The Chess Mind

It looks like a bad joke at first, as Topalov remains in first place, despite his dismal performance at Morelia/Linares. The answer is that they didn't rate the tournament for this list - explanation and more details here.

HT: Susan Grumer.

Now that the distraction of the Amber tournament is out of the way, we can turn back to what's really important: "my" anti-French variation! (1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3.) Here's part 3, what I call the appeasement strategy. In the first post we briefly examined the most obvious move, 4...dxe4, and in the sequel we considered the more restrained 4...Nf6. This time, we'll get some idea of how the placid 4...c6 works out.

Black's aim is to maintain the strong point on d5, making a sort of peace offering with White: "I'll let you be - I won't capture your pawn - so please let me play my game in peace too."

Now, there are cases where that sort of approach is wholly reasonable - here are two examples.

(1) 1.e4 e5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 (or 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.c3 d5 5.exd5 Qxd5 6.d4 Bg4) d5! 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.cxd4 Nc6 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.Nc3 Bb4! 8.Be2 Bxf3 9.Bxf3 Qc4, when Black's decision on move 3 not to grab the pawn leads to a position where Black is at least equal and without any difficulties whatsoever.

(2) 1.e4 c5 2.d4 (or 2.c3 Nf6 3.e5 Nd5 4.d4 cxd4) cxd4 3.c3 Nf6! (rather than 3...cxd4) 4.e5 Nd5 allows Black - who will still need to know some theory - to reach a safe, strong, dynamically balanced position while avoiding lots of traps, long-term positional pressure and her opponent's home turf in exchange for an extra pawn.

Back to the anti-French. Black is hoping for something similar, but in my experience with the line, White often gets a very comfortable advantage:

1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3 c6



5.exd5 cxd5 6.d4 (6.Nc3 might be a more accurate move order, as 6...d4 is well-met by 7.Bc4, and 6...Nf6 7.d4 Nc6 8.Bb5 a6 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Nf3 Bd6 11.0-0 0-0 12.Bg5 h6 13.Bh4 Rb8 14.Qc2 Be6 [14...Be7 15.Ne5+=] 15.Na4 gives White a comfortable edge.)



6...Nf6 (6...Nc6 7.Bb5) 7.Nc3 Be7 8.Bb5+ Nc6 9.Nf3 0-0 10.Bxc6 bxc6 11.0-0 (else ...Ba6, preventing castling, could prove annoying) 11...Bd6 12.Bg5 Rb8 13.Qc2 h6 14.Bh4 Be7 15.Ne5 Bb7 16.Na4+/-



offers a type of position that I've achieved quite regularly in this line: White gets a nice grip on e5 and c5, the pawn on c6 is locked in place and Black's two bishops are impotent. Granted, it's not the usual tactical melee, but I'll happily accept a positional edge like this any day!

(The analysis can be replayed here.)

ChessBase has a useful article, listing the most prestigious upcoming events for the next several months:

1. The European Championships (April 3-15, 2007, in Dresden, Germany)

2. Kramnik-Leko, Rapid Match (April 24-29, 2007, in Miskolc, Hungary)

3. Kramnik-Aronian, Rapid Match (May 4-6, 2007, in Yerevan, Armenia)

4. The M-Tel Masters (May 9-20, 2007, in Sofia, Bulgaria)

5. FIDE Candidates in Elista, Kalmykia (no date given)

6. Dortmund Sparkassen Chess Meeting (Starts June 23, 2007, in Dortmund, Germany)

Now for the unintentional humor, from the press release announcing the Kramnik-Leko rapid match:

"We cannot underestimate the excitement generated by this eight-game duel between two leading players in the world of chess, Péter Lékó and the world champion, Vladimir Kramnik."

Is there really that little excitement?

As the top spots were already clinched, the final round was pretty much a formality. Kramnik enjoyed a slight edge in both games with Vallejo, but had nothing to gain by playing for a win. So: two draws. Likewise, Anand couldn't catch Kramnik overall and couldn't be caught in the rapid half, so he took two quick draws against Gelfand.

The other matches all saw decisive games. Svidler lost quickly in the blindfold game with Morozevich after missing a two-move tactic, but Svidler made up for it with sharp counterattacking play in the sequel. Radjabov made up some ground yesterday, but went backward against Leko. Leko gave a nice demonstration of Black's possibilities against the Saemisch Nimzo-Indian. Aronian-Ivanchuk was a very nice technical win - especially for a blindfold game - and van Wely put the finishing touches on a miserable tournament by losing a probably drawn ending to Carlsen in their rapid game. (Games can be replayed on the tournament website.)

Final Blindfold Standings:

1. Kramnik 9
2-3. Gelfand, Morozevich 7
4-5. Ivanchuk, Svidler 6.5
6. Aronian 6
7-8. Anand, Radjabov 5
9-10. Carlsen, Leko 4
11. van Wely 3.5
12. Vallejo 2.5

Final Rapid Standings:

1. Anand 8.5
2-5. Carlsen, Ivanchuk, Kramnik, Leko 6.5
6. Aronian 6
7. Svidler 5.5
8-9. Gelfand, Morozevich 4.5
10-11. Radjabov, Vallejo 4
12. van Wely 3

Final Overall Standings:

1. Kramnik 15.5
2. Anand 13.5
3. Ivanchuk 13
4-5. Aronian, Svidler 12
6-7. Gelfand, Morozevich 11.5
8-9. Carlsen, Leko 10.5
10. Radjabov 9
11-12. Vallejo, van Wely 6.5

On the Association of Chess Professionals website, there are mini-interviews with GMs Kamsky, Shirov, Grischuk, M. Gurevich, Navara and Malakhov. They are very short, and focus on the "hot topics" of the newly proposed world championship cycles and time controls.

HT: Chess Today.

In my comments to the round's 3 Marshall Gambit games, I had a little fun at the players' expense, particularly the two Anand-Leko games, due to their almost complete lack of new content. Svidler and Kramnik received kinder treatment, as Svidler came up with a new try, and Kramnik had to put in a little effort to neutralize it.

It turns out, though, that Kramnik and Svidler deserve a little jab for their other game. Unlike Anand and Leko, who at least managed to play four new half-moves in two games, the blindfold game Kramnik-Svidler saw no new moves at all. Surprisingly, they followed a 2006 US Chess League game Bonin-Mikhailuk, which continued another move and a half before they split the point. Nice effort, gentlemen.

Another funny note: Aronian's blunder against Radjabov had an exact precedent in Legky-Tunik, Geller Memorial 2006. In that game, Legky did resign after 7...Qa5+. That's not the shortest game lost to this tactic; in fact, the shortest legitimate loss in a serious tournament - which has happened twice - featured this blunder: 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 c6 3.e3?? Qa5+ 0-1 occurred in Djordjevic-Kovacevic, Bela Crkva 1984 and Vassallo-Gamundi, Salamanca (Spanish tt) 1998.

Click here for Kramnik-Svidler (and Bonin-Mikhailuk).

HT: Chess Today

In 1988, Jorge Sammour-Hasbun, then Jorge Zamora, won the U-10 world championship, and later won the U-12 championship. At 15, his USCF rating was 2500. Although he hasn't yet achieved the GM title, he was a very strong player and did achieve the IM -though without acquiring it. (In 1997 he told me that there was a mix-up with him and another FIDE player of the same name that impeded the ratification of his title.) Yet for all his promise, he more or less dropped off the map around the turn of the century.

