The Chess Mind

Here's the position, again:


Wotawa 1963; White to move and draw

Were you able to solve it? White cannot allow Black to queen, so he must take the pawn. But which way? To figure that out, we must first figure out what Black is up to. After all, Black is not exactly promoting anything on the kingside, while a 4-0 queenside majority is normally enough to force a queen (and then some). We then notice that White's king is rather constrained, and a move like ...f6+ or ...h6+ puts it on the edge of the board, awaiting a cruel fate.

The problem with ...f6+ is that after Kh5, it will be impossible to mate with ...g6. That's because White will have Kh6, and Black can't put his king on g7 while his pawn remains there. So now we can work out the threat: Black will play ...h6+, scoot his king to h7, and play ...g6#. Note: even a White queen, with the move after ...Kh7, will generally be powerless against this idea. In fact, there's only one promotion square for a new queen that will allow a white queen to cope with this possibility.

If you hadn't worked it out before the hints, those will probably get you most if not all of the way there. But if not, that's okay too. You can find the solution here.

Well, it's at least relatively easy. (But not trivially easy. Black has a threat!)


Wotawa 1963; White to move and draw.

The solution will be given tomorrow.

Rather than allowing the previous post to have comments, it seemed a better idea to reserve this post for that purpose. So have a look there to see the problem, and then offer your solutions here.

Visiting my friend Alex Herrera's correspondence chess website, I came across this position:


(His diagram and arrow.)

It's from the game Walters-Herrera, USCCC18, and of it Alex writes "Draw". Does this mean that the position is a draw (objectively) or that it wound up drawn, or both? Was 1.Kxf6 played, or should it be played, or is it White's threat but with Black to move? I have answers to some but not all of these questions, but for the sake of simplicity, let's set things up this way:

Suppose it's White to move. What should he do, and what's the right result? Work it out, but save your answers for a second post, so that those who come across this post later don't have the solution spoiled for them. I'll offer my thoughts later - if necessary. (If my talented and industrious readers work it out themselves, all that will be left for me is to say yea and amen.)

For those of you waiting for my announcements to check them out, you get a two-fer. Last week's show was posted after I had decided to take the week off from blogging, and now that I've resumed the new show is up as well. So:

(1) Last week's show: Part 6 on the Super-Fast Najdorf. This marks the end of the series (I can hear both the cheers and boos), and covers the variations starting with 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.g4. This includes some of the sharpest chess known to mankind, and unless you're already thoroughly familiar with the B99 systems I highly recommend checking it out. Even if you never play them, you'll find the analysis most entertaining.

(2) This week's show: Viewer Questions, Episode 8. As usual with the viewer question shows, it's a bit of a grab bag, with some chess and some training advice. You might not find everything interesting, but since you'll probably find something you can use it's worth a look.

This is especially the case given that the shows are free (though you will need to register [also for free]) to watch, at least for the next month or so. (After that they go to the archives, where they can be accessed, along with the other two years' worth of my shows, with a premium membership.)

The Dortmund Sparkassen Chess Meeting is one of the traditional super-events on the yearly calendar, and the one where ex-world champion Vladimir Kramnik has had some of his greatest tournament successes. He has won this tournament eight times since 1995, and he's in it this year as well. Here are the participants, together with their Live Top List ratings:

Magnus Carlsen 2772.4
Dmitry Jakovenko 2759.5
Vladimir Kramnik 2759
Peter Leko (the defending champion) 2755.9
Etienne Bacrot (qualified by winning Aeroflot) 2721
Arkadij Naiditsch 2700 (according to FIDE, but not the LTL - he will apparently drop below that when the new ratings come out on Wednesday)

It's a double-round robin running through the 12th of July, with a single rest day at the halfway point (July 7). Here are the round 1 pairings (thanks to Chessdom):

Leko - Kramnik
Carlsen - Jakovenko
Naiditsch - Bacrot

Predictions?

Easy go, easy come.

Vassily Ivanchuk's string of poor results in tournaments with a "classical" time control came to a convincing conclusion this past week when he won the King's Tournament in Bazna, Romania. Not only did he go undefeated (as did Boris Gelfand and Teimour Radjabov), he finished with an impressive 2874 TPR and his 7-3 score won the super-tournament by a full point. Alexei Shirov also bounced back from a (very) bad tournament by tying for third (at 5½, equal with Radjabov and half a point behind Gelfand), so the "old" guys aren't out of the picture yet by any means. (And that's a relief to those of us who aren't in our teens and twenties!)

Final Standings:

1. Ivanchuk 7
2. Gelfand 6
3-4. Radjabov, Shirov 5½
5-6. Kamsky, Nisipeanu 3

The next big event is Dortmund, which I'll cover more thoroughly in my next post.

Here.

The norm event wasn't an unmitigated disaster, but it wasn't exactly a smashing success, either. So while I'll do my best to learn the lessons of the tournament, I'm going to move on to other topics on the blog. Thanks to everyone who wrote in with their wishes, and we now resume normal blogging.

I'm preparing for another IM norm event, which starts tomorrow, so other than blurbing this week's ChessVideos show whenever they post it, there won't be much (any?) action here until the event ends Friday the 26th and I return to "civilian" life.

Wish me luck, feel free to send any killer novelties you've got stored up, and if you're feeling generous and want to help defray my expenses or my relative absence makes you overcome with gratitude for my blogging, please visit the donation site on the upper right. :) See you in a week or so!

In a couple of recent games at the Maia Chiburdanidze Cup, the talented young Slovenian IM Anna Muzychuk had a couple of textbook tactical finishes.


(Source: Wikipedia, Photo: Paweł Suwarski)

In the first, she was the victim:


Dzagnidze-Muzychuk, Maia Chiburdanidze Cup 2009, Round 6: White to move and win.

And in the second, she got to be the hero:


Muzychuk-Galojan, Maia Chiburdanidze Cup 2009, Round 8: White to move and win.

The solutions can be found here.

Robert Hübner*.

The quotation, once again, was this:

There are innumerable examples with this line [the Zaitsev Variation of the Ruy Lopez]; everyone knows the famous games from the world championship matches between Kasparov and Karpov.

It cannot be within the scope of these brief notes to discuss the merits of the main line in detail. The general statement must suffice that in introducing a sharp, clear-cut idea of counterplay (f7-f5 destroying white's centre) it seems to be more promising than the continuation chosen by...."

