![]() |
| << SEARCH MORE | ||||
| Silvio Danailov: “Only during the game” | ||||
In our column “Not again!?” of yesterday, by co-editor Arne Moll, Silvio Danailov’s statements from this Europe-Echecs interview was described as “provocative” and “destructive madness”. This morning we asked Silvio Danailov whether he would like to comment on our column, and perhaps clarify matters, and that we would be happy to publish it. We received the following reply:
| ||||
Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:32:20 +0000 | ||||
| Not again!? | ||||
Photo: Europe-Echecs
In the video of the interview, Danailov talks about whether the ‘Sofia rules’ apply in the upcoming Topalov-Anand match, to be held in Sofia next month. They will not be applied – at least not officially. But that’s no problem for Danailov:
It’s a remarkable statement: Anand – forced against his will to comply to rules that are not official; this is the future of chess, no matter what ‘old’ chess players say – their opinion clearly is unimportant and shouldn’t be respected. But the most remarkable is that Danailov says that Topalov will not only refuse to offer any draws but also will ignore his opponent altogether: “He will not speak to him.” In other words, he will drop all courtesy and normal etiquette and create a ‘non-speaking terms’ atmosphere in a match in his home country, against one of the most relaxed and friendly chess players in the professional chess scene. And why? Because of ‘professionalism’, that vacuous word all too often misused by people who refuse to acknowledge that most if not all work requires empathy and social skills – in other words, people who haven’t the slightest idea what ‘professionalism’ really means. (Here’s how one competency library actually defines ‘professionalism’: “Thinking carefully about the likely effects on others of one’s words, actions, appearance, and mode of behavior.”) To exclude all social elements from a profession is in fact the ultimate un-professional thing imaginable. It’s a fallacy Frans de Waal convincingly demolishes in his book, showing how cooperation and social interaction are absolutely crucial to succeed in any job and society, and are in fact measures by which we judge people and choose them as colleagues, friends or mates. Not so for the Bulgarians, who’ve created their own rules and apparently don’t mind to be social isolates in the chess world, as long as the results speak for themselves. What an utterly unprofessional attitude! In a similar vein, we’ve argued before on this site that shaking hands before and after a game shouldn’t actually be incorporated in the rules of chess, but instead should be respected even though they’re not in the rules – because, as De Waal shows, that’s how empathy and social skills work: intuitively, without explicit rules, automatically. And that’s why apes and other animals are capable of displaying them, too, without being able to read lawbooks or guides on ethical behaviour. It’s a thing of nature. It’s in our genes.
In his book, Topalov wrote that it was naive of him to agree to the match against Kramnik being played on Russian (well, kind of) ground, because such a match obviously couldn’t be fair. Well, it’s four years later and look who’s playing on home ground this time. Will Topalov and Danailov return the compliment and agree if Anand claimed a match in Bulgaria couldn’t ever be fair because of some kind of home advantage? Frans de Waal devotes an entire chapter on the ‘walking in other man’s ’shoes’ concept, but looking at the interview of Europe Echecs, I have my doubts if Danailov has read it. Note how he laughs during the entire interview, routinely dismissing dissenting views and announcing how the reigning World Champion will be ‘forced’ to do this and that. Does that sound like someone showing any kind of empathy or ‘ethical principles’ at all? Silvio Danailov has recently announced his candidacy for president of the European Chess Union. Heaven forbid someone who doesn’t understand the first thing about ‘professionalism’, baselessly accuses some world class players of unethical behaviour and laughingly tells others what to do, ever gets to play such an important role in European chess, even if he did show some good initiatives like the exciting M-Tel tournament and his passion for more fighting chess. This kind of destructive madness really can’t be tolerated in our beautiful chess world. Frans de Waal ends his book The Age of Empathy (I am quoting from the Dutch version) with the following words:
We can only hope this message will reach the Bulgarian team before the Topalov-Anand match starts. | ||||
Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:15:15 +0000 | ||||
| Sledging Vishy | ||||
| I don't think I've used the word before on this blog, but there's always a first time. Silvio Danailov is a cunt. And I swear I mean that with affection. Chessvibes has the reason why. Talking about whether or not the 'Sofia rules' will apply during the upcoming match between Topalov and Anand, Chessvibes quotes Danailov: If one player doesn’t offer or accept draws they will apply. Vishy [Anand] doesn’t agree but he will be forced, because Topalov will not offer him a draw and he will not speak to him. So, what to do? He will be forced. This is the best. This is the best, otherwise… I don’t know, there’s people who are absolutely conservative, they are against these rules, but this is the future of chess. This is for sure. To which Arne Moll, writing in CV, responds with understandable shock. But the Dutchman should relax. Danailov is simply practicing a bit of that old familiar technique: sledging. Now as I understand it, Danailov spent some time in Melbourne. Did he learn it there, I wonder. Speaking of sledging, Anand ought to have no problems with salvos of his own. Who else to turn to for a few good ones but his compatriots the cricketers? He could take a few tips from Indian legend, Ravi Shastri. Here's what happened between an Australian 12th man and Shashtri: Shastri hits the ball towards the 12th man in the game and looks for a single. The Aussie guy gets the ball in and says, True story that. And as a matter of fact, it was Indian sledging against the old enemy Pakistan that led to the so-called "Frog Jumping Incident". That one's a hoot! | ||||
Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:50:00 +0000 | ||||
| ChessX 0.6 | ||||
A couple of months ago and two years after the previous version ChessX has released a new version. This is version 0.6, which can be downloaded for Windows and Mac on the download section of the ChessX site.
As you can see the PGN file uses a lot of memory when compared to the SCID or ChessDB database files. I was unable to use the large database. It started to load the games, but after waiting for more than an hour it was still busy loading.
If you only need something like this for your own games (with a rather small database) than this may be a very interesting multi platform alternative, but for large databases it will probably not be usable. However, the next release promises to add a Native Database Format, which may solve these problems. | ||||
Sun, 18 Oct 2009 09:09:52 +0000 | ||||
| WordPress 2.8.4 | ||||
I have upgraded to WordPress 2.8.4, because yesterday a vulnerability was discovered by the WordPress team: a specially crafted URL could be requested that would allow an attacker to bypass a security check to verify a user requested a password reset. As a result, the first account without a key in the database (usually the admin account) would have its password reset and a new password would be emailed to the account owner. This doesn’t allow remote access, but it is very annoying. Version 2.8.4 seems to fix all known problems and is highly recommended for all users of WordPress.
| ||||
Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:05:49 +0000 | ||||
| Inglorious Blunders ( at the Harry Nelson Pillsbury Memorial) | ||||
| ACIS Update: Do check out Harvey as he has now started a Google group dedicated to the cause which will allow a better exchange of ideas and resources as we can up/down load files and share common useful links etc. ![]() Tourney report: I like the Harry Nelson Pillsbury Memorial held every Fall in Massachusetts as it’s a recognized Heritage event and has been held annually for over 25 years! It’s a Grand Prix event as well but since I am not a master, that has little importance for me ( this year). The format has changed over the years. This year, it was kept to a 1 day event with four rounds of a G60’s. This meant some serious yet fast action was about to happen on this Sunday following our American Thanksgiving. We were blessed with team members from the famous Boston Blitz featuring, GM Eugene Perelshteyn and IM’s David Vigorito who tied for first place in the open section. FM Dennis Shmelov and Ilya Krasik, also Boston Blitz players, tied for 3rd and 4th place. There were four sections for a modest turn out of 53 players in all three sections. I played in the Under 1900 section below is my round for round account of my games. Round one loss to a Class A player: I played the back side to an English opening that was more like a Reti when I responded 1…c6. I should have known better as I studied Reti in the New York 1924 series. I might have faired better had I played a line with Bf5 which Lasker used regularly to avoid the cramped complications I fell into. I really need to work on the transpositions. Two major issues came up in this came. The first, looking at the position below on Black’s move 10. ![]() I wanted to advance c5 and keep the bishop as it was my only one “out of the gate”. But I ended up with a dumb position hemming in that bishop altogether. The chess engine suggests moving the knight to f8 as this will be handy later. I think even better is to exchange on d2. Where Black’s game is cramped and I want to lock the pawns on dark squares, having a pair of knights will be better. Plus White’s dark squared Bishop gets hemmed in now. The second issue was a bad plan to remove White’s light squared bishop. A couple moves later, I created a battery with a queen and Bishop on the c8-h3 diagonal and went after White’s Bg2. Somewhere I had a notion that getting rid of the bishop would weaken White’s king position. True, in some cases with finachetto’s this is a good plan. The exception I overlooked was that it traded Black’s Active Bishop for White’s more passive one. Round 2 win against a Class A player: I played the White side against a Nimzo-Indian defense. I had been studying the Rubinstein variation since my New York 1924 studies and liked the games in Zurich 1953 with Taimanov playing some interesting ideas against Averbahk. Now my problem is that I play 6Nge2 in the more traditional sense of the Rubenstein meant to keep the q-side pawns from being messed up. The idea is to follow-up with f3 and e3-e4 especially once Black exchanges the bishop. By Zurich 1953, that line was replaced with a more aggressive 6Nf3 made popular after New york 1924 and became the main line. The idea is to allow the double c-pawn and get the bishops on both diagonals ( a1-h8 and b2-h7) in preparation for opening the center. I didn’t do that… was happy to settle with remember to play the bishop to D3 first and then said Nge2 must come next. Regardless of this, I did manage a playable middle game as I had the opportunity to test Black’s ability to play an IQP. I sort of know how to attack and/or defend such a position. I recall my lessons’ Jorge Sammour-Hasbun in telling me the fundamental is that the endgame is more favorable for the player who doesn’t own the IQP. Exchanges then become favorable and the owner should avoid it. Black didn’t do much to prevent this in the game. Blocking the square in front of the IQP also keeps it from advancing and getting traded to equalize or worse… become a decoy as a king side attack forms. The defender will place the rooks on both adjacent files ( as did my opponent in the game and I got my knight in front of the pawn. He missed a knight forking tactic on the other weakness on d6. ![]() Round 3 win ( I should have lost) against a Class C player You know, I was feeling pretty damn cocky. Round one wasn’t a total loss and I just beat a class A player. When this opponent played an Advanced variation, I decided on the spot to try something I had never tried before and played 3..c5. I read through this variation back in a day ( never played it)…but felt I could “think through this” OTB. By move 11 I was humbled with a Greek gift on h7: ![]() Sucker punched, I hobbled my king in the corner for a few moves, desperately pulling in reinforcements in when I could. Then I had a chance 11 moves later and played this: ![]() I got damn lucky. Note to self, don’t pick a tournament to “explore” a new line I was meaning to look into when I got a round to it. Round 4 victory against a Class A player ( cinching the Class prize): My opponent’s third round game was the last to finish and he ended up losing in a time scramble when he thought he had set his clock to correctly allow the 5 second delay. He was rattled as he challenged my 1d4 witrh 1..c5. “Crap, a Benoni”, I thought. This time, because of my training positions, I made sure I had some from previous “lessons” and managed to survive the opening without any traps. It did give Black a slight advantage in piece mobility. I decided to handle the game as a hypermodern positioning my bishops as Black expanded in the center with pawns. Black’s d-pawn became backward and I was given a chance to exchange pieces and win the pawn. ![]() In turn Black had the bishop pair in an open position giving me a pawn advantage if I made it to the end game. To my surprise, Black exchanges one of his bishops for my knight on b5. This gave me more mobility and then he totally hung a piece. He clearly was still rattled from the previous match. I finished with 3 points to clear the under 1750 class prize and did a happy dance with my BIG money winnings of $75. Lessons I learned: 1) Learn your openings enough to get to a middle game you can play. 2) Recognizing and being comfortable with certain middle game themes like IQP and minority attacks can be beneficial if I come out of the opening a little less than equal. 3) Don’t try anything new. | ||||
Sat, 05 Dec 2009 23:17:00 +0000 | ||||
| Happy Thanksgiving : A.C.I.S. Update | ||||
HI everyone. In America, today is holiday that is meant to remind us of all the things to be grateful for. I hope all of you enjoy this day as well as my readers outside the USA. I am grateful for the energy the A.C.I.S. of Caissa movement is experiencing. Loomis is chugging along a la MDLM, brushing off the CT-ART rust. He’s such a classic. Bannat is trying real hard to break the USCF 1200 barrier. Wish this improver some luck. Chess Tiger has an interesting game where he plays a Colle-Zuckertort against some 1…b5 line. He’s looking for some feedback. Get you annotation pens out. Chunky rook has amazing animated chess graphics ( How does he do it) and bemoans an inglorious blunder. Harvey is new to the quest and seems to be trying out my database suggestions as he files off some rough edges. Please, pay him a visit and welcome him. Steve Eddins psoted his first training position created in Chess base ( using his Chess Imager utility to display the position on his blog) Wahreit gets all philosophical. Let him know why imporoving is a quest for you. And then enjoy the Cake he serves up J I’ve had a couple others on the close fringes of joining “the movement” asking about what plans and others just don’t want to advertise and that’s fine too. As for me, I am gearing up for the Harry Nelson Pillsbury memorial. MY database already grew to 440 positions. I have gone through the first 60 positions every day with increasing results. I plan on having a daily hit list and a weekly mash with more problems and a once a month brain burner where I go through the whole set. I also took the advice from one of my readers to start using category names so people can find this under ACIS. I went back only as far as the Zurich series and created category tags for that series as well. Hope the tryptophan is off set by coffee. Set up the pieces! | ||||
Thu, 26 Nov 2009 14:39:00 +0000 | ||||
| Part 3: Finding training patterns in your Repertoire | ||||
