The Chess Mind http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/ en-us 2008-05-09T06:05+00:00 MTel Masters, Round 1 http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210314108.shtml There weren't any whiz-bang games, but all the games were long and decisive. Both the locals - Topalov and Cheparinov - won, and they were joined in the winner's circle by... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-09T06:05+00:00
Radjabov - Ivanchuk was a balanced game most of the way, with Radjabov having a slight edge at a few points, but the decision to play 31.Rd5 was self-destructive. Maybe he wasn't losing there, but the trend was negative and by move 38 at the latest he was lost.

Aronian - Topalov started without any problems for White, but Topalov's play offered a nice demonstration of "Capablanca's Rule", that queen and knight typically work better together than queen and bishop.* Topalov's 36th move was especially interesting: a brilliant rook sacrifice initiating an 11-move combination resulting in a winning knight vs. bishop ending. It was a very nice idea, but it has to be said that it was an error - see the game page for details.

Finally, Cheparinov - Bu Xiangzhi was a nice case of light-squared domination by White. Especially instructive was Black's mistaken decision to open the position up with 26...g6 and 27...f5. Black possibly hoped to achieve counterplay with the break, but it didn't really happen. Worse, White's knight was able to reach f5, with great effect.

For round 2, these are the pairings:

Topalov - Ivanchuk
Bu Xiangzhi - Radjabov
Aronian - Cheparinov

Links and videos here; the games with my comments here.

* Whether this really deserves the status of "rule" is disputable - I believe John Watson has called this into question in Secrets of Modern Strategy. Still, while there are always loads of exceptions to such rules of thumb, there's enough to it that it deserves consideration.]]> Nona Gaprindashvili on men and women in chess http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210310649.shtml If a man wrote this, he'd be tarred and feathered (or worse), but here are the words of Nona Gaprindashvili, former women's world champion and the first woman to earn... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-09T05:05+00:00 If a man wrote this, he'd be tarred and feathered (or worse), but here are the words of Nona Gaprindashvili, former women's world champion and the first woman to earn the "men's" (full) grandmaster title:

- Yes, men and women should play separately, since male players have a number of advantages before the start of the game. On the one hand, ever since their birth boys are genetically predisposed to compete and fight. On the other hand, the physiological processes that take place within the male and female bodies are not in favour of the latter chesswise. Third - the nervous system, the psychological stability is better in men. Fourth - the active chess life of a woman comes to an end when she creates a family, or at best it can last until she bears a child. From this moment on she can never abandon herself to chess completely, while a man, if he has earned enough to take good care of his family, can be 'exempted' from his parental obligations. If you take into account all these points you will understand why women should not compete in male tournaments.

Maybe some of these points could be used to explain why men have been more successful in chess (though the argument would be controversial, of course), but it doesn't seem even remotely plausible as an argument that women shouldn't compete in (primarily) male tournaments. Indeed, Gaprindashvili herself hasn't followed this advice, neither when she was young (she played in Hastings in the early 1960s, when she was in her early 20s), middle-aged (most notably Lone Pine 1977, which she won ahead of dozens of grandmasters) nor in her relatively old age (three years ago, in her mid-60s, she nearly won the "men's" senior championship). In short, it's a strange comment.

(Source here.)

HT: Chess Today

]]> Pivdenny and the humble Grandmaster Golubev http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210309221.shtml From tonight's Chess Today:... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-09T05:05+00:00 From tonight's Chess Today:

The 4th Pivdenny Bank Chess Cup lineup has been finalised. This rapid tournament will take place in Odessa from 30 May - 2 June. I [GM Mikhail Golubev - DM] will represent the host city as well as GM Yuri Drozdovskij. Other participants are no less than: Anatoly Karpov, Viktor Korchnoi, Ruslan Ponomariov, Boris Gelfand, Pavel Tregubov and Valery Beim. I have already asked whether there will be a prize for 8th place; it will be useful to know this. The official site will be at worldcup.pivdenny.com.

Come on, Mikhail, have some confidence! Your opponents may share your opinion and overpress against you, so be ready to collect the points.

]]> Viswanathan Anand wins 2007 Chess Oscar http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210245146.shtml The chess "Oscar" has nothing to do with Hollywood and the AMPAS. It's an award by journalists - those polled by the Russian chess magazine 64-Chess Review (sadly, I... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-08T11:05+00:00 AMPAS. It's an award by journalists - those polled by the Russian chess magazine 64-Chess Review (sadly, I wasn't one of them) - awarded annually to the person receiving the most votes for the best player of the past year. In what shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, Viswanathan Anand won going away, with Vladimir Kramnik finishing second and Gata Kamsky third in the voting. Kramnik probably had a slightly better 2007 than Anand, if one doesn't count the world championship in Mexico City, but that's a rather huge omission, and Anand deservedly won his 5th Oscar. (Note: If Kramnik beats Anand later this year, in Bonn, and regains the title, the roles will be reversed: Anand has clearly had the better year so far, but nothing tops the title.)