For those of you familiar with Hübner's work, you've probably got a pretty good idea of what's coming next. For those who aren't, you're probably wondering why I'd bother with such a pedestrian quote. OK, it's useful for someone unfamiliar with the Zaitsev Ruy to know that it featured in some extraordinary Kasparov-Karpov games and to know that ...f7-f5 is an important idea for Black in its main line, but really! - Is it worth bothering about that as a special quotation?

The answer is that it's not. My real interest in the quotation is the first sentence of the second paragraph: "It cannot be within the scope of these brief notes to discuss the merits of the main line in detail." Even less interesting, you might be saying to yourself. (Hold your horses, impatient reader.) The reason why this is amusing has to do with Hübner's work as an annotator, which is oh, shall we say, somewhat thorough. The book from which this quotation was found is called Twenty-five Annotated Games; and now here's a question: how long would you guess the book is? There are some authors who could finish the job in about 50-60 pages, and many more would reasonably call it a day at about 100-110 pages.

Not our Grandmaster Hübner - not by a long shot! Hübner, who was for a couple of decades among the world's strongest players (and no slouch now with a 2595 rating, despite a second career as a papyrologist, complete with Ph.D.), is legendary for his persistence in and enthusiasm for analysis, and the book comprises 416 pages. Nine of those pages are dedicated to material other than the games, and there are generally a couple of diagrams on every page. Even so, you're definitely getting your money's worth out of this volume.

Now let's turn to the game from which the notes were taken. That was game 22, Hübner-Portisch, from the first round of the 1981 super-tournament in Tilburg. The first 15 moves pass without comment, and then there are several short paragraphs, including the ones reproduced above. So far, "brief notes" looks plausible. As it turns out, though, Hübner devotes 52 pages to this game. The high point comes on White's 32nd move, when he spends 13 pages considering alternatives. Hübner was quite possibly pulling the reader's leg when he spoke of "brief notes", but if not I tremble to think what he'd consider a properly filled-out commentary!

Lest anyone think that the foregoing is intended dismissively, I assure you that it's not. His thoroughness is admirable (especially considering that the product was his, not Frybka's - the book was published in 1996), and while it's as obvious as almost anything in this world that very few will plow through the whole thing, the games are fascinating in their own right, and even skimming the analysis is valuable for instruction, insight, entertainment and training.

And fans of my ChessVideos presentations might benefit too: maybe I'll do a series called "The Super-Fast Hübner", where each part will cover a page of his analysis. Imagine the possibilities: we could get through the Hübner-Portisch game in just one year!

*Source: Wikipedia, Photo: Stefan64

One for the road:

Bazna: Good and/or exciting chess continues to be played at this super-tournament, and after the first cycle Boris Gelfand and Vassily Ivanchuk lead with 3½/5. In round 5, Gelfand defeated Alexei Shirov (who had been a co-leader) with the Black pieces in yet another great battle between these two elite grandmasters. Meanwhile, Ivanchuk made his way to the tie when he won - also with Black - after Kamsky needlessly "contributed" a rook to the Vassily Ivanchuk Rating Fund.

Ruy Lopez: With one round to go, Ivan Cheparinov enjoys a half-point lead over Mickey Adams. Happily for friends of dramatic finishes, they play in the last round, though given Adams' solid style and Cheparinov's getting the white pieces, it'll be hard to overturn the standings.

Capablanca Memorial: Leinier (or "Lenier", if you want to find his games in the databases) Dominguez has clinched clear first and finished his games, though everyone else (except Lazaro Bruzon) has a round remaining. I'm predicting draws...

Browsing a new games collection, I came across the following comment:

There are innumerable examples with this line [the Zaitsev Variation of the Ruy Lopez]; everyone knows the famous games from the world championship matches between Kasparov and Karpov.

It cannot be within the scope of these brief notes to discuss the merits of the main line in detail. The general statement must suffice that in introducing a sharp, clear-cut idea of counterplay (f7-f5 destroying white's centre) it seems to be more promising than the continuation chosen by...."

Who said it, and why is the comment noteworthy? I'll give the answer and explanation tomorrow. (Meanwhile, back to preparing for tonight's ChessBase show.)

More about it here. It airs in the U.S. at 9 p.m. ET, which means I'll have to miss (or record) it. The rest of you might certainly enjoy it though.

HT: Brian Karen

**UPDATE*

The times seem to vary from place to place, so check your local listings. Here, for instance, it starts at 8 p.m. ET; YMMV.

Were he still alive, Tigran Vartanovich Petrosian, the 10th World Chess Champion, would be 80 years old today. In a cruel irony, it was exactly 40 years ago - on Petrosian's 40th birthday, that he lost his title to Boris Spassky. A game from that match might be the topic of another week's lecture, but tonight we will of course look at a more successful performance by the enigmatic Armenian.



Petrosian was nicknamed "the boa constrictor" for the remarkable way in which he could suffocate even the greatest opponents over the chessboard. In an incredible number of games, Petrosian would gain a space advantage, eliminate the opponent's dynamic possibilities, and then squeeze the dried bones of the enemy position until they collapsed. Indeed, this style gave him a twofold gift. The first was his tremendous ability, and he'd have had that aside from any questions of style. But because his way of playing was so unusual, it posed a further problem for his opponents. They just couldn't figure out how to play against him! Both Botvinnik in 1963 and Spassky in 1966 complained about this after losing world championship matches to him, and it was only in 1969 that Spassky finally managed to get enough of a handle to overcome him and take the title.

Yet for six years, Petrosian was the champion, and was the first player since Alekhine in 1934 to win a title match as champion. Rather than looking at the 1966 match, however, we'll look at his first win in the 1963 match, against Botvinnik. He had lost the first game of the match, in part due to nervousness, but by game five he had himself under control. As the game left the opening and went almost immediately to an ending, Petrosian didn't seem to have very much. No one would have been surprised by a quick draw - but that's not how things worked out. As we'll see, Petrosian went on to win a masterpiece, one characteristic of his style. As you'll see, it was not only a beautiful and instructive game, but a humorous one as well - and I think that too is characteristic of his style. But see for yourself, and let me know if you agree.

But how to watch? I'm glad you asked, and am pleased to report that it's quite simple. Log on to the Playchess server tonight (Wednesday night at 9 p.m. ET, which is equivalent to 3 a.m. CET for those of you on the other side of the pond), go to the Broadcast room, and either look for Petrosian-Botvinnik under the Games tab or "Initiative" (that's me) under the Player tab. The show is free; hope to see you there!