But a few months ago he started playing again in earnest, and this past weekend, he won the very strong Dos Hermanas event on the Internet Chess Club, defeating GM Tigran L. Petrosian (who had beaten Mamedyarov and Nakamura in earlier matches!) 3.5-2.5 in the final. Given his lack of a title and his disappearance from the chess scene almost a decade ago, and given the frequency of online cheating, accusations of cheating flew freely. Yet the accusations were false, as Sammour-Hasbun was playing under the direct supervision of a USCF tournament director. (This seems to have been a condition placed only on him, but he took it in stride, as those who heard his post-win interview on chess.fm can attest.)

It takes a high level of talent to pull off such a feat, and as you'll see from the "attached" games, Sammour-Hasbun is indeed a talented player. Let's hope that he continues to play, and further cultivates his talent in the years to come. Have a look.

As mentioned here, I'm going to cover the game Geller-D. Byrne, USSR-USA (m) 1955 in tonight's ChessBase show, but I almost chose his 1962 victory over former world champion Vassily Smyslov instead. There's nothing strange about a world champion outplaying and easily defeating an IM, but when it works the other way around, it's noteworthy. And in this game, Byrne completely outclasses his illustrious opponent. See for yourself.

The penultimate round was unusual, as five of the six matches were drawn. The matches of the top three players went draw-draw, while van Wely-Vallejo and Morozevich-Carlsen saw the first-named player win the first game and lose the second. Only Radjabov made progress today, beating Aronian twice.

In our game selection, I present the round's three thrilling Marshall Gambits, to allay any fears readers might have had from earlier rounds that it's anything but a coma-inducing, soul-killing, draw-producing scourge. (Forget the Sofia rules; can we ban the miserable 7...O-O in the Closed Ruy? We should at least get the ACP to take a poll on this.) I've also included Aronian's stupendous opening blunder in the non-blindfold game.

Games with my comments here; tournament website here.

Blindfold Leaders after Round 10:

1. Kramnik 8.5
2-4. Gelfand, Ivanchuk, Svidler 6.5

Rapid Leaders after Round 10:

1. Anand 8
2. Ivanchuk, Kramnik 6

Overall Leaders:

1. Kramnik 14.5
2-3. Anand, Ivanchuk 12.5

Final Round Pairings:

Vallejo - Kramnik
Carlsen - van Wely
Svidler - Morozevich
Gelfand - Anand
Aronian - Ivanchuk
Leko - Radjabov

When you see or hear the name “Donald Byrne”, your first thought is probably about the so-called “Game of the Century”, Byrne’s famous loss to the 13-year-old Bobby Fischer in the 1956 Rosenwald Tournament. And this is understandable – Fischer himself has called this his best game! But Byrne, who died in 1976 at just 45 years of age, was an impressive player in his own right. He was a strong IM (a GM by today’s standards), many times a participant in the U.S. Championships, the 3-1 winner of a match against then-Candidate Yuri Averbakh, and had to his credit wins or draws against world champions Smyslov, Tal, Petrosian, and Fischer. That’s already quite impressive, and even more so when you realize he was an amateur. He had a Ph.D. and was an associate professor of English at Penn State the last 15 years of life, where he also coached their chess team.

He is thoroughly worthy of his own show, therefore, and this week we’ll take a look at his win over Ukrainian legend Efim Geller from one the 1955 USSR-USA team match. Byrne played the Dragon Sicilian, and against Geller’s 9.O-O-O chose the playable but now thoroughly unfashionable 9…Be6. (Dragon fans can rejoice: even relatively bad sidelines defeat world-class opposition!) Geller enjoyed various static advantages, but Byrne always managed to keep his dynamic play alive. This took both imagination and courage: positionally, he accepted tripled pawns and a buried bishop; materially, he sacrificed a piece, and then the exchange. For all that, the battle remained extremely unclear, but Geller finally broke, missing a sham sac combination that won Byrne a piece. Even after that the win wasn’t entirely clear, thanks to Byrne’s pseudo-bishop, but with good technique the American brought home the point.

It’s a nice win by a good guy, and theoretically interesting, too. What more could a chess fan want? I hope to see you all this Thursday night at 9 p.m. ET. (Directions for watching the show are here.)

The 3rd MTel Masters in Sofia, Bulgaria, is scheduled to run from May 9-20, 2007, and will have the following participants:

Veselin Topalov (2783)
Shakriyar Mamedyarov (2754)
Michael Adams (2735)
Gata Kamsky (2705)
Krishnan Sasikiran (2700)
Liviu-Dieter Nisipeanu (2689)

This tournament is the organizational brainchild of Silvio Danailov, so it's not exactly surprising that Kramnik isn't playing. Still, it's a nice, strong tournament, and with the famous no-draw offer rules in effect it should be a consistently entertaining one as well.

The news is that there isn't any: Kramnik continues to lead, thanks primarily to his overpowering performance in blindfold chess. Two points behind are Anand, who is dominating the rapid games, and Ivanchuk.

With two rounds to go, the players are clearly tired (even Kramnik, who entered today's round with 7.5/8 in blindfold, offered Carlsen a draw because he was starting to "lose pieces", but there have been some attractive games as well. Especially noteworthy are Kramnik's wins over Gelfand and Carlsen from rounds 8 and 9. Regarding the win over Gelfand in round 8, here's an excerpt from the tournament website's report:

‘I think I played a good game’, Vladimir Kramnik said after his win in the blindfold game against Boris Gelfand. ‘I was pressing and Black made no obvious mistakes.’ As the World Champion isn’t the sort of player who loves to pour praise on himself these were telling words. Indeed it was fascinating to see how Kramnik obtained a small advantage and gradually turned on the screws. The only move of his opponent that he mildly criticized was 19…Ba5, where he felt that 19…Na5 would have been better. The rest of the game is recommended study material for anyone who wants to work on his or her endgame technique. Or as Gelfand put it, ‘Incredible how he played this. I can only think of Fischer or Karpov who could do this. Most grandmasters wouldn’t even manage this with sight of the board.’

Kramnik-Carlsen was a different story, with the world champion nuking the youngster with a big novelty he didn't want to use in this event, but believed he needed to to ensure overall victory in the tournament.

As for blunders, they have been plentiful. To see a collection of gaffes, along with the two aforementioned Kramnik games, both of today's games between Anand and Aronian, and, finally, Gelfand's win over Aronian, click here.

Blindfold Standings after Round 9:

1. Kramnik 8
2-4. Gelfand, Ivanchuk, Svidler 6
5-6. Aronian, Morozevich 5
7. Anand 4
8-9. Carlsen, Radjabov 3.5
10. Leko 3
11-12. Vallejo, van Wely 2.5

Rapid Standings after Round 9:

1. Anand 7.5
2-4. Aronian, Ivanchuk, Kramnik 5.5
5. Leko 5
6-7. Carlsen, Morozevich 4.5
8. Svidler 4
9. Gelfand 3.5
10-11. Radjabov, van Wely 3
12. Vallejo 2.5

Overall Standings:

1. Kramnik 13.5
2-3. Anand, Ivanchuk 11.5
4. Aronian 10.5
5. Svidler 10
6-7. Gelfand, Morozevich 9.5
8-9. Carlsen, Leko 8
10. Radjabov 6.5
11. van Wely 5
12. Vallejo 4.5

Round 10 Pairings:

Anand - Leko
Ivanchuk - Gelfand
Radjabov - Aronian
Kramnik - Svidler
van Wely - Vallejo
Morozevich - Carlsen

Along with the Amber tournament, two other important round robin events have been going on the last couple of weeks: the Karpov Poikovsky tournament, which finished Saturday, and the Ruy Lopez Magistral, which finished on Friday.