![]() In part 1 I proclaimed my new training regimen which basically consists of creating a personalized set of positions from my own games, repertoire and study material. In Part 2 I showed you how I used chess base to create my own training positions to have a set of tactical and positional puzzles themed from my own games. In this entry I will show you how I develop a repertoire data base and how I use this to create study positions. But first a brief update on the growing A.C.I.S of Caissa movement: Following an action from the playbook of Loomis, I plan on keeping the ACIS of Caaissa updates limited to THIS blog and not on my mirrored site at the greater community at Chess.com. I like the smaller closer circle of friends here as it tends to promote a more supportive environment. The "how to" stuff will get forward to chess.com. Unlike the brutish Knight’s errant DLM movement of the mid ‘00’s, A.C.I.S. of Caissa is proving to be more accessible to the “common folk” as the final circles of the MDLM method was just unreachable if you work, have a family and want to practice good hygiene. If the truth be known, most of the knights errant had modified the MDLM method to smaller circles and approached it in a more realistic manner. Loomis has joined in this universalistic approach and proclaims to be Baaaack. Steve (learn’s chess) Eddins is firing up the blog to declare his mission and thoughts. Chunky Rook has fired off a series of gif patterns worth checking out on his blog Linuxguy reviews a game he played on FICS and shows appreciation to having studied Zurich 1953 And finally, Chess tiger was lulled into this quest with this line: What pulled my attention is that one may choose his or her own study plan. So Building a repertoire database. I use chess base for a lot of reasons. One of the things I’ve done was create a blunder-rep database with games centered around my openings I play. First, I pull in games that I have studied from the classic tournaments that are in any shape or form close to what I play in my chess games. Hastings 1895, London 1924 and Zurich 1953 is not enough resources for what I am looking for. There are several ways to approach this. You can set up a position using chessbase and use the search online tool to pull games from their huge inventory. I find this tedious as I haven’t found a clean way to import the large volume of games as a result of this method. The best I was able to achieve was dumping them all into one huge game file or saving each one individually. I will use this method to find key players ( grandmasters) who play this variation but not as a means to build the volume I seek for the purpose of building a training database. I wanted a quicker method to build the base up. I use google to search for PGN or CBH data bases of specific variations. There are several websites that fill this gap. Chessgames.com will allow a search for the position and provide a collection of games to download as PGN. Chessopolis (http://www.chessopolis.com/openings.htm) is another resource I use frequently and they actually have CBH files that can import directly to Chess base. There are plenty more if you search. The trouble with “canned” data sets from some of these places is the quality of games are littered with amateur games. But my philosophy at this stage in my improvement path is that I can still learn from these amateurs. Panning for gold. Once you have a repertoire database built up, the next step is to use the search capability of chess base to find positions to study. Finding Traps in the opening to avoid or inflict: The first thing I do is to find the opening traps I want to avoid. I will set the search to find the games that end in 15 moves or less where the side I would most likely play loses. ![]() I will create training positions described in my previous post for each of the unique wins. Some are duplicates and worth skipping over. What you get is a clear pattern of what not to play in certain lines. Optionally, you could run the engine on each of these to get some annotations and ideas what to play. I merely reference my books and make a quick note where to improve and what not to play. The opening tactical trap becomes the positional study that I solve for the aggressor. Then I look at the notes in the game centered around the failing position. This is where having an amateur database comes in handy as you will more likely have a lot of examples to chose from. On the flip side, from the same repertoire base I will change the search to games where my side wins and repeat the process. The result will build up tactical positions found in the openings of my games that I can inflict if my opponent doesn’t play exactly in this line. Positional themes start to come about from these and I get a better understanding of the opening. Finding Mating themes: Another search I will conduct in the bluder-rep is to find those games that have ended definitively with a check mate. To weed out the previous search I set the move order to a range greater than 15 to include the long games. I go through the same process of looking at wins for both sides to see the kind of attacks typical from both perspectives. I then create training positions from these making notes of the type of attack as a memory marker for the pattern. For added measure I use the same filter but instead of definitive mates, I search for results being my side to win. This will include winning endgame positions to come about in my games with higher probability. Middle game positions: There’s no way around this but to review games against masters who play the same openings in your repertoire. I am building on this with my tournament games studies and include several positions from each of the highlighted games. So far I have just over 100 positions as I build upon this. I think it’s a good start. I’d like to build this to at least 500 by Spring, but I don’t want to get stuck in the process before using it. 100 problems to start with will be a good litmus for the upcoming Pillsbury Memorial here at the end of the month. | ||||
Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:50:00 +0000 | ||||
| Adult Chess Improvement Seekers ( ACIS) | ||||
![]() I will be stepping out of the time machine between now and through the holidays. Partly because I am waiting for Christmas before I pick up my next tournament book ( Dear Santa, I want the Grandmaster Chess: The Book of the Louis D. Statham Lone Pine Masters-Plus Tournament 1975 for Christmas). There is a large community of adult chess improvement seekers out there. You know who you are. I believe improvement is still out there for us old dogs as long as we are willing to put in the right effort. Coaching is a big benefit but if you are like me, sometimes, the financial resources aren’t there. Which books to buy, what method to choose and how to train vary with the individual ACIS. In a recent post by Eric, aka Blue Devil Knight. The question of whether the ill famed cult of the knight errants DLM have died off. In brief, and for you new comers, a Knight Errant DLM is basically an improvement seeker who has attempted to follow ( loosely) the Rapid Chess Improvement method of Michael De La Maza by doing what I call the seven circles of hell. There was a blog community that had formed as a result and for the chess blog-osphere… this was a viral moment. Like a moth to a flame, I too, did the MDLM method and saw moderate results ( gaining roughly 300 USCF… warning results vary widely).Most of us realized the original author was unemployed and could focus the time and effort to reach the 400 points in 400 days idea. The rest of us did modifications according to our real world experience. For instance, I chose a concentric circle method, doing each level of CT-ART 3.0 seven times before advancing to the next level. MDLM, suggests doing all 9 levels sequentially and repeating it 7 times decreasing the allotted time by one half ( roughly). Some felt a smaller set of circles was more beneficial and others used a different set of tactical problems… like How to beat your dad in chess. The plus side of this method is that it is a brute force way to etch a bunch of tactical patterns in your noggin especially if you score poorly in tactics in the first place. The repetitious nature of the MDLM method is a good way to ultimately a good way to increase your base of pattern recognition into long term memory. In his landmark book, Thought and Choice in Chess. Adriaan de Groot determined the fundamental difference between Master and amateur was the ability to recall these patterns. A master is in order of magnitude greater than that of an amateur thus, underscoring the idea of finding a way to improve your base of patterns to recall. De Groot’s study was lot more complicated than that but I don’t want to digress from the plus side of having some kind of method to increase you ability to recall and play with confidence a certain number of positions.Aside from the outrageous time commitment ( which can be dialed down to practical real-life terms), the down side to the MDLM method is that it’s like pheasant hunting with a canon. Once the circles are completed you may recall only a few of the patterns. This is because in practice, you only use a small subset of those patterns. The rest never or so rarely occur that they don’t make it into long term memory. Sustaining the 1000 tactical patterns in memory is not realistic with this method. You lose it if you don’t use it. What should one do? I believe the answer requires picking the right problem set for the individual. The best results would be to study patterns and positions that occur in your regular games based on your opening repertoire. Notice how I also say patterns and positions and not necessarily tactics alone. I believe you have to include the whole game. Making the right choice in an opening, middle game and endgame requires an understanding of position and patterns. I point back to Adriaan De Groot. He believed players went through four stages to determine the right move: Stage one: “Orientation phase” requires the player to assess the situation and determine generally what to do next. Now, whether you use a method like Silman’s imbalances or Nimzovitche’s system … there is a requirement to recognize patterns here. Stage two: “Exploration Phase” is the calculation phase and Kotov’s Think like a Grandmaster “tree of analysis” is a good example of this. Does pattern recognition help here? Sure it does. In order to evaluate a branch in your head, if you can recognize a winning position that can be reached it saves time OTB. Stage three: “Investigation phase” is where the subject actually chooses a line to play as the “best move” and then Stage four is the “Proof phase” where the player confirms the choice being valid. Here is what I plan on doing over the next couple months and will blog on my progress and efforts. 1) I will select a personal set of problems based on my recent games and put them into chess base using the training position tool and setting scores based on complexity. These will mostly come from my losses and even some wins. 2) I will create opening training positions where I have difficulties 3) I will use chess base to filter miniatures out of the database based on my specific repertoire. I will create additional problems to add from these. 4) I will select games from my previous historical games studies that pertain to my openings I encounter and find specific middle and endgame positions that are most beneficial to my repertoire. 5) As the data base grows, I will apply the circles training method ala MDLM. This is a work in progress subject to modifications. My next post will be on the mechanics of setting up my own problems using chess base as I work on the first item. | ||||
Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:09:00 +0000 | ||||
| Storia di un’idea | ||||
Robert William Kearns (Gary, 10 marzo 1927 – Baltimora, 9 febbraio 2005) inventore statunitense; noto soprattutto per l’invenzione del tergicristallo a intermittenza usato su molte automobili dal 1969 ad oggi.
Kearns citò la Ford Motor Company nel 1978 e la Chrysler nel 1982 per violazione di brevetti. Il caso Ford ebbe il processo nel 1990. Ford perse, sebbene la Corte ritenne che la violazione del brevetto non era intenzionale. Ford si accordò con Kearns pagando 10.1 milioni di dollari e il patto di non proseguire la causa con ulteriori appelli. Dopo l’accordo con Ford, Kearns ebbe il processo contro la Chrysler e agì come avvocato di se stesso, ponendosi domande al banco dei testimoni. Il verdetto del caso Chrysler fu deciso nel 1992, e fu una vittoria per Kearns. Alla Chrysler fu imposto il pagamento di 18.7 milioni di dollari con gli interessi. Chrysler si appellò ma la Corte d’Appello Federale degli Stati Uniti lasciò il giudizio immutato.
Kearns morì il 9 febbraio 2005 di cancro al cervello, con complicazione dovuta al Morbo di Alzheimer, a Baltimora, Maryland. La storia della sua invenzione e della querela contro la Ford formano le basi del film Flash of Genius. Robert Kearns e sua moglie Phyllis erano divorziati. Ebbero due figlie, quattro figli e al momento della sua morte sette nipoti.
Un’altra storia, simile, racconta…:
Nel 1847 il dottor Ignác Semmelweis, un giovane medico ungherese, fu assunto nel reparto maternità del Policlinico di Vienna. Egli notò che nella prima divisione, dove operavano medici e studenti, la mortalità era dieci volte superiore rispetto alla seconda divisione, affidata a ostetriche e infermiere. Semmelweis ebbe l’intuizione giusta quando un collega, il professor Jakob Kolletschka, morì di febbre puerperale dopo che uno studente lo aveva ferito accidentalmente con un bisturi durante un’autopsia. Medici e studenti visitavano le degenti dopo aver toccato i cadaveri delle donne morte di febbre puerperale, così dedusse che l’infezione si trasmetteva attraverso le mani sporche. E propose la soluzione ovvia: lavarsi le mani prima di visitare le degenti. La sua idea venne respinta: il lavaggio delle mani fu considerato una novità offensiva e l’incarico non gli viene rinnovato. Semmelweis tornò a lavorare in Ungheria ma anche qui la sua teoria incontrò forti resistenze e nel 1857 gli venne revocata la cattedra di ostetricia che gli era stata assegnata nell’Università di Pest. Nel 1865 Semmelweis iniziò a mostrare segni di squilibrio mentale e fu ricoverato in una casa di cura per alienati dove morì il 13 agosto. La verità scientifica della sua teoria verrà confermata più avanti, grazie alla scoperta dei batteri da parte di Pasteur. La febbre puerperale era causata da uno streptococco e l’infezione si poteva evitare con normali procedure antisettiche: lavandosi le mani.
Oggi basta Topo Gigio che compare in televisione perché la cosa sia accettata!! Morale delle storie…:
Tanti concetti che oggi ci appaiono scontati hanno faticato parecchio per affermarsi e molte persone hanno pagato un duro prezzo perché la verità venisse a galla. E così molti concetti che domani saranno ovvi ancora oggi sono incompresi o osteggiati, perché le verità per affermarsi deve combattere contro gruppi di potere, di interesse o semplicemente contro la stupidità dilagante. Storie e scacchi…: Come nella vita anche negli scacchi le novità sono sempre osteggiate soprattutto quando il silicio non dà parere positivo… Una novità che i programmi informatici scacchistici non danno vantaggio di +0.80 sarà scartata a priori!! Dovranno faticare parecchio questi nuovi concetti per affermarsi… Mi piace soffermarmi su alcune aperture per niente contemplate ma che possono anche raccogliere discreti risultati in tornei di media forza… è la storia di un’idea!!!
E’ chiaro che si può rientrare nella posizione anche partendo con 1.Cf3 d5 2.e4 … Pronti via e il silicio dà vantaggio al nero (0.43), ma è un’idea che porta con sé grandi insidie e alcuni Maestri anche a tempo lungo hanno deciso di provare!! … è la storia di un’idea!!!
Kozii,Yuri (2280) – Sutorikhin,Vladimir (2350) Szeged TT10 IM Szeged, 18.10.1998
[B01]: Difesa Scandinava 1.e4 d5 2.Cf3 dxe4 3.Cg5 Cf6 4.Cc3 Cbd7 5.Ac4 e6 6.Axe6 fxe6 7.Cxe6 De7 8.Cxc7+ Rd8 9.Cxa8 Ce5 10.d4 exd3 11.0–0 b6 12.Te1 Ag4 13.f3 Axf3 14.gxf3 Cxf3+ 15.Dxf3 Dxe1+ 16.Rg2 dxc2 17.Cd5 Ac5 18.Cxf6 gxf6 19.Dxf6+ Rd7 20.Df5+ Rc6 21.Df3+ Rd7 22.Dd5+ Re8 23.Cc7+ 1–0
Buergi,Oswald (1972) – Schuettig,Ruediger (2234) [B01] Rail 4 countries 22nd Arosa, 26.06.2006
[B01]: Difesa Scandinava 1.e4 d5 2.Cf3 dxe4 3.Cg5 Cf6 4.Cc3 e6 5.Cgxe4 Cxe4 6.Cxe4 c5 7.g3 Cc6 8.Ag2 Ae7 9.d3 e5 10.Ae3 Cd4 11.0–0 0–0 12.Rh1 f5 13.Cc3 f4 14.Axd4 exd4 15.Cd5 Ad6 16.Ae4 Dg5 17.gxf4 Axf4 18.Tg1 Dh4 19.Cxf4 Txf4 20.f3 Tb8 21.De2 Df6 22.Ad5+ Rf8 23.Tae1 Ad7 24.Dg2 g6 25.Dg3 Dd6 26.Te4 Tf6 27.Dg5 Rg7 28.Tge1 Tbf8 29.Te7+ T6f7 30.Axf7 Txf7 31.Txf7+ Rxf7 32.Dh6 Rg8 33.Dh4 Ac6 34.Rg2 Dd5 35.Df6 1–0 | ||||
Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:23:18 +0000 | ||||
| Europei, la sconfitta di Caruana contro Sokolov | ||||
|
Vediamo come il bianco giochi in maniera aggressiva prendendo molti rischi, fino a quando Fabiano decide di restituire il pezzo con 28…Cxd7 che probabilmente è la mossa perdente, anche se non appare facile trovare un’altro piano. A questo punto Sokolov diventa implacabile e conclude con precisione. | ||||
Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:41:24 +0000 | ||||
| Diccionario de ajedrez - Ramón Ibero | ||||
![]() Volumen 62 de la Colección Escaques - Ramón Ibero nos ofrece una valiosísima obra de consulta en el presente diccionario ajedrecístico. Aquí están la mayoría de las respuestas a nuestras dudas sobre el significado de los términos que, con frecuencia, encontramos en las crónicas, revista o libros de ajedrez. Este libro va más allá de un simple diccionario, por su intensidad informativa bien puede considerarse un método de iniciación al mundo del ajedrez. La obra está complementada con el reglamento oficial y cuadros de rondas para conducir certámenes de tres a veinte jugadores. Mediafire | ||||
Tue, 16 Mar 2010 06:04:00 +0000 | ||||
| Ivanchuk in sole lead after three rounds in Nice | ||||
The 19th Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament takes place at the Palais de la Mediterranée in Nice, France, from March 12 to 25, 2010. The event is organized by the Association Max Euwe of chess maecenas Joop van Oosterom, which is based in Monaco. The total prize-fund is € 216,000. The following twelve grandmasters take part: Magnus Carlsen (Norway, 2813), Vladimir Kramnik (Russia, 2790), Levon Aronian (Armenia, 2782), Alexander Grischuk (Russia, 2756), Boris Gelfand (Israel, 2750), Peter Svidler (Russia, 2750), Vasily Ivanchuk (Ukraine, 2748), Vugar Gashimov (Azerbaijan, 2740), Ruslan Ponomariov (Ukraine, 2737), Sergey Karjakin (Russia, 2725), Leinier Dominguez (Cuba, 2713) and Jan Smeets (The Netherlands, 2651). Games round 3Game viewer by ChessTempo Round 3 reportVasily Ivanchuk in sole lead Vasily Ivanchuk immersed in thought at the start of his blindfold game against Sergey Karjakin. Following a 1½-½ win over his former compatriot the Ukrainian grandmaster is in the sole lead. Alexander Grischuk and Boris Gelfand played a blindfold game that at first sight may have looked lively and entertaining for the spectators. However, they were following a theoretical line and after the game Grischuk summed up his assessment of what had happened as ‘very boring’. White had a small advantage in the ending that appeared on the board, but it never took on serious proportions and the games petered out to a draw. For Gelfand the line evoked old memories: ‘The last time I played this line was in 1988 in Vilnius. Against Goldin at the Soviet Young Masters.’ Certainly an interesting footnote to this game.
