The Chess Mind

Anand's game, and the round, is now over: he survived the ending by a single tempo and is poised to become the 15th real world champion (sorry, lovers of the FIDE k.o.). I annotated the two important games on the fly (though not throughout), and while there are surely errors and superficialities (the latter will always be there anyway, both because of human - and computer - finitude (especially mine) and especially under the constraints of trying to put out an instant analysis), at least those errors are mine and not those of the tin can. While in Mexico City I practically never had access to computer analysis, which was what I wanted. It's very easy to get addicted to seeing what Fritz, Rybka, Zappa etc. have to say, but while it's important to check when seeking the ultimate truth of the position, it's very easy to atrophy your mind by relying on the engines. So my intent is to reduce, though probably not eliminate, the presence of computer analysis in my posts, at least until such time as I'm feeling like a real chess player again.

So: here are my thoughts on today's two main games, in all their unvarnished glory, folly, or something in between.

Standings after Round 13:

1. Anand 8.5
2. Gelfand 7.5
3. Kramnik 7
4. Leko 6.5
5. Aronian 6
6-8. Grischuk, Morozevich, Svidler 5.5

Pairings for Round 14:

Anand - Leko
Morozevich - Gelfand
Kramnik - Aronian
Svidler - Grischuk

N.B. I won't be around tomorrow, so look for more blog action on Monday, maybe Sunday night if the mood strikes.

The third game - Aronian-Svidler - has finished: a draw. The game was an unusual English (1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.g3 Bc5 5.Nxe5 Bxf2+ 6.Kxf2 Nxe5 7.e4 etc.) in which White almost but never quite managed to gain a real advantage. There was an entertaining tactical flurry starting with 25...d5 and concluding with 31...gxf6, the upshot of which was to reach a drawn queen ending.

Meanwhile, in The Game That Counts, Grischuk has let the win, or at least the serious winning chances he enjoyed, slip away, and the game is almost surely winding down to a draw in a very few moves. If so, it's a very close escape for Anand, and one that just about guarantees him the title.

The second game to finish was Leko-Morozevich, and although it's not of any direct importance to the race for the title, it may have some indirect significance. Leko won pretty convincingly, as Morozevich tried the Sicilian again (why? 1...e5!=). Against Anand a few rounds ago he tried the Najdorf and got a bad game; today he switched to the Classical (...Nc6 + ...d6) and lost quickly and convincingly.

So what's the significance? Just this: Leko should get a little confidence boost from the win, and that could make him a tougher opponent for Anand tomorrow. And speaking of Anand, his game with Grischuk continues. It's move 50 in a rook ending that's probably winning for the Russian, but the route to success is not yet trivial. Here's the position with White to move:

White: Kf4, Rd3, p's a3, f2, g4, h4
Black: Kf6, Rb2, p's a4, f7, h6

More news as it happens.

In one of the two games with relevance to first place, Gelfand and Kramnik agreed to a draw after 26 moves. (Appropriately, I should add - the final position posed no problems for either side.) The game was a Semi-Slav with e3 and 6.Bd3, and although White enjoyed the initiative Kramnik was able to neutralize it with a few accurate moves.

The other game that matters, Grischuk-Anand, is still going, but Anand is frankly in trouble, about to be down a pawn for nothing in a rook and knight ending. The material is reduced, so maybe he'll be able to save a draw, but my impression is that this is an endgame White should win.

Should Grischuk win this game, Anand's lead over Gelfand will be cut to half a point going into the last round, with Kramnik another half a point behind. These are the relevant last round pairings:

Anand - Leko
Morozevich - Gelfand
Kramnik - Aronian

Of course, Grischuk hasn't won the game yet, but if he does we could be in for a fantastic (and potentially tragic) finish.

But I should be back in earnest on Monday, or Tuesday if I need some time to recover. Until then, enjoy what should be Anand's coronation (though if something incredible happens, it could be Anand's coronary). It looks like the match many chess fans wanted six years ago (Anand-Kramnik) is finally going to happen.

Start here - it's definitely worth checking out if you've seen that movie.

HT: Brian Karen.

Actually, I'm back stateside as of last night, but in the third picture of this ChessBase report - reproduced here - you can see that I was there.



(HT: Alex Herrera, who is the character on the far left of the same picture, an old friend who was my traveling companion for the trip. I'm on the front right, and the gent in the middle is the El Jefe of ChessBase, Frederic Friedel.)

From the blogging standpoint this is most inconvenient - I'll be out of the country for a week or so and unable to blog. Ironically, too, as I'll be in Mexico City watching the games and soaking in the atmosphere. Live and in person, I'll perceive the palpable pain of the players' persistent failures to puncture the Petroff, to marshal sufficient resources against the Marshall, and experience the pain as one by one the contenders drop off in their pursuit of chess's holy grail. Hopefully I'll have some wonderful stories by the time I return, but it's also possible I'll be too exhausted to do anything! We shall see; meanwhile, look for activity to resume with the start of the new month. See you in October!

UPDATE: The games (with my comments) are here.

Round 5 Results:

Leko - Kramnik 1/2-1/2
Anand - Svidler 1-0
Grischuk - Morozevich 1-0
Gelfand - Aronian 1-0

Leko-Kramnik finished first, and highlighted the frustration 1.e4 players are experiencing in light of the Petroff Defense. Leko used the Bishop's Opening move order to get to the Giuoco Piano. The goal there is to reach a Ruy-style position, and Leko succeeded in that aim. That was his only success, however, as his attempt to build a kingside attack was skillfully neutralized by Kramnik, and the game was drawn in 24 moves.

Anand-Svidler was a ray of hope for White, however. Svidler threatened the Marshall Gambit, and for the second time in the event (the first was Svidler-Leko in round 2), White called the bluff and captured the pawn. On this occasion, White was able to stop Black's progress, and although he wasn't winning after 27.a4, that move marked the beginning of White's play. Svidler didn't react successfully, and Anand rolled him up in another dozen moves, taking the tournament lead by himself.

Grischuk-Morozevich was a Ragozin Queen's Gambit, a line more commonly seen in Aronian's opening repertoire than Morozevich's. This showed in that the moment when they left theory on move 16, Morozevich had used up more than 3/4 of his time. Had this resulted in a great position, it might have been a good investment, but that wasn't the case. Morozevich's position was precarious, and his position was lost or nearly lost in another 10 moves. Eventually Grischuk won, and now from the possibility of last place before pulling out the draw against Kramnik he's now tied for second, half a point out of first.

Gelfand is part of that tie, defeating Aronian on the white side of a Modern Benoni sideline. Black always looked a bit worse, and when the tricks didn't work Gelfand collected the material and crushed him on the kingside.

Standings after Round 5:

1. Anand 3.5
2-4. Kramnik, Gelfand, Grischuk 3
5-7. Leko, Morozevich, Aronian 2
8. Svidler 1.5

A great deal happened after my "Round 4 in progress" post, much of it shocking. Svidler-Gelfand had already been drawn, but the other three games were in progress.

Aronian-Leko was a Hedgehog of sorts, and Aronian enjoyed the typical space advantage but nothing clear. That changed immediately after Leko's 27...Bd8, allowing the simple shot 28.e5, winning material. Leko would have some compensation after 28...Bc7 29.Qd2 dxe5 30.Qxd7 Nxf4, but when he chose 29...dxe5 instead Aronian was winning easily.