In the King's Tournament in Bazna, Romania, the Nisipeanu-Kamsky "clash" wasn't - they agreed to a draw in 16 very unenterprising moves, playing a game I was capable of when my age was in single digits. Since Kamsky had Black had Nisipeanu was 0-2 coming into the round, however, it's at least understandable if unfortunate for the spectators.

The other games were better, or in the case of Ivanchuk-Gelfand, longer. Gelfand played the Petroff, and while the game went a respectable distance it never looked like anything but a draw. Gelfand was never in any danger on the board, and the spectators were in no danger of getting excited. Still, that's professional chess, and the players gave it a fair shot. No problem.

Radjabov-Shirov, on the other hand, was more lively, featuring various imbalances (bishop pair vs. better structure; bishop pair and initiative vs. the exchange, etc.), so even though it finished in a draw as well, the spectators got value for their time.

As for the Capablanca Memorial in Havana, the great man might be spinning in his grave. All three games were drawn in round 8 (7?), two of them before move 13! Of the 22 games so far in this "event", 18 have been draws, 9 of them in fewer than 21 moves. If all the players have caught ill and are struggling just to make it to the board, then that's one thing. (And maybe that is the case, or perhaps the game scores are often truncated and the players have been more belligerent - does anyone know?) If not, it's a real travesty.

Finally, in the main Ruy Lopez tournament in Zafra, Spain, all four games made it to at least move 45, and two of the four had a winner. Cramling bounced back from yesterday's loss to defeat Perez Candelario, while Caruana continued his climb back up the table by beating Koneru (who lost her second straight game). After four rounds, Cheparinov leads with 3 points, half a point ahead of Adams and Cramling.

From 1950 to 1961 American comedian Groucho Marx hosted a quiz show called "You Bet Your Life" on television. It's pretty slow-paced by today's standards, but at the time it was a big hit. Occasionally the guests had some claim to fame, directly or indirectly, and so it was on this show. American GM Isaac Kashdan participates in the first grouping, along with a woman who is the mother of a famous celebrity (and now in retrospect, the grandmother of still another) - can you guess who it is?

HT: Brian Karen

If you're a Najdorf fan, then this is absolutely your week! After recording the 5b video, I had the opportunity in a local blitz game to try out the theory I had spent the past couple of weeks summarizing. My fiendish opponent didn't realize he was supposed to fall, lemming-like, into my preparation, and I was quickly on my own. The game grew wild almost immediately, and while its theoretical significance is minimal its entertainment value was through the roof. (At least for me!) I think you'll find it exciting and enjoyable as well, and since it's free you might as well have a look - right here.

(Not so keen on the Najdorf? Fear not: I have already recorded part 6, and it's the grand finale of the series.)

It was a heckuva round today in Bazna. OK, Kamsky-Radjabov wasn't as exciting as one might have hoped, but the other two games definitely made up for it. Gelfand won on the white side of a very exciting King's Indian against Nisipeanu, while Shirov and Ivanchuk had a battle royale that finished in a draw. It looks like they're both in good form; if so, a great tournament might be in the offing.

Speaking of offing, the women were offed today in the Ruy Lopez tournament. Despite having White, Cramling sac'ed/lost a pawn in the opening to Adams without seeming to get much in return. Somewhere before it turned purely technical, Adams was able to whip up an attack, and Cramling gave up shortly before getting mated. That put Adams in clear second, behind only Cheparinov, who got there by defeating Humpy Koneru in a long, tough Ruy Lopez. (They don't have to play that opening there, but it's nice when they do!) In the other games, Perez Candelario defeated Larino Nieto in a wild contest, and Caruana got off the schneid with a victory of Granda Zuniga.

Finally, I guess Dominguez is leading the Capablanca Memorial, but I'm not sure. He has 4½/7 in this snoozefest, but everyone else (except Bruzon) has played only 6 games, or has only been reported as playing six games. (Maybe Dominguez played a game out of order because he or Bruzon has to hop over to another tournament right after this one?) Anyway, if Meier wins the game he's missing relative to Dominguez, he'll be tied for first. I'm not sure if any exciting games are happening there, but if something happens worth seeing, please let us all know. The poor transmission, the round 6 weirdness, and the heavy percentage of draws (15 of 19) - many of them short - has sapped my interest.

I might present the Bazna games later tonight, if I have time; otherwise, check out the tournament website - their report for round 1 was very good.

For those who want to take a closer look at the goings-on at the King's Tournament in Bazna, Romania, the website has some nice features. GM Dorian Rogozenko is writing round recaps (round 1's is here) and GM Mihail Suba offers further, deeper analysis of the game of the day (round 1 here). The site also has a couple of webcams for their live coverage, too, so check it out - reward them for covering their tournament the right way!

P.S. Round 2 is underway, and Shirov-Ivanchuk is looking especially entertaining. Here are the moves so far: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Nf6 4.Nc3 Qc7 5.O-O a6 6.Bxc6 dxc6 7.e5 Nd5 8.Ne4 Bg4 9.c4 Nb4 10.d4 O-O-O 11.Nxc5 e6 12.Nxb7.

Here, with varying degrees of comment, are the three games from Bazna, plus Humpy Koneru-Perez Candelaria.

HT: Ben Vinyard

The last classical tournaments for Alexei Shirov and Vassily Ivanchuk were disasters. So, of course, what happens today, in the first round at Bazna? They win, of course - and with Black, no less.

Round 1 Results:
Radjabov - Gelfand ½-½
Kamsky - Shirov 0-1
Nisipeanu - Ivanchuk 0-1

At the Chess Festival named for the clergyman Ruy Lopez, after whom one of the most popular openings of all time has been named, it was ladies' night. After their non-aggression pact yesterday, Pia Cramling and Humpy Koneru won today, and are tied for first with Ivan Cheparinov. Italian/American Fabiano Caruana lost again today, this time to Adams in a long battle.

I hope to present some games later.

Nothing too exciting happened at the Capablanca Memorial (in Havana) today, as all three games were drawn, two of them quickly. That concludes the first cycle of the double-round robin, and Lenier Dominguez leads with an undefeated 3½/5; Georg Meier is his closest pursuer with 3.

The Bazna tournament starts tomorrow (Sunday), but another attractive event started today: the III Ruy Lopez International Chess Festival. After the first round we've already had a major upset: IM David Larino Nieto beat (super-) GM Michael Adams. Larino Nieto is thus in first with Ivan Cheparinov, who defeated Fabiano Caruana (ok, go ahead and keep him...just kidding: send him back!). The other two games were drawn: Cramling-Koneru and Perez Candelario-Granda Zuniga.