When Leinier Dominguez arrived at the board for his blindfold game against Ruslan Ponomariov, the Ukrainian grandmaster already sat waiting impatiently. As he laughingly told the arbiter: ‘I am nervous, let’s start!’ Once he was allowed to start the game, Ponomariov went for 4…g6 against the Ruy Lopez, a set-up that is sometimes considered slightly suspect, but mostly leads to satisfactory play for Black. Dominguez certainly obtained an edge, but with precise and active play Ponomariov comfortably equalized and once they reached a rook endgame with three pawns on each side, there were few reasons left not to draw the game.
The blindfold game between Vugar Gashimov and Vladimir Kramnik saw the Russian grandmaster play another Pirc. However, this time it didn’t bring him much pleasure, as his mix of set-ups landed him in a risky position. Things looked threatening for Kramnik, especially when on move 26 Gashimov got a golden opportunity. With 26.Rxd6 he could have been a healthy pawn up, as 26…Ne8 is answered by 27.Rxh6, but instead of all this the Azeri grandmaster played 26.Nxd6 and a few moves later he agreed on a draw.
The blindfold game between Peter Svidler and Magnus Carlsen started with a comic prologue when, once they were seated behind their laptops, the Norwegian discovered much to his dismay that he wasn’t White is this game, as he had believed, but Black. The comedy of errors was continued in the game and even after the Russian had resigned, when the spectators in the hospitality lounge switched on some engines. In the game Carlsen invited Svidler to play a full-fledged Dragon, but instead White opted for a more quiet approach. For some time there was nothing new under the sun until White played a new move, 19.Qf4 (19.Qe2 had been seen). The comedy of errors came back to life on move 20, when Svidler suddenly had second thoughts about the intended 20.Rxd7 because of 20…Qc6 21.Rxb7 Rxf4 22.Bd5 and now 22…Qf6 wins for Black. However, both players had missed 22.Rb6 with an edge for White. On move, 22 Svidler refrained from 22.Qh3 because he didn’t like 22…Nf4, but after the move he played, 22.Qe1, he was unpleasantly surprised by 22…Bxg2. Now Black developed a raging attack, but was it was deadly as Svidler acknowledged when, after 25…Nd4, he resigned? Indeed it would have been if Black had played 24…Nh4+ (instead of 24…Nf4+). But now things were different, as in the final position the engines immediately showed the amazing 26.Nd7!, attacking the rook on f8, and there is no immediate win and the position looks drawish.
When Sergey Karjakin, who is now playing for Russia, sat down to play his former compatriot Vasily Ivanchuk there was little doubt that a fierce clash would follow. In the blindfold game Ivanchuk gradually managed to took over the initiative and when he pushed 19…c4! it was clear that Karjakin faced a difficult defence. The final mistake White made on move 32, when playing his bishop to a3, he allowed Black to invade his position and force his surrender. Jan Smeets was happy with the outcome of the opening of his blindfold game against Levon Aronian. After all he was allowed to play the improvement he had suggested after his game against Karjakin in Round 2, 17.Be4 instead of 17.Ne4. White got an edge, but failed to exploit it. His first inaccuracy was 24.Rac1 where 24.a4 was called for, but the real mistake was 26.Bxd8?, an exchange that was prompted by his fear that Black’s knight would come to e6 and White’s bishop on f6 would end up out of play. Now Smeets suddenly found himself in an unpleasant rook endgame, which Aronian first converted in a winning pawn endgame and then into a winning queen endgame. Report & photos © official website, more here Videos
![]() ![]() ![]() Links
| ||||
Mon, 15 Mar 2010 20:30:14 +0000 | ||||
| Plagued by network problems | ||||
| Only light blogging for the moment as I seemed to be plagued by network connectivity problems (cf the missing thursday post). For some reason websites seem slow/unreachable while time wasters like World of Warcraft are still available! | ||||
Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:45:00 +0000 | ||||
| Faites de l'exercice pour progresser | ||||
C'est bien connu, rien de tel que l'exercice régulier pour garder la forme échiquéenne! Pour cela, nous vous proposons chaque jour 3 problèmes d'échecs tactiques avec Shredder pour démarrer en douceur. Ensuite, vous pourrez choisir des positions réelles, selon 3 niveaux de difficulté croissante. Pour vous entraîner chaque jour et progresser aux échecs, retrouver notre sélection d'exercices sur | ||||
Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:19:00 +0000 | ||||
| Amber R2: Carlsen bounces back, beats Aronian 2-0 | ||||
The 19th Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament takes place at the Palais de la Mediterranée in Nice, France, from March 12 to 25, 2010. The event is organized by the Association Max Euwe of chess maecenas Joop van Oosterom, which is based in Monaco. The total prize-fund is € 216,000. The following twelve grandmasters take part: Magnus Carlsen (Norway, 2813), Vladimir Kramnik (Russia, 2790), Levon Aronian (Armenia, 2782), Alexander Grischuk (Russia, 2756), Boris Gelfand (Israel, 2750), Peter Svidler (Russia, 2750), Vasily Ivanchuk (Ukraine, 2748), Vugar Gashimov (Azerbaijan, 2740), Ruslan Ponomariov (Ukraine, 2737), Sergey Karjakin (Russia, 2725), Leinier Dominguez (Cuba, 2713) and Jan Smeets (The Netherlands, 2651). Games round 2Game viewer by ChessTempo Round 2 reportCarlsen bounces back with 2-0 win over defending champion Aronian Magnus Carlsen fared excellently in Round 2 with two wins over Levon Aronian. After the round the Norwegian was happy to comment on his blindfold game for the tournament website. Just like last year the second round of the Amber tournament clashed with the final stage of Paris-Nice, the 8-stage cycling race that started in Paris (you had guessed that much) a week ago. For many hours the Promenade des Anglais was crowded with people waiting for the denouement of the 68th edition of this legendary race and we can tell you that quite a number of chess fans mingled among these spectators. But after, early in the afternoon, Alberto Contador had won his second Paris-Nice, three years after his first victory, they could concentrate on chess again. Right they were. After the drama in Round 1 there was every reason to look forward to the developments in Round 2. ![]() The final stage of the cycling course Paris-Nice finished today, about two hundred metres from the venue and about two minutes after the second round started | Photo Nadja Wittmann ![]() Alberto Contador after winning the final stage of Paris-Nice | Photo Nadja Wittmann Magnus Carlsen was obviously eager to fight back after yesterday’s dramatic 2-0 loss, but with Levon Aronian as opponent this was easier said than done. Moreover the Norwegian had the black pieces in the blindfold game and one would think that his first concern should be not to lose again. Already before the tournament Carlsen had prepared the King’s Indian and his ambition to steer for a highly complicated struggle worked out beyond expectation. To begin with he got the chance to implement an idea he had seen in a game Eljanov-Radjabov; a quick counter-push on the queenside to undermine White’s centre followed by a piece sacrifice (20…Nxd5) to break up that same centre. The tactical complications that ensued demanded a lot from both players and it was soon clear that Carlsen felt more at ease. Aronian missed the push 22…e4, a seemingly contradictory move that seems to contribute little to Black’s wish to open up lines and files, but which in fact is the right move to keep his initiative going. White could still have put up some resistance with 25.Bg5 (instead of 25.Nxf2), but Aronian had also missed 25…Qh4, which in case of 26.Be1 is followed by the deadly 26…Be5. Three moves later Aronian threw the towel. Carlsen found it easy to smile again when a couple of minutes later he spoke to the press. ![]() Blindfold: Carlsen beats Aronian with Black in a spectacular King's Indian Jan Smeets had no trouble acknowledging that he had been completely lost in his blindfold game against Sergey Karjakin, as he was happy enough with the half point that he had saved miraculously. In a Ruy Lopez with 3…Nge7 and 4…g6, White drifted into trouble when he played his knight to e4 on move 17 (better 17.Be4) and followed this up with 20.Nf6+. Things quickly went from bad to worse and with 35…Kf8 Black could have forced his resignation. But even the pawn ending that Karjakin allowed his opponent, was lost for Black if only he had found 46…h5. Now the Dutch grandmaster could save the draw, even if, as usually, he was very short of time for the greater part of the game. ![]() Dutchman Jan Smeets managed to draw twice with Sergey Karjakin The blindfold game between Vasily Ivanchuk and Peter Svidler not surprisingly saw a Grünfeld Defence, an opening in which the Russian is one of today’s greatest specialists. Afterwards he called the opening phase of ‘mild theoretical importance’, as Ivanchuk deviated on move 11 from an earlier game Gelfand-Svidler. In that game White played 11.Be2, Ivanchuk preferred to first play 11.Nf3. Almost forced the players ended up in an ending that Svidler had (of course) looked at before and although Black’s play is not entirely carefree he felt that it should be a draw objectively speaking. As a possible improvement for White he indicated 21.Bc6, the way it went now the point was quickly shared. Boris Gelfand recovered from his poor performance in the first round with a win in the blindfold game against Vugar Gashimov. Nevertheless he called it ‘a stupid game’, as he had spoiled an excellent opening position to end up in a problematic situation. The last trick he wanted to try in order to extricate himself from this situation was 20.Nxd5. Now he was lucky as Gashimov could have played 22…Qb4 and White might as well resign. After 22…Qc7, White’s problems were not over yet, but when Black blundered with 23…Qxc4?, he suddenly was presented with a winning position. For the rest of the game Gelfand kept his eyes on the ball and converted his advantage without further problems. The blindfold game between Vladimir Kramnik and Leinier Dominguez was a fascinating fight. Obviously Kramnik emphatically played for a win, but Dominguez fought back in his customary razor-sharp style. The game was decided when in a highly complicated position the Cuban grandmaster continued 36…Kh7 where his only chance was 36…Bf8. With the text-move he invited a forced mate and a couple of moves before this mate would become reality, Dominguez resigned. ![]() Deep concentration: Leinier Dominguez and Vladimir Kramnik The blindfold game between Ruslan Ponomariov and Alexander Grischuk saw a Catalan Opening, similar to a game Ponomariov had played with colours reversed against Gelfand in the final of the recent World Cup. Instead of 10…Bb7, as Ponomariov had played, Grischuk went 10…Ba6. White obtained the bishop pair, but with a symmetrical pawn-structure it was difficult to exploit that slight advantage. Both players invested a lot of time as there were always tactics to be considered with opposing rooks on the c-file, but when Grischuk offered the opportunity to repeat moves and agree to a draw, Ponomariov saw no good reason to play on. Report & photos © official website, more here Videos
![]() ![]() ![]() Links
| ||||
Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:32:01 +0000 | ||||
| Re: Unzipping UEL files now corrupt? | ||||
| Hi,
I don't change anything. When I downloaded a file I have no problem to unzip it with Winrar. Regards, Patrick Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t804-Unzipping-UEL-files-now-corrupt.htm?p=2293 | ||||
Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:26:45 +0000 | ||||
| El match del siglo - Ludek Pachman | ||||
![]() Volumen 40 de la Colección Escaques - Indiscutiblemente que el campeonato mundial de ajedrez disputado en 1972 en Reykjavik, entre Boris Spassky y Robert Fischer, mereció el título de "Match del Siglo". Este campeonato puso al ajedrez en el escaparate mundial, fuera de la élite ajedrecista de aquella época y, para muchos de los que ahora lo practicamos, fue nuestro primer acercamiento al juego ciencia. Hoy es grato recordar esas partidas de la mano del maestro Pachman, quien escribió este libro en ese mismo año, tan pronto culminó el match. Está sazonado con comentarios del Dr. Werner Lauterbach acerca de los sucesos previos al match, así como con comentarios técnicos de las aperturas utilizadas, hechos por el propio Pachman. Mediafire | ||||
Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:05:00 +0000 | ||||
| De la Apertura al Final - Edmar Mednis | ||||
![]() Volumen 76 de la Colección Escaques - No hay duda que las dos fases de la partida de ajedrez que pueden aprenderse mejor son la apertura y el final. En este volumen, el gran Maestro Edmar Mednis, experto mundial en finales de ajedrez, expone cómo pasar de la apertura a un final favorable en el menor número de jugadas, eludiendo en escencia el medio juego. En resumen, Mednis nos muestra cómo lograr los mejores movimientos en la apertura para llegar al final con ventaja. Va dedicado especialmente a aquellos jugadores que se sienten incómodos en posiciones del medio juego. (Este libro de Escaques, de la década de los 80, está editado en notación algebraica). Mediafire | ||||
Mon, 01 Mar 2010 04:59:00 +0000 | ||||
| Una espléndida partida de lucha | ||||
| Y con un increíble final, fue la que jugaron Michal Krasenkow y Baadur Jobava en la cuarta ronda del Campeonato de Europa Individual que se está celebrando en la ciudad croata de Rijeka. Aquí las blancas acaban de atacar el caballo negro en d5 por tercera vez con 33.Dg2. ¿Qué opina de la situación? A) La batería de la columna d resulta decisiva en favor de las blancas; B) un inteligente truco para librarse de la clavada conduce a un final con calidad de menos para las negras, pero que probablemente sea de tablas. C) el segundo jugador gana. Puede ver la solución aquí, pero antes de mirarla le sugerimos que reflexione sobre el problema con una versión más grande del diagrama... | ||||
Sat, 13 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT | ||||
| Ivanchuk beats Carlsen 2-0 in first round Amber | ||||
The 19th Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament takes place at the Palais de la Mediterranée in Nice, France, from March 12 to 25, 2010. The event is organized by the Association Max Euwe of chess maecenas Joop van Oosterom, which is based in Monaco. The total prize-fund is € 216,000. The following twelve grandmasters take part: Magnus Carlsen (Norway, 2813), Vladimir Kramnik (Russia, 2790), Levon Aronian (Armenia, 2782), Alexander Grischuk (Russia, 2756), Boris Gelfand (Israel, 2750), Peter Svidler (Russia, 2750), Vasily Ivanchuk (Ukraine, 2748), Vugar Gashimov (Azerbaijan, 2740), Ruslan Ponomariov (Ukraine, 2737), Sergey Karjakin (Russia, 2725), Leinier Dominguez (Cuba, 2713) and Jan Smeets (The Netherlands, 2651). Games round 1Game viewer by ChessTempo Round 1 reportFirst day sensation: top-seed Carlsen loses 2-0 to ‘Mr Amber’
There were also references to Steely Dan’s Hey Nineteen, Joe Jackson’s Nineteen Forever and Chanel 19 (by some strange coincidence Coco Chanel was presented the famous Chanel logo – two C’s elegantly locked together – by the owner of the Chateau de Cremat about a century ago!) and of course the twelve grandmasters were welcomed, with a special mention for Vasily Ivanchuk, ‘Mr Amber’, who participated in all 19 tournaments. Once the drawing of lots had taken place, we could start to think about the pairings for the first round and the overall chances of the participants. Who is the top-favourite for first place? Vladimir Kramnik, who won a record of six Amber tournaments? Levon Aronian, who won the last two editions? Or Magnus Carlsen, the world’s number one, who very appropriately celebrated his 19th birthday a couple of months ago? In any case the opening round didn’t go as they may have hoped. Not at all.
Today at 14.30 the first round started of a blindfold and rapid spectacle that will keep us entertained for the coming fortnight (the 11th and last round is on March 25). As always the players started with two blindfold sessions (in each of which six GMs played) followed by two rapid sessions and immediately there were some intriguing pairings. When Ruslan Ponomariov saw at the drawing of lots that he had to play Boris Gelfand in the first round, he wondered aloud if he had to play Gelfand for the rest of his life. What he meant to say was that this was his first official competition since the dramatic final Gelfand and he played in the World Cup last December, a lengthy final that was only decided in the blitz games. Ponomariov’s second remark was that he wanted to have his revenge for that lost final. The only problem was that the first game was a blindfold game and his experience in that discipline was almost zero. In fact he had asked to play a training game on the day of his arrival in Nice. To avoid any complications he decided to play fast and to remain fully concentrated, not even considering the option of going to the toilet if needed. The approach worked well, as with the help of Gelfand his opening was a great success and after 15.Ng5 he felt that he was spoiled for choice when looking for a way to exploit his advantage. The game was practically decided when Ponomariov captured Black’s h-pawn. The rest was simple and he converted without any problems. After the game he was greatly relieved that this game for which he had been so nervous had gone so well. ‘Perhaps it turns out that I am not so bad at blindfold chess.’ He also shared his impression of playing chess on a screen that only shows an empty chess board: ‘It’s just like a computer game!’