The first was a triumph for rating-favorite Dmitry Jakovenko, whose 6/9 score might vault him into the stratospheric 2700 club. That's impressive, but even more remarkable was the performance of Armenian GM and frequent Aronian second Gabriel Sargissian. His score of 6.5 out of 7 won the tournament by 2.5 points and indicated a 3021 performance rating! That won't quite bring him to 2700 (he's "only" 2658 now), but it's a big step in that direction.

Easy go, easy come.

One day after falling back into a first-place tie with Aronian and Ivanchuk, Kramnik regained clear first. Paired with Aronian, he won the blindfold game and scraped out a draw in the rapid contest. Meanwhile, Ivanchuk drew twice with Svidler, so Kramnik again enjoys a tenuous half-point lead.

And speaking of half-points, that's really the story of the day: there were nine draws against only three decisive games. Some of those games were disappointingly short - primarily in blindfold (better to draw than hang something!), but quite a few represented the triumph of dogged defense. In addition to the Aronian-Kramnik rapid game, Gelfand-Morozevich, Carlsen-Anand and Svidler-Ivanchuk all saw the bolded player achieve the draw only after a lot of hard work. So although it wasn't a spectacular round, it was a good one.

Kramnik-Aronian and Radjabov-Vallejo here; tournament website here.

Standings after Round 6:

Blindfold Leaders:

1. Kramnik 5.5(!)
2-4. Gelfand, Ivanchuk, Svidler 4

Rapid Leaders:

1-2. Anand, Aronian 4.5
3. Ivanchuk 4

Overall Leaders:

1. Kramnik 8.5
2. Ivanchuk 8
3. Aronian 7.5
4-5. Anand, Svidler 7

There were lots of draws in round 5, but Kramnik would have preferred to see one more. Aronian, who entered the round half a point behind Kramnik, drew twice with Svidler - no progress. Ivanchuk trailed Kramnik by a point going into the round, and in their first game couldn't make a dent even with the White pieces. In the rapid game, however, Kramnik came out of the opening with the weaker position and was duly outplayed.

That leaves a three-way tie for first, with Anand and Svidler a point back. Anand went up against VW, and in the ensuing collision he was the mack truck.

Anand's first win over van Wely, together with a crazy Leko-Carlsen draw and Kramnik's loss to Ivanchuk can be replayed here. For the rest of the games, the tournament website is here.

Blindfold Leaders after Round 5:

1. Kramnik 4.5
2-4. Gelfand, Ivanchuk, Svidler 3.5

Rapid Leaders after Round 5:

1-2. Anand, Aronian 4
3. Ivanchuk

Overall Leaders after Round 5:

1-3. Aronian, Ivanchuk, Kramnik 7
4-5. Anand, Svidler 6

Pairings for Round 6:

Kramnik - Aronian
van Wely - Leko
Morozevich - Gelfand
Anand - Carlsen
Ivanchuk - Svidler
Radjabov - Vallejo

Starting in a few days, or at least by the end of the month, I hope to start a weekly series of mini-interviews with GMs and IMs. The idea is loosely based on the New in Chess "Just Checking" feature, but our version will be more chess-related and less Barbara Waltersish. (I won't ask anyone what kind of tree they would be.) So far two participants have submitted their questionnaires, two others have promised to do so, and we'll see how long we can keep it going!

Any titled players reading this who are interested in participating (you'll have a chance to hawk your wares, so there's something in it for you too), please contact me here. For the rest of you, if you know a titled player who might be willing to participate, please let them know. Thanks!

It's possible that tonight's show will have too much material. If so, I may give Donald Byrne his own show next week, and then it's only fitting after that to give his brother Robert a show as well.

Robert Byrne was a former world championship candidate, the inventor of an important plan in the King's Indian and a proto-founder of the English Attack against the Najdorf. And in addition to those impressive accomplishments and a win over Fischer, he also fits with the current show's theme: he's best-known for his 22-move loss to Fischer from the 1963 US Championship.

After that, Vassily Smyslov and his magnificent endgame technique will make an appearance. Beyond that, I have various ideas, including the impressive Anand-Kramnik game from a couple of days ago and one or two openings-based shows. Stay tuned, and remember to invite your friends!

It’s a rare chess fan who doesn’t know about Adolf Anderssen’s classic victories against Lionel Kieseritzky (the “Immortal Game”) and Jean Dufresne (the “Evergreen Game”), or Bobby Fischer’s “Game of the Century” over Donald Byrne. These three – Kieseritzky, Dufresne and Donald Byrne – have gone down in chess history as famous losers.

Undeservedly!

While the trio weren’t up to the level of their conquerors, they were all fine players in their own right. Kieseritzky and Dufresne both beat Anderssen several times and were successful chess authors, while Byrne was a talented player who was considered for a time more talented than his older brother Robert. (And Robert Byrne even reached the Candidates matches in 1974!) So this week, we’ll give these men their due, and show some of their triumphs; moments that remind us that these were strong, imaginative players worthy of respect in their own right as well.

The games are a lot of fun, so I hope to see you all there – Thursday night at 9 pm ET! (As always, directions for watching the show can be found here.)

More precisely, save it from the Washington Post's comics section editor's decision to reduce its space by a third. Lubomir Kavalek's weekly chess column is the best I've come across in over 30 years, by far.

But see for yourself (registration required, but as ChessBase helpfully points out, you can use the pre-existing passwords available here), and then, if you feel so inclined, do something about it. Here's the contact info:

Write them at comics@washpost.com

or

call the comics hotline: 202-334-4775

or

write a letter to Comics Feedback, The Washington Post, 1150 15th St. NW, Washington D.C. 20071.

Don't forget to be polite!

HT: Susan Grumer

Kramnik and Aronian continue to set the pace going into the first rest day. For Aronian, half a point behind Kramnik in the overall standings, it was a matter of superior technique against Carlsen. For Kramnik, it was something completely different.

In the blindfold game, with White against Anand, Kramnik didn't really achieve much. He enjoyed a slight initiative from the opening, but Anand's patient, accurate defense had just about established full equality. Unfortunately, he devised a "brilliant" three-move tactic, but there was a little detail he got wrong...1-0.

The second game was opposite the first in character. Where the first was a positional struggle, the second was a brutal tactical fight, with Anand sacrificing first an entire rook and then a piece for a pawn. Anand's king-hunting expedition was terrifying to behold, but Kramnik defended well, judiciously returning material as needed. Well - but not perfectly. Anand missed a subtle chance to win, and Kramnik eventually scampered his way to a slightly better but ultimately drawn ending. A great save by Kramnik, who, had he lost, would have had the misfortune of seeing the game published everywhere from now until the end of chess history.

In addition to both Kramnik-Anand games and Aronian's win over Carlsen, I've included some other games in today's batch. While yesterday's van Wely-Radjabov game turned out well for the King's Indian, today's van Wely-Morozevich and Ivanchuk-Radjabov games did not. I've also included both of Vallejo's losses to Svidler. The first was another entry into the Blindfold Chess Hall of Shame, with Vallejo "sacrificing" first a knight and then a queen. The second loss was more interesting, and better described as a Svidler win. In a Q + N vs. R + B + N ending where one wouldn't expect any fireworks, Svidler whipped up a remarkable and instructive attack with the little guys.

Games here.