And won, I should add, because both Kramnik and Anand were just as "winning" as Aronian, but both drew. In Anand's case, Morozevich put up very strong resistance, and Anand failed to find the winning moves when they presented themselves. Kramnik-Grischuk, on the other hand, was another story altogether. Grischuk didn't have to do anything at all; Kramnik was generous all by himself - see the game link, below.

I suspect both of them are either nauseous, angry with themselves, or both - rightly so. The question is whether the free day will let them work it out of their system or if it will fester into something self-destructive. We shall see, but for now, they continue to lead:

Standings after Round 4:

1-2. Kramnik, Anand 2.5
3-6. Morozevich, Grischuk, Gelfand, Aronian 2
7-8. Leko, Svidler 1.5

Games here.

Remember, tomorrow is a rest day, so get your chess fix by watching my ChessBase show!

We're between two and a half and three hours in, and of the four games

Svidler - Gelfand
Aronian - Leko
Morozevich - Anand
Kramnik - Grischuk

one game is finished and at least one more is nearly decided. Svidler joined Anand and Leko in anti-Petroff futility, again testing Gelfand in the 5.Nc3 line. After 5...Nxc3 6.dxc3 Be7 he varied with 7.Bf4, but Gelfand passed the test and drew in 24 moves. It is my sincere hope that Gelfand smashes all three of these players in the second cycle for their impudence, but maybe those three really have no faith in White's chances for an advantage in the main line.

Aronian-Leko has been a Hedgehog of sorts, and is still in the dull phase. If Black goes for d5 or b5, it can sharpen up, so I'll try to stay awake until it's finished.

Morozevich-Anand has been a disaster for Morozevich, who quickly found himself with a lost position in the Reynolds Variation* of the Meran Semi-Slav. Black's up a pawn - a strong passer at that - with a better position, so while it's almost never too late to lose a game, realistically speaking it's 0-1.

Finally, Kramnik continued his run this tournament of completely outpreparing his opponents. Kramnik, with White, has achieved a nice edge and a huge lead on the clock, but Grischuk has played well enough that the game is still closer to a draw than a White win.

*Thanks to IM Dave Vigorito for the correction.

Even though the game lasted 65 moves, Anand-Kramnik was the first game to finish, ending well before the first time control was completed. Anand prepared an unusual continuation in the current main line of the Petroff, but Kramnik proved the better prepared player. The players reached a rook ending with three pawns apiece on the kingside, but with Black enjoying an extra pawn on the a-file. Kramnik gave it a good go, but after Anand's accurate 39.h4! the ending is demonstrably drawn.

The next game to finish was a draw between Grischuk and Aronian. Grischuk had a kingside initiative, but Aronian was fine until his 27th move. That was a blunder, but but Grischuk didn't see it. No matter: they repeated moves, and Grischuk missed it a second time. Fortunately for Aronian, he was able to declare a three-time repetition before Grischuk could have a third chance to find the win.

Morozevich-Svidler concluded a few moments later, and this was a win for White. Morozevich played an unusual line of the Scotch (I think whenever Morozevich is involved, we can use the template "Morozevich played an unusual line of..."), and Svidler enjoyed a pretty healthy advantage right away. Unfortunately for Svidler, he didn't seem to understand what was going on as well as Morozevich, and from a clear advantage on move 12 he was lost by move 21. The game went to move 37, but without any drama at all: Morozevich's play was forceful and accurate, and Svidler was crushed.

Finally, there was the perplexing (to me) game between Leko and Gelfand, another 5.Nc3 Petroff. (I wonder if Gelfand is offended by having this garbage line used twice against him, especially when Anand played the main line against Kramnik.) It seemed that Leko had a clear advantage, but he conducted the game as if the position was equal or even in Gelfand's favor. Eventually, that's just what happened: equality by the end of the first time control, and after 23 minutes' though from Leko, a clear extra pawn and serious winning chances in a queen ending. Gelfand tried (and tried, and tried, and tried) to win it, but after 100 moves the game was duly, and dully, agreed drawn.

Standings after Round 3:

1-2. Kramnik, Anand 2
3-6. Morozevich, Grischuk, Gelfand, Leko 1.5
7-8. Svidler, Aronian 1

Games here.

New Notre Dame football slogan: we're not Cumberland. Alternative slogan: We Willingham.

Next week's victim: Notre Dame Michigan State. Is it 2008 yet?

Entering the last round, Movsesian and Akopian led, with Ponomariov half a point behind. Akopian tried the "official" drawing variation - the Marshall - but Shirov accepted the pawn (good!), survived the complications and won the game. Movsesian had to suffer a bit against Timman, but he created an unbreachable fortress and that game was drawn. He needed that draw, too, because Ponomariov (also with Black!) demolished Laznicka in a beautiful attacking game, tying for first (but coming in second on tiebreaks). Finally, there's a result I'd rather not mention: Korchnoi lost (with Black) to Navara, concluding a terrible tournament.

Final Standings:

1. Movsesian 4.5 (of 7)
2. Ponomariov 4.5
3. Akopian 4 (again, on tiebreaks)
4. Navara 4
5. Shirov 3.5
6-7. Timman, Laznicka 3
8. Korchnoi 1.5

Tournament site here.

If you're going to see one round this first cycle, I think this is the one to watch. The pairings:

Morozevich - Svidler
Grischuk - Aronian
Leko - Gelfand

and the really big shooooow:

Anand - Kramnik

A draw is the most likely result, but I'll go out on a limb - a very well-supported limb - and say if there's a decisive result, the winner will go on to win the whole enchilada.

Today, the fight was on. Gelfand-Grischuk ended quickly, a Queen's Indian with a Bogo-Indian twist that was drawn in 23 moves, but the remaining games were fascinating struggles.

In Kramnik-Morozevich, the world champion played a gambit variation of the Catalan, and that was just the beginning. On move 8 he introduced a novelty offering two more pawns, and then a few moves later followed things up with a piece sacrifice to boot. ("Boring Kramnik" - riiiiiiight.) His conception appears to have been correct, and he continued forcefully, increasing his advantage until his most unfortunate 21st move. Had Morozevich played correctly, he could have escaped with a draw, but working everything out with the little time he had left was too difficult. Kramnik didn't give him a second chance, and he brought home the full point in the mostly brilliant game.

Aronian-Anand was a Moscow Variation, and unlike Kramnik against Svidler yesterday, Aronian went in for the sharp main line with 6.Bh4. He achieved a reasonable position, too, but after his poor 19th move the game went from better and promising to worse and uncomfortable. In fact, it seems he had only one more chance, on move 25, to keep things interesting, and after missing it he was ground down horribly.

The last game to finish was Svidler-Leko; amazingly, the only game the first two rounds to make it to the first time control. Svidler braved Leko's Marshall Gambit, grabbing and keeping the extra pawn, but the game was drawn just the same. I think he did have some winning chances, but maybe his play in the ending was a bit too straightforward.

Standings after round 2:

1-2. Kramnik, Anand 1.5
3-6. Svidler, Leko, Gelfand, Grischuk 1
7-8. Morozevich, Aronian .5

Games here.

About a week ago, I gave this position as homework, based on (but not from) the game Volkov-Popov from the Russian Championship (Higher League):



It's White to move, Black to win; the task if figuring out how. In fact the basic idea is quite simple, as long as one is familiar with this elementary endgame:



It doesn't matter whose move it is here, as Black will push the f-pawn every move (unless he's checked, when the simplest response is to head for the rook until it can't safely check any longer) until White reacts in one of three ways:

(1) He captures the f-pawn with the rook. In this case, Black can move his rook and promote the a-pawn.
(2) He captures the f-pawn with the king (on f3, presumably). In that case, Black plays ...Rf1+ and ...a1Q.
(3) He meets ...f3+ with Kf2. That is met by ...Rh1, with the point that Rxa2 falls to the skewer ...Rh2+ followed by ...Rxa2.