Russian champion Alexander Grischuk had his work cut out for him when he immediately had to play Vladimir Kramnik. There could be no misunderstanding about Kramnik’s intentions as he played almost all his moves instantly. ‘He wanted to trick me’, smiled Grischuk after the game. Playing with white he had to leave the initiative to Black, but to his mind Kramnik went too far in his winning attempt. But even if Black ended up in a difficult position, the situation was still far from lost and things only got hopeless when he reverted to the desperate 38…Nxg4, where it seemed that Black could have stayed in the game with 38…Nf3. Now things were easy for Grischuk and the handful of seconds he still had on the clock proved enough to win an important scalp.
The encounter between debutants Dominguez and Gashimov took a relatively quiet course, although the grandmaster from Azerbaijan offered to play a sharp Benoni, an invitation that was quietly turned down with Rodriguez. They ended up in a rook endgame that was slightly better for Black, but it was his lavish use of time that did Dominguez in. With more than ten minutes less on the clock he committed a few inaccuracies and when Gashimov stormed down the board with two passed pawns it was clear that the fight was over. After the game Gashimov was congratulated on his blindfold debut and confessed that he had not especially prepared for this unusual type of chess. ‘I played one training game two days ago against Ruslan (Ponomariov), this was my second game.’ Magnus Carlsen openend his blindfold game against Vasily Ivanchuk with 1.a3, aiming for an open battle, unburdened by theory and steering clear of any possible preparation of his opponent. The plan wasn’t a success, even if he managed to win a pawn, but Black got such good compensation that the Norwegian top-seed must have regretted his unorthodox approach. He kept looking for his chances, but Ivanchuk remained fully concentrated and his advantage was such that at some point the white position should collapse. An oversight on move 31 sped up the end of the game and floored another top-favourite.
‘It’s been a while, clearly’, Peter Svidler commented after he had beaten Jan Smeets in his first Amber blindfold game in three years. Svidler had an edge from the opening, but Smeets should have been able to hold a draw. Things got funny when Svidler, played his 39th move thinking Black’s bishop was on e6 (it was on d7). That it was not, he found out when Black played 39…Ne6+ and picked up the pawn on g5. This was not a problem in itself as now White can go 40.Nd5+ and pick up the b6 pawn, but not knowing where the black bishop was, Svidler now reasoned that it was on c6, which ‘prevented’ this knight jump. Smeets on his part got confused by White’s 44.Bxg6 and panicked with 45…Be6 when 45…Kg5 was still a draw. Well, in fact he would have even won, as (still thinking the black bishop was on c6) Svidler had planned to answer 45…Kg5 with 46.Be4 Kxh6 47.Bc6, thinking he would capture a bishop but in fact giving one away. After this comedy of errors had ended, Smeets was left with a lost position and had to resign soon. Sergey Karjakin obtained a winning position in the blindfold game when in a sharp opening tussle Levon Aronian committed a serious error. Instead of 19…Bg5?, the Armenian grandmaster should have played 19…Bh4 or 19…Rb4. Things looked bleak for Aronian, but then he didn’t win himself a reputation for ‘slow-motion’ swindling for nothing last year. And this time, too, he almost escaped when Karjakin allowed a repetition of moves. But Aronian was going for the whole hog and thinking he was winning he didn’t repeat moves, but played 36…Nxc3, which turned out to be a losing move. Report & photos © official website, more here Videos
![]() ![]() ![]() Links
| ||||
Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:34:21 +0000 | ||||
| European Individual Championships Rijeka 2010 | ||||
| The European Individual Championships for men and women take place 6th-18th March 2010 in Rijeka. Leading entries include: Etienne Bacrot, Zoltan Almasi, Sergei Movsesian, David Navara, Evgeny Tomashevsky, Francisco Vallejo Pons, Evgeny Alekseev, Alexander Motylev, Michael Adams, Viktor Bologan, Liviu-Dieter Nisipeanu,
Gabriel Sargissian,
Vladimir Akopian,
Alexander Moiseenko,
Fabiano Caruana,
Kiril Georgiev etc.
The first round was on Saturday. The Official site seems very well put together with live games, video and commentaries. However on day one they did have problems coping with the level of traffic, but there has been a steady improvement since then. It marks a trend this year which seems to indicate traffic to official sites has been increasing. Play starts at 2:30pm UK time. All the live games and their results are now up along with previous rounds complete. chess-results.com has the full official results and standings and the latest pairings. | ||||
Fri 12 Mar 2010 10:22:00 AM UTC | ||||
| 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 White Repertoire Webliography | ||||
| I have been developing a 1.e4 e5 White repertoire based on the Italian Game or Giuoco Piano (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4) where White blows open the center with an early d4 (after 3...Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 or the gambit 3...Bc5 4.d4!?) rather than play the "quieter" Giuoco lines with 4.c3 Nf6 5.d3 (which will feature in a repertoire book by John Emms titled Beating 1.e4 e5 due in May from Everyman Chess). The repertoire also features the aggressive "Duffer's Attack" against the Two Knights (with 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 -- which Seigbert Tarrasch famously labeled a "duffer's move"). I realized the other day that my repertoire could be learned from web sources alone, so I thought I'd take on the challenge of putting together a "1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 White Repertoire Webliography" for anyone who is interested. I have also listed a few books and other materials for those who want to study these lines more deeply. I present the repertoire as a 14-part webliography of sources. Even if you are not interested in the Giuoco Piano, you may benefit from the recommendations and online resources against the Petroff, Philidor, Latvian, Elephant, and other lines at Black's disposal. As always, I invite reader comments and additions. 1. Giuoco Piano Overview (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5) I recommend learning a few different Giuoco Piano lines to get the maximum enjoyment from the repertoire. I am personally most interested in the Steinitz-Sveshnikov Attack (4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.e5!?), but I have also enjoyed trying out the Moeller Attack (4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3), Rossolimo Variation (with 7.Bd2), and Max Lange Attack and Gambit (beginning 4.d4!?). All are lots of fun to play for amateurs and well supported by online sources. Some of these lines are regarded as "suspect" by GM theory, but all have been used with success by GMs, while amateurs will find them simply deadly against their level of competition. Those interested in exploring the world of the Giuoco Piano or Italian Game in greater depth might pick up Jan Pinski's Italian Game and Evans Gambit (Everyman 2005) or Jude Acers and George Laven's The Italian Gambit System (Trafford 2003)--the latter of which has a surprising amount of good opening advice to offer amateur players. I also have Reinhold Ripperger's ChessBase CD on The Giuoco Piano, which has some annotated games and exercises but is probably not worth the investment. As usual, the web offers everything most amateur players will need to get started:
1A. The Giuoco Piano, Steinitz-Sveshnikov Attack, a.k.a. "Anderssen Attack" (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.e5!?) The advance with 6.e5!? secures a space advantage for White and creates opportunities for controlling the dark squares and attacking on the kingside. First played by Adolf Anderssen, the line was adopted by Wilhelm Steinitz in a few World Championship match games with Lasker (though he later rejected the line in favor of the Moeller Attack), and much later revived with success by the great theoretician Evgeny Sveshnikov. There really is not much good "book" material on this line, though Pinski or Acers & Laven offer coverage. Currently I am analyzing Ni Hua's games based on his notes in Mihail Marin's excellent book on the Reggio Emilia tournament. I think this line is typically underestimated by theory and can be deadly at amateur level. It also does not risk as much as the gambit lines and is more fun than the Rossolimo.
1B. The Giuoco Piano, Moeller Attack (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Nc3) This is a risky line and Black probably keeps a pawn with best play, but you are not going to find too many opponents below 2000 ELO who can prove that over the board. Besides, these lines are a lot of fun and Black has lots of ways to go wrong. If an amateur player asked my advice on learning the Moeller Attack, I think I would recommend hunting down a copy of Andy Soltis's fun little book Winning with the Giuoco Piano and the Max Lange Attack (Chess Digest 1996), which presents the material wonderfully for non-experts (though John Nunn questions some of the analysis in his Secrets of Practical Chess). Due to its historical significance and continuing interest among beginners, there is plenty of material online, especially Tim Harding's articles (cited above) and the following links:
1C. Giuoco Piano, Rossolimo Variation (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 Nf6 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ 7.Bd2) The idea of playing the safe 7.Bd2 was revived by U.S. players Nicolas Rossolimo and Edmar Mednis and recently advocated by Roman Dzindzichashvili in some videos and in Chess Openings for White, Explained. The game Rossolimo-Reissmann, Puerto Rico 1967, is rather inspiring. Though the resulting trade of Bishops generally eases Black's task, the line still leads to wide open positions with plenty of piece play and chances for both sides. White accepts an isolated pawn, but this gives him control over the center, especially the c5 and e5 squares. You will see that theory finds two methods of achieving equality for Black, but that is never the end of the story in amateur games.
1D. Max Lange Gambit and Attack (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4) There has been a revived interest in the Max Lange Attack and Max Lange Gambit, due mainly to some excellent analysis published by Lev Gutman and Stefan Bücker in the German chess journal Kaissiber (volumes 22-25 especially). Most of Gutman and Bücker's analysis is neatly summarized by John Emms in the recent Dangerous Weapons: 1.e4 e5 (Everyman 2008), which I have reviewed in these pages and think is excellent. You can also find lots of material online, including by yours truly:
2. Rousseau Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 f5!?) This counter-gambit is much trickier than you would expect and must be met vigorously by 4.d4! See the second part of the McGrew analysis for details.
3. Blackburne Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nd4?!) Black's idea resembles the Bird Defense to the Ruy Lopez, except that White's Bishop is much better placed on c4 than on b5 once the Knight goes to d4. White should probably play 4.Nxd4! exd4 (White is up two tempi on the Bird) 5.c3! with a clear advantage. The quiet alternative 4.c3!? Nxf3+ 5.Qxf3 Qf6 yields White little. You may be amused, as I was, by the idea of "falling for" the trap after4.Nxe5?!? Qg5 5.Bxf7+ Ke7 6.O-O! and Tim McGrew does the best job of demonstrating White's chances for attack.
Two Knights, Duffer's Attack Overview (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5) Seigbert Tarrasch may have called it a "Duffer's Move," but 4.Ng5 clearly forces Black to surrender a pawn or suffer a dangerous attack. In "Duffer's Delight," a writer at the Streatham & Brixton Chess Blog describes some of the reasons why 4.Ng5 is being seen more frequently in GM practice, as computers have helped analysts recognize that even odd-looking ways of winning or holding an extra pawn are difficult to meet. 4.Two Knights, Duffer's Attack, Traxler Counter-Gambit (4.Ng5 Bc5!?) This may well be the toughest thing Black has against the Duffer's Attack with 4.Ng5, but I feel safe with the unusual 5.d4!? This is the rarest line for White, the easiest to study, and offers some safe bail-out options (like 5.d4 d5! 6.dxc4 dxc5 7.Qxd8+ etc). Pinski does not think much of it, but other authors think it may be best. If you disagree, check out the webliography for more links -- including the complete set of articles by Maarten de Zeeuw from New in Chess Yearbook available online for download.
5. Two Knights, Duffer's Attack, Amazing Counter Attack (4.Ng5 Nxe4?!) Tim Harding explored this wild line (based on the idea that 5.Nxe4?! d5 is good for Black), returning to the subject later with the best ideas for White. Best to be prepared so you are not amazed.
6. Two Knights, Lolli Attack or Fried Liver (4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4! or 6.Nxf7!?) This is actually a bit of a disputed territory of late, thanks to the use of computers. And some players (most notably Dan Heisman) have made a very deep study of these lines, concluding that Black might be able to hold or reach an unclear position. However, at the amateur level, you can be pretty certain that if your opponent plays into this line he has done so unwittingly and is going to be defeated swiftly. The Lolli Attack (with 6.d4!) seems like the way to get the most out of the position compared to the traditional Fried Liver continuation (with 6.Nxf7!?), but both are very effective at the amateur level. Hat tip to The Bishops Bounty for pointing me to some sources.
7. Two Knights, Duffer's Attack, Gunsberg Variation (4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+ c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Bd3!?) Daniel Stellwagen's article in SOS #9 on the surprising 8.Bd3!? (securing e4 for the Knight's retreat, as in Stellwagen - de Jong) seems to have inspired a number of GM games, including Nakamura-Friedel, Short - Sokolov, and Conquest-Howell. Nakamura's use of the line to win the 2009 US Championship certainly gave it excellent publicity. White gets a very dynamic and complex game with an extra pawn and solid position. The pressure is on Black to show what he has got.
8. Two Knights, Duffer's Attack, Fritz-Ulvestad (4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 or 5...b5) This is another tricky territory for White, but some recent games suggest that White looks good after 5....b5 6.Bf1 Nd4 7.c3 Nxd5 8.cxd4 in the Fritz-Ulvestad. I am looking for more analysis to support this section.
9.Hungarian and Closed Defenses (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4) Besides the traditional Giuoco Piano with 3...Bc5 and the Two Knights Defense with 3...Nf6, Black can also play several moves leading to a more closed position with 3...Be7 (the Hungarian Defense), 3...Qe7 (Euwe's traditional Closed line), 3...d6 (Mihail Marin's recent favorite) or 3...g6 (my own preference as Black). Jan Pinski's book on the Italian Game and Evans Gambit (Everyman 2005) probably offers the most objective coverage of these lines. None of these lines is something White needs to fear. The simplest general policy is to play as you would against the closed Philidor with c3, d4, h3, and a4, restraining Black and holding onto more space. I would say that you will rarely encounter these lines at the amateur level.
10. Philidor's Defense (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4) Since my bibliography, Christian Seel's The Philidor: A Secret Weapon and a new edition of Van Rekom & Jansen's The Black Lion have come out to supplement Christian Bauer's book (which I now see has plenty of flaws). But the bibliography is still useful and offers the best "refutation" of Jim West's favorite Philidor Counter-Gambit with 3...f5: 4.exf5! as seen in Dvoirys - West, New York 2000.
11. Petroff (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4!) I think the best way to achieve an unbalanced position against the Petroff is by 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 which also has the advantage of getting many amateur Petroff players out of their comfort zone. If you are serious about finding an antidote to the Petroff, you might consider tracking down The Petroff Defence by GM Artur Yusupov (Olms 1999) which may still be the best reference on the 3.d4 lines I recommend.
12. Latvian (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f5!? 3.Nxe5! Qf6 4.Nc4!?) If you are somebody who likes to have a book to study an opening, you might consider picking up Tony Kosten's The Latvian Gambit Lives! (Batsford 2001), but online analysis has gone much further than Kosten. Though there is an intimidating amount of analysis on the line, I recommend the Leonhardt Variation, which I first encountered looking at the game Trifunovic - Apsenieks, Stockholm 1937. The line is recommended by a number of books, including Chess Openings for White, Explained.
13. Elephant Gambit (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 d5!? 3.exd5!) The best analysis of this tricky line is probably on the web, especially now that you can download an excellent chapter from Watson and Schiller's Survive & Beat Annoying Chess Openings. I have never encountered this opening in a game, but it pays to be prepared.
14. The Damiano (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6?) Does this really need commentary? Well, with Sam Sloan on the loose playing this move against unsuspecting youngsters, it at least deserves mention.