Blindfold Leaders After Round 4:

Kramnik 4
Ivanchuk, Svidler 3

Rapid Leaders After Round 4:

Aronian 3.5
Anand 3
Ivanchuk, Kramnik, Morozevich 2.5

Overall Leaders After Round 4:

Kramnik 6.5
Aronian 6
Ivanchuk 5.5

Round 5 Pairings: (On Thursday)

Gelfand - Vallejo
Carlsen - Leko
Svidler - Aronian
Morozevich - Radjabov
Anand - van Wely
Ivanchuk - Kramnik
(Colors correspond to the blindfold pairings)

Lots of fun, interesting games today, as Kramnik takes the clear lead in the overall competition.

Leading off tonight's hit parade are three blindfold games. First, in a sharp line of the Nimzo-Indian, Ivanchuk gained an edge on both the board and the clock with his novelty. Anand attempted to solve his problems with tactics, but the result was a very fast loss - his shortest loss in over a decade (at least that's what I can recall off the top of my head).

Next, Morozevich-Kramnik. It wasn't a spectacular game, but the final position makes an impression: Kramnik gives a fine display of the power of centralization.

Next up, van Wely and Radjabov continued their debate in the Bayonet King's Indian. Van Wely's 17th move was a fascinating novelty that took me back for a moment - it seemed that White forgot how to count! I quickly figured out what he was up to, as did Radjabov, who managed to equalize. That equality remained until move 39, when van Wely missed a tactical shot, then overreacted to it, and went on to lose the ending. (Happily for van Wely, was 0-5 in the tournament by this point, he went on to beat Radjabov in the rapid game.)

Kramnik is leading overall, but Aronian is on top in the rapid. After getting crushed by Gelfand in the blindfold, Aronian extracted his revenge in a wild Moscow Semi-Slav. Objectively, Black (Gelfand) was fine almost all the way, but all the mines were on his side of the board. That's a tough position to be in when it's a rapid game, and Gelfand duly cracked. (I leave the analysis to the readers - it's a crazy game.)

Finally, Anand-Ivanchuk saw the Indian get his revenge. Games like this remind me why I don't play the Main Line Ruy: Black can do everything right, crash through on the queenside, make one small error and get mated in style. That's pretty much what happened here - Anand threw everything at the kingside, ignored the queenside and center, and smashed Ivanchuk to bits.

Those games, the first three with my (light) comments, can be found here. Tournament website here.

Round 3 Blindfold Leaders:

Kramnik 3
Ivanchuk 2.5
Gelfand, Svidler 2

Round 3 Rapid Leaders:

Aronian 3
Anand 2.5
Kramnik 2

Round 3 Overall Leaders:

1. Kramnik 5
2. Aronian 4.5
3. Ivanchuk 4
4. Anand 3.5

Round 4 Pairings: (Colors correspond to the blindfold games.)

Radjabov - Ivanchuk
Kramnik - Anand
van Wely - Morozevich
Vallejo - Svidler
Aronian - Carlsen
Leko - Gelfand

Have a look.

HT: Brian Karen

In addition to the Poikovsky Karpov tournament and of course, the Amber event, there's yet another very strong event taking place. The Ruy Lopez Festival in Zafra, Spain, includes three events, including a round-robin featuring Ponomariov, Sasikiran (both 2700s), I. Sokolov (a one-time 2700), Sargissian, Granda Zuniga (very strong 2600s), Candelario (local GM, I think), Stefanova (the former women's world champ and a "real" GM), and the amazing Chinese prodigy Hou Yifan (just turned 13, rated 2509). Website here.

There were plenty of good games, but nothing that really grabbed me. So for this round, at least, I'll refer you to the tournament website. To read their round 2 report, click on the Reports/PGN tab and then (obviously) on the Round 02 link; to replay the games on their site, go to the Games tab and select "Archived".

Combined Standings after Round 2:

1-2. Aronian, Kramnik 3.5
3. Ivanchuk 3
4-5. Anand, Morozevich 2.5
6-7. Gelfand, Svidler 2
8-10. Carlsen, Leko, Vallejo 1.5
11. Radjabov .5
12. van Wely 0

Round 3 Pairings: (Colors correspond to the blindfold games)

Leko - Vallejo
Gelfand - Aronian
Carlsen - Svidler
van Wely - Radjabov
Morozevich - Kramnik
Ivanchuk - Anand

Here.

HT: JaiDeepBlue

With 12 games a day I won't try to cover them all, but I'll point out some of the highlights - and the lowlights, too.

First, I was delighted to see rubbish openings, most especially the worthless Schliemann Defense to the Ruy Lopez. Even better, Black scored 1.5/2 with it! Aronian's 8...Bh5 (instead of 8...Bxf3) is unusual, but Radjabov's handling of one of the main lines against Kramnik went completely according to recipe.

Another staple of the event (especially in the blindfold games) is the outright blunder, and round 1 did not disappoint. In a superior position against Aronian, Vallejo's 32...Rc5?? left him with an immediately lost position after 33.Qh3. It's easy to overlook a long horizontal move like that in blindfold, but if Vallejo was actually looking at his rather bare king, I think he'd have seen it coming and found an adequate response (e.g. 32...Bd5, and if 33.Qh3 Qa4+ 34.b3 Bxb3+! 35.Qxb3 Qxb3+ 36.axb3 Nc3+ 37.Kd2 Nxe2 and if 38.Kxe2 Rc2+ regains the pawn with a winning ending.

Radjabov and Kramnik traded blunders in their game. After coming out of the opening with a fantastic position, Kramnik would have regained his sacrificed piece while keeping two extra pawns as interest if he played 20...Nce6. Instead, he played 20...Nfe6?? This allowed Radjabov to play 21.Nxe6 Rxd2 22.Nxc5! - a shot unavailable had Kramnik used the other knight on move 20. Kramnik maintained some edge, but Radjabov constructed what looked like an impregnable fortress; impregnable, anyway, until he left his bishop en prise with 59.Rc3??

Also noteworthy were Ivanchuk's enormously impressive attacking games over van Wely and Aronian's long endgame win in the Schliemann. Plenty to keep you all busy!

Games here.

Round 1 Blindfold Results:

Aronian - Vallejo 1-0
Leko - Svidler 0-1
Gelfand - Carlsen 1/2-1/2
Radjabov - Kramnik 0-1
van Wely - Ivanchuk 0-1
Morozevich - Anand 1-0

Round 1 Rapid Results:

Vallejo - Aronian 0-1
Svidler - Leko 0-1
Carlsen - Gelfand 1/2-1/2
Kramnik - Radjabov 1/2-1/2
Ivanchuk - van Wely 1-0
Anand - Morozevich 1/2-1/2

Round 1 Totals:

1-2. Aronian, Ivanchuk 2
3-4. Kramnik, Morozevich 1.5
5-8. Carlsen, Gelfand, Leko, Svidler 1
9-10. Anand, Radjabov .5
11-12. Vallejo, van Wely 0

Round 2 Pairings: (Names given in order for the blindfold games; colors reversed for rapid games.)

Anand - Radjabov
Ivanchuk - Morozevich
Kramnik - van Wely
Vallejo - Carlsen
Svidler - Gelfand
Aronian - Leko

In an earlier post, I introduced a long-time pet anti-French Defense line. The line is objectively unsound, but it's very easy for Black to go awry - sometimes, as we've seen, in a brutally quick and dramatic way. In today's post, I want to look at one important early Black deviation from the main line.

1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3 and now, instead of 4...dxe4, let's see what happens if Black tries 4...Nf6. My responses to this move changed over time, and we'll take a look at them in more or less the order in which I tried them.