Returning to our first position



the trick is to transform this into a version of our elementary ending. To do this, we must make the f-pawn a passer, and that involves two preliminaries: eliminating White's e-pawn and White's g-pawn, or at least turning the latter into an h-pawn.

The first step is easy as pie, because White to move is in zugzwang: he can't move his king because of ...Rh1#, g3 is bad because of hxg3+ Kg2 h4 followed by ...h3+, forcing the White king to allow a safe check from Black's rook, and White's rook can't stay on the 5th rank because it would allow ...Rc1 followed by ...b1Q. (Of course, if it were Black to move it wouldn't be any more difficult: 1...Ke6/Ke4/Kf4 all work perfectly well.)

So: 1.Rb8 (no better or worse than any of Rb3/4/6/7) 1...Kxe5 (preliminary 1 is taken care of) 2.Rb7 f5 3.Rb8 f4 (it's useful to push the f-pawn as far it can safely go before playing ...h3, so that there's no need to worry about g3 in reply) 4.Rb3 h3! 5.gxh3 (and there's preliminary 2) 5...f3 and wins (6.Rxf3 Re1 and 7...b1Q, or 6.Kg3 Rg1+ [the sadistic 6...f2 works as well: 7.Kxf2 Rh1 8.Rxb2 {else ...b1Q} 8...Rh2+ and 9...Rxb2] 7.Kxf3 b1Q).

The Russian Championship, Higher League (which isn't really a Russian Championship at all, but a qualifier for the "Super-Final" - the real championship) has ended in typical Swiss System fashion; to wit, with a massive first place tie. Your eleven winners, with a fairly draw-heavy score of 7/11, were: Rychagov, Vitiugov, Dreev, Amonatov, Timofeev, Sakaev, Zvjaginsev, Rublevsky, Tregubov and Kobalia*. I don't know if all ten of them will be seeded into the Super-Final, so if any of you know or can figure it out from the official website, please let us know in the comment section.

Meanwhile, in Karlovy Vary/Karlsbad/Carlsbad, the standings going into the last round look like this:

1-2. Akopian, Movsesian 4 (of 6)
3. Ponomariov 3.5
4-5. Navara, Laznicka 3
6-7. Shirov, Timman 2.5
8. Korchnoi 1.5

HT: Chess Today.
* In the original post, following Chess Today's report, only ten winners were given; Kobalia's name had been overlooked. They made the correction and I pass the update along to you.

We’re all enjoying the World Championship in Mexico City, the newest iteration in a series going back to 1886. The game has come a long way since then. Nowadays, we have a champion who utilizes openings like the Slav and the Berlin Defense with the Black pieces, whereas in 1886, Johannes Zukertort, in his match with Wilhelm Steinitz, played openings like…the Slav and the Berlin Defense!

Of course, chess has developed by leaps and bounds the past 121 years, but there are commonalities and things we can still learn from the players of those days and their games. So this week, to supplement the gap left by the first rest day in Mexico City, we’ll look at the crucial sixth game of the Steinitz-Zukertort match. Steinitz won game 1, but then Zukertort won four games in a row to completely take over the momentum. (Draws? What draws? They only split the point five times in twenty games.) Steinitz desperately needed to stop the bleeding, and this game marked the start of a comeback that made him the first official world champion.

The game was a Berlin Defense, but before you all fall asleep, it was a very sharp line, one which sometimes causes trouble to even very strong contemporary players. So one benefit of tuning in is that you can add a very dangerous weapon to your opening arsenal! Second, it’s an excellent game from start to finish: interesting opening play, a well-played middlegame attack, and excellent endgame technique by Steinitz to finish it off. Third, there’s a curious feature of this game that could not have happened nowadays (or at least wouldn’t have). And fourth, I’ll be in Mexico City for about a week, so this will be your last chance for a while to see one of my shows!

Remember, although it’s on an unusual day (Monday night), it’s at the usual time: 9 p.m. ET, 3 a.m. CET. (But remember, European non-night owls, you can watch the shows in the archives starting almost immediately after they finish.) Directions for watching the show, either live (for free) or in the archives (very cheaply, but not quite free) can be found here.

Bring back Fischer, Kasparov and Topalov!

Of course it's early and that's an overstatement, but draws in 22, 23, 25 and 28 moves makes for a less than inspiring first round. Despite that, the games did have their interesting moments, as we will see.

Anand-Gelfand ended very strangely, as both players blundered on their final move! Anand's 22.Re1? simply hung a pawn to 22...Rxf4 (23.Qxf4? Bg5 is a queenectomy), but Gelfand missed it, played 22...Rxe1+ and offered a draw, which was accepted.

Kramnik's advantage against Svidler was less tangible than Gelfand's should have been, but with 22.Bd3 or especially 21.Bd3 he'd place the burden of proof on Black to prove real compensation for the sacrificed pawn. Either Kramnik disagreed with this assessment, or maybe he initially thought his approach gave him even more. If so, he was mistaken, and after 22.Nh2 Rxd4 Black had regained the pawn (at no other cost), so Kramnik played 23.Rxd4 and offered a draw, which was accepted.

Draw #3 was Grischuk-Leko. This game was always about even, with Leko never enjoying more than a micro-edge. His active possibilities were always constrained by Grischuk's mild kingside initiative, so Leko bailed out with a nice exchanging idea to force the draw.

Finally, Morozevich and Aronian turned into a big swap meet: another draw. Wheeee.

The games, with my comments, are here.

Ok, two hours in and time for another update.

Kramnik-Svidler: Kramnik has a clear advantage. Black has just executed the thematic ...c5 break, but under circumstances that seem favorable for White.

Anand-Gelfand: 18.g4 looked more dangerous for Black than the move Anand chose, 18.Ng4. Right now (move 20) Black has a beautifully centralized position, and is if anything a touch better, though I assume White will be able to draw without too much sweat, should he so desire.

Morozevich-Aronian is proceeding slowly, with the players only up to move 16. At this exact moment not much is happening, but the board is so full of imbalances an exciting battle appears likely.

Grischuk-Leko is continuing in normal Anti-Marshall style: Black is slightly more comfortable in what should be a long slog.

As we approach the end of the first hour, here's a quick update of what's going on.

Kramnik-Svidler: Svidler surprised the world champion by entering the Semi-Slav (Svidler's bread and butter against 1.d4 has long been the Gruenfeld). Kramnik thought for about 10 minutes and played 5.Bg5, which was itself a surprise. Svidler played 5...h6, inviting the sharp Moscow Variation, but Kramnik kept things manageable with 6.Bxf6. This variation is well-known, and offers a battle between White's extra space and lead in development against the long-term prospects of Black's bishop pair.

Anand-Gelfand: Gelfand essayed the Petroff, which Anand met by the lightly regarded but occasionally popular 3.Nxe5 d6 4.Nf3 Nxe4 5.Nc3. White accepts minor damage to his pawn structure and a lack of central pawns in exchange for hopes of a kingside attack. If I remember right, Anand once defeated Kramnik with this system in a rapid game, so it's certainly not without its dangers.