I hope you have enjoyed this repertoire and the number of excellent online resources that support it. There are many other resources out there, but not everyone has access to them. I have most enjoyed Boris Alterman's videos at ICC/Chess FM and look forward to his forthcoming Alterman Gambit Guide from Quality Press devoted to White Gambits. And I wish Chess Commander would stop ripping off my stuff. | ||||
Fri, 26 Feb 2010 20:13:00 +0000 | ||||
| Positively Sam Sloan | ||||
| Is there a strategy for Sloan getting back to some status of respectability in the chess world? (I’m thinking of something like the post-Watergate Nixon did.) First, let’s clear out some underbrush. About the election: Sloan’s election chances are slim. The worst thing from his standpoint was that he’s in an effectively 2 man race. Had there been a third man for that last slot, then he might have had a shot at getting in by the majority of anti-Sloan voters splitting their vote. As it is, every one of them can concentrate their votes on Walters. The election is Walters’ to loose. He does not need to be qualified or even knowledgeable; he just needs to avoid anything stupid. Sloan’s only hope is to get people thinking the USCF is badly managed and then go negative on Walters. He’s not up to the job; he cannot fix things – that sort of spiel. This is a plausible strategy for him; he likes attacking people. Still, Sloan faces the problem that he has no base of support. Further, in his case, his experience on the Board actually works against him in this election. I just do not see him winning this. Even if he does win, what does he get? - A seat at a Board where he will once again be isolated. Worse, Sloan being Sloan, he probably won’t be able to resist the opportunities to cause trouble. Having gone to the well once already, the USCF may do unto Sloan what it did to Polgar and Truong and expel him. Eviscerating the rules for removal from the Board will not be the novelty it was last year. Sloan’s best bet would be to withdraw from the race so that he can get an early start on his rehabilitation but to analyze that move would be to withdraw from any plausible Sloan-like behavior into fantasy. So, I assume that he will run, adopt some strategy such as I imagine, and loose. Then what? What is his best strategy from that point? | ||||
| Players protest “zero tolerance” rule | ||||
An interesting development is taking place at the European Individual Championships in Rijeka, Croatia. Participants in the tournament have shown their aversion to the “zero tolerance” rule which states that a player must be present when the round starts or suffer a forfeit. It was a matter of time before a protest would put an end to the policy. There would be nothing else to do if players held fast to the protest. This issue became the focal point of a controversy at the 2008 Olympiad where FIDE instituted the rule change without testing it. There were about 20 forfeitures at the Olympiad and inconsistent rulings on the matter. A good percentage of the forfeits involved African and Caribbean teams. There have been other high profile cases such as the Chinese Championship where Zhou Jianchao forfeited to Ding Liren, the eventual champion. Hou Yifan also forfeited despite being in the hall, but not at the board. Discussion on this issue has not abated since it had been imposed. The other getting a lot of attention was the policy on cell phones ringing. That rule has been widely accepted an automatic infraction and loss of game. A petition was circulated and 110 players (more than 25% of total) signed in support of a 30-minute grace period. Organizer Damir Vrhovnik had this to say,
What does this mean? It probably means that the organizers will capitulate and make the allowance. FIDE rules do allow for flexibility and leave it to the discretion of the organizers. However, this is the first protest of the rule which is said to be draconian. At the 2008 Olympiad, there was a vote and the players voted overwhelmingly for a grace period. One of the main problems with imposing this rule in Dresden, Germany was the fact that all federations were not housed in a village. In some cases, teams had to take an hour tram ride while others were within walking distance. Of course, there may be no such exception made at the 2010 Olympiad. However, the following regulation is still in the rulebook,
FIDE: http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook?id=94&view=article | ||||
Wed, 10 Mar 2010 06:10:28 +0000 | ||||
| The f-pawn, part 4: what to do when it goes wrong? | ||||
Black has taken White's f-pawn, leaving White exposed. Is there a way to deal with it? Stefansson-Djurhuus, Munkebo 1998. White to play. RB Over the last few columns we have been looking at the f-pawn as battering ram – an early, bullish advance to break open the enemy king's position with sheer aggression. But here the f-pawn has been exchanged very early – on the seventh move! There is no ram with which to batter, and the rook on f1, the usual beneficiary of any successful f-pawn push, is staring down at a solid phalanx of enemy pawns. Manoeuvring rather than force seems to be called for. But manoeuvre what where? Looking at White's own setup, there's an obvious target for Black in the e3 pawn. Can I advance it to e4 and, with exchanges, try to rid myself of the weakness? 1 e4 Nxe4 (not 1…fxe4 because of 2 Bg5) 2 Nxe4 – oh, oh, I can already see this is not going to work out well – 2…fxe4 3 Bxe4 and now 3…Rxf1+ 4 Kxf1 (4 Qxf1 loses the knight) Qf6+ and it's horrible for White. One way to protect the e-pawn would be to plant a knight on e6, the only problem being that e6 is covered by Black's light-squared bishop. This is as far as my thinking goes. I'm in a hole – I'll let the grandmaster dig me out. DK Black has made an early f-pawn advance but White has it under control: it cannot move on, and that means the bishop on c8 and rook on f8 have limited scope. That's why I would not consider 1 e4 at all – why free those pieces? As Ronan mentions, the e6 square is weak, and that's where I would focus my thoughts. The knight on d4 is perfectly placed, so why not bring a second knight into play? White can do that with 1 Nce2, threatening to pirouette via f4 into e6, and from there a knight would paralyse Black's entire position. If only Black could retreat his pawn back to f7. Now we are seeing the downside to kick-and-run chess: you leave yourself exposed at the back if the attack peters out. I hope the England football team are taking note. chess@guardian.co.uk guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds | ||||
Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:05:04 GMT | ||||
| Review: Reggio Emilia 2007/2008 | ||||
The tournament book tradition has given us many classics, e.g. Bronstein on Zürich 1953, Alekhine on Nottingham 1936 and, more recently, Jan Timman on Curacao 1962. Nowadays, tournament books are a rare guest among the countless opening guides, chess tutorials and personal game collections. Still, a serious tournament report has many advantages over these other genres. If a single game is like a newspaper column, and a game collection is like a short story, a collection of all games from one tournament is, in my view, like a full-grown novel, with different story-lines and intricate plots, small personal dramas and highlights, seemingly trivial details and an intricate plot leading up to a satisfying or thought-provoking finish. I would like you to see Mihail Marin and Yuri Garrett’s Reggio Emilia 2007/2008, published by Quality Chess, as an intriguing and well-written novel, rather than ‘just another’ chess book on the market. On of the characteristics of a good tournament book is that all games are seriously analysed. As Garrett, the tournament’s technical director, writes in the introduction, in the current book, 25 out of the total of 45 games are analysed by at least one of the combatants, 3 of them present the views of both players and the remaining 20 have been annotated by GM Mihail Marin. One of the very nice things is of this is that quick, ‘boring’ draws are also seriously analysed. This is something you don’t see in regular game collections or in New in Chess magazine, but I’ve always found it very instructive to see how the big guys make these draws, especially with such an outstanding explicator as Marin commenting them:
Of course, the tournament not only consisted of solid draws, but also of some very spectacular and beautiful chess. And again, Marin takes us by the hand towards a crystal-clear understanding of the games.
In this fragment, we see Marin at his best. He honestly describes his emotions yet manages to stay objective all the time, enabling him to explain the technical details without ever becoming boring or repetitive. He also shows a constant concern for the reader trying to make assessments of the arising positions. Marin even comes to the rescue in annotations by the other participants, when they have not been explicit enough to Marin’s satisfaction. The very first game of the book is a good example: Zoltan Almasi analyses his victory over Pentala Harikrishna in a solid, but rather clinical fashion, so Marin jumps in at several points in the analysis to add useful comments like “It may seem that Black has regrouped his forces harmoniously and his kingside counterplay is developing without problems. However, White’s space advantage in the centre and on the queenside should not be underestimated.” Reggio Emilia 2007/2008 (it started on December 29, 2007) was in many ways perfect for a tournament book. Not only were there a number of world-class players such as Vugar Gashimov and David Navara, but also the legendary Viktor Korchnoi was present, as well as two rising stars from Asia (Pentala Harakrishna and Ni Hua), and of course Mihail Marin himself. As is good practice in a literary review, I won’t give away the ending of the ‘novel’, nor any other spoilers. In the end, however, it’s the moves and the games that tell the story of this tournament, not the results. I thoroughly enjoyed immersing myself into this tournament (even though I had never seen a single game from it before), identifying with the players and the problems they were facing during the games, and I suddenly felt it as a real loss that such books are hardly ever written anymore these days. I think a tournament book is the closest a chessplayer can come to identifying with fictional characters, and it’s a true pleasure to be able to enjoy the excitement of chess for once without having to think about improving my own game or updating my opening or endgame knowledge. This is simply top level chess entertainment. Apart from the tournament itself (the heart of the book) there are numerous interesting extras in Reggio Emilia 2007/2008, such as excellent interviews with the players, a history of the Reggio Emilia tournament (including some memorable games from past editions) and a sympathetic description by Garrett of how this particular tournament was organised. Garrett is a keep observer who not only loves to watch the games but also the players themselves:
I hope readers will consider buying this very charming book; perhaps it will energize publishers to publish more serious tournament reports. It’s too beautiful a tradition to be written off already. Links | ||||
Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:26:10 +0000 | ||||
| The new Lubbock Chess Club story | ||||
Founder of Lubbock Chess Club answers some questions about group Sunday, March 07, 2010 Story last updated at 3/7/2010 - 4:37 pm Avalanche Journal This week we have a special interview conducted by Chase Watters, member of the Texas Tech Knight Raiders nationally ranked chess team, and former president of the Texas Tech Knight Raiders Chess Club. His guest is Sam Houchin, founder of the new Lubbock Chess Club. 1. How did you revive the Lubbock Chess Club into existence? We were surprised to find that the previous Lubbock Chess Club had disbanded several years ago. In our online search we found a newsletter generated by the TTU Knight Raiders that led us to a “chess game night” at Barnes & Noble on a Friday night. There, we met several members of the Knight Raiders and the idea of reviving the Lubbock Chess Club was born. 2. What is the relationship of the Lubbock Chess Club with SPICE and/or the TTU Knight Raider Chess Club? Once we began playing routinely several nights a week with members of the Knight Raiders, it was brought to Susan Polgar’s attention that we were interested in starting Lubbock Chess Club. She immediately jumped in and helped us to initially organize our efforts and to locate a weekly meeting place. Combined with the ongoing support and participation of the Knight Raiders, we have had very successful club attendance to date. 3. Who is welcome to come and play with the Lubbock Chess Club? Are novice chess players and kids welcome to play? All are welcome. Male or female, any age or skill level. Chess is a game for people of all ages and you can learn to play at any time. So come play even if you have never seen a chess board or if you are a highly advanced player. 4. How many players typically come and play at the Lubbock Chess Club, and what is the typical strength of those players? It varies. We have an average of 18 to 20 regular players. Some nights we have as many as 30 plus players and 12 to 14 on others. 5. Is there a fee to join the Lubbock Chess Club? At this time there is not a fee to join the club. However, in order to provide for the membership in the future we are in the process of formalizing the club with officers, by-laws, constitution and, of course, fees. Preliminary discussion on fees has been $20 per year for an adult membership, $15 per year for college students, and $10 per year for persons younger than 18. 6. What are some upcoming events that the Lubbock Chess Club is planning? Since we are still getting off the ground we don’t have any events on the current schedule. We plan on sponsoring tournaments, leagues, chess ladders, and blitz tournaments in the future. 7. Why do you like playing chess? In my opinion, chess is the ultimate game having a positive effect on a player’s attitude toward learning and cognitive achievement. Chess play engages the human brain and employs new ways of thinking, imaginative processes, and creativity. Chess also develops your critical and analytical thinking ability and contributes to the increase of intelligence, problem solving skills, memorization and concentration. A little competition is also great for mental alertness, patience, sportsmanship, as well as challenging your sense of accomplishment. 8. How do you like playing chess at Lin’s Buffet on Mondays? Lin’s provides us with a large, open, comfortable area to meet and play along with a wide variety of delicious food items to choose from. They offer a 10 percent discount to all members and, while we encourage dining, it is completely optional. 8. Where do you see the Lubbock Chess Club six months from now, and one year from now? The current version of the Lubbock Chess Club is in its infancy. In the future we hope to offer chess instruction for any age and a comprehensive chess library available to all members. Our primary purpose is to have fun and to promote the popularity of chess. We hope to eventually conduct tournaments and other forms of chess competition. I feel that our membership will increase with time and advertising. As for the community, we hope to reach out to the school districts in the Lubbock area and promote the subject of chess and hopefully integrate it into their scholastic curriculum. Source: http://www.lubbockonline.com | ||||
2010-03-09T00:28:00.000-06:00 | ||||
| Izvestia Chess Puzzle Contest Winners | ||||
![]() Photo courtesy Vladimir Suvorov/"Izvestia" Hello everybody! A few posts ago I let you know about the Puzzle Contest in the Russian newspaper "Izvestia". On March 3 the winners of this contest were announced and the solutions for the Puzzles#5 and #6 were posted: Puzzle #5. A. Kosteniuk, 2009, White to move and make a draw. SOLUTION: 1. b8Q h1Q 2.Kd4+! R?1 3.Qg3+ Kh5 4.Qh3+ Kg5 (4. .. Qh3 stalemate) 5. Qg3+ Kh6 6. Qh3+ Kg7 7. Qd7+ ?f8 8.Qd8+ Kh7 9.Qd7+ Kh6 10.Qh3+ Kg5 11. Qg3+ Kf5 12.Qh3+ Kf4 13.Qh4+ Kf3! 14.Qf4+ Kg2 15.Qg4+ Kf2 16. Qh4+ Ke2 17.Qf2+ Kd1 18.Qd2+ Kd2 stalemate Puzzle #6, ?.Pervakov, 2008, White to move and win. SOLUTION: 1.?3! 1.cb? doesn't win in view of Kh6! 2.Rg6+ Qg6 3.Bg6 Kg6 4.b4 Kf6 5.Kd2 Ke7 6.Ke3 Kd7 7.Ke4 Kc7 8.Kf5 Kb6 with a draw 1. ... b2+ 2.Kb2 Kh6! (2. ... Kh8 3.Rg8+!), Now doesn't win 3.Bd3? in view of Q?4! 4.Rg6+ Kh7 5.Rg4+ e4! 6.R?4 Qd1! 7.Bc2 Qg1! 8.Rg4+ Kh8! (9. ... Kh6? 10.Rg6+!) 9.Rg1 stalemate The correct continuation is 3.B?2!! Q?4! (3. ... Qd5 4.Rg6+ Kh7 5.Rd6+ winning the Queen and the game) 4.Rg6+ ?h7 5.Rg4+ e4! 6.R?4 Q?7! 7.Re7+ Kh6 8.Rh7+! - winning I hope you enjoyed solving these puzzles and can assure you that daily solving of different tactical and endgame problems and puzzles will increase you level of chess. Solve many puzzles on my CHESS KILLER TIPS podcast page. Posted by: Alexandra Kosteniuk Women's World Chess Champion | ||||
Sun, 07 Mar 2010 01:23:00 +0000 | ||||
| Den Weltmeister bei der Arbeit... | ||||
|
... konnten die deutschen Schachfans am letzten Bundesligawochenende in Heidelberg bewundern, als Vishy Anands Club OSG Baden-Baden gegen Meisterschaftskonkurrent Werder Bremen die erste Saisonniederlage quittieren musste. Dies ist seine Weißpartie vom Sonntag. Wie ist die Lage in Ihren Augen nach 23...Dxe5 einzuschätzen?