(A) 5.e5

This isn't a bad idea; it's just that White's (now) poor queen placement and lack of development render this a blank shot. After 5...Ne4 6.Nf3 (6.d4 Nc6 [6...c5 is also good for Black] 7.Nf3 Bb4+ and Black is already at least equal) 6...c6 7.d4 Qb6 the position is balanced and, at least equally important for the fan of this line, relatively dull.

(B) 5.d3

This option has two things going for it. First, it keeps White's pawn structure more or less intact; second, it comes with a cheapo: if 5...dxe4 6.dxe4 Nxe4??, White wins the knight with 7.Qa4+ and 8.Qxe4+. Every once in a while the cheapo works, but if Black avoids it and focuses instead on rapid development and control of the d4 square, then White's position is inferior. Thus 5...dxe4 6.dxe4 Bc5! 7.Nf3 O-O 8.Bd3 Be6! (8...Nc6 is good too) 9.Qc3 (9.Qxb7? Qxd3 10.Qxa8 Nxe4 wins due to the double threat of 11...Bxf2# and the queen-trapping 11...Bd5) Nc6! gives Black the advantage.

(C) 5.Nc3 d4 6.e5

First of all, note that 5...dxe4 6.Bc4! justifies the delay by transposing back into the sort of position examined in the initial post. Black can also play to hold the d5 point with 5...c6; that will probably be the subject of yet another post.

Sticking to 5...d4 lines then, you might remember that I presented a game in this line in the original post, which continued 6.e5 dxc3 7.exf6 cxd2+ 8.Bxd2 gxf6?!, when White won quickly. After the obvious and natural 8...Qxf6, however, Black is in good shape.

(D) 5.Nc3 d4 6.Bc4!!



This very nice idea is one of my best finds in this variation, and I'm pleased to say I found it in a blitz game rather than by asking my software for its opinion. (In case you're wondering, Don Fritz and the rest of the family have since given the move their blessing.) Of course, had Black played 5...dxe4, 6.Bc4 would be the obvious rejoinder - but even here, at the potential cost of a piece, it still works out well! After 5...d4 6.Bc4!! dxc3 7.Bxf7+ Ke7, 8.e5 leaves White with more than enough compensation.

Black should probably return the knight with 8...Nc6 9.bxc3 Qd3 10.Ba3+ Kd8 11.exf6 gxf6 12.Bxf8 Rxf8 13.Qd5+ Qxd5 14.Bxd5, when White is essentially a clean pawn ahead but Black can still resist. (Another possibility is 8...cxd2+ 9.Bd2 Ne4, but White has a winning attack with 10.O-O-O.)

It's more likely that your opponents will try to hang on to the piece with 8...Ng4, and then things get fun - at least if you have the White pieces. Best now is 9.d4! (threatening 10.Bg5+), when Black has two options:

(a) 9...cxb2 10.Bg5+ Nf6 11.Rb1 with a significant advantage, thanks to his attack and huge leads in space and development.

(b) 9...Qxd4 10.Bg5+ Nf6 11.Nf3 cxb2 (everything loses, but this is the most entertaining option) 12.O-O! bxa1Q 13.Nxd4 Qxd4 14.exf6+ gxf6 15.Re1+ Kd6 (15...Kd8 16.Re8+ followed by 17.Qe6#) and now, as Mike Tyson might say, 16.Bxf6! sends Black to "bolivian", as 16...Qxf6 17.Qd5 is mate.



In sum, while there was a time when I didn't enjoy facing the 4...Nf6 line, those days are long gone, thanks to the 6.Bc4! idea. Further, the results back this up: in the 5.Nc3 line (playing 6.Bc4 whenever facing 5...d4), my score in ICC 3 0 blitz against players rated from 2486 to 2712 is a terrific 14-1 (and I was better in the one loss, too, against one of the lower-rated players in the bunch). Better still, many of my wins were extremely quick - in the 5...d4 6.Bc4 line, for example, my score is a clean 5-0 with the wins coming in just 21, 11, 17, 13 and 16 moves!

I have been honest and warned the reader: there are problems with this whole 4.Qb3 line for White. Speaking from a purely practical perspective, however, there are many more ways for Black to go wrong than White - and when Black takes a wrong step in this variation, it's often straight into the abyss. So give it a shot, French Defense foes!

(The analysis can be replayed here.)

[Reposted from my previous blog.]

In this post, I presented Andrew Martin's ChessBase show puzzle.



Since his deadline for entries has passed, it shouldn't do any harm to publish the solution. When you're ready to have a look, click here.

In the current issue of Chess Today, I came across several items of special interest.

First, the ACP has posted the results of its survey on draw offers. While the most popular response was to maintain the status quo - allowing them at any stage of the game (43%) - a majority (55%) favored disallowing them before move 30, though only 18% wanted to ban them outright.

Also on the ACP site is an open letter by Alexei Shirov expressing his unhappiness with the current world championship proposals, especially the rematch privilege given to Kramnik if he loses in Mexico. (My own view is that the rematch clause is really a sop to Topalov and a one-time reward to Kramnik. For Topalov, it's compensation for not getting his challenge match or to participate in Mexico - if Kramnik wins in Mexico, Topalov gets the 2008 rematch. And for Kramnik, it's a reward for (a) reunification, (b) putting up with the Topalov/Danailov accusations and (c) participating in Mexico instead of creating a new schism.)

At the end of the Shirov letter, he alludes to our third news item, FIDE President Kirsan Iljumzhinov's insane new time control proposal. For the elite events and "some traditional chess tournaments", the 7 hour time control will remain. For everything else, though, the control will be 1 hour for the whole game, plus 10 second increments from move one. That's it!?? Presumably the idea is that this, finally, will introduce the golden era of chess on TV. That seems to me unbelievable, but I wouldn't mind being wrong. In the more likely event that Iljumzhinov is wrong, however, I hope he'll return the time control to something slower. We'll see.

Finally, Russian readers (and those willing to use online translation programs) can find recent interviews with Kramnik and Anand.

First up, an open tournament in Bad Wörishofen has caught my eye. It wasn't especially strong, but Bu Xiangzhi's 8-0 start (before a last round draw) was impressive, and should bring him closer to the absolute elite level foreshadowed by his early successes.

That's over, but the Poikovsky Karpov tournament, a 10-player round robin, started just yesterday. It's not quite as strong as Linares, but with players rated from 2619 to 2691, five of whom (I think) have been over 2700, it's still worth checking out.

But speaking of Linares, or rather Linares-strength fields, it's time once more for the great recreational event on the yearly calendar, the Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament in Monte Carlo sponsored by Joop van Oosterom. It starts tomorrow and continues through the 29th; here's the list of participants:

Viswanathan Anand
Vladimir Kramnik
Vassily Ivanchuk
Peter Leko
Levon Aronian
Alexander Morozevich
Boris Gelfand
Teimour Radjabov
Peter Svidler
Magnus Carlsen
Loek van Wely
Francisco Vallejo

Yikes!

Many 1.e4 players find themselves annoyed when facing 1...e6 in reply. Wouldn't it be nice to give the French player the drubbing he or she so richly deserves? (French Defense players, ignore that comment as a joke, and please avert your eyes now.)

Needless to say, I can't truthfully promise an opening variation that will do that. If I could, I'd be a published chess author! What I can do is share an untrustworthy but lovable old cur of a variation. My results with it, primarily in blitz but against good opposition, have been very good, which is a testament to its dangerousness if not its soundness. In other words, it's worth trying, but caveat emptor - especially considering that the "buyer" hasn't paid anything at all!

