake hands?" is somewhat redundant: it would have been prominently mentioned if they did!?

Another non-handshake game I watched live onsite was Shirov-Kramnik, Corus 2001 (could find the year back as Kramnik played the Caro-Kann which isn't part of his main repertoire). Here Shirov had his understandable reasons, even though it's unclear whether Kramnik can be personally blamed (not meaning to start a debate on this!). Their relationship has improved, even if they still may not be exactly friends of each other.

I figured (as maybe a few others did) that maybe Topalov might've mellowed in his attitude since his recent marriage, and so might have been more amenable to the possibility; but apparently not. Re: Shirov and Kramnik, they seem to be on pretty decent terms now, I believe; I remember seeing videos of them analyzing together after some game, anyway, which I suppose says something (though perhaps not much). Are there any other outstanding "feuds"/unfriendly attitudes between any of the top GMs out there now? (e.g., have Kasparov and Kramnik reconciled? Can't think of any others that had problems with each other...)

Problematic duo examples include Short- Kamsky, Kamsky-Benjamin, Kamsky-Ilya Gurevich, Kamsky-Frias, Topalov-Morozevich, Ponomariov-van Wely, Short-Miles, Korchnoi-many.

Some names appear rather often ... . For Kamsky it may refer to Rustam rather than Gata - hence it's history because his father no longer plays a major role in Gata's (second) life and chess career? Another problematic duo would be Topalov-Short, if they ever meet each other again over the board.

In response to rcfchess: I also thought that Topalov _might have_ "mellowed", but it isn't newsworthy or very surprising that it hasn't happened (yet). So we didn't find out how Kramnik would have reacted if Topalov had offered his hand - he's principled and, at earlier occasions, said that a public excuse by Topalov "for Elista" would be required to normalize their relationship.
As to Kramnik-Shirov: I also noticed their seemingly friendly postmortem at Corus 2010, but (if my memory is reliable) the German magazine "Schach" quoted Shirov afterwards "making it very clear that he still hasn't forgiven Kramnik". So their relationship may be, at best, professional but not friendly ... .

Interesting (& thanks for the info)...if I remember correctly, it wasn't really Kramnik's fault that he ended up being the one to face Kasparov; it was the fact that there were no sponsors that could be found to hold the match, at least for a reasonable prize fund (possibly/likely due to his terrible record against big K)(on the other hand, Fischer had a similar record against Spassky before their match, having never beaten him). Is Shirov supposing that Kramnik somehow "pulled strings" or did something underhanded to influence potential sponsors, I wonder? Otherwise it would seem that he's blaming Kramnik for being in the right place at the right time, so to speak. If positions had been reversed, one wonders, would Shirov have refused a match with Kasparov, on "principle," if Kramnik hadn't been able to secure one, saying "No, he deserves it, I don't"?! Maybe there's more than meets the eye here, to those of us not in the know...Shirov's always impressed me with his personality as well as his creativity/brilliance, but I wonder if he's possibly carrying a grudge undeservedly here.

As I recall, the inquisitive nature of that gentleman got him into a spot of bother. There are various conspiracy theories going around and some of them may be taken seriously. There are also internal politics at work, undermining the perceived transparent process. The desperate criticism of the procedure by the aforementioned group is definitely a sign of weakness.

To illustrate Shirov's position, some quotes from his preface to "Fire on Board Part II", written in February 2005:
"I still think that Rentero, Kasparov and Kramnik are themselves responsible for what they have done to me, all of them in general and each one in particular."
Regarding Kramnik, he doesn't/didn't recognize his WCh title: "Since then [after beating Kasparov] Kramnik has been recognized as the 'world champion', though fortunately there are still people who doubt whether it is really possible."
His grudge towards the others seems to be more justified (if his story and quotes are accurate):
"I received a phone call from Luis Rentero, and he horrified me with the news that my match against Kasparov in Seville was cancelled and nothing similar was being offered in its place. When I told him that it was his obligation, in that case, to pay me two hundred thousand dollars cancellation fee according to the contract signed ... , his answer was that he would eat that contract and din't want to compensate me anything. After that conversation that man stopped existing for me of course ... ."

"I tried to get the match to Barcelona with the support of the Catalan government, but then - it was October 1998, only four months after Cazorla - Kasparov publicly announced that he was going to look for a new challenger. As for my rights ... nothing." [Garry first approached Anand, then Kramnik]
"The final result (8 points out of 11) in a Category 19 tournament [Sarajevo, May 2000] was very good, but I only shared second place with Adams and it left me feel dissatisfied, especially as Kasparov scored half a point more. After the tournament Kasparov said to the press: 'What I wanted least would be Shirov's victory in this tournament, because he would then claim his rights again'. No comment."