A) Weiß ist in Schwierigkeiten, da der Läufer f7 nicht ziehen kann; B) Die Figur kann entfesselt werden, aber Schwarz hat keinerlei Probleme; C) Weiß gewinnt forciert. Taktik, Eröffnungen, Endspiele und mehr bei ChessBase Magazin Online... Größeres Diagramm... | ||||
Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT | ||||
| Save the rainforest – buy a sustainable chess set | ||||
I got interested in this question after seeing an advertisement for a truly magnificent chess set called the ‘Endangered Parrots of the World Chess Set’. Created by Grant Dawson Collections in the United States, it is “hand made from certified sustainable North American hardwoods (walnut and maple), food safe natural finishes with recycled glass ball feet, and features 32 lead-free pewter playing pieces finished in 24k gold or sterling silver.” The set is one of the most beautiful I’ve ever seen, but it’s not exactly cheap: if you’re interested, you can buy it here for the nice sum of $5000. It’ll buy you this: ![]() Endangered Parrots of the World Chess Set That’s much more expensive, for instance, than the slightly less serious Freshwater vs. Saltwater Fish Chess Set or the various Animal Chess Sets that are sold on the internet. (”Endangered species will live on, healthy and free, in your own controlled temperature living room. Beware if you lose a piece or you could be in trouble with the Feds.”) This is all good fun, of course (in fact, I can’t help mentioning a marvellous – if not really environmentally ‘correct’ – Through the Looking-Glass chess set, with pieces vanishing as soon as they are captured!) – but what about regular, Staunton-style chess sets? I personally became interested in deforestation and sustainability issues after a visit a few years ago to Easter Island (which was completely deforested by its original people) and after reading Jared Diamond’s influential book Collapse (2005) about the collapse of great civilizations in the past and present, which deals about deforestation in great detail. As Diamond writes:
I tried searching for the word ’sustainable’ on a couple of well-known chess vendor sites such as The House of Staunton and the online shop of the London Chess Centre, but got a No products matched your search criteria in all cases. (One of the very few hits I got at all on Google was for a recyced chess set on Cool Gadgets.com. Pretty cool indeed, but hardly useful for even the smallest-sized chess tournament.) I looked for more information online on the type of wood that’s used in chess sets. Again, it’s not easy finding out about this. On one site, I learned that “rosewood is a very popular type of wood used for chess men.” This would be bad news, since rosewood is in fact a tropical hardwood which is hugely overexploited. Still, a quick look at some retailer’s sites show that this is indeed one of the most commonly used wood for chess sets. According to the BBC,
The widely-used Digital DGT wooden boards are made of rosewood. On the website of the USCF Shop, too, most chess sets (both pieces and boards, and both ‘tournament’ and ‘luxury’ sets) seem to be made from rosewood, ebony or mahogany. And on this site, too, the word ’sustainable’ doesn’t return any pages. (There are ecologically sustainable types of rosewood, such as Santos Palisander, but again it is unclear (at best) whether this palisander type is used for the chess boards advertised on these websites.) In fact, one of the very few websites that explicity features ’sustainable chess sets’ is the English ShopWiki, which links the so-called Negiel Decorative Staunton Wooden Chess Set:
![]() The sustainable Negiel Staunton chess set doesn't look so bad, does it? (Apart from the wrongly placed king and queen, that is.) It’s also quite cheap (certainly compared to the Endangered Parrots one!): £44.99, and it will be in stock from April this year on. But again, on the above-mentioned online shops, you’ll search in vain for the Negiel chess set, as far as I can tell. I phoned Joris van Vuure of Chess and Go Shop Het Paard in Amsterdam, one of the largest chess equipment sellers in The Netherlands, to ask him what, if anything, he knew about sustainable chess sets. “Well, to be honest I’ve never thought about it,” Joris van Vuure told me. “Our customers – including the Dutch Chess Federation – simply never ask for it. They are obviously interested in the price and quality of the chess sets, but not their sustainability. Our top-selling chess sets are mostly made of mahogany, palissander or boxwood. Boxwood pieces are usually painted, which you can easily recognize because the black pieces are really black, whereas the others have a natural dark wood colour. I personally thought boxwood is sustainable, but I’m not sure.” In fact, the sustainability of boxwood (or buxus as it says on the chess sets) is questionable. It’s an extremely hard type of wood which makes it very suitable for many things, including chess pieces, but it’s often overexploited and its sustainability really depends on where the plant was cultivated. Even if some boxwood would deserve to get the benefit of the doubt (Het Paard sells a lot of them, which is a good thing!), rosewood, mahogany and other tropical hardwoods wouldn’t. Van Vuure says their shop would be interested in marketing explicitly sustainable chess sets, possibly even with an FSC logo, but he doubts whether customers would want to pay more for them. “In fact, many of our customers explicitly say they want nice wooden products rather than plastic ones, which obviously look cheap and actually have a bad image environmentally speaking. It’s a complicated issue, but if we could market it in a good way, without confusing customers, why not?” Exactly how bad is it that we chess players mostly use unsustainable wooden chess sets, and what can be done about it? To quickly answer the first question: I have no idea – but it certainly doesn’t help. As often with these things, it’s clearly better in any case to be part of the solution, instead of the problem. Besides, I’m pretty sure more chess sets are being sold each day than expensive musical instruments made of the same materials, so there’s another clue. Finally, while unsustainble furniture at least looks really nice, I really wouldn’t be able to spot the difference between a maple chess set and a boxwood one. Nor would I much care: as long are the pieces are heavy (which can be achieved in other ways as well) and they don’t look too distracting, it’s all perfectly fine by me. The second question seems tougher. I can advice you to buy a sustainable chess set next time, and you can tell your chess-playing friends, but even if you’d be willing to follow my advice, when will that be? And how effective will that be in the grand scheme of things anyway? It’ll also look decidedly pedantic to complain with your local club staff about the nice sets they just bought to please their club members: gee, thanks for the support! This is an example of what marine scientist Jennifer Jacquet, who studies the overfishing problem, calls horizontal agitation:
Although horizontal agitation can be beneficial, as studies have shown, Jacquet thinks there’s a better way: vertical agitation.
Jennifer Jacquet talking about the problems sustainable fisheries face against the big companies, and what can be done about it. In terms of chess sets, the problem is obviously not as big as, say, slavery or the extinction of the bluefish tuna. Nor will buying sustainable chess sets alone save the world’s rainforests. But, as Joris van Vuure says, why not give it a try? At least unsustainable chess sets are not subsidized by FIDE! Chess organizers and federations could use nicely made plastic chess sets only (there are nice plastic sets, I’ve seen them myself!) or they could ask retailers about sustainable wooden sets. They might even be subsidized because of it! Retailers, especially small ones already offering that little ’something extra’ to customers, should in my view seriously consider importing (and marketing) more sustainable wooden chess sets made of, for instance, oak or beech, even if perhaps they don’t always look as posh as some of the tropical of subtropical hardwood products. After all, in no-nonsense tournament chess, nobody ever really looks at the pieces for their beauty, do they? As long as they’re not distracting, surely it’s the chess that matters, not the board and pieces? Finally, FIDE (Gens una sumus) itself should also be listening closely. Since they seem to have a liking for introducing weird new rules, here’s a suggestion for them: order all FIDE-rated tournaments to play with plastic or sustainable wooden chess sets. And they shouldn’t just do it because they like new rules, either. Like most ’sustainability’ initiatives, it could actually save them real money in the long run. What with all the financial troubles of our dear World Chess Federation, might this not be music to their ears? | ||||
Fri, 05 Mar 2010 09:13:45 +0000 | ||||
| 25 CCA Chess Tournament Myths | ||||
| 25 WIDELY BELIEVED MYTHS about Continental Chess Association tournaments Revised 2/22/10 MYTH 1: If I enter in advance and my entry is lost, I will be refused entry in the tournament and my travel to the site will have been wasted. ACTUAL: No such thing has ever happened in our 45 years of running tournaments. If you enter in advance, the chances that your entry will somehow go astray are very small, not nearly sufficient to justify worrying about, and if this does happen we will get you into the tournament anyway. We always have sufficient space and no entries are ever rejected due to space considerations. MYTH 2: If the advance entry list has not yet been posted at chesstour.com, I need to call or email the CCA to find out whether my entry was received. ACTUAL: If you enter online and see "Thank You For Your Order," your entry is confirmed. We recommend that you either record your order number or print out the page on the screen, in the unlikely event there is a problem. If you want a further confirmation, please be patient and wait for the advance entry list to be posted (link is in middle of home page). We don't confirm advance entries individually which would be an enormous amount of extra work, as it is not possible to search the shopping cart by name for entries that are not yet processed, and often we fall behind processing a tournament because we are concentrating on another tournament that will be held earlier. MYTH 3: It is important to confirm that my advance entry was received. ACTUAL: No it isn't (see #1 and #2 above), and even though we do not confirm entries individually, the many confirmation requests we receive make it harder to prepare for running a tournament. MYTH 4: If I enter in advance online, I will receive a confirming email. ACTUAL: Our shopping cart is not set to send confirming emails. We disabled this feature as it kept malfunctioning, leading to many questions which we don't have time to answer. MYTH 5: Advance entries must check in at the site. ACTUAL: There is no check in, all who enter in advance are paired for round 1. MYTH 6: You can't do a bye in round 1 entering after the round has started. ACTUAL: No problem, just arrive before round 2 pairings and you can enter with a round 1 bye, we don't need to know in advance that you are coming. Or arrive before round 3 pairings and you can take two byes. Of course, this is a late entry so for most events the fee is slightly higher. MYTH 7: We need to know about your byes before the tournament. ACTUAL: We only want to know with an advance entry about byes that will occur before you begin play. Other byes should be requested at the tournament. MYTH 8: My name is misspelled on the advance entries, I must notify CCA. ACTUAL: Unless you are unrated, please don't, as the advance entry list isn't used for anything once the event begins, and the spelling will almost certainly be correct after we retrieve your info from the USCF database. MYTH 9: Advance entries are posted so you can see who is in your section. ACTUAL: They are posted only to inform you that your entry was received and allow you to check that your section and schedule were recorded correctly. You can't tell well from advance entries who will be in your section, because many players enter on the last day or at the door. MYTH 10: It takes 26 games to get a USCF rating. ACTUAL: It takes 4 games to get a USCF rating. After 26 games the rating is called "established," which means it will change more slowly. MYTH 11: Provisionally rated players are unrated. ACTUAL: Provisionally rated players are rated, and in most tournaments are treated the same as established players. At a few of our very biggest tournaments only (World Open, Chicago Open, North American Open, one or two others) there are prize limits for provisional players, but their ratings are still valid for entry. MYTH 12: You lose your rating if you are inactive for many years. ACTUAL: Wrong. Once rated, always rated. MYTH 13: You can play below your rating if inactive for many years. ACTUAL: You can never play in a section limited to those below your rating. MYTH 14: Players with foreign or FIDE ratings but no USCF ratings are unrated. ACTUAL: Players with ratings or categories from any country, or FIDE, are rated. MYTH 15: Players with unofficial ratings are unrated. ACTUAL: If you have an unofficial rating at uschess.org and are otherwise unrated, we will generally use that rating. On rare occasions we may not, for example we might not see that rating because it appears online after we have finished looking up that player's rating. MYTH 16: Players formerly in a higher class must enter that class. ACTUAL: You can always use your official USCF rating to decide your section, unless we have assigned you a CCA minimum rating. At a few of our largest tournaments only, there is a prize limit for those who were 30 or more points above the class in the past year, but those players can still enter that class. MYTH 17: Tiebreaks are used for cash prizes. ACTUAL: Cash prizes are split evenly, except that for some events, there is a bonus, in the top section only, for clear first place or tiebreak winner. MYTH 18: If 5 players tie for first with 4 and I have 3.5, I place second. ACTUAL: If 5 players tie for first with 4 and you have 3.5, you place (or tie for) 6th. (As in sports in which if two teams are tied for first, no one ever says that the team following them is second.) MYTH 19: If I can't play the next round, my opponent will be happy to take the win and I don't need to tell anyone. ACTUAL: It's important that you notify the Tournament Director in advance if you are skipping a round or withdrawing from the tournament. Many players find it highly annoying to be deprived of a game, even though they win by forfeit. MYTH 20: If I forfeit without notice, I can just show up for the next round. ACTUAL: Players who forfeit without notice are removed from the tournament. To get back in you must tell the Director that you are back, and you may be asked to pay a fine or put up a deposit to assure that you don't forfeit again. MYTH 21: If my opponent doesn't show up, I post a win for me, 1 vs. 0. ACTUAL: You must post 1F vs. 0F, the F standing for forfeit. If you post 1-0, we won't know that your opponent failed to show and will pair him or her again, probably causing another forfeit. MYTH 22: You can't get black twice in a row. ACTUAL: This is common, and you can even sometimes get the same color three times in a row! Score has priority over color, so colors will alternate perfectly for everyone only if white and black win the same number of games each round. MYTH 23: If both players had black last round, and the same number of each color in the tournament, the higher rated player (or player with more points) gets white. ACTUAL: This happens only if both players have identical color histories in every round. Otherwise, the most recent round in which the players' colors were different decides. For example, in round 7, WBWBWB gets white against BWWBWB. MYTH 24: The hotel says there are no rooms left at the chess rate, so I can't stay there. ACTUAL: Though this could be true, hotels often misinform players, saying there is no availability or quoting a higher rate when actually the chess rate is still available. Before giving up, call the hotel Sales Office during normal business hours (Monday-Friday 9-5) and if that doesn't work, send us an email. MYTH 25: I called on the last day listed for reservations and the hotel says no rooms are available, but it was guaranteed that they would still be available on this date. ACTUAL: How can we guarantee such a thing? Rooms can always sell out. After the date listed, the hotel has the right to raise the rate or give our rooms to another group, but even if you are "in time," if other chessplayers got the rooms first, you are out of luck! Best is to not wait until the last few days, and reserve as early as possible, at least a week before the date advertised. | ||||
| Karpov Announces FIDE President Candidacy | ||||
![]() “It is necessary to restore order,” Karpov was quoted. “The problems with the World Championship, the calendar, changes of decisions, changes during a cycle, this didn’t happen before. Besides, the prestige of the World Champion should return to its old level.” Source: Chessvibes | ||||
| Double Blunder by Zuma | ||||
| On a visit to England this week, SA president Jacob Zuma managed to achieve a double. He embarassed himself silly in front of his hosts. After blasting the Brits as "colonialists", the African leader then later met the Queen and presented her with a chess set. There's only one problem. Former SA president Nelson Mandela had already given the same exact chess set way back in 1996! The Mirror has the juice. ![]() In fact, that chess set was shown at this recent exhibition. | ||||
Fri, 05 Mar 2010 06:21:00 +0000 | ||||
| Karpov to vie for FIDE Presidency | ||||
Peter Doggers relayed a report from a Russian website that 12th World Champion Anatoly Karpov will seek to win the FIDE Presidency. This comment comes after much grumbling about FIDE temperamental policies. “It is necessary to restore order,” said a resolute Karpov. He continued to strengthen his argument, “The problems with the World Championship, the calendar, changes of decisions, changes during a cycle, this didn’t happen before. Besides, the prestige of the World Champion should return to its old level.” The current President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov ran in 2006 on the platform of unifying the World Championship and providing more visibility for professional chess. While the championship cycle had been mended with the ascendancy of Viswanathan Anand, the process was fraught with a number of midstream changes. Ilyumzhinov and his cabinet are also responsible for a number of unpopular changes including the “no tolerance” rule. It is not clear what Karpov’s platform will be, but leading up to the 2010 Olympiad in Siberia, he will certainly have one laid out. It is ironic that an interesting interview can be found on the Chess Fidelity site that Ilyumzhinov used for his campaign. Karpov predicted that Ilymuzhinov’s chances were 100%. In this interview Karpov talked about his championship days, Bobby Fischer, his FIDE candidacy in 2005. In that view he made some interesting comments about the FIDE elections. Source: http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/karpov-candidate-for-fide-president/#more-22636 FIDE Electoral Regulations: http://www.fide.com/fide/handbook?id=4&view=category Interview: http://www.chessfidelity.com/elections.php?txt_id=75 | ||||
Wed, 03 Mar 2010 19:52:59 +0000 | ||||
| California Budget Crunch Threatens Sacramento Chess Club | ||||
Another sad sign of the times from the Sacramento Chess Club:As many of you are aware, the City of Sacramento has been suffering from budget problems for several years now. In 2008, those budget issues directly affected the Sacramento Chess Club, requiring us to pay rent to use the Redwood Room of the Hart Senior Center. Through the donation of generous benefactors, the Club has been able to continue to rent the space at the Hart Senior Center. Since then, the Club has also looked at the options available, with the primary focus being to avoid charging members dues, something the Club has been able to do throughout most of its existence, and remain in or close to the downtown area. The cold, hard reality of the state's fiscal catastrophe will be felt yet again. Ever since I began playing competitive chess in 1994, Sacramento was my home club. Each Wednesday night, 30 up to nearly 100 players would drop by the Hart Senior Center on J Street between 27th and 28th Street to play chess. The club was quite fortunate to meet rent free until the summer of 2008. In turn, the weekly tournaments (G/10 and G/60 were most popular) only cost $2 or $5 per player. Since the City of Sacramento began charging a steep rental fee, the club cannot keep going; it will have to find a cheaper venue for meetings.This story mirrors the harsh reality at many other small chess clubs around the country. That's why many meet at fast food places, eager for extra business in the evenings. Unfortunately, most restaurants can't accommodate a club as large as Sacramento. I would really be sad to see a club whose history dates back to 1934 close. Hopefully that won't be necessary. | ||||
Thu, 04 Mar 2010 07:26:00 +0000 | ||||
| The World Champion at work... | ||||
|
... the German chess fans had the pleasure of watching at the last Bundesliga weekend in Heidelberg, when Vishy Anand's club OSG Baden-Baden had to acknowledge their first defeat of the season versus title contender Werder Bremen. This is his white game from Sunday. How would you assess the situation after 23...Qxe5?