1.e4 e6 2.c4

There it is, folks: impressed? Stay tuned, it gets better.

2...d5

2...c5 is a legitimate way to bail out, and perhaps I'll discuss that move in a future post.

3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3



Now we have the real beginning point of the line - the ordinary 4.exd5 would transpose to a version of the Exchange French that's reasonably good for Black. Of course, this position is even better for Black, but non-standard play will be required.

4...dxe4

Other moves are possible here too, but again, that's a story for another day.

5.Bc4

Now it's starting to become clear what White is up to, but wait: much more fun is on the way!

5...Qe7 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.d3!

What?!



7...exd3+ 8.Kf1! c6 9.Bg5 Be6 10.Re1



To put it mildly, this isn't forced. But Black's moves are extremely natural, and I've won dozens, possibly hundreds of blitz games against masters and up along these very lines. Here are three quick examples:

DM-NN (2504), ICC 3 0, 1999

1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3 dxe4 5.Bc4 Qe7 6.Nc3 Nf6 7.d3 exd3+ 8.Kf1 Nbd7 9.Bg5 Nc5 10.Qa3 Qe5 11.Re1 Nfe4 12.Nf3 Qf5 13.Bxd3 Nxd3 14.Qa4+ Bd7 15.Rxe4+ 1-0

DM-NN (2236), ICC 3 0, 2000

1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3 dxe4 5.Bc4 Qf6 6.Nc3 Qg6 7.Nge2 Bd6 8.d3 exd3 9.Nf4 Bxf4 10.Bxf4 d2+ 11.Kxd2! Nc6 12.Nd5 Kd8 13.Nxc7 Nf6 14.Rad1! Bg4 15.Qxb7 Rb8 16.Kc1+ Bxd1 17.Rxd1+ Ke7 18.Nd5+ Kf8 19.Bd6+ Kg8 20.Ne7+ 1-0

DM-NN (2402), ICC 1 0, 2000

1.e4 e6 2.c4 d5 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3 Nf6 (A different line, but the "traditional" motifs arise soon enough.) 5.Nc3 d4 6.e5 (N.B. 6.Bc4!! is an important improvement I've discovered since then.) dxc3 7.exf6 cxd2+ 8.Bxd2 gxf6?! 9.Nf3 Bd6 10.Bc4 Qe7+ 11.Kf1! Kf8 12.Re1 Qd7 13.Bh6+ Kg8 14.Bxf7+ Qxf7 15.Re8+ 1-0

(You can replay those games here.)

[N.B. This is reposted from my previous blog.]

Alexander Alekhine, the fourth world champion, was a player so blessed with creativity, so richly endowed with fantasy, that even games played in simultaneous exhibitions were sometimes tactically deep and rich. And so it was in the game Alekhine-Hulscher (N.B. in Alekhine's My Best Games of Chess, the opponent is called "Mindeno"), from a 1933 simul in Holland. Though just 17 moves long (and the first nine moves are simple theory), the heart of the game displays tactical complications it took generations of commentators to finally get right!

Lovers of attractive, complicated attacking games will want to tune in, but what about others? Here are some reasons to watch this Thursday at 9 pm ET:

1. An intro to the Philidor Defense, an opening that has been surprisingly popular of late.

2. Discussion of and comparison with the tricky Chekhover Variation against the Sicilian.

3. Tips for h-file attacks, for both attackers and defenders.

4. The opportunity to practice your tactical skills.

5. Free virtual pizza, supplied by ChessBase. (Complete with pictures - have a look!)

Directions for watching the show can be found here.

A very small and selective taste at that, but those who are interested can sate themselves via this past week's TWIC download.

First up is Bisguier-Bury. Bisguier isn't the player he once was (who is, at 77? - except maybe Korchnoi in 2008), but he's still a strong player. Unfortunately, he seems to have adopted an overly casual, non-challenging approach to his openings. This might seem pragmatic - who above the age of 20 wants to memorize 35-move variations in the Najdorf, Dragon and Semi-Slav? - but it has its drawbacks. While Bisguier - one of the strongest players in the West in the late 50s and early 60s - can still outplay good opponents if he comes out of the opening in reasonable shape, he has to get out of the opening first. In the game with Bury, however, he was lost by move 6, with White - and he wasn't even down any material!

The other two games feature former students from almost a decade ago, back when I worked with Chess in the Schools in New York. First up: Sunil Matabeek against IM Jay Bonin. Sunil didn't come out of the opening in great shape, but after that he was his usual resourceful self. I think his great strength as a defender comes from his ability to not self-destruct. Against Bonin, patience, accuracy, a few nice tricks and maybe one bit of good fortune allowed him to hold the draw. Very good!

The second game featured Matthew Morales taking on a player named Joseph Byrnes. Matthew's opening play wasn't perfect, but it was logical and at least more accurate than his opponent's. But when it was time to close in for the kill, his play wasn't just logical, it was accurate too. Another nice job!

Games here.

One of the most powerful weapons in chess is the zwischenzug ("in-between move"), but one must be careful about such things. I've had students who were addicted to the device, often forsaking obvious recaptures and retreats in search of something to counterattack. The problem, more often than not, was that the opponent could elude the counter in a way that maintained the original gain (or put yet another of my students' pieces in jeopardy).

I was reminded of this when I came across the very recent game between Markus Stangl and Wolfgang Schwaninger from the Austrian Team Championship. Stangl started attacking things, Schwaninger jumped on the zwischenzug bandwagon and held on for dear life - but not for very long.

Have a look here.

Correspondence chess is one of the best ways to work on your game - especially if you're the one playing. Every aspect of your game will benefit (if you put a little elbow grease into it), so if you've got the time for it and are willing to work, give it a try.

Start national or online - there are plenty of places to play - but when you're ready for the big time, try the International Correspondence Chess Federation (ICCF). And even if you don't want to play correspondence, give their site a visit - there's lots of good material there for your entertainment and research.

"I often had as many as 150 games in progress. [It] had the useful effect of deepening my theoretical knowledge and giving me an insight into all aspects of the game. Later on this proved of great value to me in tournament play."

—Paul Keres

On the other hand...

"I have many vices but, fortunately, correspondence chess is not among them."

—Mikhail Tal

Well, even Tal was wrong sometimes!

(Quotes from this page.)

While browsing the ChessBase website a few minutes ago, I came across Andrew Martin's show blurb and found two items of interest.

First, an amusing puzzle:



It's White to move: what should the result be? (Don't submit the answer here!) It's pretty simple, but the idea is humorous.

Second, he mentions Normunds Miezis as a player with interesting opening ideas, and presents his 1.c4 e6 2.e4 d5 as an example (Miezis was White). That game turned into an Exchange French after 3.exd5 exd5 4.d4, which is underrated and can be played as a genuine winning try (it's the spineless 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.exd5 exd5 4.Bd3 that gets the bad press). But it's not as original as 3.cxd5 exd5 4.Qb3:



This line was invented by that crazy German theoretician Stefan Bücker, and was played for many years by your truly. I did a series of posts on this variation on my old blog, and I think I'll bring them over here shortly.

As expected, Anand drew quickly and comfortably against Ivanchuk to clinch at least a tie for first (which doesn't mean Ivanchuk didn't try), but I was mistaken about Leko-Carlsen. I thought Carlsen would be happy to draw quickly with Black, and that Leko would be eager to put this tournament behind him. To Leko's credit, he fought and was rewarded with his first and only win of the tournament. It was a very nice win, too, as he convincingly outplayed the youngster from beginning to end. (The game could have been a little faster though: Carlsen made an outright blunder on move 39, and Leko missed it. Both players were a little short of time, but it was still surprising!)

