The Chess Mind

This puzzle was presented a couple of days ago, based on this position:



White's down a piece and objectively lost, but won after 27...Ng5 28.Bxg5+ Kxg5 29.Rxe6 Kxh4 30.g3+ Kg5 31.Rg6#. The puzzle was to determine the last place Black could save (and not only save, but win) the game. The solution is here.

An anonymous reader writes:

[I've noticed that]...more than half (60% or more!) of my losses are the result of an outright blunder. Things like mate in one when it can easily be defended, hanging pieces for nothing, and dropping pawns like nobody's business. It's easy to do some tactical puzzles or study some rook and pawn endgames, but as for the blunders it's simply a matter of doing it or not doing it. If this were simply affecting my blitz games I wouldn't care so much, but I've done some really stupid things in OTB games too. I know to look once more at the position before finally making your move and everything, but for some reason it doesn't seem to matter. I was wondering if there is any input you have on the subject, and more than the cliche "look at the position like a beginner" stuff I see everywhere. Maybe this is a (serious!) problem with other people too, and maybe they have found a way to fix it! Thanks[.]

Here's my advice: quit.

There was some talk about having the Aerosvit tournament rated in time for this list, but it clearly didn't happen as Carlsen wound up sixth rather than second on the current list. Even so, he continued his progress to the top, adding 10 points to his April rating. Here's the current top 10:

1. Anand 2798
2. Morozevich 2788
3. Kramnik 2788 (Morozevich is the official #2 based on having played more games since the April list)
4. Ivanchuk 2781
5. Topalov 2777
6. Carlsen 2775
7. Radjabov 2744
8. Mamedyarov 2742
9. Shirov 2741
10. Leko 2741

Other notables:

15. Karjakin 2727
17. Kamsky 2723
22. Polgar 2711
31. Nakamura 2697

If you want to make the top 100, your rating must be at least 2631. Good luck.

You can find the full top 100, along with the top 50 women, top 20 juniors and top 20 girls here.

GM Andrew Soltis has carved out a successful career over the past 2-3 decades as a chess author, writing four sorts of books. First, there have been historical works like Soviet Chess 1917-1991 and his biography of Frank Marshall. Second, there have been instructional works aimed at the average club player. Third, there have been opening works, generally dedicated to non-mainstream lines. Fourth and finally, there have been lighter works like Chess to Enjoy, largely based on his monthly columns for Chess Life.

His latest book, The Wisest Things Ever Said About Chess, falls most neatly in the second category, but there's a bit of category four in there as well. Soltis writes with a light touch and tongue in cheek humor, so his instructional works seldom feel like textbooks. Here's how the book works: Soltis starts each entry with a short, generally sentence-long quotation or approximate quotation expressing some wise rule of thumb, and then (when applicable, which is most of the time) follows up with a concrete example to illustrate the point.

Those of us who have read John Watson's comments about the rule-independence of contemporary chess may balk at this book's concept, but Soltis replies wisely in his introduction:

This is a book about ideas....Some are well remembered, others have forgotten. These thoughts are expressed in maxims, aphorisms, wisecracks, kibitzers and proverbs that have been passed down to us. Some can be called "rules." That's a word that divides players. Amateurs love rules. Masters love to ridicule them. "A chessplayer's talent is measured not be his knowledge of the rules but his ability to find exceptions to them," wrote Viktor Korchnoi. "Only the exceptions matter," said Alexei Shirov. But GMs follow rules like everyone else. The occasions when they do so vastly outnumber the times that they break rules, as a look at any grandmaster game plainly shows.

Rules and maxims should not be used as a substitute for thinking. But they are wonderful as prompters to thinking. Good rules point in the right direction. They "should be used only as mnemonics, reminders of what to think about," as Kenneth Mark Colby, an avid amateur player and respected psychologist, wrote. One of the great chess teachers, Cecil Purdy, got it right. "The true art of the teacher lies in stating rules in memorable form," he wrote.

Soltis' book is an attempt to state 288 such rules. The book is divided into 17 chapters, and to give you an idea of what's in the book, I'll list one "saying" per chapter.

1. Attack: "When you have opposite attacks going, the quantity of pieces is often more important than their quality." (#7) 2. Calculation: "Long variation, wrong variation." (#20) 3. Defense: "Never make a purely defensive move." (#35) 4. Endgame: "The basic rule of endings is not to hurry." (#55) 5. Evaluation: "A weakness is a weakness if and when it can be attacked." (#80) 6. Mistakes: "Defenders blunder more than attackers." (#103) 7. Move Selection: "Always look for ways of ignoring threats." (#114) 8. Openings: "Develop as well as possible - but not as quickly as possible." (#142) 9. Pawns: "A pawn is best defended by a pawn." (#156) 10. Pieces: "He who has the bishops has the future." (#184) 11. Psychology: "Of the two evils, under-estimation and over-estimation of one's own strength, the former is much the more harmful." (#200) 12. Sacrifice: "If you play the King's Indian, don't be afraid to be a pawn down." (#215) 13. Strategy: "A weak point is a square - not necessarily occupied - which can be attacked by heavy pieces." (#233) 14. Studying: "When a player decides to change his openings, it's a sign that he's growing up." (#245) 15. Tactics: "Any piece or pawn that is attacked as often as it is defended is a tactical weakness." (#259) 16. Technique: "When you win material you lose interest." (#266) 17. Tournament Tactics: "Technique is most of all limiting counterplay." (#274)

Once upon a time books were filled with this sort of advice, but nowadays, for whatever reason, it's less common to find such useful aphorisms except on a piecemeal basis. While experts and especially masters will know most of these ideas, and players under 1300 or so should first spend their time achieving their initial tactical competence, I think The Wisest Things Ever Said About Chess (available here) could prove helpful to those who are in between.

Today's games weren't much longer than round one's, but while all four games were drawn yesterday, three of today's games saw the player with White win.

The first game to finish, Gustafsson-Naiditsch, may have featured the event's lowest-rated players, but it was surely the game of the day. Gustafsson introduced a new move in the Vienna Variation of the QGD (16.f4), and while I think Black can neutralize it with 17...Rac8!, it's quite easy to prefer Naiditsch's 16...Rab8 OTB. It's natural and logical, but it loses, and Gustafsson crushed him quickly.

The second completed game was the only draw of the day. Nepomniachtchi had some advantage on the White side of a Closed Ruy, but after missing some opportunities Mamedyarov managed to equalize and draw.

Shortly thereafter, Kramnik finished his crushing win over van Wely in a Colle (Zukertort version)/Slav hybrid. Kramnik made it look easy: Ne5, Qf3-h3, f4, etc...but it's the "etc." that took the skill. One remarkable feature of the game was that despite Kramnik's kingside buildup, he simultaneously managed to lure all of his opponent's pieces to the queenside, with predictable results.

Finally, Leko defeated Ivanchuk in his best style. Step 1: press strategic advantages. Step 2: when the opponent lashes out to relieve the pressure, exploit this tactically. Step 3: calmly cash in the winnings collected in step 2. The game went 57 moves, but it had been decided from move 25.

Standings after Round 2:

1-3. Kramnik, Leko, Gustafsson 1.5
4-5. Nepomniachtchi, Mamedyarov 1
6-8. van Wely, Ivanchuk, Naiditsch .5

Round 3 Pairings: (On Tuesday; tomorrow is a rest day)

Naiditsch - Kramnik
Mamedyarov - Gustafsson
Ivanchuk - Nepomniachtchi
van Wely - Leko

The round 2 games, with my comments, are here.