A) White is in trouble since the bishop f7 can't move;
B) this piece can be unpinned, but Black has no problems whatsoever;
C) White wins by force.
The solution is here, but first ponder over it with a larger version of the diagram. | ||||
Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT | ||||
| Ajedrez y Psicología | ||||
Ajedrez y ansiedad
Por la Lic. María Enriqueta Granero – Psicóloga
¿como podríamos hacer para mantener la ansiedad en niveles óptimos?
Nota Previa: En las búsquedas que uno hace por Internet suele encontrarse con muchas cosas. Está en cada uno saber aprovecharlas y distinguir lo importante de lo accesorio.
Para ser breve, encontré el muy buen sitio ajedrezconmaestros.com y en él las magníficas notas sobre “Ajedrez y Psicología" de la Lic. Granero. He pedido permiso para reproducirlas y cortésmente, tanto el MI Fernando Braga como la Lic. Granero han permitido la reproducción de los artículos; así como también nos han ofrecido el espacio para que nuestros lectores ”puedan también integrarse a realizar preguntas que consideren importantes y ella no tendrá problemas en contestarlas.” | ||||
Fri, 05 Mar 2010 09:00:37 +0000 | ||||
| Red Knights "Lack Direction" | ||||
![]() Red Knights "Lack Direction" Says Shinawatra Tuesday, 2 March 2010 The bid by a consortiom of high rollers - known as The Red Knights - to wrest control of Manchester United FC from the clutches of the Glazers has been broadly welcomed by the vast majority of United fans, but a note of caution was sounded today by Thicksack Shinawatra, the Thai shopkeeper who claims to be a distant cousin of disgraced former Manchester City owner, Thaksin Shinawatra. "Red Knight thing lacking in sense of direction," Shinawatra told us. "It is always same problem with knights. They go two steps forward then one to the side. Or two steps to the side and one step forward. Or one step back and then two to the side. Wait a minute - that's chess. No matter! Instead of being Red Knights, they should be Red Queens - that way they could move in all directions." We pointed out to Mr Shinawatra that Queens, red or otherwise would be an unacceptable term to use in connotation with a leading club in the super macho world of football... "I see," nodded Mr Shinawatra. "Okay then, not Red Queens, but not Red Knights either. Both no good. Maybe Red Bulls better. Strong sounding." Erm...yes... The Red Knights played no part whatsoever in the formulation of this football/chess related story. More when we unearth a more credible contact. Source: http://www.thespoof.com | ||||
2010-03-03T05:56:00.001-06:00 | ||||
| Review: Improve Your Chess at any Age | ||||
This is the last part of a ‘triptych’ on recent chess improvement books – you can find the other two reviews here. I’ve written before that in my view there are really too much ‘improve your chess’ books on the market; fortunately, some of them are very good and you may be surprised to hear that I like Andres Hortillosa’s Improve Your Chess at any Age as well. Actually, the book is every patzer’s childhood dream: an entire book (170 pages, beautifully published by Everyman Chess) dedicated to your own games, where you get to write about your thoughts on chess in general and during the games; your favourite style and your ideas on chess development theory! Too good to be true, right? Well, as we say in Dutch, chess publishers may be good, but they’re not crazy, and Hortillosa has a little more up his sleeve than just patzer analyses and ditto philosophies. Yes, it’s true: Andres D. Hortillosa is a ‘mere’ 2199 FIDE player who just wrote a book on how he improved over the years at a, shall we say, riper age than most of us start to play chess. And yes, most of the games and game fragments are from Hortillosa’s own games. But why is that necessarily a bad thing? On the very first pages of the book, the author presents himself as a modest guy with good intentions, wisely anticipating some of his future critics but not bending over backwards to please them. He also says some pretty sensible, if not terribly spectacular, things about chess improvement targeting an audience of players with a rating below 2000. My first impression after reading the introduction was that perhaps this somewhat oddly-titled (and marketed) book deserved the benefit of the doubt. This feeling was confirmed by some of the stuff in Chapter One, where Hortillosa paves the way for his theories on chess improvement and shows some of his past games. Again, note that his commentary, though not exactly grandmasterly, is certainly sensible, down-to-earth, and will definitely evoke a pang of recognition with most club players:
This may not be a huge shocker to advanced chess players, but anyone who’s ever trained weaker players knows what it feels like to constantly have to remind your pupils to ‘keep your hands off these pawns already!’ It’s a very good point and one that shows Hortillosa may actually have something to offer club players that truly strong players often don’t: to speak to them in their own languages and with examples from their own level of play. I myself have often been frustrated by how strong players often take stuff like this ‘for granted’. Hortillosa, you can be sure, never does. Here’s another example from the same game after Black has played 13…e5 (and before White played 14.d5):
Again, I was impressed by how well Hortillosa points to something weak players often struggle with. I could quote countless examples from my own games where I incorrectly resolved the tension in the game (as well as, fortunately, examples where I successfully put the pressure on by increasing pawn tension!). This is good, useful stuff. In Chapter Two, Hortillosa elaborates on his ideas on chess improvement and thinking, the sum of which he calls, with a clear undertone of self-mocking (thank God!), ‘The System’. His approach here is more theoretical, but fortunately, he never becomes too vague (or too pretentious) for comfort. Again, what Hortillosa writes won’t sound too novel to people who’ve already read their Rowson, Watson and other chess philosophers, but one of the charms of Improve Your Chess at any Age is that there’s a real sense of personal involvement of the author in much of what he claims:
To be honest, I didn’t always find Hortillosa’s opinions on thinking processes too convincing. For instance, one of the things he claims is that chess tactics puzzles often miss their mark because they focus on the finding of the solution instead of creating a practical game-situation where a (tactical) resolution can be created (’Anyone can solve a puzzle, but can anyone play the moves leading to the puzzle?’). I think this is only partly true: sure, it’s important to know the ‘context’ of a tactic, but solving puzzles does sharpen the mind and it definitely creates a reservoir of ‘chess tactics knowledge’ in the brain which may be extremely useful in later games, as many chess prodigies have clearly demonstrated. In a chapter called ‘Are Openings Really Important?’, Hortillosa makes some valid points on studying opening theory (’stronger players are better in confusing us with sidelines than we are at confusing them’) and he gives a couple of great (and often quite hilarious) examples of why having your opponent fall for an opening trap doesn’t always guarantee victory. The main part, however, is explained in ‘The System’, the author’s answer to the question ‘how we prevent these errors from cropping up?’ Hortillosa gives a checklist of eight points you should always be aware of during play. These include things like ‘2. Search for specific threats’ and ‘5. Search for candidate moves’ – good advice, to be sure, but surely Hortillosa doesn’t expect players to answer these eight questions at every move? Indeed he doesn’t, and here again is the book’s charm: the author shows modesty and self-knowledge by condeding that, of course, ‘the system has some implicit assumptions. One such assumption is knowing when to invoke the system.’ He follows up naming the exceptions, and especially the moments in a game when it does make sense to invoke ‘the system’. (He also gets kudos for questioning ‘the viability of the system’ altogether, ’since evidence is severely lacking’.) The points he makes are useful all the same, and I liked the two examples that illustrate them – but disappointingly, the rest of the book hardly mentions the eight points again explicity and instead focuses on thorough and at times engaging analysis Hortillosa’s tournament games from 2008 and 2009. The result of this is perhaps the book’s only real problem: it’s overlong; I’d say it’s at least 50 pages too long. Like all chess enthusiasts, Hortillosa just loves to talk about his own games and to describe the thoughts that went through his head during them – and he knows he’s pretty good at it – but it’s just too much. Sometimes the explanation of ten perfectly normal opening moves is spread out over two and a half pages, and we get comments like this:
You’d think this was already more than enough explanation for a very common opening manoeuvre in a game that will last 60 moves in total, but Hortillosa has only just started:
And this isn’t even the end of it. I’m not saying Hortillosa doesn’t make some valuable observations along the way, but such lenghty commentary does appear a bit self-serving to me. More importantly, the games in this section, while entertaining, don’t very well explain how Hortillosa’s ’system’ got him the results he achieved. My impression is Hortillosa simply had a lot of time on his hand, studied a lot of chess, received professional training (from IMs and GMs) and made very deep analysis of his games. And lo and behold, he made considerable progress. No ’system’ needed at all! With that in mind, the rest of Hortillosa’s book does ultimately become ‘just’ any amateur’s dream: a great way to show a lot of, at best, fairly interesting tournament games. They’re all very well analysed, they do contain a lot of useful prose, interesting digressions good advice, but in the end they’re still games played by a 2100 player with an interesting message. It’s an interesting experiment in the sense that this (modest) game level may actually be helpful to players of that level (if only because their mistakes are so recognizable). Personally, though, I prefer playing over games by the big guys, but there you go. That said, Improve Your Chess at any Age may well offer a glimpse at the future of chess publishing 2.0: everyone has a chess engine these days, so why not publish a book with your own chess games? Andres Hortillosa, at least, has written a very sympathetic version of this new concept, and I think lots of club players will enjoy his writings and recognize (and improve upon) many well-known issues in it. Links | ||||
Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:04:39 +0000 | ||||
| ‘Karpov candidate for FIDE President’ | ||||
Sunday night Anatoli Karpov landed at the airport of Saratov, Russia for a simul and a meeting with the local governor. There, according to local news agency SarInform, Karpov announced that he has the ambition to become FIDE President. “It is necessary to restore order,” Karpov was quoted. “The problems with the World Championship, the calendar, changes of decisions, changes during a cycle, this didn’t happen before. Besides, the prestige of the World Champion should return to its old level.” The new Presidential elections which will take place during the General Assembly of the FIDE Congress, held during the 39th Olympiad in Khanty-Mansiysk in September this year. Nominations for the office of President must reach the FIDE Secretariat at least three months before the opening of the General Assembly. To be elected, each candidate must first be nominated by his federation. The Russian Chess Federation hasn’t yet officially nominated Anatoli Karpov as their candidate. After Bessel Kok’s failed attempt to win the FIDE Presidential elections during the Turin Olympiad in May 2006, Karpov would be another big name fighting against current FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov. The 12th World Champion never concealed that he’s unhappy with Ilyumzhinov’s policy. During the opening press conference of their rapid and blitz match in Valencia last year, he and his old rival Garry Kasparov took the opportunity to heavily criticize FIDE. In recent times, Karpov has been occupied mainly as a business man and politician. Since 2005, he has been a member of the Public Chamber of Russia. These days he only plays a few tournaments a year. Links | ||||
Tue, 02 Mar 2010 07:57:35 +0000 | ||||
| Karpov Vies for FIDE | ||||
Chessvibes is reporting that Karpov will be a candidate for presidency of FIDE.Sunday night Anatoli Karpov landed at the airport of Saratov, Russia for a simul and a meeting with the local governor. There, according to local news agency SarInform, Karpov announced that he has the ambition to become FIDE President. Somehow I have big doubts over Karpov's candidacy. Ilyumzhinov and his mates are far too entrenched now, I think, to be movable. I remember very well that journalists' meeting in Dresden when famed Spanish chess journo Leontxo Garcia suddenly remarked (words to this effect), "if you want to see corruption, just go in there", while pointing to the main hall where the FIDE delegates where also meeting. The whole thing is a joke! | ||||
Tue, 02 Mar 2010 09:19:00 +0000 | ||||
| Recursos Tácticos Doble de Caballo 2/3 | ||||
Diez ejercicios tácticos presentandos a modo de problemas para que sean estudiados desde la propia página o bien ser descargardos y dedicarles algún tiempo más.
| ||||
Sat, 27 Feb 2010 23:00:00 +0000 | ||||
| 101 minipartidas. R. CrusiMoré | ||||
![]() Colección Escaques - De este libro, el Gran Maestro Internacional A. O'Kelly dice "bonita colección de miniaturas seleccionadas por Ramón Crusi..." y efectivamente así es. Crusi Moré colaboró con la revista Trebejos y de sus aportaciones allí recopiló las miniaturas jugadas entre 1965 y 1969 para darnos esta obra. Son 101 partidas cortas donde se pueden admirar combinaciones, celadas, novedades y sorprendentes finales que serán un deleite para todo ajedrecista. Este volumen, impreso en 1970, lo he obtenido de un juego de fotocopias que me facilitó un buen amigo, desconozco si le corresponde un número dentro de la Colección de Escaques, si alguien tiene más datos de él le agradeceré me los haga llegar. Cortesía de: http://problemistaajedrez.blogspot.com/ http://www.mediafire.com/?5xtnwyjkzuf | ||||
Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:28:00 +0000 | ||||
| Base de finales varios | ||||
(Foto solo como ilustración)Como he visto que también publican bases de datos, aquí les envío ésta, que he ido recopilando básicamente de las webs de notichess e Inforchess y enriquecidas con algunas de las posibilidades de chessbase. Por supuesto, lo primero es agradecer a dichas páginas todo el material que cuelgan, que yo, desde mi muy modesto nivel ajedrecístico, creo que es muy interesante. Esta base contiene distintos textos y partidas relacionadas con Finales. Tiene un pequeño problema y es que en algunas de las partidas las fechas de publicacion y versión se han perdido, me imagino que por problemas de configuración de mi ordenador. Pero el material creo que es muy interesante. Espero que te resulte interesante para su publicación. Saludos, Gregorio (Peón dormido). http://www.4shared.com/file/223537670/48a8acd9/Finales_Varios.html | ||||
Wed, 17 Feb 2010 01:30:00 +0000 | ||||
| Teoría de Aperturas, Tomo I - Vasili N. Panov | ||||
![]() Volumen 4 de la Colección Escaques - Otro clásico que no necesita presentación, este libro corresponde a la séptima edición del título que sobre aperturas abiertas y semiabiertas publicara exitosamente en 1960 el gran maestro soviético Vasili Nicolaievich Panov. Esta edición fue revisada y puesta al día por el propio autor en 1967. En ella el maestro expone con sencillez ideas y conceptos sobre las aperturas que resultarán fáciles de asimilar. Indudablemente que este y el segundo tomo son brillantes trabajos del maestro Panov para el estudio de las aperturas. Nota: Las fotocopias de donde se obtuvo este volumen fueron mal encuadernadas y en la parte superior de algunas páginas se pierden datos, que afortunadamente pueden deducirse. Mediafire | ||||
Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:17:00 +0000 | ||||
| Su valoración, por favor | ||||
|
El duelo entre caballos y damas era literalmente el tema central de la
posición que les presentamos en el diagrama. Las blancas tienen una amenaza:
¿qué jugada de con el caballo asegura las tablas a las negras? A) 29...Cc5 B) 29...Cxb2 C) 29...Cf4 Puede ver la solución aquí, pero antes de mirarla le sugerimos que reflexione sobre el problema con una versión más grande del diagrama... | ||||
Fri, 26 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT | ||||
| Linares 2010 | ||||
| The Linares tournament took place in Spain 12th-25th February 2010. Veselin Topalov emerged as the winner for the first time. He beat Boris Gelfand in the final round and edged out Alexander Grischuk by half a point.