Svidler could have taken clear second with a win against Morozevich, and he had the White pieces, too. Unfortunately, Svidler - the only unbeaten player in the tournament going into the last round - missed or underestimated Morozevich's clever 14...d4!, and then went on a dubious fishing trip with 19.Qxc5. His opponent grabbed the material, neutralized the attack, and shockingly finished tied for second. After finishing the first half of the tournament at -3, Morozevich went an amazing +4 =3 in the second half. (Even as late as round 11 he was tied for last, but good things happen when you win three in a row.)

Finally, Topalov and Aronian limped to the finish with a 20-move draw. By my calculations, he'll lose 18.4 points in the tournament, which will not only put him well behind Anand on the next rating list, but pretty close to Kramnik as well. (He should still be a hair ahead, given their performances at Wijk aan Zee and Kramnik's Dutch League draw with Smeets.)

Final Standings:

1. Anand 8.5
2-3. Carlsen, Morozevich 7.5
4-5. Aronian, Svidler 7
6. Ivanchuk 6.5
7-8. Leko, Topalov 6

Games, with light notes, here.

The article is on his opposition to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Nothing too new here for those who have followed the matter even casually the last two years, but there was one important detail I hadn't heard: Putin's approval rating is around 80%. Kasparov has his work cut out for him.

[HT: Michael Bagalman]

Three games were drawn - and it could have been four - but every game had its dramatic moments.

Anand-Leko featured two players with a propensity for quick draws playing an opening - the Anti-Marshall - that almost guarantees a quick draw, but even it bears some examination. Leko's 17...Kh7 & 18...Rg8 was a nice defensive maneuver Ruy Lopez players should have in their toolkit, and there are entertaining complications around 21...Bxe4. (Maybe White should have "blundered" with 22.fxe4!) So although it was a speedy draw, it wasn't without interest.

Carlsen-Svidler threatened to be exciting once or twice, and Carlsen did what he could to put a dynamic twist into the game. Black's position was very solid, though, and in the end it was the youngster who steered the game to its peaceful conclusion.

Aronian-Ivanchuk reversed the pattern by starting wild and then calming down. Against the semi-antique 4...Bb7 + 5...Be7 Queen's Indian, Aronian employed Polugaevsky's wonderful 7.d5 pawn sac. Ivanchuk countered with the very unusual 12...d4, returning the pawn (the range of Ivanchuk's knowledge and preparation is staggering), and although it slowed White's kingside play, it didn't stop it. Aronian's 17.e5 set the board ablaze, but Ivanchuk's good defense (and perhaps a slight missed chance on move 19) resulted in mass exchanges and a drawn ending.

Morozevich-Topalov was hands-down the game of the day, going just about the full seven hours. After 31 moves the players reached an equal knight ending that could have been agreed drawn, but Topalov dared his opponent to create an imbalance. Morozevich "bit", and almost 50 moves later, after many errors by both sides, he won. Admirable fighting spirit from both players. For Morozevich, it's his third win of the second cycle, bringing him back to 50%, while Topalov falls to -2, just half a point out of last place.

Heading into tomorrow's final round, here are the standings:

Standings after Round 13:

1. Anand 8
2. Carlsen 7.5
3. Svidler 7
4-5. Aronian, Morozevich 6.5
6. Ivanchuk 6
7. Topalov 5.5
8. Leko 5

Pairings for Round 14:

Ivanchuk - Anand
Leko - Carlsen
Svidler - Morozevich
Topalov - Aronian

In theory at least, this could be an exciting and dramatic last round, with three players having a shot at first place. In reality, Anand and Carlsen will probably draw their games quickly and finish 1-2...but remember, if I predict it, it's probably wrong. (But now I've made a meta-prediction. Does that count?)

Games, with fairly thorough comments, here.

The pawn-odds match between the latest version of Rybka and the only version of Jaan Ehlvest* has concluded, and in some sense** the former won the match 5.5-2.5. The match score may seem especially depressing, given the material odds, but I think the match gave grounds for hope. After falling behind 3-0 and 4.5-.5, Ehlvest clearly figured out what he was doing, and finished the match with a win and two draws. Not bad - especially when you remember that Rybka wasn't going to get tired or depressed.

So I for one would like to see what would happen in a rematch. If Ehlvest can win such a match - and there's reason to think it's possible - that would provide good evidence that the gap between us and "them" isn't that big. Yet.

The remaining games are here.

*I'm hereby taking my stand against counterpart theory and person-stage views of personal identity.

**It's not clear to me that such a thing as Rybka actually exists per se (except, perhaps, as an abstract object), and if it does exist that it's the sort of thing that does something, and even if it (or a computer + program combo) does something, that the something in question is playing chess (as opposed to pushing electrons around in ways we find interesting). Listing all these qualifiers would make for tiresome writing and reading, so while they point to issues far more important than odds matches, I'll pretend for the sake of convenience that we can unproblematically speak of Rybka as a chess-playing entity.

In this recent post I presented the highlights of FIDE's new plans for conducting the world championship cycles. Overall, the plan looks pretty good, except for a few oddities about the first cycle or so, and the Association of Chess Professionals has picked up on this as well. Their response is largely positive, and you can read their constructive suggestions here.

A music video, referring to the Icelandic grandmaster.

[HT: Brian Karen]

Hungarian grandmaster Andras Adorjan is a colorful fellow: a former world championship candidate, an experienced trainer, and perhaps above all, an outstanding theoretician and polemicist, probably best known for his slogan “Black is OK!” Adorjan thinks the White slight edge is a myth and that Black can fight for the advantage from the first move, and he has tried to prove it in his theoretical researches. (Perhaps the most extraordinary of his ideas is the “Adorjan Gambit”: 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.f3 e5!??, which Leko once used against Kramnik – and won!)

One combative variation Adorjan has employed is the so-called “Hedgehog”, a formation against the English (and sometimes in the Sicilian) characterized by Black pawns on a6, b6, d6 and e6 against a White pawn on c4 (and often on e4); Black’s c-pawn and White’s d-pawn have been exchanged. It may look passive – Black’s pawns and pieces are all situated on the last three ranks, while White typically occupies all four ranks on his side of the board – but Black’s position enjoys enormous dynamic potential.

Case in point: the game Miles-Adorjan, from the 1979 Interzonal in Riga. Miles grabbed his space, took aim at the d-pawn, made no glaring errors…and was routed in 32 moves. To see how this happened, and why, tune in this Thursday night (9 pm ET), and learn some of the mysteries of the Hedgehog in the process! See you then.

(Directions for watching the show can be found here.)

Heading into the final rest day, Anand and Carlsen maintained their positions atop the Linares leaderboard. Anand's Anti-Marshall achieved little against Aronian, while Carlsen drew quickly against Topalov. The latter game was more interesting, but when Topalov was unwilling to risk a two-pawn sacrifice the game concluded in a repetition.

There was more excitement in the chase pack, as Ivanchuk and Leko continued their unfortunate descent. Ivanchuk was simply outplayed by Morozevich, whose queenside initiative finally bore fruit in major piece ending. Likewise, Leko endured Svidler's queenside initiative for a while, but blundered on move 32, breaking Svidler's tournament drawing streak at 11.