I get Google Alerts for my last name, so I can see when I get in trouble around the web, and discovered that my Kamsky-Topalov match preview had been favorably mentioned in this post on Chess Daily. It looks like a site to watch, and while you're there have a look at their Dortmund preview. After that, you might want to take a look at the Dortmund preview over on Chessdom, and then you'll be fully prepared to offer your own Dortmund predictions, here or here.

Here's a puzzle sent to me by an anonymous reader, from a recent 5-minute game he(?) won:



White, down a piece for next to nothing, has just played 27.Bc3-d2. The move doesn't threaten anything, but Black now goes into helpmate mode: 27...Ng5 28.Bxg5+ Kxg5 29.Rxe6 Kxh4 30.g3+ Kg5 31.Rg6#. White's idea was very clever, but (especially with the benefit of hindsight) it's clear that Black didn't have to be so cooperative. So here's the question/puzzle: what was the last moment where Black could save himself? Try to figure it out without software assistance, and I'll supply the answer in a couple of days.

Four draws today, but they weren't too terrible. The first game to finish (barely) was Mamedyarov-Leko, a 4.f3 Nimzo-Indian. Mamedyarov devised a new idea with 12.Ne2, surrendering the extra, forward, doubled c-pawn in order to give Black a weak c-pawn which he can then win. That's just what happened, but then Leko had the last anti-c-pawn laugh. Given a choice between forcing perpetual, returning the extra pawn by losing his remaining c-pawn or keeping the pawn but giving Leko's rooks free reign he chose door #1, and the game ended on move 24.

Next up, we had a big opening surprise in Gustafsson-Kramnik. After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 Kramnik played 2...g6, a move which isn't exactly a normal part of the ex- (and future?) champion's repertoire or seemingly in keeping with his classical tastes. After 3.Nc3 the surprise was partially abated by his third move, 3...d5 (much more "Kramnikian" than a King's Indian), but I still suspect this is some sort of disinformation for Anand (to make him waste time preparing for something he won't play) or is being used to hide novelties in his "real" openings. (Possible objection: Anand never plays 1.d4. Reply: Neither did Leko prior to the 2004 match in Brissago, and it turned out that Kramnik was taken by surprise there.)

Whatever Kramnik's real motives, Gustafsson was clearly taken by surprise, as he wound up spending a fair amount of time repeating a Kramnik(!)-Svidler game that wound up a short, easy draw for Black. That game was drawn after Black's 27th move, and this game differed only in its going two more moves. An easy day for Kramnik, but perhaps a pity to waste such a surprise on the weakest player in the tournament.

Those games ended almost simultaneously, and it took a good while before the third game, Naiditsch-Nepomniachtchi, came to its peaceful end. This was the sharpest game of the day, a 6.Bc4 Najdorf that quickly left theory behind. After the opening a position was reached where Black's king was stuck in the center, but despite White's active pieces Black's bishop pair, strong knight on e5 and counterplay on the g-file was enough to keep the balance. White might have had a chance near the end with the risky-looking 22.g3, but preferred 22.Nd5, forcing a draw by "perpetual" on Black's queen.

Finally, Ivanchuk-van Wely was a Najdorf-turned-Scheveningen with 6.Be2 that saw the Ukranian pressing. Black's isolated d-pawn and White's extra space gave Ivanchuk some chances, but after a series of exchanges White's extra space was a liability. Ivanchuk could prevent perpetual or try to make progress, but not both, and a draw ensued.

After round 1, then, we have an eight-way tie for first, and so predictions for the tournament are still welcomed! Here are the pairings for round 2:

Kramnik - van Wely
Leko - Ivanchuk
Nepomniachtchi - Mamedyarov
Gustafsson - Naiditsch

Last but not least, here are the games, with my comments.

More details here and here, respectively. The g/60 takes place today (Saturday), while the g/30 is on Sunday.

The Dortmund super-tournament starts in the morning (3 p.m. local time in Germany = 9 a.m. ET), and here are the pairings:

Gustafsson - Kramnik
Naiditsch - Nepomniachtchi
Mamedyarov - Leko
Ivanchuk - van Wely

I'm going to go out on a limb (not!) and predict that Kramnik will win the tournament, with Ivanchuk challenging (but maybe running out of gas); Nepomniachtchi is my dark horse. I think Mamedyarov will do well but not threaten for first; likewise Leko (but maybe slightly worse than Mamedyarov), and Gustafsson, Naiditsch and van Wely will likely feature as chum. Readers? Predict away - but do so before the first round gets going!

As I noted in yesterday's post, three players entered the last round in norm contention. Marc Arnold and Yuanling Yuan both needed only a draw for the IM (Arnold) and WIM (Yuan) norms, and with short draws against Mehmed Pasalic and Angelo Young, respectively, both succeeded. Congratulations to both!

The other norm-relevant game was Jim Dean-Florin Felecan. If Felecan could pull out a win, he too would get an IM norm. Yet although his opponent was in last place coming into the final round, it was Dean who seized and maintained control from beginning to end, and won. Felecan was undoubtedly very disappointed by the last two rounds, but I'm sure he'll achieve his next norm soon. (But hopefully not at my expense.)

Final Standings:

1. Arnold (IM norm) 6.5
2. Felecan 5.5
3-4. Pasalic, Kuderinov 5
5-6. Chow, Tate 4.5
7-8. Young, Yuan (WIM norm) 4
9-10. Stamnov, Dean 3

Tournament site here.

The question, asked by reader Ken Smith in this recent post, asked this:

I enjoyed catching up on the Dowd - Crusats puzzle you offered recently. For me one of the pleasures of the position was White's ability to threaten a different mating move on each of four successive moves. This makes me wonder if there have been games or puzzle positions that created the opportunity for even more successive different mate threats than the four move sequence given here.

And here's a reply from another reader, by email. (A comment to the post would have been fine - if the issue is one of anonymity, you can post comments without providing a name, email address or website.)

Dear Mr.Monokroussos,

Re Ken Smith's enquiry, you might like to look at problem No.7 by Lepuschütz in the introductory material on More-Movers at the BCPS website

http://www.theproblemist.org/

also problem No.5 on the following page: http://www.matplus.org.yu/MACLEOD.HTM

Best wishes, [NN...the writer can identify himself if he so wishes]

Thanks to the second reader; I hope that helped, Mr. Smith!

I generally mention the Chess Cafe only during the Dvoretsky and Mueller weeks of the month, but there are some articles this week that I'd like to bring to your attention.

First, while it's not so much an article in its own right but a review (permalink here), it's of a book very much worth reading: Jonathan Levitt & David Friedgood's Secrets of Spectacular Chess (available here). Steve Goldberg's review offers a glimpse into the book's contents and he, like GM Jonathan Rowson in the latest issue of New in Chess magazine (2008/4), has only good things to say about it. (Rowson's review, for those who have access to the magazine, provides a fuller picture and even greater enthusiasm for the book.) My own copy just came in the mail (one of the pleasures of coming home is catching up on the chess goodies that arrived while I was away), but I can already recommend the book based on the decade-old first edition. Highly recommended.

Next up, there's Stefan Bücker's opening column, "Fashionable or Ailing" (permalink here). Most of his material is of only passing interest to me, as he's generally supporting extremely unusual lines, often claiming very positive evaluations for the most suspicious-looking variations. Let me be clear that this is not an argument against any of his analyses, but a confession of doubt and suspicion. His work always looks like the product of diligent, patient and persistent work, and for those who are willing to believe him over their lying eyes, there are undoubtedly some jewels to be found.