Morozevich-Aronian is a Queen's Indian with 4.a3, which has an old-fashioned touch thanks to Aronian's kingside fianchetto. It's early yet in that game (move 11), but it's shaping up as a lively battle.

Grischuk-Leko is an Anti-Marshall, which means that Black is at least equal. In fact, I think Black might even have an edge as of move 15, and White's 10.a3 followed by 12.a4 looks strange to me. At first I thought I understood it: 10.a4 would have allowed 10...b4, preventing the knight from going to c3 (and thence to d5), while 10.Nc3 allowed 10...Na5, gaining the bishop pair. But after 10.a3 Qd7 11.Nc3 Rfe8 12.a4 b4 13.Ne2 - rather than 13.Nd5 - my explanation went up in smoke. White transferred the knight to g3, but then a3 + a4 was pointless, as 10.a4 b4 and the knight can get to g3 in three moves via the traditional d2-f1-g3 route.

I hope to update this page as I learn of more quality websites, so you'll have to let me know what's out there!

Official Website (pretty lame so far, but hopefully it will improve quickly)

Watching online:

ChessBase's playchess.com server will cover the games with GM Yasser Seirawan providing commentary, ICC will also carry the games.

The usual suspects:

TWIC (Looks like they're off to a very good start.)
ChessBase
Chess Vibes

For analysis:

ChessOk.com (live analysis, in English, by GM Sergei Shipov) (HT: Andrey)
ChessPro (Yes, it's in Russian, but there are online translators, which should be serviceable enough to get to the analysis.)
The Chess Mind (obviously!)

My predictions have already emerged over the course of the previews, with Kramnik, Anand and Aronian my top three (really going out on a limb, I know), in that order. Others I've seen include:

Chess Vibes' readers: Kramnik will win: 33%, Anand will win: 31%, Aronian will win: 20%, and after that everyone's pretty much in the basement.

Chess Today staff (in their 2500th issue - congratulations):

IM Andrei Deviatkin: "Kramnik, Grischuk, Anand - in any order."

IM Maxim Notkin: "The most likely winners are Kramnik, Anand and Leko."

GM Mikhail Golubev: "This is how I would rate the players' chances of winning the tournament:

1-2. Anand and Kramnik
3-4. Aronian and Svidler
5-6. Leko and Grischuk
7-8. Morozevich and Gelfand" [DM: This is quite close to my own view. I'd maybe bump Leko up to the Aronian and Svidler group and demote Grischuk with the cellar dwellers.]

IM Vladimir Barsky: "As for the tournament in Mexico, here is my list of who has the best chances for winning it:

1. Morozevich
2. Anand
3. Grischuk" [DM: This should be taken not with a grain of salt, but with a Lot's wife-sized block of the substance, as Barsky is Morozevich's friend, sometime trainer and co-author.]

GM Alex Baburin: "In my opinion, the most likely winners are:

1. Anand
2. Leko
3-4. Kramnik and Aronian"

And you, readers? Don't wait for the first rounds to end to make your predictions!

The event is a double round-robin, starting today (in little more than an hour, at 2:00 p.m. local time = 3 p.m. ET = 9 p.m. CET) and continuing through the 29th (unless there are tie-breaks, which would occur on the 30th), with rest days on Monday the 17th (after round 4), Saturday the 22nd (after round 8), and Wednesday the 26th (after round 11). Here are the pairings:

Round 1 (9/13)

Kramnik - Svidler
Morozevich - Aronian
Anand - Gelfand
Grischuk - Leko

Here it is: our final player preview for the Mexico City world championship, covering the rising star from Armenia, Levon Aronian.



Aronian is the second-youngest participant in the event, but his relatively brief career is already full of highlights:

World U-12 champion in 1994 (ok, it was a tournament for fetuses, but what fetuses! - Ponomariov, Grischuk, Bacrot and Vallejo, among others).
World Junior champion in 2002.
Won the World Cup in 2005 in Khanty Mansiysk, to qualify for the Candidates cycle.
Won Linares 2006.
Tied for first in Wijk aan Zee this year (2007).
A few months ago he defeated Kramnik in a rapid match, 4-2.
Chess960 World Champion 2006 - present.

Age: 24 (born October 6, 1982)
Rating: 2750

Strengths: Aronian has an excellent feel for unusual positions (witness his excellence at Chess960 for many years now), which makes him very dangerous even in games where he doesn't succeed in detonating a theoretical bomb. He's very confident (why shouldn't he be, with an almost unbroken series of successes the last few years?) and resilient, too (witness his repeated bounce-backs after losses to Carlsen in their Candidates match).

Weaknesses: Aronian professed in an old interview to be "lazy" in his opening preparation; if that's still true, that could prove costly against the big two. It's also possible that he could be overconfident (the Carlsen match is a negative example here - he kept letting his opponent back into the match).

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Kramnik: +3 -3 =6; Kramnik leads +1 =3 in classical games.
vs. Anand: +2 -4 =9; in classical games Aronian leads +1 =4 (Chess960 games excluded).
vs. Leko: +3 -1 =7 (all since 2006); +1 -1 =5 in classical.
vs. Svidler: +8 -5 =10; Svidler leads two wins to one in classical.
vs. Morozevich: +1 -4 =3, but Aronian leads +1 =2 in classical.
vs. Grischuk: +2 -1 =3; Aronian leads in classical +1 =1.
vs. Gelfand: +2 -4 =10; Gelfand won their only decisive classical game.

Aronian will prove a very dangerous player in this tournament, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he won the event - maybe even by a Topalov-like margin. Anand and Kramnik have two clear advantages over Aronian: experience, and the depth of their opening preparation. That might be enough to hold Aronian off for now, but this might be their last chance!

With the world championship starting in 14 hours or so (3 p.m. ET), we continue with our next-to-last player preview, this time featuring Russian grandmaster Peter Svidler.



Svidler's career has seen many highlights, including the following:

World U-16 champion in 1992.
World U-18 champion in 1994.
Four times Russian Champion (1994, 1995, 1997, 2003).
Tied for first with Kasparov and Kramnik in Tilburg 1997, beating Kasparov in their individual game.
Chess960 World Champion 2003-2006.
Runner-up (tied) in the 2005 FIDE world championship in San Luis.
Runner-up in the 2006 World Blitz Championship.

Age: 31 (born June 17, 1976)
Rating: 2735

Strengths: A universal style, excellent preparation, and the sort of psychological stability one needs to win an event like this.

Weaknesses: A recent tendency toward frequent short draws might reflect a lack of energy and/or ambition. Also, judging by results and comments I think he may have a bit too much respect for Anand and Kramnik. (They deserve respect, of course, but when the attitude becomes deferential it's hard to compete.) Still, they're only two players, and even if he's unambitious against them there are 5 other players he can (try to) beat up on.

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Kramnik: +14 -16 =23; in classical games Kramnik leads 5 wins to 1.
vs. Anand: +2 -9 =27; in classical games 4 wins to none for Anand.
vs. Aronian: +5 -8 =10; Svidler leads two wins to one in classical.
vs. Leko: +11 -4 = 24; Svidler leads six wins to two in classical chess.
vs. Morozevich: +10 -10 =12; Svidler leads 6 wins to 3 in classical.
vs. Grischuk: +6 -3 =10; Svidler leads 3 wins to 1 in classical.
vs. Gelfand: +10 -5 =22; three wins apiece in classical.