Right, it's not yet part 6. Najdorf fans, the end is still a week away! A viewer of the previous show brought up an interesting problem with one of my suggestions, so I decided to take a (much) deeper look at established theory in the relevant sub-variation I was hoping to bypass. The glorious details are all here, awaiting your perusal. The show is free to registered members (and registration is free), and available on-demand for at least another month or so.

Next week, the Najdorf series ends!

Four out of the five last round games were drawn in the Karpov Tournament in Poikovsky, Russia, but all of them were "real" games. Motylev's battle was especially interesting, as he seemed to be in big trouble down the exchange. The game rapidly turned into a race between pawns on opposite sides of the board, and perhaps thanks to his active king Motylev was able to just save the draw, preserving his full-point margin of victory, his undefeated status, and a TPR in the 2900s - 2916, according to the crosstable on TWIC.

That was Bologan-Motylev; Gashimov-Efimenko, Onischuk-Inarkiev, and Shirov-Sutovsky were also drawn. (With the latter, Shirov brought his TPR up to 2469 - just high enough to "make" an IM norm. Hopefully someone we all know can follow suit in a week or two!) The one decisive game was, characteristically, Naiditsch's. Unfortunately for him, he lost with Black to Rublevsky, but he gets credit for only playing one draw in nine rounds.

Next stop for the big guns: Bazna, Romania, starting this weekend.

Final Standings:
1. Motylev 7 (of 9)
2. Gashimov 6
3-4. Sutovsky, Inarkiev 5
5-7. Rublevsky, Bologan, Onischuk 4½
8. Naiditsch 3½
9. Efimenko 3
10. Shirov 2

Good news for the Capablanca Memorial: all of the games are finally available, through this page. Meanwhile, after round 4, what was a three-way tie is now clear first for pre-tournament favorite Lenier Dominguez Perez, who has three points.

And now, time for a game. Shirov-Sutovsky was very lively and theoretically significant too. Let's have a look, here.

We've all heard of people who are ahead of their time. Big deal! Being behind one's time is the bigger trick. Accordingly, I bring you yesterday's news, today. (Sometimes, other aspects of life get in the way of blogging. Sorry.)

1. Poikovsky:

Round 8 was the round of the REALLY LONG GAME, except when it wasn't. The Sutovsky-Onischuk and Efimenko-Shirov pairings found people who were happy to take a day off. God bless 'em. The other six players more than made up for it though. It was funny, actually. I looked at the games on the TWIC page's game replayer, and the one that was on top was Motylev-Gashimov. A hugely important game, too, as they entered the round tied for first - but they didn't end it that way. Motylev won an exciting rook ending in 75 moves, and now leads by a point (over Gashimov alone) by a point heading into the last round.

A long game, I thought to myself, as I loaded the next game on TWIC. This time, Naiditsch-Bologan appeared on the screen, and it went 109 moves! Bologan won - again in a rook ending - and I was amused that I found the previous game a long one. OK, on to game number three: Inarkiev-Rublevsky. Once again, a rook ending, and this time it went 118 moves before Black dragged in the full point. By this time I expected the next game to go 200 moves, but as you already know the last two games were fizzles - 21 and 23-move draws.

The last round is tomorrow...er, today.

2. The Capablanca Memorial:

It's still very early there. With three rounds (of ten) in the book, Meier, Savchenko and Dominguez lead with two points apiece. Strangely, very few of the games are available at this point.

Finally, a reminder that a great event starts this weekend; to wit, the King's Tournament in Bazna, Romania. It's a double round-robin with Radjabov, Ivanchuk, Shirov(!!), Gelfand, Kamsky and Nisipeanu.

The horror continued at the Poikovsky tournament for poor Alexei Shirov, as his loss to Alexander Onischuk dropped him to 1/7 and a 2385 TPR (by comparison, when we bewailed Ivanchuk's recent hemorrhage at the MTel Masters, his TPR was still 2607). Meanwhile, at the top, Motylev's draw and Gashimov's win left them in joint first place with two rounds to go.

Round 7 Results:
Gashimov - Naiditsch 1-0
Motylev - Efimenko ½-½
Onischuk - Shirov 1-0
Bologan - Inarkiev ½-½
Rublevsky - Sutovsky ½-½

Standings after Round 7:
1-2. Gashimov, Motylev 5½
3. Inarkiev 4½
4. Sutovsky 4
5-6. Naiditsch, Onischuk 3½
7. Bologan 3
8. Rublevsky 2½
9. Efimenko 2
10. Shirov 1

Over in Havana, Georg Meier and Boris Savchenko lead the Elite Group of the 39th Capablanca Memorial with 1½/2. The games aren't all available yet, at least not on TWIC, but I'm sure they'll be worth a look once they appear.

Perhaps the recent Chinese Championship was somewhat overshadowed by Leon, Poikovsky and the Leko-Anand rapid match, but it was probably the most intriguing event of them all. In a GM-laden field with three players who have been over 2700 (one of whom, Wang Hao, was having the tournament of a lifetime), it was an untitled teenager [I've heard both 15 and 16 - did he have his birthday during the tournament?] who came from behind and won.

That youngster, Ding Liren, won the event with 8½/11 and a near-2800 TPR, defeating Wang Hao in the penultimate round to put a cap on an incredible tournament. He received a terrible gift in the last round (a forfeit win when his opponent showed up a couple of minutes late), but considering that he was undefeated and beat three of the four highest-rated players in the tournament, his success was no fluke.

On the assumption that this tournament was the first major success of a promising career, it's worth having a first look at his chess. For our show this week, we'll examine the game that decided the championship: his win over Wang Hao. Needing a win (he was 1½ points behind with just two rounds to play!) he didn't go head-hunting, but played healthy positional chess, taking what was offered and making progress a little at a time. It was a fine game, and an excellent example of how to play in such a situation.

To tune in and join in the fun, here's what to do:

(1) Log on to the Playchess server at 9 p.m. ET Wednesday night/3 a.m. CET Thursday morning.
(2) Go to the Broadcast Room.
(3) Select Ding Liren-Wang Hao from the Games tab or double-click on my nickname, Initiative, under the Players tab.
(4) Watch and enjoy!

As someone who has been and will again be a norm aspirant, I find it hard to understand or appreciate the attitude expressed by James Howell in this article. It's one thing to make aspirants earn their norms, quite another to take some sort of special pleasure in preventing others from achieving something - especially when the other person's achievement doesn't diminish yours. But read his article for yourself, offer your own comments, and...just in case you're curious about it, Dolmatov-Howell is here.