At any rate, this month Bücker takes a look at a comparatively mainstream opening, the King's Gambit - and the main line of the King's Gambit Accepted, at that! Like the French Defense (from White's point of view), the King's Gambit is one of those openings that Black players often hate to face. This article offers a very good survey of the main line, and as (a) it's fine for Black and (b) the amount of material to master is manageable, I commend it to 1...e5 players (as well as those who play the KG).

Finally, Hans Ree's "Dutch Treat" column celebrates "Magnus Carlsen's Glorious Year" (permalink here). Much of the article recapitulates details "ordinary" readers already know, but there are some interesting and comparatively obscure, historically-based points adduced as well. Ree also offers some commentary, together with a brief presentation of Carlsen's round 1 victory over Vassily Ivanchuk from the recently completed Aerosvit Tournament.

Here.

At long last, I'm back in my usual bunker at its undisclosed location. Blogging will now return to normal.

Eight rounds down, one to go at the 12th North American FIDE Invitational, and three players are still in the running for norms.

Coming into the round, FM Florin Felecan was leading with 5.5/7, needing a point in his last two games for the IM norm. Round 8 looked like an ideal chance to get it done in a single game; after all, he had the white pieces against FM Aleksander Stamnov. It's not that Stamnov is a bad player, but he is one of the lower-rated players and was having a very poor event, tied for last with 2/7. Felecan, meanwhile, had been doing extremely well and had White...so you can guess what happened: Stamnov won. Felecan will have a second chance to acquire the norm tomorrow, if he can defeat FM Jim Dean (languishing with 2/8) with Black.

The other big game for those hunting the elusive IM norm was the FM Albert Chow - FM-elect Marc Arnold tussle. Chow entered the round needing 2/2 for the norm, while Arnold needed 1.5/2. Only one player could conclude the game still in the running, and today that player was Arnold - another success for the black pieces. Arnold will get his second norm with a win or a draw tomorrow against IM-elect Mehmed Pasalic.

The third norm aspirant is Yuanling Yuan, who came in with 2.5/7. Since even Kasparov can't score 4/2, the regular IM norm was off-limits, but with 1.5/2 the WIM norm is possible. She took a big step in the right direction with a win over IM Emory Tate, who very thoughtfully played the Elephant Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5?!/?). At one point it seemed he was ok, but when he rejected the trade of queens his vulnerable king was a big problem. Yuan's concluding attack was well-executed, and if she can draw with Black tomorrow against IM Angelo Young, her mission will be accomplished.

Today's games were very exciting (as I hope you've sensed from the descriptions above), so do check them out on the Monroi site. You can follow the link to the relevant page, starting from the tournament site, here.

From Ken Smith, by email:

I enjoyed catching up on the Dowd - Crusats puzzle you offered recently. For me one of the pleasures of the position was White's ability to threaten a different mating move on each of four successive moves. This makes me wonder if there have been games or puzzle positions that created the opportunity for even more successive different mate threats than the four move sequence given here.

My suspicion is that there are such problems (and if there aren't, they can be composed fairly easily by qualified problemists) - but I really have no idea. Fortunately, there are problemists (like Dowd) who read this blog, and they can probably answer this. If no one replies after a day or two, I'd suggest contacting Tim Krabbé through his great Chess Curiosities website. (If you do wind up contacting him and he responds, please drop me a note with the results.)

It's not meant as a serious theoretical treatise, so if you watch the video, play the line I cover and still lose to Mssrs. Carlsen, Nakamura or Baburin, it's your fault, not mine. That said, I think you'll be entertained by the games presented and might find a useful weapon for blitz and other quick games.

The show's free and can be viewed on demand, but why wait?

The great Cuban world chess champion, Jose Raoul Capablanca, was renowned for his endgame technique, and rightly so. Like every other player, he committed the occasional lapse in the final phase of the game, but overall he gained many, many more half points in the ending than he lost. Indeed, his endgame technique was so good that it helped lead to the sobriquet "The Chess Machine". As developing players, all of us can learn a lot from a careful examination of Capablanca's endgame play, and this week's ChessBase show is offered as a step in that direction.

Our game is from Moscow 1936, a major double round-robin event won by Capablanca ahead of (then-) future world champion Mikhail Botvinnik and a number of other stars including Salo Flohr, former world champion Emanuel Lasker and the still-living Andor Lilienthal. Another participant was the strong Soviet master Ilya Kan, best known today as the founding father of the eponymous variation of the Sicilian Defense (1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 a6). While not in Capablanca's class, Kan was a respectable player in his own right, and managed to defeat the third-placed Flohr 1.5-.5 in the event and split a pair of games with Lasker. He also drew his first game with Capablanca - with Black, no less - and so with White the second time around it would seem he had reasonable chances to split their match.

Nothing about the opening suggested he'd have any difficulties in this regard. The players traded pieces as if they had prearranged a draw and wanted to make it look good for the audience. Yet despite reaching a double rook ending by move 23, the game was not yet drawn. While best play would surely result in a drawn outcome, Capablanca possessed a number of very small advantages. The difficulty for Kan was twofold: first, he was probably psychologically unprepared to fight for a draw, and may have just hoped it would fall into his lap with "normal", "good" moves. Second, there wasn't any way for him to force a draw. Capablanca could do this and that, improving his position on one side of the board, then the other side, and Kan needed to react - sometimes prophylactically, but sometimes with activity of his own. In short, Capablanca's position still had play, and Kan still had enough rope to hang himself.

The game is a model in several respects. "Capa" illustrates how to utilize a small advantage from both the practical and the psychological point of view. Conversely, we can learn from Kan's errors how to better prepare ourselves for a long defense. And concretely, there are various techniques Capablanca uses that we can adopt: play on both wings, using the minority attack in the endgame, the proper timing of pawn breaks, combining horizontal and vertical attacking ideas with rooks, and more. It's a beautiful game by one of chess's all-time greats, and you can watch it, live and for free, on ChessBase's Playchess.com server tomorrow (Wednesday) night at 9 p.m. ET. Directions for watching the show are here.

Hope to see you then!

Round 5 is finishing up as I write this, and it looks topsy-turvy compared to the usual results. Here are the current standings:

1. FM Felecan 4.5
2-3. FMs Arnold, Chow 3.5
4-6. IM Young, IM Kuderinov, IM Tate, FM/IM-elect Pasalic 2.5
8. WFM Yuan 1.5
9-10. FMs Dean, Stamnov 1

Recommended: have a look at Chow's round 5 win over Kuderinov on the monroi site. It's impressive and entertaining, and it's nice to see him performing well after a number of disappointing events.

Tournament site here (includes a link to monroi).

A couple of weeks after Dortmund concludes, the 41st Biel International Chess Festival begins. It runs from July 18 through August 1, and the GM event stars the following players:

Magnus Carlsen (2765)
Evgeny Alekseev (2711)
Etienne Bacrot (2705)
Lenier Dominguez (2695)
Alexander Onischuk (2664)
Yannick Pelletier (2607)

While not quite at the level of a Linares or even Dortmund, it's still a strong tournament. It could also prove historic, as a sufficiently good performance could push Carlsen to #1 on the rating list.

It's not an everyday occurrence when a chess champion is written about in the pages of the major media, at least here in the U.S., but it's even rarer that the player is the author of the published article. Still, blue moons occur, and world champion Viswanathan Anand has written an article for Time Magazine on the history of chess. There are a few little digs at Russian/Soviet chess, enough to provoke a response from Ukranian GM Mikhail Golubev in Chess Today. Here's Golubev:

An article by the world champion Viswanathan Anand is published in Time Magazine. The main message is that chess comes from India. What must be useful to know for many readers - but, still, I (MG) have a feeling that Vishy exaggerates the problem a bit when he writes: "It's easy for Russians to imagine that chess began when they started to play it". Or: "I've heard the ownership of chess being claimed by Russians, Chinese, Ukrainians, Arabs, Iranians, Turks, Spaniards and Greeks".