If Svidler is in good form, I think his chances of winning the event are quite good. (Chess Vibes is an excellent site, but their readers are insane to put Svidler dead last in their chess poll.) Certainly the big two have better chances, and Aronian is a hotter player, but Svidler's stability and experience might well make him the third favorite.

In anticipation of the world championship, starting today(!), our sixth of eight previews features Russian grandmaster Alexander Morozevich.



Some of Morozevich's achievements follow:

Won the Lloyd's Bank tournament in 1994 (at the age of 17) with a ridiculous 9.5/10 score and 3011 TPR.
Won Pamplona 1998/9 with an 8/9 score and a 2914 TPR.
Won Pamplona 2006 (6/7, 2951 TPR).
Won Biel in 2003, 2004 and 2006.
Won the Amber rapid and blindfold tournament in 2002, tied for first in 2004.
Fourth place in the San Luis world championship in 2005.

Age: 30 (born July 18, 1977)
Rating: 2758

Strengths: His approach to the game is quite unusual, and that makes him a non-routine opponent for his fellow elites. Part of this is his very non-standard opening repertoire, which has included the Chigorin Defense, the Albin Counter-Gambit, 3...Be7 against the Tarrasch French and other interesting abnormalities. He's also a good streak player: once he gets rolling, he really gets rolling!

Weaknesses: His streakiness goes in the opposite direction as well, and he's capable of producing dreadful results, too. Another worry is his health: Morozevich has often been slated to play in events, and then withdrawn shortly before pleading illness. It's also worth noting that he hasn't won a single one of the super-GM events (not counting the recreational and rapid Amber tournaments), which may reflect a certain instability in his form, even within a single tournament.

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Kramnik: +4 -6 =10; in classical Kramnik's up +2 -1 =5.
vs. Anand: +8 -8 =10; in classical Anand leads +3 -2 =4.
vs. Aronian: +4 -1 =3, but Aronian leads +1 =2 in classical.
vs. Leko: +7 -9 =16; Leko leads 3-2 in wins in classical chess.
vs. Svidler: +10 -10 =12; Svidler leads 6 wins to 3 in classical.
vs. Grischuk: +7 -6 =10; 2 wins apiece in classical.
vs. Gelfand: +6 -4 =15; Gelfand up 3 wins to 1 in classical.

Morozevich is a fan favorite, but I see no objective basis for making him a favorite to win this tournament: no super-tournament wins, a minus score against all his rivals (except Grischuk) in classical games and questionable health.

Since the world championship starts tomorrow and the games might still be in progress by 9 pm ET, I'm going to postpone the show. I'm hoping to reschedule the next three shows for the world championship rest days, but am still waiting for approval from the big boss. More info as it comes available.

We continue our series of player previews with a look at the event's youngest participant, Russian grandmaster Alexander Grischuk.



In part because of his youth and also because he hasn't been the most active player in classical chess, his list of accomplishments is shorter than that of the other participants. That said, most grandmasters would be delighted beyond measure to have a resume like Grischuk's.

Grandmaster at 16.
A world championship semi-finalist at the age of 17.
A world championship quarter-finalist in 2004 (losing to eventual winner Kasimdzhanov in tiebreaks).
World blitz champion (won in 2006, in Israel).

Age: 23 (born October 31, 1983)
Current rating: 2726

Strengths: His opening preparation is very strong, especially but not only in sharp, forcing opening lines. (Recall what happened to Rublevsky's Scotch in their Candidates match a few months ago, for example.) There's also the advantages of youth - but see below.

Weaknesses: Unmotivated (by his own admission). Possibly mediocre physical condition: he smokes and drinks, and I haven't seen a healthy-looking picture of him for several years. He also confesses to a lack of patience, which if true will not put him in good stead against his opponents.

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Kramnik: -2 =2; =2 in classical.
vs. Anand: +4 -5 =7; =2 in classical.
vs. Aronian: +1 -2 =3; Aronian leads in classical +1 =1.
vs. Leko: +2 -2 =10; 1-0 for Leko in decisive classical games.
vs. Svidler: +3 -6 =10; Svidler leads 3 wins to 1 in classical.
vs. Morozevich: +6 -7 =10; 2 wins apiece in classical.
vs. Gelfand: +6 -3 =13, but Gelfand leads 3 wins to 1 in classical.

Given the way Grischuk came roaring out of the game back in 2000, he looked like someone who would threaten for the title in a big way. Yet Grischuk hasn't really come through on his promise - he seems more interested in rapid events and poker than classical tournaments (again, by his own admission - except when something major is at stake, as it is here). That's fine, but Caissa is jealous and this makes him a heavy underdog here. (And to be honest, given his dislike of classical chess, I'm strongly disposed to root against him - Ilyumzhinov is always disposed to make time limits shorter, and with a world champion Grischuk, the already crazy trend could go completely off the deep end.)

In case you missed them, there were earlier profiles of Kramnik, Anand, Leko and Gelfand.

A strong tournament in Karlovy Vary, formerly known as Karlsbad (of 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.cxd5 fame), started this past Saturday. The line-up is impressive, featuring a former FIDE world champion, four world championship runners-up, an "ordinary" strong GM and two strong, talented Czech youngsters (call these categories 1-4, respectively):

Alexei Shirov (2735, category 2)
Vladimir Akopian (2708, 2)
Ruslan Ponomariov (2706, 1)
Sergei Movsesian (2667, 3)
David Navara (2656, 4)
Viktor Korchnoi (2610, 2)
Viktor Laznicka (2594, 4)
Jan Timman (2560, 2)

After three rounds, Akopian, Movsesian and Timman lead with 2/3, Ponomariov, Navara and Laznicka have 1.5, Korchnoi has a point and Shirov just half a point.

Tournament website here (make sure you scroll down), and a couple of videos here, on the ChessVibes site. (Note: the first video is almost painful to watch - you've been warned.) (An aside about the ChessVibes site: they've been conducting a poll about the Mexico City tournament, and while the results are generally about what one would guess, it's incredible to me that Svidler has received 0% of the vote. I mean, c'mon - the guy tied for second in San Luis! He can't be rated above Kramnik and Anand, but below Gelfand and Grischuk, with zero?!)

It's time for the fourth of our player profiles, in anticipation of the world championship (starting this Thursday in Mexico City). We've featured Kramnik, Anand and Leko, this time we'll take a look at the "old" man of the event, Israeli grandmaster (by way of Belarus) Boris Gelfand.



Among his many accomplishments in the game, we can mention these:

Tied for first in the 1988 World Junior Championship (second on tiebreak).
Won Wijk aan Zee in 1992 and 1994.
A Candidate on several occasions, including 1994 when he defeated the young Kramnik 4.5-3.5 - and with a last-round win at that.
A regular and generally high-placed finisher in the (hopefully permanently defunct) FIDE k.o. World Championship events.

Age: 39 (born June 24, 1968)
Current rating: 2733

Strengths: The benefit of age is experience, and Gelfand has it in spades. Further, while his opening repertoire is quite narrow (it's almost a mortal lock that he'll play 1.d4 with White and the Najdorf and Petroff with Black against 1.e4) it's prepared with incredible depth. Another point not to be overlooked is that his formative years came during the heyday of Soviet chess, and as such his level of "chess culture" is very high. (That means, inter alia, that his endgame play is terrific, and that's also a result of playing when adjournments still existed.) In fact, he didn't enjoy the tutelage of some random Soviet master, but for some time was the pupil of Tigran Petrosian. (The world champion, obviously, not the newer one.)