After the rest day, the Karpov tournament in Poikovsky resumed, and the players got back to the fighting chess characteristic of the first four rounds. Here were the results:

Round 6:
Inarkiev - Gashimov ½-½
Sutovsky - Bologan 1-0
Naiditsch - Motylev 0-1
Efimenko - Onischuk 0-1
Shirov - Rublevsky ½-½

Standings After Round 6:
1. Motylev 5
2. Gashimov 4½
3. Inarkiev 4
4-5. Sutovsky, Naiditsch 3½
6-7. Onischuk, Bologan 2½
8. Rublevsky 2
9. Efimenko 1½
10. Shirov 1

Another ongoing event is the 39th Capablanca Memorial in Havana, Cuba. Ivanchuk had played the last couple of years, if memory serves, so his absence diminishes the field somewhat. Still, it's not a bad event, with the main tournament including six GMs ranging from 2617 (Bruzon) to 2721 (Dominguez). Play continues through the 18th.

Today, all but one of the events we've been following came to an end.

(1) The Anand-Leko rapid match came to an uneventful conclusion. Anand entered the day needing only a draw to clinch victory, and with White achieved it with great ease. Leko did a little better in the competitively meaningless eighth game, when he had White, but not better enough. That took was a draw, so Anand won 5-3.

(2) The Leon rapid event finished today with an Ivanchuk-Carlsen final. After two uneventful draws, Ivanchuk won the third game against Carlsen and his Dragon, grinding him down in a bishop ending. With a draw, Ivanchuk would win the tournament, but just as he did against Wang Yue, Carlsen rebounded from his loss with a win. It was on to the blitz where things were strange. Carlsen got nothing with White, but with Black missed a win (38...Rxa5!). In the end Ivanchuk held, and it was on the Armageddon finish. Sadly for the internet fans watching live, the relay was completely messed up. The website doesn't give a result for the seventh game, but it does call Carlsen the "ganador", so I guess he won with White in the finale. (When someone gets more details, please let me know.)

(3) Sigeman & Co. Nigel Short won his last game too, winning the short event with an impressive 4½/5 score (2974 TPR), a point and a half ahead of the surprising 15-year-old IM Nils Grandelius. Nyback and I. Sokolov scored 2½, Hillarp Persson 1½, and Berg brought up the rear with a single point.

(4) Finally, the Karpov tournament in Poikovsky, which is the only event not finishing today. On the other hand, it's hard to say they really got started today, either, with three quick draws. Rublevsky-Onischuk was also drawn, but with some effort, and Naiditsch defeated Efimenko to close within half a point of the leaders.

Round 5 Results:
Motylev - Inarkiev ½-½
Gashimov - Sutovsky ½-½
Naiditsch - Efimenko 1-0
Bologan - Shirov ½-½ (after four losses, Shirov needs no apology for the quick draw!)
Rublevsky - Onischuk ½-½

Standings After Round 5:
1-2. Motylev, Gashimov 4
3-4. Inarkiev, Naiditsch 3½
5-6. Sutovsky, Bologan 2½
7-9. Onischuk, Rublevsky, Efimenko 1½
10. Shirov ½

Tomorrow is an official free day.

(1) The Chinese Championship: After what started as a performance for the ages, Wang Hao collapsed at the finish and came in second behind young (16-year-old) Ding Liren. Horribly, Ding Liren's last round opponent wasn't there in time, so he got a free point - an absolutely travesty given the circumstances. Because the tiebreaks favored Ding, Wang Hao how to play for a win at any cost against Liang Chong. That prevented him from forcing a trivial draw at various points in the ending, and eventually led to a last round loss. An exceptional performance by the young champion, the last round absurdity notwithstanding. It's really time for a new FIDE President.

(2) Leko-Anand rapid match: So much for "momentum". Anand had it after day 1, but Leko had no trouble dominating day 2 (though without winning any games), and today Anand took over again. He won with Black in game 5 and was better in game 6 as well, though Leko held. Anand leads 4-2 with tomorrow's two games to go. (I don't recall if they play all eight games or if they'll stop if wins or draws game 7.)

(3) Poikovsky, Round 4: Yet another wonderfully aggressive round, with only one draw in five games. (Overall, only six of the tournament's 20 games have been drawn!) Gashimov and Motylev lead, while Mr. Fire on Board is turning into a pile of ashes.

Round 4 Results:
Inarkiev - Naiditsch 1-0
Sutovsky - Motylev 0-1
Efimenko - Rublevsky 1-0
Onischuk - Bologan ½-½
Shirov - Gashimov 0-1

Standings after Round 4:
1-2. Gashimov, Motylev 3½
3. Inarkiev 3
4. Naiditsch 2½
5-6. Sutovsky, Bologan 2
7. Efimenko 1½
8-9. Onischuk, Rublevsky 1
10. Shirov 0

(4) Sigeman & Co.: Short was finally held to a draw (by Hillarp Persson), but it's still good enough for a one-point lead with one round to go. He has 3½/4, while I. Sokolov (who drew with Nyback) and 15-year-old Grandelius (who beat Berg) are on 2½.

(5) Leon Rapid: Last, because it's still going, is the Carlsen-Wang Yue semi-final in Leon. Game 1 was drawn, Wang Yue won game 2 and Carlsen responded with an easy win in game 3.Game 4 is ongoing; I'll update this paragraph of the post when the match is over.

UPDATE: Game 4 was drawn, and it was on to the blitz. Wang Yue held with Black pretty easily, but in his white game obtained a nice advantage in a Catalan. Unfortunately for him, he completely lost the thread and then blundered a pawn. Carlsen converted and won, and faces Ivanchuk in the final tomorrow.

It's always noteworthy when a player of Alexei Shirov's caliber loses in just 24 moves, and so I present the game (here). It has to be said, though, that the result is largely to the credit (or rather, blame) of Shirov's terrible play. I would not be surprised if in an interview someday he refers to this game as one of the worst (if not the worst) in his entire adult career.

(1) As I warned my readers, Wang Hao's ultimate success at the Chinese Championship was not yet assured, as he still had to play Ding Liren. He did in round 10, the penultimate round, and he lost. He still enjoys a half-point lead with one round to go and a favorable pairing (he'll have White against tailender; Ding Liren will have Black against a higher-rated opponent who is performing better than Wang Hao's opponent), but anything could happen.