Well, in the Soviet Union it was absolutely known that chess comes from India. (Almost as known as the fact that Lenin was born in Ulyanovsk, i.e. Ulyanov was born in Simbirsk). It simply coincided with the interests of Soviet propaganda not to hide the truth, which confirmed to Soviet citizens that chess has some international value, and is not just a national game like lapta or gorodki. I remember that once a Soviet chess magazine published an article, the main point of which was that the Persian version also has a right to exist. But one or two such articles in all these years is not much. Regarding Ukraine, I am afraid I do [not] know anyone who claims that chess originated from our country. There should be no more such guys than such people who believe that Ukraine is a fatherland of elephants.

Ex-world champion Vladimir Kramnik hasn't played in the current rating period, but will re-emerge next weekend in the Sparkassen Chess Meeting in Dortmund, Germany, a tournament in which he has had incredible success. Here are the participants:

Kramnik RUS 2788
Mamedyarov AZE 2752
Leko HUN 2741
Ivanchuk UKR 2740
van Wely NED 2676
Nepomniachtchi RUS 2634
Naiditsch GER 2623
Gustafsson GER 2603

It's a very strong event (especially with Ivanchuk's "live" rating of 2790.8, making him the de facto top seed) but it's a little weaker than some of the annual super-tournaments thanks to their qualifiers & locals policy. Each year the winner of the Aeroflot Open is automatically invited (and once that qualifier - Viorel Bologan - won), along with a German entrant or two (and likewse, the local "tourist" has had the bad manners to forget his place and win the whole thing, as Naiditsch did a few years ago). Nevertheless, the presence of a mixed field of supertournament regulars along with strong but not elite GMs getting a big break usually keeps the tournament livelier than it would be if it were a Linares clone.

Play starts Saturday or Sunday (events are typically given as running from date X through Y, but usually date X is reserved for various opening ceremonies, drawing lots, etc., with actual play starting on day X + 1), and we'll follow the event closely on this blog.

Next weekend, in/near Chicago:

The US G/60 and US G/30 will be held on June 28 and June 29 respectively.

Both events will be held at the Holiday Inn Chicago Northshore Hotel and Convention Center in Skokie, IL.

For event specifics and online registration visit the tournament websites at:

http://www.nachess.org/g60 (register for the G/60 or the Combined G/60 & G/30)

http://www.nachess.org/g30 (register for only the G/30)

It's time for the latest installment of organizer Sevan Muradian'a series of IM norm tournaments; the 12th, to be exact. As usual, it takes place at IM Angelo Young's Touch Move Chess Center (5639 N. Ashland in Chicago) and takes 10 players (usually 3 IMs + 7 norm seekers, but with Pasalic it's really 4 + 6) through a round robin over the next 7 days. (Two games each today and tomorrow, then one a day from Monday through Friday.) Here are the participants:

IM Kirill Kuderinov (KAZ)
IM Angelo Young (PHI)
IM Emory Tate (USA)
IM-elect (FM) Mehmed Pasalic (GER) - gained all 3 IM norms in this tournament series
FM Florin Felecan (USA) - holds 1 IM norm
FM Jim Dean (USA)
FM Aleksander Stamnov (MKD)
FM Albert Chow (USA)
WFM Yuanling Yuan (CAN)
Marc Arnold (USA) - gained 1st IM norm at this event in March 2008

The IM norm standard is 6.5/9; challenging, but it can be done - hopefully I'll demonstrate this myself at some point. The tournament site is here, and the games can be followed live on monroi.com. Weekend round times are 10:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.; weekday rounds start at 6:30 p.m. (that's Chicago's time; add one hour for ET).

The next FIDE list won't come out until July 1, but thanks to Hans Arild Runde's Live Top List, we can keep tabs on the current (if unofficial) ratings of all players over 2700. It's not clear that the just-ended Aerosvit tournament will be rated in time for the July list (probably not, but popular pressure might make it happen), but if all the completed events are rated in time, the current top six looks like this:

1. Anand 2798.5
2. Carlsen 2791.5
3. Ivanchuk 2790.8
4. Kramnik 2788.0
5. Morozevich 2787.9
6. Topalov 2777.0

As the next player is 32.9 points behind, these six clearly constitute the cream of the current crop. And what numbers these are! Is it plausible that all these players are better than Fischer at his peak? (I know Topalov's current rating is lower than Fischer's high, but he has been higher.) Or to move closer to the present day, are they the equal of Kasparov for a reasonable fraction of the Boss's reign? I wouldn't rule out a "yes" answer to either question, though I do expect that there has been some inflation. A definitive answer, if any, will probably have to come from either a player strong enough to make comparisons or from someone sufficiently stats-savvy.

Conjecture, especially from the latter group, is welcome.

As expected, Magnus Carlsen drew his last round game with Sergey Karjakin, putting a close to his most successful tournament yet. Carlsen finished an undefeated 8-3, winning by a point and achieving a 2881 TPR. It looks like the 1969-1975 generation (Anand, Ivanchuk, Kamsky, Kramnik and Topalov) is running out of time, and getting replaced by an upstart born in 1990.

Still, let's not toss them overboard just yet! Indeed, Vassily Ivanchuk continued his run of good form, and after his first-round loss to Carlsen matched him the rest of the way. He defeated Pavel Eljanov in the last round to take clear second (7-4, 2811 TPR); hopefully he will maintain his current high level through the rest of the year.

Other winners today: Volokitin, who avenged an earlier loss on the white side of the Berlin by defeating Alekseev's attempt to use the Wall, and Shirov, who won a lively tactical struggle on the black side of a QGA against the slumping Onischuk.

The Ivanchuk-Eljanov and Onischuk-Shirov games can be replayed here, with my comments.

Final Standings:

1. Carlsen 8 (of 11), 2881 TPR
2. Ivanchuk 7, 2811
3-4. Karjakin (2745), Eljanov (2750) 6
5-7. Volokitin (2714), Jakovenko (2711), Shirov (2709) 5.5
8-10. Alekseev (2675), Svidler (2672), Nisipeanu (2678) 5
11. van Wely 4, 2612
12. Onischuk 3.5, 2583

For the casual readers of this blog, remember that I do two wholly distinct chess audio programs each week. One is on the Fritz/ChessBase/Playchess.com server; that takes place every Wednesday night at 9 p.m. ET. (That's about 2:15 from now, and you can read more about this week's show here, with directions on how to watch it (for free if you watch it live; for a nominal fee later on in the archives) in this post.)

The second weekly program is completely different. No special software is required - it's pretty much covered by a normally functioning web browser like Internet Explorer or Mozilla Firefox. This second show, which is also weekly, can be accessed for free, on-demand, on ChessVideos.tv. This week's show, which features yours truly on the White side of a Najdorf Sicilian, can be accessed here, and to judge from the viewer comments so far it's a show worth watching. Best of all, the ChessVideos' admins write that "[t]he opening of the game is relatively peaceful, but the analysis is a hoot." How can you top that? It's clearly chess tv worth watching.