Weaknesses: The drawback of experience is age, and while Gelfand isn't that old he's not a spring chicken, either, and if his level of conditioning isn't that high he could tire by the end of the tournament. Also, while his opening repertoire is prepared with incredible depth, it's quite narrow, and he could prove a sitting target for others. Another problem is that he seems to be a little intimidated by Kramnik, and maybe Anand too, and while he did reasonably well against both of them when they were younger, his later results haven't been so good.

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Kramnik: +5 -13 =35, with Kramnik up 6 wins to 3 in classical.
vs. Anand: +5 -13 =39; it's 6 wins to 5 for Anand in classical, but Gelfand's last victory came in 1993.
vs. Aronian: +4 -2 =10; Gelfand won their only decisive classical game.
vs. Leko: +8 -5 = 25; two wins apiece in classical, with the last two going to Leko.
vs. Svidler: +5 -10 =22; three wins apiece in classical.
vs. Morozevich: +4 -6 =15; Morozevich also leads in classical wins, 3 to 2.
vs. Grischuk: +3 -6 =13, but 3 wins to 1 for Gelfand in classical.

I like his chess and became somewhat of a fan when his (excellent) book came out, but I think he'll be fortunate to score 50% here. Sadly, I think he and Grischuk are the favorites for last place. If he does give it a run, it will be by virtue of perfect opportunism: he'll draw with the big guys, and collect against those who overreach seeing him as a (comparatively) easy mark.

Another disappointing loss, but I see only one fundamental weakness and three bright spots. The fundamental weakness: the offensive line. Notre Dame is first in the nation when it comes to rushing inefficiency, averaging a whopping -4 yards per game. This reflects not only the o-line's inability to run block, but their dismal failure to protect the team's quarterback(s).

Still, there are bright spots. First, both Clausen and Sharpley performed their passing duties well, albeit for short yardage most of the time - that's all they could do, thanks again to the offensive line. Second, the defense has proved both resilient and opportunistic, but they can't win the games all by themselves. And third - and I believe this is the new team motto - we're not Michigan.

Next week's victim: Michigan.

We continue our look ahead to next week's world championships in Mexico City (play starts Thursday!) with our third profile (after Kramnik and Anand), this time of Hungarian GM Peter Leko.



As usual, we begin with a very partial list of his accomplishments:

Became an IM at the age of 12.
Became a GM in 1992 at the age of 14, then the youngest-ever player to achieve that title.
Was successfully competing in super-GM events at the age of 15.
Won Dortmund at the age of 19.
Crushed then-FIDE world champion Alexander Khalifman 4.5-1.5 in a match in 2000 (20 years old).
Won the Candidates in Dortmund in 2002, defeating Shirov and Topalov in matches.
Drew a World Championship match with Kramnik in 2004.

Age: 28 (born September 8, 1979 - happy birthday!)
Current rating: 2751

Strengths: Leko is the consummate professional: not only in the externals (polite, dressed a la GQ) but where it counts, too: he's always extremely well-prepared theoretically and physically fit. He has excellent technique, defends resiliently and is almost impossible to beat.

Weaknesses: He doesn't seem to have an extra gear for those occasions when risk is involved, so if he falls behind he's not likely to give chase in earnest. He has also shown some late round vulnerability, almost blowing the 2002 match with Topalov, losing the final game against Kramnik in 2004, and losing the lead in the last round of one or two tournaments in the year or two after that. Of late he seems to have overcome the problem, so hopefully that won't be an issue this time around. Finally, his scores against his rivals fails to inspire confidence as well.

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Kramnik: +8 -14 =63; they have four wins apiece in classical games.
vs. Anand: +4 -18 =40; in classical games Anand leads 7 wins to 2.
vs. Aronian: +1 -3 =7 (all since 2006); +1 -1 =5 in classical.
vs. Svidler: +4 -11 = 24; Svidler leads six wins to two in classical chess.
vs. Morozevich: +9 -7 =16; Leko leads three wins to two in classical chess - I think.
vs. Grischuk: +2 -2 =10; the only win in a classical game belongs to Leko.
vs. Gelfand: +5 -8 = 25; two wins apiece in classical, with the last two going to Leko.

I don't think Leko's chances of winning are as good as Kramnik's or Anand's, or Aronian's or maybe even Morozevich's, for that matter.* Still, I expect he'll be in the top half of the table, and if he's hot or the big two get cold, he could easily turn up as the big winner.

* I think he'll score better than Morozevich, but think Morozevich's streaky play might make him more likely to win (or to come in last, for that matter) than Leko.

Hope springs eternal, especially against a team we whupped 41-17 last year. Enjoy the highlights from last year's pasting.

In the risibly labeled Russian Championship (Higher League)*, the game Sergey Volkov (2659) - Ivan Popov (2524), the game ended in the following position, after 46...Ke6-f5:



Black's win here is quite easy: White can't move his king (48.Kh3 Rh1#, and if it wasn't mate 49...b1Q would suffice) or push the g-pawn (47.g3 hxg3+ 48.Kg2 (48.Kxg3 Rg1+ and 49...b1Q) 48...h4 with the threat of 49...h3+ followed by the appropriate rook check and b1Q), and pushing the e-pawn is pointless. That leaves rook moves, and Black beats that by maneuvering his king to a2, e.g. 47.Rb8 Kxe5 48.Rb7 Kd4 49.Rb3 Kc4 50.Rb8 Kc3 (threatening to move the rook, so it's time to give check) 51.Rc8+ Kb3 52.Rb8+ Ka2 followed by a rook move and b1Q.

Note, however, that if there were no a-pawns White could continue checking: 53.Ra8+ and so on. Black would need another winning plan in that case, so let's go back to the beginning, set up the position without a-pawns, and "assign" the position as a test of your ability to apply basic endgame theory.



The solution will be given in a few days; meanwhile, please do NOT comment your analytical proposals.

* My criticism of the event name comes from the fact that it's actually a qualifier for the "Superfinal" later in the year. That, ultimately, is the Russian Championship.

I used to play the main line Budapest Gambit from time to time (1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 is the Budapest, and the main line continues 3.dxe5 Ng4), but never felt tempted by the Fajarowicz - 3.dxe5 Ne4. At least two books have advocated this variation in the last decade or so, but I'd like to know why. If White plays 4.Nf3 Bb4+ 5.Nbd2 Nc6 6.a3, he enjoys a useful advantage without even a smidgin of risk. Here are a couple of possible variations:

Line 1a: 6...Nxd2 7.Bxd2 Bxd2+ 8.Qxd2 Qe7 9.Qf4 or 9.Qc3 with a slight-to-clear advantage.


Line 1b: 6...Nxd2 7.Nxd2 gives White a slight edge thanks to the bishop pair.

Line 2: 6...Bxd2+ 7.Nxd2 Bxd2+ 8.Bxd2 Nxe5 (8...Qh4 9.Bc3! Qxc4 (Not forced, but then what's the point of 8...Qh4?) 10.e3 Qe6 11.Qh5 with a clear advantage) 9.Bc3 with an edge. One possible continuation: 9...Qe7 10.Qd4 f6 11.e3 b6 12.Be2 Bb7 13.O-O followed by b4, with an edge.

I freely grant that the above isn't a refutation in the strong sense: the concluding positions in these lines are all playable for Black. But the real question is why Black would want to play such positions - there are basically no complications, and the positions are primarily technical. And if one can win such positions with Black against a peer or near-peer, one shouldn't play the Budapest, but technical lines instead!