A pre-update: Hmmmmmmmmm. The last round is underway, and it says that Liren won, and yet no moves have been made. Is this another example of the horrible new FIDE rule about the players being at the board on time or getting forfeited? It's atrocious if a national championship gets settled that way. Meanwhile, Wang Hao has White in what me might call the Gajewski Chigorin in the Ruy Lopez (Closed Ruy, main line with 9.h3, then 9...Na5 10.Bc2 d5!?).

(2) Next up, the rapid event in Leon, which started yesterday (Friday). Ivanchuk won the first game of his match with Morozevich and drew the next three, securing match victory and a place in the final against the winner of today's Carlsen-Wang Yue match. It's only rapid chess, but it's nice to see Ivanchuk playing well yet again.

(3) Third, the Karpov Tournament in Poikovsky. For the third straight day, the play was very aggressive and there were not only plenty of decisive games but miniatures as well. And another feature repeated for the third straight day was Shirov losing. Ouch - and today the disaster took but 24 moves.

Round 3 Results:
Gashimov - Onischuk 1-0
Naiditsch - Sutovsky ½-½ (in 12 moves: booooooooooooo)
Motylev - Shirov 1-0
Inarkiev - Efimenko 1-0
Bologan - Rublevsky ½-½

Standings after Round 3:
1-3. Gashimov, Naiditsch, Motylev 2½
4-5. Sutovsky, Inarkiev 2
6. Bologan 1½
7. Rublevsky 1
8-9. Onischuk, Efimenko ½
10. Shirov 0

(4) Next up, Sigeman & Co. Short won again, defeating 15-year old IM Grandelius to cement his lead with a 3-0 score. I. Sokolov defeated Berg to jump into second at 2-1, and Hillarp Persson drew Nyback in the remaining game.

(5) Finally, the players had the day off in the Leko-Anand rapid match, but it resumes today.

We're almost there. Almost, but not quite! We have reached the position after 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.f4 Be7, and in this week's presentation we look at the following variations:

(1) 8.Qf3 h6 9.Bh4 g5!?

(2) 8.Qf3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 and now:

(2a) 10.Qg3
(2b) 10.Be2
(2c) 10.Bd3

The biggie, 10.g4, will be the subject of next week's show - the grand finale of our series on the Sicilian in general and the Najdorf in particular.

In the meantime, there's plenty of (entertaining) content in this week's show (right here), and it's available free and on demand for at least the next month or so. Enjoy!

If you're interested in the Sokolsky/Orangutan/Polish (1.b4) and like books with encyclopedia-style coverage, the new Russell Enterprises offering 1.b4: Theory & Practice of the Sokolsky Opening by FM Jerzy Konikowski and Marek Soszynski is the thing for you. I recall many reviews of the Lapshun and Conticello book on the same opening receiving serious criticism for their comparatively thin coverage; this cannot be said of the present volume. In fact, I think there is too much information here.

Sometimes we think the point of an opening book is to acquire information. That's true, but only up to a point. A good database will give us loads of information, but if the games aren't annotated and we don't know how to weight the information that's there, it presents the opposite problem. Now instead of lacking information, we're drowning in it. Thefore, the main reasons to buy an opening book are to get rid of the excess information we get in a database and to learn what ideas, move orders and plans are important. It's not to know or have access to every single idea in every single variation of an opening or line. As this work is much more like a print database than a typical opening book, the reader will have to sift through a colossal amount of material to develop a repertoire, and the strategic advice is comparatively sparse.

Bottom line: Konikowski and Sosynski have put in an incredible amount of effort compiling the material and including their own analysis. This includes a great deal of material from Sokolsky himself, which is quite valuable to English readers lacking access to the founding father's works. That's to K & S's credit. Unfortunately, the product is still in too raw a form for all but devoted fans of 1.b4. If you're a serious 1.b4 player, then it's a must-buy based on its thoroughness. If you're looking for an intro, however, it's a lot less useful.

The book is available here.

First of all, here are the semi-final pairings for Leon: Ivanchuk-Morozevich is the match for today, and then Carlsen-Wang Yue on Saturday. The winner of each match plays in the final on Sunday. (A summary of the tournament format can be found here.)

Next, Chess Today reports of yet another strong tournament in the near future. It's the King's Tournament (Turneul Regilor) in Bazna, Romania from June 14-25, 2009. It's apparently a double round-robin with Radjabov, Ivanchuk (of course), Shirov, Gelfand, Kamsky and Nisipeanu.

Shirov-Naiditsch and Sutovsky-Inarkiev, here.

Here's the quick summary of yesterday's action:

(1) Chinese Championship: Wang Hao won again, while Ding Liren "only" drew. With two rounds to go, here are the leading standings:

1. Wang Hao 8 (out of 9, with a 2950 TPR!)
2. Ding Liren 6½
3-4. Bu Xiangzhi, Zhou Weiqi 5½

As Wang and Ding still have to play, the event is far from over.

(2) The Leko-Anand rapid match: There were two draws today, which makes the overall score 2½-1½ in Anand's favor. The trend favored Leko, though, as he drew very easily with Black in game 3 and pushed pretty hard in game 4. Tomorrow is a rest day, and they'll resume on Saturday.

(3) The Karpov tournament in Poikovsky:

Round 2 Results:
Sutovsky - Inarkiev 1-0
Efimenko - Bologan 0-1
Onischuk - Motylev ½-½
Rublevsky - Gashimov ½-½
Shirov - Naiditsch 0-1

It's bad news for Shirov, but there's still time for him to recover. And so far it's very good news for Naiditsch, a talented player who hasn't had a really prominent success since winning Dortmund back in 2005.

Standings after Round 2:
1. Naiditsch 2
2-4. Gashimov, Sutovsky, Motylev 1½
5-6. Bologan, Inarkiev 1
7-9. Efimenko, Onischuk, Rublevsky ½-½
10. Shirov 0

(4) Sigeman & Co.: There were no draws in round 2: Short beat Nyback with Black, and Grandelius and Berg defeated I. Sokolov and Hillarp Persson, respectively. Short leads with 2/2, half a point ahead of IM(!) Grandelius.

I'll present a couple of Poikovsky games in a later post.

A couple of days ago, I presented this position



from a game between reader Tomislav Damjanovic and ChessMaster personality "Buck". It's White to move, and while there's more than one good move here, it seems to me that one continuation - the one White found and played - is significantly better than the others. Did you find the solution? The answer is here.

First the story from the Chinese Championship, which is appropriately brief. The female prodigy Hou Yifan, who is playing in the "men's" event, lost her round 8 game because...she was five seconds late. Idiotic? You bet, but that's FIDE for you. Hopefully chess will survive Iljumzhinov's tenure.