Here's the quotation, originally given in this post, which was even easier to solve than I had hoped:

Word was getting around about Bobby Fischer. From the first rumors of a talented kid from Brooklyn, he was now appearing regularly at the speed tournaments, and getting progressively better scores. At one point, however, I had beaten him four times in a row, and he cried at least once, revealing the depth of his intensity for the game. But one night at the Marshall Chess Club rapids we played a French Defense and a very peculiar thing happened. In the middle of the game Bobby made a strong move and I suddenly had an almost physical sense of the power emanating from it. And Bobby moved again with the same effect; it was as if he was playing with dynamic rays of force that I had a heightened sensitivity to. It happened once more, and my position was busted, as the coffee house players would say. I never won another game from Bobby, and I wonder if any other players have had this experience while opposing him.

The writer was none other than "Captain" Bill Hook, from his very enjoyable Hooked on Chess: A Memoir (New in Chess 2008), p. 40. The book won't add any points to your rating, but you'll be glad you read it. I'd go further, and call this required reading for non-chess players inclined to write about the game and its aficionados. Hook comes across as a very personable, very human individual, and when he writes about others, even those who might fit the bill for those looking for "weird chess players", he writes about them with (non-condescending) affection and as an equal. An excellent read, especially in contrast with those horrid writers whose imagination is so limited that they feel compelled to repeat for the thousandth time the stories of Rubinstein and Fischer at their worst.

Magnus Carlsen and Pavel Eljanov drew today (against Andrei Volokitin and Sergey Karjakin, respectively), and that means that Carlsen, who leads by a point and a half with one round to play, is the winner of the 2008 Aerosvit tournament. Carlsen's last two games were fairly quick draws, but today he tried for a good long time to break down Volokitin's Orthodox QGD. Surprisingly, perhaps, Volokitin proved the technically superior player today, and enjoyed a nominal advantage by the end of the game. Meanwhile, nothing much happened in Eljanov-Karjakin, and Nisipeanu-Onischuk and Alekseev-Jakovenko were drawn as well.

Two games concluded with a winner, one of which was important for the leaderboard. Vassily Ivanchuk won very quickly when Loek van Wely blundered just out of the opening; that puts the great Ukranian into a tie for second with Eljanov. Alexei Shirov also improved his tournament position with a win over Peter Svidler. It looked like Svidler had good counterplay in the double-rook ending, but it was Shirov who ultimately won the tactical battle. Both games were interesting, and can be replayed with my comments, here.

Standings after Round 10 (of 11):

1. Carlsen 7.5 (he'll have Black vs. Karjakin tomorrow)
2-3. Ivanchuk, Eljanov 6 (they play tomorrow; Ivanchuk will have White)
4. Karjakin 5.5
5-6. Alekseev, Jakovenko 5
7-10. Svidler, Volokitin, Shirov, Nisipeanu 4.5
11-12. Onischuk, van Wely 3.5

While he has been somewhat overshadowed by another youngster (some player from Norway, I believe), Sergey Karjakin's career and developing talent would be the envy of almost any other chessplayer on the planet. He still has the record for being the youngest GM ever, achieving the title at the age of 12 and a half. He was a world championship second at 11 and a World Cup semi-finalist last year at the age of 17. Even now, still only 18 years old, his rating is well into the 2700s. Frightening!

We'll look at one of his comparatively recent performances on this week's show, a 2007 victory over Peter Svidler on the black side of a 6.Be3 Najdorf. Karjakin's play was quite smooth, combining positional and tactical motifs in what proved a decisive attack against Svidler's king. When we look at the game, it will all appear very smooth, but that's a byproduct of Karjakin's skill, not the simplicity of the position. Many of us are likely to have our mindset with an either/or "switch": either positional play or attacking mode. But part of the beauty of this game is the way Karjakin combines the two modes into a harmonious and attractive whole.

Ok, if that's too flowery, then just tune in to see two super-GMs fighting it out in a sharp, popular opening and to see one of them win with brilliant attacking play! The show is free and begins Wednesday night at 9 p.m. ET, and you can find directions for viewing this or any of the archived shows here.

For those unfamiliar with the expression "garbage time", it's used in TV coverage of professional basketball games here in the U.S. when one side has a big lead with lots of time left and the players have to go through the motions for the rest of the game. For the most part, that seems to be the story at Foros thanks to Carlsen's large lead. The past two rounds saw three short draws out of the six games, but today that number went up to four games, none of them making it to move 21.

At least two players failed to get the memo that the tournament was essentially over, however. Nisipeanu defeated Shirov on the white side of a Sveshnikov Sicilian using the trendy 9.Nd5 Be7 10.Bxf6 Bxf6 11.c4 variation, while Eljanov outplayed Volokitin with black in the Berlin Wall. In so doing, Eljanov moved into clear second, but a point and a half behind Carlsen with two rounds to go makes it exceedingly unlikely that he'll find his way to first.

Standings after Round 9:

1. Carlsen 7
2. Eljanov 5.5
3-4. Ivanchuk, Karjakin 5
5-7. Alekseev, Svidler, Jakovenko 4.5
8-9. Nisipeanu, Volokitin 4
10-11. Shirov, van Wely 3.5
12. Onischuk 3

Let's hear it for leftovers!

I've included the decisive games from the Karen Asrian Memorial (Leko's loss to Morozevich and Aronian's win over Adams), along with Carlsen's Dragon victory against Nisipeanu from yesterday's play in Aerosvit. Here's the link - enjoy.

That's not to say that nothing happened today: three of the six games had a winner. Ivanchuk defeated Shirov on the black side of a Gruenfeld, while Alekseev and van Wely used the white pieces to defeat Nisipeanu and Volokitin, respectively.

As for the hero of the event, Magnus Carlsen, he laid an egg today. With White against tailender Alexander Onischuk, Carlsen played an unusual-looking novelty on move 11, but just three moves later Onischuk was able to achieve one of the traditional anti-Catalan breaks. To try to maintain some bind on the position, Carlsen was forced to sacrifice a pawn. His compensation was sufficient but nothing more, and a few moves later he forced a draw by repetition.

The other games were Eljanov-Jakovenko and Svidler-Karjakin, both drawn. Thus with three rounds to go, the standings are:

1. Carlsen 6.5 (of 8)
2-4. Ivanchuk, Karjakin, Eljanov 4.5
5-8. Alekseev, Svidler, Jakovenko, Volokitin 4
9. Shirov 3.5
10-11. Nisipeanu, van Wely 3
12. Onischuk 2.5

Here's a fun one:

Word was getting around about Bobby Fischer. From the first rumors of a talented kid from Brooklyn, he was now appearing regularly at the speed tournaments, and getting progressively better scores. At one point, however, I had beaten him four times in a row, and he cried at least once, revealing the depth of his intensity for the game. But one night at the Marshall Chess Club rapids we played a French Defense and a very peculiar thing happened. In the middle of the game Bobby made a strong move and I suddenly had an almost physical sense of the power emanating from it. And Bobby moved again with the same effect; it was as if he was playing with dynamic rays of force that I had a heightened sensitivity to. It happened once more, and my position was busted, as the coffee house players would say. I never won another game from Bobby, and I wonder if any other players have had this experience while opposing him.

Who said (or rather, wrote) it?

Peter Leko had been undefeated and leading for most of the Karen Asrian Memorial; today, however, he lost the first game of his mini-match with Alexander Morozevich (on the White side of a Byrne Attack Najdorf) and lost. Levon Aronian, also undefeated by half a point behind going into the round, quickly dispatched Michael Adams and thereby leapfrogged into first. As both players drew their second game of the day, the upshot was that Aronian had won the tournament, half a point ahead of Leko and a point ahead of Morozevich and Boris Gelfand. (Ironically, Gelfand had the fewest draws in the tournament - by far! - with just five peaceful outcomes in 14 games.)