With play in the world championship starting next Thursday in Mexico City, the Chess Mind blog will prepare for the event by previewing the players. A few days ago we started with champion Vladimir Kramnik; in this post we'll profile the "eternal" crown prince, Indian great Viswanathan Anand.



We begin with a very partial list of his many accomplishments:

World Junior Champion in 1987.
One of only four players in chess history to achieve a 2800+ rating.
Has been a Candidate or world champion in just about every cycle since 1991.
One of only five players to lead the FIDE rating list (Fischer, Karpov, Kasparov, and Topalov were the others; Kramnik was often second and tied for first once, but was second on tiebreak).
FIDE World Champion from 2000-2002.
FIDE Rapid Champion in 2003, and unofficially the strongest rapid player in the world, especially since Kasparov's retirement.
Winner of the Chess Oscar in 1997, 1998, 2003 and 2004.

Age: 37 (born December 11, 1969)
Current rating: 2792

Strengths: Loads! No one in the event is his superior in opening preparation (though Leko might be his equal), and that makes him incredibly hard to beat. His speed is legendary, and he may be the most resilient single-game defender around. When he gets the initiative, especially with White, the game is usually as good as over, especially given his amazing skill in calculation.

Weaknesses: He's excessively risk-averse, which manifests itself in a fairly high percentage of short draws with the black pieces and when playing white against his peers when his novelties don't give him much. Such a strategy is efficient in many circumstances, but it means that when someone is hot, like Topalov in San Luis, he's going to be stuck playing for second. Also, while he's great defending in a single game, he can collapse when things start going against him. In short, he's a great front-runner, but vulnerable when needing to play catch-up. Fortunately, two of his three main contenders are also solid, non-rabbit types, so he should be in the thick of things unless the event is a complete disaster.

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Kramnik: +18 -14 =86; in classical games Kramnik leads 6 wins to 5.
vs. Aronian: +4 -2 =9; in classical games Aronian leads +1 =4 (Chess960 games excluded).
vs. Leko: +18 -4 =40; in classical games Anand leads 7 wins to 2.
vs. Svidler: +9 -2 =27; in classical games 4 wins to none.
vs. Morozevich: +8 -8 =10; in classical games Anand leads +3 -2 =4
vs. Grischuk: +5 -4 =7; in classical games they drew twice.
vs. Gelfand: +13 -5 =39 (and Gelfand's last win was in 1993); it's six wins to five in classical.

Anand's chances here are excellent, as he's in good form, Kasparov and Topalov aren't playing, and his history with all his opponents is at worst nearly even and in some cases heavily in his favor. It's quite possibly his last really good chance, too, as he's getting old and the youngsters are taking over in a hurry.

Last week we examined two encounters between Kramnik and Anand; this week we continue our preview of the participants in the upcoming world championship tournament in Mexico City, Mexico. Our star this time is the young and very much up and coming Armenian grandmaster Levon Aronian.

While Alexander Grischuk is the youngest participant and has been a big name on the world stage since 2000, Aronian, one year Grischuk's senior, was comparatively unknown to the general chess public until late 2004/early 2005. Since then it's as if he was shot out of a cannon, blasting past almost everyone. He has won several super-GM events, reached as high as number three on the rating list (he's currently #8) and has even defeated Vladimir Kramnik in a rapid match.

Aronian has claimed to be a bit lazy when it comes to theoretical preparation, but if true he certainly makes up for it in his ability to improvise over the board. We will see this in our game tonight, Aronian-Anand from this year's Morelia/Linares tournament. Anand won the event, but Aronian won their mini-match with fine play in a queenless middlegame/endgame.

What can we get from our examination of this game? First, friends and foes of the Slav will get a glimpse into the important 4.Qc2 sideline - a nice way for White to avoid the mounds of theory devoted to 4.Nc3 dxc4/a6/e6 (there are literally 100 times more games with 4.Nc3 than 4.Qc2 in the databases, so this is a real time-saver).

Second, several important pawn-structure themes arise in the game: White accepts doubled, isolated h-pawns at one point, and it's interesting to reflect on whether or not this is a serious problem. On the other hand, White enjoys the more impressive pawn center, as he usually does in the Slav. Whether this is serious, and what he can do with it, will also be considered in our coverage.

Third: Aronian enjoyed the bishop pair in a situation where that can prove meaningful, and so we'll spend some time discussing that feature of the game as well. That the bishop pair can be used aggressively is well-known, but they also performed useful prophylactic and defensive work, too.

Fourth and finally, there are some beautiful tactics and finesses, and of course we'll pay careful attention to them, too. Aronian's win constitutes an impressive strategic effort, but it's the tactical aspects that really put the shine on the game.

Remember to tune in for the show live, tonight (Thursday) at 9 p.m. ET (that's 3 a.m. Friday morning, CET, for you night owls); directions, as always, can be found here. Hope to see you there!

When Topalov and his team recite their "Toiletgate" allegations in various public forums, there are two temptations I strive to avoid. The first is to completely ignore him, wishing he, or rather his accusations, would simply disappear; the second is to fervently express what I believe but cannot prove. Option three is correct and what I try to stick to: report the facts when they are newsworthy, and limit commentary to those publicly accessible points. So: because it's newsworthy, I direct those of you who are interested to two Topalov-related items in this week's Chess Cafe: (1) a review (permalink here) of Topalov's book on the match (co-written by Zhivko Ginchev); (2) an exclusive interview with Topalov himself (permalink here).

Of pancreatic cancer. More here, and some videos of the singer here. (Incidentally, for those who think there are three - now two - tenors in the world, let me suggest having a look and a listen to Giuseppe Di Stefano (who was Pavarotti's own model) and Jussi Björling; here and here, respectively, for some videos.)

A ridiculous title, I know. What's next, a post explaining how to breathe? If the topic concerned the position after 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6? 3.Nxe5! fxe5 4.Qh5+, you'd be right to think this post is unnecessary, as it has long been known that White wins here: 4...Ke7 5.Qxe5+ Kf7 6.Bc4+ d5 7.Bxd5+ Kg6 8.h4! (but absolutely, positively NOT 8.Bxb7? Bd6! 9.Qa5 Bxb7 10.Qf5+ Kh6 11.d3+ g5 12.h4 Kg7 and the Black king survives) 8...h5 9.Bxb7! (now!) 9...Bd6 10.Qa5 Bxb7 11.Qf5+ Kh6 12.d4+ g5 and now both 13.Bxg5+ (many sources) and 13.Qf7 (McGrew) win and then some.

However, as McGrew notes in his July 2003 Gambit Cartel article, 3...Qe7 is far more resilient. Black will die a painful and deserved death after 4.Nf3 Qxe4+ 5.Be2 followed by quick and natural developing moves, but 4...d5! 5.d3 dxe4 6.dxe4 Qxe4+ 7.Be2 Bf5 (as played against Bobby Fischer in a simul - drawn!) or even 7...Nc6 8.O-O Bd7 9.Nc3 Qf5 looks remarkably survivable for Black. (You can find more details in McGrew's article.)

This offended my sense of propriety - how can Black play such garbage and live to tell the tale? - but the few minutes I spent trying to improve McGrew's analysis back in 2003 was altogether inconclusive. Flash forward to yesterday afternoon, when Dan Dugovic offered a comment on my last post. That comment and its follow-up got my wheels spinning, and during a little session of daydreaming the solution came to me. The answer: meet 3...Qe7 with 4.Nc4! I think this is better than 4.Nf3 for two reasons.