[written by someone who likes both Shirov and Kramnik, and obviously respects Kasparov as a chess player]

Kasparov got what he deserved for ditching Shirov, who was the rightful challenger. That's why I have no sympathy for him when his attempts to get an opportunity to reclaim the title from Kramnik repeatedly failed...even though I wish that Kramnik hadn't cowardly tried to avoid a rematch with Kasparov prior to his retirement.

Thanks for the post, Thomas.

Thomas, thanks for the post...to me this certainly clarifies why Shirov would hate Rentero - and I wonder why he didn't pursue legal action against him; but perhaps things work differently in Europe (? - but then why have contracts at all, one wonders) - and to some extent Kasparov, but I'm still in the dark as to why Kramnik, the accidentally fortuitous beneficiary of the circumstances, should be vilified as well (e.g., would Shirov have hated Anand, if he had accepted Kasparov's offer of a match instead?!), unless it's simply that he felt that ethically it was the wrong thing for Kramnik to do, especially having lost the match to Shirov. Yeah, maybe that's it: the simplest explanation that fits...?!

Why didn't Shirov sue Rentero? The answer may also be in his book - I quote a bit more from the preface, but I would highly recommend buying it (detailed annotations to his games are also worth the money! ,:) ):

"When I returned to my house in Tarragona [after the Cazorla match against Kramnik] I found it empty. ... The same day I learnt that the main bank account had been 'cleaned' by my already ex-wife. The divorce procedure is always tough, especially with a four-year old child (my daughter Natalia) in the middle. Besides, I felt like a complete beginner with the Spanish legal system, because two or three years adapting to the society is not the same as living one's whole life in the same place."

In such a situation, it's understandable that he didn't want to go for another parallel experience with the Spanish legal system? Moreover, right after this he played in Dortmund ("sometimes it isn't easy not to fulfil your contractual obligations"), finishing last with 2.5/9 while Kramnik won 'as always'. Rentero's lawyer might have used this to come up with some force majeure construction!?

For balance, Kramnik's point of view from another highly recommended book, "From London to Elista" (written/finalized in 2007, hence also many years later). Technically, these are Ilya Levitov's words, but they were certainly authorized by Kramnik himself:

"A GIFT FROM THE GODS" [not to be taken literally - if Kramnik is at all religious, it would be monotheistic ...] "Strictly speaking, Kramnik was lucky. You could say that fate handed him the match with Kasparov, because he hadn't won any kind of qualification tournament. Alexey Shirov won the right to a match with Kasparov, but the money couldn't be found for the match ... and Garry evidently didn't want to play it, as Shirov had resoundingly lost almost all their games.
Legend has it that Kasparov nonetheless managed to find $500,000 and he suggested to Shirov that they limit the prize fund to this modest amount [2 millions were promised, and this sounds rather vague, is/was there any confirmation from other sources?]. Alexey decided to take some advice - not just from anyone, but from Karpov. He, naturally, advised that it was better to wait for a more generous offer. The match fell apart. So did Shirov.
.... (skipping the part about a possible Kasparov-Anand match) But in July 2000 a new ratings list came out and now Kramnik was the world number two. So Vladimir had earned [?!] the right to contend for the title. For this match sponsors who could afford several million dollars were also found.
Who was Kasparov preparing to take on? A fantastic player who'd been in the world chess elite for many years, with wonderful tournament results, and ... who'd contrived to lose three Candidates Matches already!"

My take on this: even years later, Kramnik realized and acknowledged that the turn of events was awkward, to say the least. What should he have done? Maybe go for a rematch with Shirov (rather than Kasparov) after beating Garry? I guess his chances in such a match would have been "decent", even if Shirov claimed a plus score against Kramnik before Cazorla - seems correct but it was a slight plus (only more recently he became one of Kramnik's "clients").

Can't forget the famous Short-Cheparinov Handshake Affair.

Thanks for the great post, Amber. I agree about pictures. I have lots of photos that I take around the house, etc., but I Google a topic to get pix sometimes. dental implant mancheste I discovered that one a few months ago.

I visited this page first time to get info on people search and found it Very Good Job of acknowledgment and a marvelous source of info......... Thanks Admin! http://www.reverse-phone-look-up.net

All the best of luck to all the participants on Monaco, I'm sure they'll have a blast with the event! Break a leg everyone. I read on this site http://www.the-term-papers.com/ that it this will be amazing. Great ready for a great ride.

All the best of luck to all the participants on Monaco, I'm sure they'll have a blast with the event! Break a leg everyone. I read on this site http://www.the-term-papers.com/ that it this will be amazing. Great ready for a great ride.

Twitter Updates

    Follow me on Twitter



    About this Entry

    This page contains a single entry by Mig published on March 9, 2011 2:35 AM.

    Kasparov on Watson, in Brief was the previous entry in this blog.

    Carlsen and Chess in The New Yorker is the next entry in this blog.

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