Standings after Round 12:

1. Anand 7.5
2. Carlsen 7
3. Svidler 6.5
4. Aronian 6
5-7. Ivanchuk, Morozevich, Topalov 5.5
8. Leko 4.5

Pairings for Round 13: (On Friday)

Anand - Leko
Carlsen - Svidler
Aronian - Ivanchuk
Morozevich - Topalov

And for those who want to look ahead to Saturday's final round, here are the pairings for Round 14:

Ivanchuk - Anand
Leko - Carlsen
Topalov - Aronian
Svidler - Morozevich

[Note: If the pairings followed those of the first cycle, the round 14 pairings would have been used for round 13 and vice-versa.]

Games, with light notes, here.

The mini-match between Zappa Reykjavik and GM Erwin L'Ami has finished, and L'Ami managed a creditable 1-1 draw, holding his own in the second game without too much trouble. Congrats to the young Dutchman, even if he was the beneficiary of time odds (1:45 for him, :30 for Zappa).

Unfortunately, the other man-machine match, between Rybka and GM Jaan Ehlvest, is turning out disastrously for the carbon side. Rybka won all three games yesterday, and after a quick draw by repetition in round 4 (the "contempt factor" was set too low, I guess), Rybka won in round 5 as well.

Games from both matches, here.

The dog-and-pony show is on tour again, but this time with a twist. Man vs. machine matches have pretty much lost their value as a competitive spectacle; the interesting questions now are "How bad will it be?" and "Can humans win any games anymore?" Oh - and one other new question: how much material can the computer spot the human and still win?

That's the premise of the Rybka-Jaan Ehlvest match. Ehlvest is a strong Estonian/American GM once among the world's elite, while Rybka is currently the biggest, baddest bully on the computer chess block. How big & bad? Enough to give Ehlvest pawn odds - and win! To be fair, it was just one game, the computer had White, and the handicap was the miserable h-pawn. Giving that up was almost to its advantage, you might think. That might be overstating it, but in any case, it will give up different pawns in different games. Have a look here for some resources; as for the first game, see the link below.

The second match is more conventional, a two-game match, without odds, between Zappa Reyjavik (the successor to Zap!Chess) and Dutch GM Erwin L'Ami. And here we have good news to report: the human drew, with Black, and if anything missed chances for more! (Whether this bodes well for humanity, or can only be chalked up to L'Ami's strengths or Zappa's weaknesses remains to be seen.)

Here are the games.

After drifting for several rounds and capsizing in round 10, Carlsen regained his bearings in round 11. Super-substitute Ivanchuk essayed the Gruenfeld, but his handling was too passive. A kingside space advantage and a stable center are two typical preconditions for an attack, and Carlsen mauled him.

That brought him to within half a point of Anand, who had no trouble holding with Black against Morozevich. The other games were drawn as well. Topalov had an advantage with Black against Svidler, but the latter escaped. Aronian had an edge against Leko, but the roles were promptly reversed when he missed 24...Nxa2. Fortunately the damage wasn't too serious, and when Leko missed or underestimated Aronian's own little trick (29.Ne1 Re2 30.Nf3! Rxe4 31.Nd2! shutting the rook out of play), the position became equal.


Standings after Round 11:

1. Anand 7
2. Carlsen 6.5
3-5. Aronian, Ivanchuk, Svidler 5.5
6. Topalov 5
7-8. Leko, Morozevich 4.5

[Only two plus scores!]

Pairings for Round 12:

Anand - Aronian
Topalov - Carlsen
Leko - Ivanchuk
Morozevich - Svidler

In the first cycle, Aronian beat Anand while Carlsen beat Topalov. If it happens again, Carlsen would be back in first, but it's not very likely - Anand and Topalov both have White.

Games, with comments, here.

The fellows at ChessVibes have been putting lots of videos lately, and not just of supertournaments. Here, for instance, are several videos taken from the Dutch League, including the post-mortem of a Smeets-Kramnik game. And their Linares coverage continues, too - here's a recent installment, presenting the Morozevich-Leko post-mortem from round 9. (ChessBase presented video coverage of a few rounds back in Mexico - most recently here (scroll down near the bottom) - but nothing yet from Linares.)

According to the note in Chess Today-2310, world champion Vladimir Kramnik and world cup titleist Levon Aronian will play a 6-game rapid match (25'+10") on May 4-6, 2007 in Yerevan, Armenia. Further details, will eventually be available here.

In round 10, co-leaders Anand and Carlsen faced off in what will probably prove the decisive game of the tournament. In their first meeting, back in round 3, Anand outplayed Carlsen in an equal ending, and now, in the rematch, he made it two for two. Anand's form hasn't been that impressive so far, but in this game he was his usual brilliant self. Carlsen bravely - or foolishly - went into the old main line of the Closed Ruy Lopez, one of Anand's specialties, and was first strategically and then tactically crushed.

In other games, Ivanchuk remained in second (now tied with Carlsen) after an entertaining draw with Svidler, Aronian drew a relatively quick game with Morozevich, and then there was the extraordinary battle between Leko and Topalov. Topalov outplayed his opponent, but that was only good enough for an extra pawn in a drawn rook ending. But then the adventures began! Both sides made serious errors, but, at long last, the "right" result came to pass - a draw.


Standings after Round 10:

1. Anand 6.5
2-3. Carlsen, Ivanchuk 5.5
4-5. Aronian, Svidler 5
6. Topalov 4.5
7-8. Leko, Morozevich 4

Pairings for Round 11: (Today was a free day; round 11 starts Tuesday morning)

Morozevich - Anand
Carlsen - Ivanchuk
Svidler - Topalov
Aronian - Leko

Games here (unannotated tonight - sorry).

Here are five more games from last weekend's Bundesliga matches. They have practically nothing in common with each other, except that all five immediately captured my attention as I replayed them.

The first was a marathon game between Konstantin Landa and Liviu-Dieter Nisipeanu. After 34 moves, they reached a bishop ending with an extra pawn for Landa, and after White's 60th move his advantage jumped to two pawns - the only two pawns remaining on the board. It looks like a drawn ending, and for a long time Landa made no progress, no matter what journeys he made with his king. And then, all of a sudden, he wins! Dedicated students are invited to solve this mystery (without tablebases, of course): did Black blow it, or was White winning all along?

Next up: Christopher Lutz's win over Czech star David Navara. It was a nice effort from Lutz, who won by taking turns attacking on the queenside, the kingside, and then straight up the middle of the board. What I especially like about this game was that White won with the anti-Marshall (I loathe the Marshall/Marshall threat for its drawing propensities, at least in top class chess) and without any megabomb novelty.

The third game, Bu Xianghzi-Robert Rabiega, caught my attention because Rabiega played the Chigorin Defense. Well, that, and that he got obliterated. If any of you have the Morozevich & Barsky book, could you drop a comment letting us know where Rabiega departed from M & B's recommendations?

Fourth, Jan Markos vs. Klaus-Juergen Schulz is one of the oddest-looking games I've seen in a while. White threw just about everything into the attack, Black ate it all, and eventually won when White tried too hard to win. It looks like a great game to analyze, but I'll leave that to all of you.

Finally, Karsten Mueller played a very old-fashioned variation of the Giuoco Piano against Michael Hoffmann, and won easily. I enjoy seeing these old lines anyway, but what really grabbed me was that I had once faced this line myself. My opponent was 300 points lower-rated, and that probably saved me half a point - not because he played badly, but because he was as afraid of me as I was of the position. We probably both overreacted, but I don't trust Black's position at all. Have a look for yourself.