More info and useful links here.]]> The Famous Vallicella Trap?! http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210226860.shtml I was browsing IM Jovanka Houska's 2007 book Play the Caro-Kann, and while looking through the introductory section on the Panov/Botvinnik Attack I read something incredible. In a subsection called 7th... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-08T06:05+00:00 I was browsing IM Jovanka Houska's 2007 book Play the Caro-Kann, and while looking through the introductory section on the Panov/Botvinnik Attack I read something incredible. In a subsection called 7th move sidelines, I came across this:

1 e4 c6 2 d4 d5 3 exd5 cxd5 4 c4 Nf6 5 Nc3

5 Nf3 is known as Vallicella's Caro-Kann trap - Black has to watch out for one big trick. Best is simply to play 5...Nc6, transposing to the main line after 6 Nc3, but 5...Bg4? would be a mistake after 6 c5! Nc6 7 Bb5. The point is that Black has big difficulties defending the c6 point; for example, 7...e6 8 Qa4 Qc7 9 Ne5 Rc8 10 Bf4 and White is winning!

There's nothing objectionable about the analysis*; rather, what struck me was the reference to Vallicella's Caro-Kann trap, as if this was standard lore in treatments of the Caro-Kann. How did Bill Vallicella, an outstanding philosophical blogger but a 1500-1700 club player not engaged in publicizing his games, suddenly achieve such fame? I had come across his trap either from an email by him or on a post on his predominantly philosophical blog, but when did a move he may have played but a single time turn into an idea requiring mention in a pretty major new theoretical work?

Houska doesn't cite a source, and I certainly didn't recall seeing it in any published materials, so naturally it was off to Google. Entering "Vallicella Caro-Kann", I discovered the main source, conveniently entitled "Vallicella's Caro-Kann Trap"...and you can, too - just click here. Then laugh.**

* Actually, while I wouldn't disagree with her positive suggestion, I don't believe 5...Bg4 is in fact a mistake; the real error comes later. After, e.g. 7...e5 I don't see a White advantage after 8.dxe5 Ne4 or 8.Qa4 Bxf3 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.Qxc6+ Nd7 11.gxf3 exd4, and even the arguably best 8.Nc3 promises little or nothing after 8...Nd7 9.dxe5 Bxf3 (10.Qxf3 d4; 10.gxf3 a6).

** If anyone knows IM Houska personally, please ask her to write me (via the Contact link) - I'd like to trace the path from Vallicella's idea to her book.

]]> US Chess League 2007 Game of the Year: The Bronze Medal goes to... http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210196180.shtml ... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-07T21:05+00:00 here, replay the game here, and see my coverage of it on ChessVideos.tv by the end of the week.]]> An Analysis Exercise: Can You Top Alekhine? - Part Two http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210130804.shtml In this post I challenged all of you to make the best sense of this position, from the game Alekhine - J. Morrison, Manchester (simul) 1923:... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-07T03:05+00:00 this post I challenged all of you to make the best sense of this position, from the game Alekhine - J. Morrison, Manchester (simul) 1923:



It's White to move, and promising tactical possibilities are afoot on the h-file and the b1-h7 diagonal. In the game, Alekhine chose 20.Rxh7 and won, but lamented this move in his notes. During the game, he calculated 20.Nxg4 Bxg4 21.Rxh7, but found only a perpetual with 21...Kxh7 22.Qxg6+ Kxg6 23.Be4+ Kh5 24.Rh1+ Bh3 25.Bf3+ Kg6 26.Be4+ etc. The problem is that the otherwise desirable 25.Rxh3+ Kg4 leaves both the Bf4 and the Rh3 hanging. An impressive calculation in a simul, but Alekhine claims in his notes that 20.Nxg4 was the right move, as long as 20...Bxg4 is met by 21.Be3. Black's queen will presumably run away from the various possible discoveries, and then White goes back to the Rxh7 idea. The bishop won't be hanging on f4 after 22.Rxh7 Kxh7 23.Qxg6+ Kxg6 24.Be4+ Kh5 25.Rh1+ Bh3 26.Rxh3+ Kg4, so White can conveniently and attractively finish Black off with 26.Bf5#.

Now that you know a little of what Alekhine saw and was thinking, you might want to return to your chessboards (or monitors) and see what else you can come up with. When you've worked it all out, you can have a look here.]]> This Week's ChessBase Show: Sutovky-Smirin, Israel 2002 http://chessmind.powerblogs.com/posts/1210128047.shtml The city of Baku, Azerbaijan, seems almost a factory for great chess players. Garry Kasparov, Teimour Radjabov, Shakhriyar Mamedyarov, Vugar Gashimov, Vladimir Akopian, and the star of today's show, Emil Sutovsky.... Dennis Monokroussos 2008-05-07T02:05+00:00
Further, it's not only his results that have been exceptional; he is renowned for playing beautiful attacking games. Perhaps his greatest game so far came against Ilya Smirin, from the 2002 Israel Championship. Smirin, himself a great player (a few months before this game he was over 2700), played a novelty in an anti-anti-Sveshnikov variation, but Sutovsky was either better prepared or experienced some over the board inspiration. Whatever the story, this week's hero devised a real two piece sacrifice that gave him enduring attacking chances, but nothing that could be calculated to a finish in advance. Sutovsky's idea proved absolutely correct, and after a number of accurate building moves, he finished the job with a beautiful final blow. All in all, a masterpiece in miniature.

It's a game worth seeing, and watching the show this Wednesday night at 9 p.m. ET is a great way to pass the time between the just-finished FIDE Grand Prix (in Baku!) and the pending MTel Masters. The show is free and directions can be found here. Hope to see you then!]]>