Final Standings:

1. Aronian 8.5 (of 14)
2. Leko 8
3-4. Morozevich, Gelfand 7.5
5. Bu Xiangzhi 7
6. Sargissian 6.5
7. Adams 6
8. Akopian 5

Now back to the main event, the Aerosvit tournament in Foros. The big news is rapidly ceasing to be news: Magnus Carlsen won yet again, confidently dispatching Liviu-Dieter Nisipeanu on the black side of a Dragon Sicilian. That gives him 6 out of 7 and a gaudy 3021 TPR, and might also vault him past Anand on the July rating list. (Or would, were the event to be rated in time. The normal FIDE cutoff for a rating list is one month before that list's publication, but they also make exceptions for at least some super-GM events. I remember that a few lists ago, when Anand was going to top the FIDE rating list for the first time ever, some of his fans cried "conspiracy" when such an event initially failed to be included in time; will they say the same thing when it benefits Anand by delaying Carlsen's trip to the summit?)

Back to the event: Dmitry Jakovenko defeated Loek van Wely with the white pieces, while Pavel Eljanov wielded the sable forces to defeat Alexander Onischuk. Meanwhile, three games saw 1.e4 e5 and quick handshakes: Volokitin-Svidler was a Marshall Gambit, Karjakin-Ivanchuk a Petroff and Alekseev-Shirov a Giuoco Piano.

Standings after Round 7:

1. Carlsen 6
2-4. Volokitin, Karjakin, Eljanov 4
5-8. Svidler, Ivanchuk, Shirov, Jakovenko 3.5
9-10. Alekseev, Nisipeanu 3
11-12. van Wely, Onischuk 2

I hope to present a couple of games later today - check back later!

It's a rest day at the Aerosvit tournament, and since the players doubled up the last two days at the Karen Asrian Memorial (to make up for the two day postponement), the schedule is back on track and a single double-round was played. Six of the eight games were drawn, the two exceptions being Adams' win against Gelfand in their first game (with White) and Morozevich's win over Akopian in their second game (characteristically, with Black).

Standings after 12 of 14 rounds (or 6 of 7 double-rounds):

1. Leko 7.5
2. Aronian 7
3. Sargissian 6.5
4-5. Bu Xiangzhi, Morozevich 6
6-7. Adams, Gelfand 5.5
8. Akopian 4

It's game-like enough to suggest a study, but it's actually a directmate problem - White to move and mate in 5:


Steven Dowd & Joaquim Crusats, Probleemblad 2008

I presented it (c/o Mr. Dowd himself) on Wednesday; the solution, if you're ready for it, is here.

Today's round in the Aerosvit tournament was a dud: six draws, half of them 22 moves or fewer. There was one worthwhile game, however, and that was the battle between Alexei Shirov and Sergey Karjakin. Shirov employed Topalov's* 12.Nxf7!? sac in the Anti-Meran Gambit and craziness ensued. Have a look at this position, for instance:



It's Black to move and it looks like he's dead: the bishop on g5 can't be protected, but it has no safe moves, either - moving it off the h4-d8 diagonal allows the devastating 22.Bh4+. So what's Black to do? See if you can figure it out - and then see if you can figure out how White can survive! This game almost made the otherwise lousy round worth it, and you can replay it, with my comments, here.

The relative standings are thus the same as they were yesterday: Magnus Carlsen, with 5/6 and a 2989 TPR, leads by a point and a half over closest pursuers Andrei Volokitin and Sergey Karjakin.

Meanwhile, after several understandably dull and dispirited rounds, there was finally some action at the Karen Asrian Memorial in Yerevan, Armenia; some, but not much, and as if to make up for the liveliness in mini-rounds 8 and 9, three of the four round 10 games were drawn in 19, 20 and 21 moves. Granted that this tournament is a bit unusual on account of Asrian's tragic death, a comparison of this event with Aerosvit is wholly in the latter's favor, and suggests that fans who believe shorter time controls are a panacea are quite mistaken.

Standings after Round 10 (or after the fifth double-round):

1. Leko 6.5
2. Aronian 6
3. Sargissian 5.5
4-5. Bu Xiangzhi, Gelfand 5
6. Morozevich 4.5
7. Adams 4
8. Akopian 3.5


* The move was first played by Topalov, but it was discovered and developed by his second, countryman and emerging super-GM Ivan Cheparinov.

By email, from Robert Coleman:

Hi Dennis, Garry Kasparov is scheduled to appear on the Charlie Rose television program tonight, Friday, June 13th on the PBS network. The show usually appears at 11pm Eastern, 10pm Central, but local affiliates may air the show in a different slot. I thought your other readers might be interested, too. I believe that one can view the episodes after the air date at the Charlie Rose website. Robert

Thank you, Robert! The only thing I'll add is the URL for Rose's website - it's here.

Ok, the last part's a joke. But here is what IM Regan has written on the subject (by e-mail):

ChessBase posted an update earlier this week, prompting people to view the video in slo-mo: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4686. I have done so, and this adds one meaningful observation to the above, about the time when I said hands came into near-contact. According to ChessBase's re-creation of the game---which appears to be correct---these moves were:

37. Rb7 c5 38. Rxb6 a5 39. Ra6 c4

However, Zatonskih's hand playing 38...a5 also pushed White's Rook from b6 back to b5, even touching a sliver of b4. This explains the *forward* motion of Krush's hand to execute what shows on the scoresheet as the sideways move Rb6-a6. This also delays Krush's hand, and as Krush is making the move, Zatonskih's is already hovering over her c-pawn. It is *possible* that Zatonskih touched the pawn (necessitating its move to c4) before Krush finished her move, and *possible* that she began thrusting the pawn forward before Krush released her hand from the Rook on a6. However, on stepping frame-by-frame between the 0:43 and 0:44 marks on ChessBase's cut of the video, I see that in the first frame (two before 0:44) with a definite forward movement of Zatonskih's hand, Krush's hand is already over a6 and is *lifting straight up* thru the next two frames.

In line with points (1)--(4) of my original comment, is there consensus that *Krush* could have claimed a win at move 38 since Zatonskih pressed her clock without fixing the Rook she jostled from b6 to b5/b4? My new summary point is:

(6) At no time did Zatonskih clearly begin making a move on the board before Krush finished executing a move on the board. The moves 39. Ra6 c4 were close, but the video does not prove such a violation. At all other moves it seems clear to me that Zatonskih did wait until Krush had finished her move-on-the-board, in keeping with Braunlich's clarification of legal play. I believe 39. Ra6 c4 is the juncture referred to in Bionic Lime's "second issue", and the main part of what Krush's letter says about Zatonskih's moves with the c-pawn, but I disagree that the video shows it matching Lime's "(A)-(F)" sequence. Overall I see no video contradiction to Tom Braunlich's description and interpretation of the rules.

The slowed-down video also shows how Krush lost the "8-to-3-sec" time advantage: her moves (especially 38.Rxb6) took longer to execute! And I meant to say in my previous comment that "regular rhythm" did not mean the times were equally spaced between the two players---it is more a heartbeat rhythm, ba-bum, ba-bum... In sum I empathize with Irina about there being irregularly-played moves during the scramble (two, one by each player), about her being unable to press her clock the last two moves (for "no-fault" reasons I explained in point (5)), and about the US title having been decided by something that was "not chess", but I find nothing to counter the proper non-intervention by the arbiters, let alone overcoming the need for a protest to have been lodged at the time.

[Kenneth W. Regan, 6/12/08]

As I will remain here in overly sunny Las Vegas through the end of the month, any of my readers in this fine city (or in Henderson [of course!], Boulder City, etc.) have the opportunity to take lessons with me in person over the next two and a half to three weeks. (Those not in the area are also welcome to sign up for lessons, or to have me annotate your games, etc., via the good old internet.) Interested parties should write me via this link.