(HT: TWIC)

Second and more happily, there was a nice attacking game from the women's championship (Zhao Xue - Wang Xiaohui), which I have annotated for you here. Hope you like it. (But how could you not?)

Conducted by ChessVibes shortly after his success at MTel.

From an email I received earlier today:

Last night I was having some down time and I did a search for chess blogs. I discovered one I thought was good. Until I saw your name as author.....

That's us, making friends everywhere.

For information about the tournament and the first round, see here. Meanwhile, to have a quick look at three dramatic rounds from that first round, click here.

The annual rapid event in Leon, Spain, starts tomorrow (Friday) and continues through June 7. (That seems to be the official ending date of every event but the Poikovsky tournament.) There are four participants: Magnus Carlsen, Alexander Morozevich, Vassily Ivanchuk (of course) and Wang Yue (also of course, at least this year).

I believe the pairings will be determined some time today, but here's how it will work. On Friday at 4:30 p.m. local time two of the players will face off in one semi-final, on Saturday at the same time the next pair will play the second semi-final, and on Sunday the final match will occur. Each match is a best of four at 20' + 10", with 5' tiebreak games in case of a 2-2 tie.

Tournament site here.

...and a partridge in a pear tree. Soooo muuuuch cheeeeess!

Results now, some games later.

First, in the Chinese Championship, the three leaders all drew: first-placed Wang Hao with third-placed Bu Xiangzhi, and the surprising second-placed Ding Liren with (fourth-placed) Zhou Weiqi. So with three rounds to go, Wang Hao leads with 7/8, Ding Liren has 6/8, Bu Xiangzhi has 5/8.

In the Leko-Anand rapid match*, Anand won the battle of the Grünfelds 1½-½. With White, Leko was unable to break Anand, but in game 2 Anand made it look easy. His opening initiative encouraged Leko to sac a pawn for play, but Anand was able to keep the material (and win some more), converting it in an endgame.

In the Poikovsky tournament, it was a great day for the white pieces, with four wins in the five games - three of them quick crushes. (I hope to present those games later today.)

Round 1 Results:
Gashimov - Bologan 1-0
Inarkiev - Shirov 1-0
Motylev - Rublevsky 1-0
Naiditsch - Onischuk 1-0
Sutovsky - Efimenko ½-½

Finally, there's Sigeman & Co., a six-player single round robin. (Just five rounds? Seems more like an appetizer.) Here's how the first round panned out:

Short - Berg 1-0
Nyback - Grandelius ½-½
Hillarp Persson - I. Sokolov 0-1


* In case anyone wonders why I'm naming Leko first when Anand is the world champion, it's because the match was arranged by Hungarian sponsors for Leko, the fifth straight year that they have organized such a match. (E.g. in 2005 vs. Adams, vs. Karpov in 2006, Kramnik in 2007 and Carlsen in 2008.)

Svetozar Gligoric (b. 1923) was for many years in the world’s elite – three times a Candidate, for starters – and had he not lost about six years of his life to the ravages of World War II, it’s conceivable that the ultimate crown would have been his. Even so, he was a great player whose contributions to the game’s theory and praxis were considerable.

Thanks to great players like Gligoric, our understanding of opening theory is far deeper than it would have been. Positions that might have been mysterious to masters 50 years ago now strike amateurs as if the right way to handle them were as obvious as the multiplication tables. Yet the depth of great players’ understanding is not only revealed by their having figured out for themselves what we have learned by their example, but also by what they do in positions that still haven’t been pre-packaged for the general public.

The game we’ll look at this week, Gligoric-Tolush (from a Leningrad team tournament in 1957), puts both qualities on display. At some moments of this fine game, Gligoric’s play is recognizable to all (or almost all) of us. While attractive and very well calculated, the way he prosecutes the attack in the middle game will have a familiar look to most of us. Maybe we couldn’t have finished the job ourselves, but it will all make good sense. The real trick in this game is the way Gligoric set things up. It doesn’t take all that long, but the way he gets there is a brilliant combination of logic in the opening and non-stereotyped thinking a few moves later. It is here above all that he demonstrates his class as a chess thinker.

Sound interesting? The details will be filled in tonight – Wednesday night – at 9 p.m. ET (or 3 a.m. CET Thursday morning, for my European viewers) on the Playchess server. To watch, log on at the appropriate time, go to the Broadcasts Room, and either double-click on my handle (“Initiative”) or on Gligoric-Tolush in the Games list. Hope to see you there!

Here's a position pregnant with possibility:


T. Damjanovic - "Buck" (A ChessMaster "personality")

White (to move) has more than one good option, but what's best? The answer will be given in a day or two.

Wang Hao and Ding Liren continue their ridiculously torrid pace at the Chinese Championship. Ding Liren, who is untitled, has 5½/7 and a 2810 TPR - and is in second place! Wang Hao has 6½ points and a slightly impressive 3043 TPR. It's not likely that he can maintain this pace through the remaining four rounds, but if he manages to even come close, the result will be tremendous.

It has been fun keeping up with that event, and tomorrow three more events of interest begin:

(1) The Poikovsky Tournament (previewed yesterday)

(2) Sigeman & Co., which stars Short, I. Sokolov, Nyback, Hillarp Persson, Berg and Grandelius.

(3) The Leko-Anand rapid match. There will be eight games (two a day, with Friday off), with playoff games if needed. It will be nice to see the world champ in action!

Here's the problem, again:


Wotawa 1937, White to move and win:

As noted in the earlier post, White has loads of extra material, but Black's passers are very dangerous. And the other relevant issue is the precarious location of Black's king. At the end of the day, that's what matters; as an old chess friend liked to say, what counts is that we get the guy with the hat on his head. (Of course, the bishop has one too, but never mind!) When you think you've got it figured out, or are tired of trying, click here.

In the Chinese Championship, Wang Hao continues to brutalize the field. Yet his 5½/6 score (and 3020 TPR) has him in first by only a point over untitled Ding Liren. There are five rounds to go.

Meanwhile, Wednesday will see the start of the 10th Karpov Poikovsky tournament (or Karpov tournament in Poikovsky). There are ten players from eight countries, but all were at one time part of the USSR. They are:

Alexei Shirov (2745)
Vugar Gashimov (2730)
Sergei Rublevsky (2702)
Arkadij Naiditsch (2700)
Viktor Bologan (2690)
Alexander Onischuk (2684)
Zahar Efimenko (2682)
Alexander Motylev (2677)
Ernesto Inarkiev (2676)
Emil Sutovsky (2660)

The folks over at the Chess Cafe (Russell Enterprises) have been re-releasing old tournament books lately (St. Petersburg 1909, New York 1924), and their newest offering is Alexander Alekhine's classic Nottingham 1936 (available here and here [for a significantly better price - if you're willing to wait until August]). In the following brief review I will first discuss the tournament, then the book in its own right, and finally the new edition of the book.