First, in the 4...Qxe4+ line, White's kingside pieces are more aggressively placed on e3 and d3 than on f3 and e2, and he should therefore be more quickly able to stir up trouble on the e-file. Second, by keeping the d1-h5 diagonal open, White can meet 4...d5 with 5.Qh5+ and 6.Qxd5. Black does gain some counterplay for the pawns, but it looks like accurate play allows White to consolidate with an extra pawn in the bank.

Order has been restored in the universe: moves like 2...f6 followed by 3...Qe7 leave Black in a lousy position. Perhaps you'll never have the chance to use this analysis, but hopefully it will inspire you to trust the power of the traditional rules of open games. And if this encourages you to seek refutations of your opponent's liberties in open games - and to succeed in finding them - then this post will have been a success.

More details here.

It's possible useful, and at least entertaining.

Link.

With the world championship just around the corner (play start September 13), it's time to start getting psyched up for the big event. Accordingly, we'll start a series of player profiles and then make some predictions.


We start with the world champion, Vladimir Kramnik. The list of his accomplishments is staggering, but here are a few to give you some idea:

1st Category (about 2000 FIDE) at age 7 (gulp!)
Won the world under-18 championship at the age of 15.
Achieved a 2685 rating and the GM title at the age of 16.
Defeated Kasparov in 2000 to become the (a) world champion.
Became, at the end of 2000, the second player in history to achieve a 2800+ rating.
Defended his title in 2004 against Leko.
Defended his title and claimed the unified title by defeating Topalov in 2006.
Has won many major international tournaments, including Linares on three occasions and Dortmund eight times.

Age: 32 (born June 25, 1975)
Current rating: 2769 (going up, thanks to Dortmund)

Strengths: He's the world champion, so of course he's strong in every aspect of the game! Still, we can pick out some relative strengths (and weaknesses). First, he's very solid: extremely hard to beat, but capable of beating anyone. His opening preparation is generally excellent - not so much in finding novelties that lead by forced variations to kills, a la Kasparov, but in finding ideas that achieve smaller goals and give him positions where he can maximize his strengths. He's an excellent endgame player, and has tremendous "heart", as evidenced by all three of his world championship matches and his now-frequent late round successes in tournaments. (This is in distinction to earlier in his career, when he'd often tire and maybe choke a little in late rounds and big games.)

Weaknesses: His health is at times iffy, and has been for many years, though his fitness and general well-being seem pretty good of late. He doesn't blunder too often, but often enough for it to be noticeable. He certainly seems more prone to the occasional debacle than, say, Topalov or Anand. His preparation in very sharp, concrete lines is sometimes slightly inadequate, but since the last example that comes to mind is the Marshall Gambit debacle against Leko in 2004, he may have fixed that problem.

Scores against other Mexico City participants:

vs. Anand: +14 -18 =86; in classical games Kramnik leads 6 wins to 5.
vs. Aronian: +3 -3 =6; Kramnik leads +1 =3 in classical games.
vs. Leko: +14 -8 =63; they have four wins apiece in classical games.
vs. Svidler: +16 -14 =23; in classical games Kramnik leads 5 wins to 1.
vs. Morozevich: +6 -4 =10; in classical it's +2 -1 =5
vs. Grischuk: +2 =2; their two classical games were drawn.
vs. Gelfand: +13 -5 =35; it's six wins to three in classical.

No one who has been reading this blog for any length of time should be surprised to know that I'm rooting for Kramnik to win this event, and I think his chances are slightly better than (more or less) co-favorite Anand's. But not much, and with players like Aronian and Leko to overcome, it can't be said that any particular player is likely to win - not even Kramnik.

Okay, it's probably more common than that, but I'm only aware of two - or maybe three - instances of this combination.

The first time I remember seeing it was back in 2001, at the time of the game Ponomariov-Volokitin from a juniors event in Lausanne. I recently rediscovered this game in Andrei Volokitin's excellent advanced tactics book Perfect Your Chess (Gambit 2007, co-authored by his coach, Vladimir Grabinsky) - it shows up as the very first and thus presumably easiest problem:


Ponomariov-Volokitin, Lausanne 2001; Black to move:

White's position looks quite good: even material, blockaded isolani, great bishop on d4, rook on the 7th, and e2 satisfactorily covered. It doesn't look like Black deserves to have anything in a position like this, but he does:

31...Ne4+!! 32.fxe4 dxe4 and now Ponomariov had to bail out with 33.Ne1 e3+! 34.Bxe3 Rxd2+ 35.Bxd2 Re2+ (so much for the adequately covered e2 square) 36.Kg3 Rxd2 and draw agreed. But why must White be so compliant? Why not 33.Nc1, covering the e2 square? The answer is the tactical theme of the day: 33...e3+ 34.Bxe3



34...Rf6+! and Black wins! (35.Kg3 Rxe3+ -+; 35.Kg1 Rf1#) This sideways checking idea is easy to overlook - it's an unusual pattern, made even harder to see by the rooks bearing down on the files.

When I rediscovered this example a couple of weeks ago, I was happy to solve it and remembered seeing the game, but that was the extent of my experience with the idea, until earlier tonight. Along came Chess Today, issue 2491, and one of the combinations was the following:


Westerinen-Larsen, Capablanca Memorial 1967; Black to move:

The first thing that catches one's eye are all the possible fork squares: f3, b3, and c2, but in the second moment it's clear that all those squares are satisfactorily covered. It's moment three that counts: 25...Nf3+! and White resigned, because after 26.gxf3 Rd5 27.Kc1 Rxe1 is mate.

So while it's a rare idea, it does happen. And then a few minutes before I started writing this post, I got a strong feeling of déjà vu. It's not a game I have any more, and in fact it may have been a casual game, but I believe I lost to this very idea back in 1983 or 1984. If the latter, then we can revise the subtitle of this post: it happens every 17 years!

That could have gone better. (On the plus side, we could have lost to Appalachian State.)

Next (first) victim: Penn State.

It has been a bad three days for Nigel Short. First FIDE censured him on the "undercard" of the Topalov & Danailov reprimand, and then he got his head handed to him by the young Czech super-GM David Navara. On Thursday and Friday they played six regular rapid games, and Navara outscored him +3=3, and Navara won today's Chess960 games +2-1=1 to finish off with a 7-3 victory.

The other match was even stranger in a way, as the Czech organizers put up WGM Jana Jackova against the Dutch legend Jan Timman. Timman may not be the player he once was, but he's still about 2600 going up against a WGM (a title slightly weaker than IM), and she was crushed by a 7.5-2.5 margin (and 5.5-.5 in the rapid games). Not much of a contest - foreseeably, unlike the other match - but Timman got a payday and Jackova obtains experience, so presumably everyone's happy.

Link here. (The page's organization is very strange - it looks like a bad link, but scroll down and you'll find what you're looking for.)

This is a nice one, made nicer still by the computer's inability to solve it.

Link.

Have a look at the latest entry (#352) on Tim Krabbé's outstanding Open Chess Diary - the main game is crazy, the studies are nice, and those of you not already familiar with a certain game played in 2002 will find a nice surprise in one of the links.

Yep, time for some more ND propaganda!

First, a genuine pre-game clip.

Next, highlights of last year's game.

Then, since the famous "Rudy" game was against Georgia Tech in 1975, the real footage here and the movie clip here.