On Monday I bestowed this position on my readers:



It's White to move and win, but it's not easy! If you think you've figured it out, though, you can confirm your results here.

Let's start with the more serious event (in terms of time control, though probably not in mood), the Aerosvit tournament in Foros. Magnus Carlsen has won again, though the "achievement" was primarily playing out an equal ending for 40 moves and then collecting when Shirov blundered into a quick mate:



It's Black to make his 61st move, and if he retreated his bishop along the b8-h2 diagonal, the position would remain equal. Most moves along the other diagonal are playable though not ideal, too. Unfortunately, Shirov played 61...Bg7?? This might have been an instinctive reaction, putting the bishop where it's protected by the rook (generally speaking, it's a good idea, all things being equal, to have one's pieces protecting each other - it reduces LPDO [Loose Pieces Drop Off] possibilities), but here it's a double whammy. First of all, by not remaining on the b8-h2 diagonal, White can now play 62.Kg3 - and so Carlsen did. Second, by putting the bishop on g7, that square is no longer available to the rook - and that means there's no real defense to the simple threat of 63.Bg6+ Kg5 64.h4+ gxh3 65.f4# (or vice-versa with the pawns).

Here are two other tactically interesting moments from today's round. First, here's a position from the Onischuk-Svidler game; it's White to move.



White's down the exchange, but with active bishops and a passed pawn on c7 it looks like there must be something good there. See if you can find it. Next, a snapshot from Volokitin-Karjakin, again with White to move.



White's up a pawn, but Black has pressure on the f-file and his knight is coming to c5. White would love to play a move like 29.Bd1, threatening to take on b3 and to consolidate with f3, but there's 29...Rxf2 in reply. So what should White do?

The answer to this question and the previous position's riddle, along with the full Carlsen-Shirov game, can be replayed (with comments) here.

Round 5 Results:

Carlsen - Shirov 1-0
Volokitin - Karjakin 1-0
Nisipeanu - van Wely 1-0
Alekseev - Eljanov 1/2-1/2
Jakovenko - Ivanchuk 1/2-1/2
Onischuk - Svidler 0-1

Standings after Round 5:

1. Carlsen 4.5 (3084 TPR!)
2-3. Volokitin, Karjakin 3
4-8. Svidler, Eljanov, Nisipeanu, Ivanchuk, Shirov 2.5
9-10. Alekseev, Jakovenko 2
11-12. Onischuk, van Wely 1.5

As for the Yerevan Chess Giants, this event has now been renamed the Karen Asrian Memorial (and not only for this year, but for subsequent editions of the tournament as well). After a two-day hiatus, it resumed today with four games instead of the usual two. There were a surprisingly large number of draws for a rapid event, but I'm sure that once the players get their minds back into the tournament, the fighting spirit will improve.

Standings after Round 3 (or 6, if you prefer - the rounds consist of two-game mini-matches):

1-4. Sargissian, Morozevich, Aronian, Leko 3.5
5. Adams 3
6-7. Akopian, Gelfand 2.5
8. Bu Xiangzhi 2

Most directmate problems look pretty ridiculous by the standards of OTB realism, but here, brought to you by co-author Steven B. Dowd, is a mate in five problem that looks like it could arise in a real game.


Steven Dowd & Joaquim Crusats, Probleemblad 2008; White to move and mate in 5

The solution will be given on Friday.

At the Aerosvit tournament in Foros, we finally had a relatively lame round. Three games were drawn in just 19 moves (boooooo!), but the other three games just about made up for it. Karjakin defeated Jakovenko in what may now be White's main anti-Petroff weapon, the variation with 5.Nc3. Meanwhile, it seems no round is complete anymore without at least one Semi-Slav, and that was supplied by Alekseev against van Wely. Alekseev employed a comparatively rare line - the Noteboom Variation - but it didn't turn out well; he was soundly beaten by van Wely. Finally, the last game to finish was Eljanov-Carlsen, and a titanic struggle it was (though no icebergs were involved). Eljanov defended for a long time in an ending that started with him having a pair of knights and a pawn against a rook and three pawns. He won one of the pawns, but at a certain point had to give up a knight for another pawn. My suspicion is that he was probably okay at the start of the NNP vs. RPP phase, but when it reached NP vs. RP, it was probably a tablebase loss. It took 82 moves in total, but Carlsen finally managed to win and maintain clear first.

Standings after Round 4:

1. Carlsen 3.5
2. Karjakin 3
3. Shirov 2.5
4-6. Eljanov, Volokitin, Ivanchuk 2
7-12(!). Onischuk, Alekseev, Svidler, Jakovenko, Nisipeanu, van Wely 1.5

We continue our series on the up-and-comers of today with a look at a player who, though still young, isn't a child prodigy. Nevertheless, the rise of Levon Aronian to the upper echelons of world chess has been dramatic the last 2-3 years, and he probably has as good a shot as anyone to become a world champion sometime the next few years.

In support of this claim, we'll look at his win over the current world champion, Viswanathan Anand, from the 2007 Morelia/Linares tournament. This game has been ranked highly in various 2007 game of the year contests, and with very good reason. Aronian developed what had been thought an innocuous opening approach into a strategically dangerous idea, outplayed Anand in the early endgame, and then devised an incredibly deep sacrificial idea where his rook and split passers were more valuable than Black's rook and two minor pieces! Start to finish, it's a great effort by Aronian, and the theoretical significance along with the brilliant combination referred to above make this a game very much worth seeing.

Since watching is free, there's all the more reason to join me this Wednesday night (today, for many of you) at 9 p.m. ET on the playchess.com server. (Further directions are here.) Hope to see you there!

One of the most eventful games I've played in the last month or two was the battle with Aleksander Stamnov from the 11th North American FIDE Invitational in Chicago about three weeks ago. I was faced with an unfamiliar opening but played very well and achieved a significant, probably decisive advantage in the early middlegame. Soon afterwards, however, I slipped up and let him escape, after which I had to scramble to stay alive. Eventually I reached an ending where I had very good drawing chances, then a guaranteed draw, then the better half of the draw...and then won! Crazy chess - but that's how it goes with mere mortals, this side of eternity. My preference, both for myself and as a fan, is for clean victories featuring beautiful combinations or logically consistent positional play, but there's something to be said for a good scrap, too.

So have a look here - it's free, requires no software and is available on demand - and you'll find an exciting game with some very well played moments, a little interesting opening analysis, and some psychological comments that may prove helpful to some of you. My hope is that you'll find it instructive, but even if you don't you're bound to find it entertaining. See for yourselves.

Because of Karen Asrian's sudden and tragic death, resumption of the Giants event in Yerevan will be postponed for a couple of days, and an affiliated rapid event has been canceled.

The other major event, the Aerosvit tournament in Foros, continued today. Just as happened yesterday, four of the six games saw a winner, and in each case it was the player with the white pieces. Shirov had been leading the event, but he lost to Eljanov, and that allowed Carlsen to take clear first with a win over van Wely. Here are the full results from round 3:

Carlsen - van Wely 1-0
Eljanov - Shirov 1-0
Alekseev - Svidler 1-0
Jakovenko - Volokitin 1-0
Onischuk - Karjakin 1/2-1/2
Nisipeanu - Ivanchuk 1/2-1/2

Standings after Round 3:

1. Carlsen 2.5
2-4. Eljanov, Karjakin, Shirov 2
5-8. Ivanchuk, Alekseev, Jakovenko, Volokitin 1.5
9-11. Svidler, Onischuk, Nisipeanu 1
12. van Wely .5

Carlsen-van Wely and Eljanov-Shirov can be replayed here, with my (light) comments.