Part I: Nottingham 1936, The Tournament

Nottingham 1936 was one of the great chess events of all time. Former world champions Emanuel Lasker (1894-1921), Jose Raul Capablanca (1921-1927) and Alexander Alekhine (1927-1935) were playing, along with then-current champion Max Euwe (1935-1937). To add to the colossal strength, two future champions were playing - the aforementioned Alekhine, who would reclaim his title a year later and keep it until his death in 1946, and Mikhail Botvinnik, who was champion from 1948-1963, with two one-year breaks (1957-8, 1960-1). This means that there were five players in this tournament who, together, possessed the world championship title from 1894 to 1963, excepting two years when it was held by others and two years when the title was vacant. That's sixty-six years' worth of world champions!

The non-champ portion of the field was impressive, too. There was Reuben Fine, who in 1938 tied for first in what was a sort of Candidates event, and who could have played in the 1948 World Championship. There was Sammy Reshevsky, who did play in the 1948 Championship and was among the world's elite from the 1930s through the 1960s. Salo Flohr was one of the world's very best players in the early 1930s, Efim Bogoljubow had played in two world championship matches (in 1929 and 1934) and had won some very strong events in the past decade, and Milan Vidmar and Savielly Tartakower were comparatively lesser but still very strong GMs (by contemporary standards) in their own right. Only the British players (Tylor, Alexander, Thomas and Winter) were comparative cannon fodder, and yet they each played a small role as spoiler.

As it turned out, the tournament was very closely contested. Botvinnik and Capablanca tied for first in what was the last great result of the Cuban's chess career. They finished with 10 points, half a point ahead of Fine, Reshevsky, and Euwe. Alekhine had 9, Flohr and Lasker 8½, while the next closest finisher was a full 2½ points behind. There were many classic games, and a lot of fight too. Even among the prizewinners there was a good deal of bloodletting - it wasn't just the visitors wiping out the locals.

Part II: Nottingham 1936, The Book

Now to the book. All the games are annotated by Alexander Alekhine, and his notes make for instructive and lively reading. No one will confuse his comments with a Rybka printout, but his notes are clear, instructive, and punchy. (You can find an excerpt here here, on the Chess Cafe website.) Among the more amusing comments by Alekhine are his comments to the ending of Tylor-Flohr, which he describes as a four-step plan:

"From now a pretty dull affair begins. In order to make a long story short it is better, I think, to divide the following play into sections.

"I. Black prepares and finally plays f6 in order to free the c5-square for his king.

"II. Black prepares and actually plays b5.

"III. Black gradually brings his passed pawn to a3 where it is weaker than at a5!

"IV. Black prepares and at last makes the decisive mistake."

About this mistake, Alekhine writes that

"There were some voices in the press which attributed Flohr's failure at Nottingham to 'bad luck,' and especially to the fact that he lost two points to the British players, against whom he had previously had good results. The present game, more than any other, shows that such an appreciation is entirely wrong: Because a master, who, not being able to win through his own ability, tries to gain a point by exhausting a less physically trained opponent, fully deserves to lose."

Take that, sitzfleischers!

As all the games can be found in many databases, it's the notes that make or break the book. To my mind, they make the book worth having - not only as an historical document and as entertainment, but also to see some great games and to see chess understanding as it starts evolving into something modern.

Part III: This Edition of the Book

As usual, my feelings are mixed. The pluses: the book is in print again, and has been updated into algebraic notation. If, like me, you're "bilingual", then it's not so important; but as many players are unfamiliar with or averse to descriptive notation, it's a worthwhile change.

The format is in the typical Russell Enterprises/Chess Cafe style (which you can see for yourself at the link given above), but while this was a colossal improvement over the earlier editions of St. Petersburg 1909 and New York 1924, the Dover edition of Nottingham 1936 is already eminently readable. The new book is a little cleaner and nicer, but it's only a small upgrade in this case. Another minor plus for the new edition is a foreword by GM Andy Soltis.

Unfortunately, there are some negatives, too. Some minor errors and oddities were easy to find. For instance, the table of contents refers to the "Index of Opening". Another example: in the excerpt linked to above, in the note after Black's 6th move in Alekhine-Capablanca, an opening variation is referred to using descriptive rather than algebraic notation. Another error: in the paragraph giving the scores after round 14, an asterisk indicating that Capablanca had already had his bye is missing next to his name. I also noticed at least one typo in the notation, but couldn't find it again on a quick browsing. These are minor points; alas, there is worse to come.

As with the Russell Enterprise editions of St. Petersburg 1909 and New York 1924, some of the supplementary material has been excised. (In this case, almost all of it.) (1) W. H. Watts' 7-page introduction is gone, as is (2) E. G. R. Cordingly's tabular Openings Index. (The book has a more typical, less descriptive index.) But wait - there's less! The new edition (3) also excises six games from the simultaneously held minor tournament, of which five games are annotated by Alekhine. Also AWOL are (4) the round-by-round score table, (5) the dedication (to Alderman J. N. Derbyshire), and (6) proper credit for the round reports. The reports are included in the new edition, but one is led to assume they are by Alekhine. They're not: it was A. J. Mackenzie who deserves the credit.

All told, my dismay over these omissions - especially the latter, which while the least interesting represents the biggest sin against history - outweighs my appreciation for this book. If you're not descriptive-phobic and can find an affordable version of the 1962 Dover reprint, buy that. I've also noticed that there's a 2002 edition published by Hardinge Simpole; if it's faithful to the original text (except for updating to algebraic notation), then I would recommend purchasing it instead. (If any readers have it and can tell me how it fares, please do in the comments.)

Russell Enterprises can only be commended for its choices when it comes to deciding which old books to reissue, and their catalog of old and new books (e.g. by Mark Dvoretsky and Karsten Müller) places them among the elite chess publishers of our day. But their habit of excising auxiliary material (see the links to the earlier reviews for further examples) is a serious negative, so much so in this case that I cannot endorse this edition if earlier ones are available. If omission (6) is remedied in a subsequent printing, I will change my assessment; happily so if (at least) omissions (1), (3) and (5) as rectified as well. (But why not fix them all?)