Probably not, but it's down there. I'm referring to the pointless so-called thriller called "The Strangers", which my dad and I had the misfortune to see a few hours ago. (The other choices were either unattractive, already seen or not starting at a convenient time.) The movie was lousy in concept, lousy in execution, and makes one feel morally polluted from having seen it. Save your time, money and moral/emotional/spiritual equilibrium and take a pass on it.

Ok, back to chess.

Right now I'm at the home of a friend, and included in his small chess collection (he doesn't play the game, so the presence of any chess literature is surprising) is a book I had never heard of and that really isn't a chess book: The Chessmen of Mars (1922), by Edgar Rice Burroughs (best known as the author of the "Tarzan" volumes). Here's the copy on the back cover:

Human chessmen who must fight to the death at their masters' command - such is but one of the many thrills that await the reader in this terrific tale of adventure and discovery in the lost cities of Barsoom - the Mars of Edgar Rice Burroughs!

Gahan* of Gathol pits his sword against heads without bodies and bodies without heads, against a fiendish monarch, and against the terrors of a forbidden city - with his reward the hand of a captive maiden, Tara, the Warlord's daughter.

THE CHESSMEN OF MARS is a science-fiction classic by the author of TARZAN OF THE APES.

Gosh.

Readers, have any of you read this? If so, how is it - worth reading?

* Aha, so now I understand GM Babakuli Annakov's handle on ICC.

"Dvoretsky" refers to the (rightly) famous trainer and author, Mark Dvoretsky, and the adjectival phrase "Dvoretsky-simple" refers to something that's presented as a sort of warm-up exercise in his books or articles, but would be considered a real workout in almost any other publication. For example, take the following position:



This is the very first exercise in the book Secrets of Endgame Technique (co-authored with Artur Yusupov ["Jussupow" for those who want to look him up in ChessBases databases]), recently reissued in a corrected and expanded edition by Edition Olms in their "Progress in Chess" series. If you're over 2000 and have a work ethic, get the book!

Anyway, back to the problem: it's White to move and win, and if you can solve this quickly you should definitely give yourself a pat on the back. If you can't, don't feel bad - but keep trying. It took me quite a while to get it, but when I finally did, the satisfaction of doing so made it worthwhile. The answer will be posted by Thursday.

It's not quite as convenient to post games when I'm on the road, but it can be done! So here are a couple for your entertainment and/or instruction. Both are from the National Open; the first is the donnybrook between GMs Gata Kamsky and Mark Paragua, and the second is my game against Carl Haessler (presented mainly because it's the only really consistent game I played in this tournament). Both are entertaining, and even have a slight resemblance in that Bxh7/Bxa7 led to real tactical problems for White in both games. Enjoy.

As reported on ChessBase and noted by several readers of this blog, I won Edward Winter's ChessBase contest, receiving as my prize a signed and personally dedicated copy of Viswanathan Anand's My Best Games of Chess. Cooooooool.

Let's start with the big winners of the 2008 National Open. Going into the last round, Gata Kamsky and Josh Friedel shared the lead with 4.5/5 and were paired. They played a long, tough game that was eventually drawn, and they were caught by four other players: Laurent Fressinet, Tigran Petrosian, Atanas Kolev and Ben Finegold. (The latter's achievement was especially impressive, as he was completely lost in round 1 to Jerry Hanken and seemed to be in trouble in round 3, too, if I remember right. Despite all this, he righted the ship in time for a big finish.) Three players were another half a point back (Erenburg, Khachiyan and Robson), and then there was a group of 14 more money winners with 4/6.

That's where I would have been if I had won my last round game, but despite having a very comfortable edge, I allowed my opponent to utilize a nice tactical resource to solve all his problems. Rounds 3, 4 and 6 were all a little disappointing, as in each case I had real pressure but was unable to convert it into something substantial. I'm not sure how "guilty" I am for the draw in round 3, but in rounds 4 and 6 the errors were clear and unfortunately irrevocable. On the other hand, my win in round 5 was a decent achievement: good opening play, a middlegame characterized by the successful implementation of my own strategic plans while thwarting my opponent's attacking ambitions, followed at last by some nice if relatively simple tactics at the end. (At least that's how it seemed to me at the time; perhaps a closer look will suggest that it wasn't quite as clean as I thought!)

Overall my openings were quite successful (except against Akobian), but my technique wasn't up to snuff. So, there's my main project until the next tournament!

The big chess news in Yerevan was the death of Karen Asrian, but after a moment of silence on his behalf the Chess Giants rapid tournament began. It's an eight-player event with a round a day, but each round consists of two games against the same opponent (each player gets one White, of course). The event did not get off to a great start, as all the games featuring Armenians were almost immediately drawn (perhaps because of their personal grief over the loss of their friend, colleague and teammate). Here were the results:

Morozevich - Gelfand 1.5-.5 (Both games, especially the second one, which was drawn, were very exciting. Morozevich won the first one after a humongous Gelfand blunder.)
Leko - Bu Xiangzhi 1.5-.5
Aronian - Akopian 1-1
Adams - Sargissian 1-1

Meanwhile, in the Aerosvit tournament in Foros, two rounds have been completed. Here are the results so far:

Round 1:
Carlsen - Ivanchuk 1-0 (The big game of the round)
Onischuk - Jakovenko 1/2-1/2
Eljanov - Svidler 1/2-1/2
Alekseev - Karjakin 1/2-1/2
Nisipeanu - Volokitin 1/2-1/2
van Wely - Shirov 0-1

Round 2:
Shirov - Jakovenko 1-0
Karjakin - Nisipeanu 1-0
Volokitin - Onischuk 1-0
Svidler - Carlsen 1/2-1/2
Ivanchuk - Alekseev 1-0
van Wely - Eljanov 1/2-1/2

Standings after Round 2:
1. Shirov 2
2-4. Carlsen, Volokitin, Karjakin 1.5
5-7. Svidler, Eljanov, Ivanchuk 1
8-12. Alekseev, Nisipeanu, van Wely, Jakovenko, Onischuk .5

Karen Asrian was a strong Armenian grandmaster who died today, apparently of a heart attack while driving his car. A great pity for his friends and loved ones, and for the Armenian chess community as well.

More info here, here and here.

With the tournament over, I'm too tired to blog right now. More accurately, I'm too tired to present anything substantial, but after a good night's sleep and meeting the other obligations of life we'll resume normal operations here at The Chess Mind. Stay tuned.

I've already mentioned the Aerosvit tournament in Foros and given the lineup, but what needs to be corrected is the day for the start of play. The event begins today, in the sense that various ceremonial activities will occur, but play begins on Sunday.

Also starting tomorrow, in the Armenian capital, is an even stronger event, the Yerevan Chess Giants. Here's the lineup for this second monster event:

Alexander Morozevich 2774
Levon Aronian 2763
Peter Leko 2741
Michael Adams 2729
Boris Gelfand 2723
Bu Xiangzhi 2708
Vladimir Akopian 2673
Gabriel Sargissian 2643

Good times in the chess world!

I'm not sure how good the online coverage is, and am too tired right now to look. If my games are available on the tournament website, let me know and I'll fill out the comments a bit. For now, just a quick report and then off to bed.

In round 1 I played Ruth Haring (2018 USCF/2120 FIDE), at one time one of the strongest female players in the country but now pretty inactive. Despite playing Black, I was quickly