Final Round 10 Alexander Grischuk felt that he was lost for much of his game against Francisco Vallejo Pons and that the best position he had was the last one. The Sicilian Najdorf didn't seem quite as bad as this but white definitely had the intitiative and some extra minutes at the end when he decided to repeat the position. This draw left Grischuk with a superior tie-break (better results against the leading players) but waiting for the result of Topalov's game. Veselin Topalov rather bravely took on Boris Gelfand's super-solid Petroff Defence. Topalov managed to present Gelfand with some new problems but it seemed for a while that black was doing fine. However Gelfand then chose to give up the exchange in the hope that Topalov couldn't break through. Although the position was rather difficult to break down it seems like Topalov should be much better and he chose to exploit this by returning the exchange in a position where he had the advantages of 4 vs 3 pawns on the queenside and black's king was cut off. With best play this probably would have been drawn but getting there was fiendishly complicated. Gelfand got a long way towards securing the draw but then started to go wrong. 48....a2 49. Rd7+ Ke6 was probably drawn a little easier than his 48...Ke8 which took 15 minutes of thought. His 49...a2 seems to be losing (49... Ke7 50. Rh7+ Ke6 51. c4 Ke5 52. Rd7 Rc3 53. Rd5+ Ke4 seems to be the correct drawing idea). Topalov then brought home the full point and secured his first Linares win (he lost out on tie-break to Kasparov in 2005). Levon Aronian said that after 9 draws in a row (a record for him) he was definitely going to look for a win today and this he mananged. He played a very complicated Modern Benoni against Vugar Gashimov. There were still plenty of pieces on the board at first time control on move 40 and although Aronian had something of an advantage Gashimov's position probably shouldn't have collapsed as fast as it did. Round 10 Results
Vallejo 1/2 Grischuk Final Standings: Topalov 6.5, Grischuk 6, Aronian 5.5, Gelfand 4, Gashimov 4, Vallejo 4 | ||||
Thu 25 Feb 2010 01:29:00 PM UTC | ||||
| 2010/02/27 - WCBCSC Final Results | ||||
The results of the final of the Winton Capital British Chess Solving Championship, 2009-2010 are now available. I hope to post the problems used, and their solutions, in the next day or so. | ||||
Sat, 27 Feb 2010 17:53:49 +0000 | ||||
| Chess in School | ||||
| For 2010, Amaroo School (in Canberra, ACT) has added chess to the school curriculum. Each 3,4 and 5 grade classes (250+ kids in total) has 1 hour of chess per week one of its regular subjects. The classes are run in a specialised chess classroom, which is fitted out with sets, posters and will soon have a smart-board system installed. The classes are taught by one of the schools teachers, who has put together a chess course for the year. The school is also running 2 lunchtime chess clubs (one for primary school and the other for high school) and are getting 60+ children to each session. Of course the aim of the program isn't just to get more kids playing chess (although that is always a nice goal to achieve) but to also use chess as a tool to improve the educational outcomes of the school's students. At the school's Parent Information evening, the listed benefits of the program included improved concentration and problem solving skills, as well as better memory and strategic thinking. Hopefully the program will produce masses of happy, smart, chess playing kids (including my daughter) and that its success will encourage other schools in Canberra to implement similar programs. | ||||
Thu, 25 Feb 2010 12:44:00 +0000 | ||||
| Veselin Topalov Campeón de Linares en solitario. | ||||
Tras el duro golpe que el Campeón ruso Alexander Grischuk sobre Veselin Topalov, en la 9na Ronda, alcanzándolo en la punta del torneo, la 10ma y última Ronda prometía un final de suspenso y emoción.
Vallejo Pons, Francisco-Grischuk, Alexander: ½-½ (32). Siciliana Najdorf. Alexander venía de dos victorias y tenía mejor sistema de desempate en caso de compartir la punta con Topalov. Esto le daba buena chance de consagrarse ganador del Linares. Hasta 10. … Ce5 se repetía Anand-Grischuk, Match, Mainz CCM5, Rapid, 2005 (½ en 24). Paco jugó bien –no por nada es un Top 2700-, quedó con iniciativa y da la impresión que tuvo algunas opciones. Grischuk ofreció el peón b7 para movilizar sus piezas y montar contrafuego, pero lógicamente no fue aceptado. No pareció buena 20. … Tab8 y el Blanco quedó con la pareja de Alfiles y un peón en c6 que podía generar algún problema al Negro. Queda por ver si era suficiente. Paco eligió cambiar piezas y tras una repetición de movidas se acordó el empate. Grischuk a la espera de lo que pudiera hacer el duro Gelfand. Un empate sería buena noticia para él.
Topalov, Veselin-Gelfand, Boris: 1-0 (62). Defensa Petroff. Ya sabemos que Gelfand conoce bien y practica mucho la Petroff y que no es fácil ganarle. Se siguió Caruana-Kramnik, Corus 2010 (½ en 31), que ya publicamos en Zona de Ajedrez. Veselin trató de presentar problemas nuevos a Boris y mantener la partida viva y en tensión. Claro que habrá jugadas técnicamente mejores, pero hay que resolver en el tablero. Tras 24.fxe3 Topalov había quedado con calidad e iniciativa. Gelfand debería trabajar bastante para sostener la posición. Imprevistamente 32.Txf6 (32.Td1 +/-) devuelve calidad y todo pareció equilibrarse. Quedo un final de Torre y cuatro peones contra Torre y tres peones, que aunque complicado no se veía con muchas chances de desnivel. 49. … a2?? (49 ... Re7 50. Th7+ Re6 51. C4 Re5 52. Td7 Tc3 53. Td5+ Re4 parece ser el camino correcto hacia el empate) y Topalov aprovechó. Un nuevo error 51. … Tb2?? Y el final ya era inmodificable. No obstante Topalov es Topalov y es muy linda la definición con 61.Txa2!!.
Aronian, Levon-Gashimov, Vugar: 1-0 (58). Benoni. Ya hablamos varias veces de Gashimov y la Benoni. Una posición con varios antecedentes recientes. No parece buena idea 13. … h6. Una partida bastante compleja, con altibajos, pero interesante. Se llegó al control de tiempo con bastantes piezas en el tablero e iniciativa para Aronian. Gashimov no tardó en derrumbarse, 50. … Cxd6?, 51. … Df5? y Levon demostró que las Blancas ganaban, así que Vugar se resignó poco después. Para Aronian el único triunfo tras 9 empates. Para Gashimov una actuación que lo dejó en el último puesto y con Gelfand los que más puntos perderán por sus actuaciones. Acompañamos las posiciones finales, un detalle de todas las Rondas y las partidas para ver y descargar. {iframe height="730"}visor3/visor.php?archivo=2010-Linares (1).pgn{/iframe} | ||||
Thu, 25 Feb 2010 20:34:25 +0000 | ||||
| Arte Visual - Imaginación Creativa | ||||
![]() En un primer acercamiento al tablero hay una percepción física y una atracción por la disposición y los movimientos de las piezas, también por la relación sutil entre éstos y las casillas. Este arte visual impacta en el "ojo de la mente" y allí, la imaginación creativa los toma y transforma. Todo este proceso es arte porque es creación. Y es dinámico porque transforma la posición en una nueva, que a su vez genera un nuevo proceso y una nueva obra de arte visual. La maravilla del ajedrez es que este arte es obra de cualquier simple jugador y tan válido como el de Carlsen. Simplemente porque genera satisfacción al creador. Cada uno en su nivel podrá disfrutarlo. El problema creo que refleja plenamente esto y es una gran combinación de arte visual e imaginación. Su autor, Lev Ilich Loshinsky, fue presentado en nuestro anterior: " El Blanco debe desalojar la casilla d4, pero para ello necesita antes una sutil jugada que permita controlar dos casillas blancas imprescindibles para que el Rey Negro no escape. Recuerden que es sutil y que el procedimiento permitirá crear siempre una doble amenaza sin respuesta. No es fácil, creo, pero es cuestión de ponerle empeño y ganas. Recuerdo que la primer jugada no es jaque. Todas las piezas cumplen un objetivo, por eso, si bien hay dos piezas que podrían cumplir la función, una está cumpliendo una función defensiva. Claro que hay varios mates en 4 y seguramente en más también y que las Blancas ganan. Pero hay que encontrarlo en tres y para eso sólo sirve una única movida. La segunda movida, también es única (no a que es una sola, sino ante las diferentes respuestas del Negro no habrá 2 sino 1). La jugada que da mate también es única.{iframe height="730"}visor3/problema.php?archivo=Problema-Arte Visual.pgn{/iframe}
| ||||
Tue, 23 Feb 2010 23:00:00 +0000 | ||||
| More useful studies | ||||
Using studies as a training tool is (a) quite effective and (b) not that popular. As with other chess problems (in the classical sense) chess players tend to shy away from 'unreal' positions. But it is only looking at 'normal' positions, and 'normal' moves that can cause the biggest blunders.The diagrammed position is from a game played at Street Chess last week. It was one of the last games to finish for the round, the crowd had gathered round, and White was running short of time. No problems. With the study like 1.Qa4 (resisting the usual urge in Queen endings to check like a maniac) White set up a mate in 1, and iced the game. | ||||
Mon, 22 Feb 2010 12:41:00 +0000 | ||||
| Re: Est- il possible de .... | ||||
| merci patrick pour ton astuce qui repond parfaitement à mon probleme .
je n'aurais pas trouvé la solution sans ton aide ! je suis à peu près certain que ce genre d experience mettra en evidence les differences de " penser" entre differents moteurs , en se referant au jeu qui a été joué en realité par les gmi . bien sur il ne faut pas faire jouer une position " tactique " dans laquelle le gmi n'a pas vu une combinaison, mais au contraire choisir une position dans laquelle le joueur humain joue un cup qui peut paraitre "mysterieux" sur le moment mais qui sur le long terme se revelera capital . ce type de positions n'est pas facile à trouver , je suis en train de relire ma collection d'europe echecs depuis 1981 , pour reperer ce genre de position . ps : les positions de Pierre Nolot sont interressantes, mais elles ne permettent pas de comparer forcement avec la partie jouée par des gmi de premier plan . je me lance dans un travail de plusieirs semaines pour selectiooner les positions critiques . grace à ton astuce , je pourrais je l'espere les valider et faire ressortir les differenfes entre moteurs . cordialement thierry ps : quelles nouvelles de ton open ? Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t780-Est-il-possible-de.htm?p=2209 | ||||
Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:34:10 +0000 | ||||
| Topalov beats Vallejo, increases lead in Linares | ||||
The 27th Torneo Internacional de Ajedrez “Ciudad de Linares” takes place February 12-25 in Linares, Andalucia, Spain. As a result of the financial crisis, the event went back to the (nowadays almost universal) formula of six players, double round-robin. This year Veselin Topalov (2805), Levon Aronian (2781), Boris Gelfand (2761), Vugar Gashimov (2759), Alexander Grischuk (2736) and Francisco Vallejo Pons (2705) play. The rounds start at 16:00 CET; rest days are on the 17th and the 22nd. The rate of play is 2 hours for 40 moves, then 1 hour for 20, then 20 minutes for the rest of the game, wit 30 seconds increment starting from move 61. The Sofia rules for offering a draw apply in Linares for the first time. Round 6 report by Rick Goetzee![]() Ljubomir Ljubojevic Ljubojevic met his wife-to-be at the 1981 tournament. He then decided to settle in Linares, also because there was quite a bit of chess activity in the region, apart from the yearly grandmaster tournament. In those years there were plans to bring chess to schools, but unfortunately they didn’t materialise. According to Ljubojevic this is a great pity, as he was often approached by parents telling him that their children would love to learn chess and he visited schools to talk about the game. ![]() The press room, at the first floor of the Teatro Cervantes Recently a second attempt has been launched. Only two cities in Andalusia have plans to integrate chess in the school curriculum: Sevilla and Linares. Ljubojevic says that it is a pity that it took almost thirty years before a second attempt was made but ‘better late than never’. Ljubo doesn’t like the Sofia rules: ‘they are funny’. In his view top chess players are artists and artists have good days and bad days and this should be accepted as part of the game. Also he thinks it’s hard to enforce the rule, because if strong players want to make a draw they will find a way through a perpetual check or move repetition. “It is done because organisers think it will favour chess. What they should do is invite the right people, then they won’t have to worry about short draws.” There was some confusion at the start of today’s round at the board of Topalov-Vallejo. A guest made the first move and started the clock but Vallejo’s clock started to run. The arbiter had to intervene to reset the clock. ![]() Topalov and Vallejo pointing out the error to arbiter Faik Gasanov Then Vallejo took three minutes to reply to Topalov’s 1.c4. After an English opening the game became very sharp as Vallejo setup an attack against Topalov’s king. It was hard, even for Ljubo, to give a correct evaluation of the position although it seemed that Vallejo was better. His main problem was the clock, having only one minute left for the last twelve moves. He played well for a long time till he hung a full rook on the 38th move and overstepped the time limit on move 40. According to GM Larry Christiansen on ICC’s Chess.FM, Gashimov proved to have done a lot of good homework against Gelfand’s Petroff. He achieved a promising position from the opening without counterplay for Black. However, Gelfand defended accurately and a draw was agreed in a knight endgame.
Grischuk decided to burn the midnight oil against Aronian, trying to win a rook vs knight endgame with an extra pawn for Black. In an empty pressroom there was still the voice of Leontxo Garcia continuing his commentary for the tournament website. Finally, at move 101, the players decided to call it a day.
Before we’ll leave you, we’d like to point out that GM Anish Giri, reigning Dutch champion and winner of the Corus B group this year, is doing wonderful commentary for Chessbase each round. This round he did Topalov-Vallejo, over here. Games round 6 with brief annotationsGame viewer by ChessTempo Linares 2010 | Pairings and resultsLinares 2010 | Round 6 Standings
![]() The town hall of Linares which proudly shows... ![]() ...the tournament poster - something the Spanish are really good at ![]() Andalusian palm trees in sunny Linares ![]() The entrance of the venue; the Teatro Cervantes Photos © Rick Goetzee Links | ||||
Sat, 20 Feb 2010 03:41:19 +0000 | ||||
| Theophilus Thompson’s Problem Book! | ||||
Theophilus Thompson is recognized by most as the first Black player of note in the U.S. Born in 1855 in Frederick, Maryland, Thompson took to chess after seeing two gentlemen playing. He learned the moves from observing and was soon kibitzing in the games. It was interesting to note this interaction was possible when slavery was still practiced. After noticing Thompson’s interest John Hanshew, the publisher of The Maryland Chess Review, loaned the 17-year old Thompson a board and several chess problems to solve. Thompson duly solved these and then made some of his own for good measure! Thompson played in a few tournaments and has several interesting games, notably his dashing win over C.H. Blood. In a June 1986 article in U.S. Chess Life, Larry Parr reported that Thompson played correspondence chess and scored 7-2 in one tournament. Neil Brennan also wrote a very comprehensive essay on Thompson. Thompson is famously known for his book on chess problems called “Chess Problems: Either to Play and Mate”. Below is a link to this historic document! by Theophilus Thompson | ||||
Sat, 20 Feb 2010 01:46:39 +0000 | ||||
| Nabakov Chess Sonnet #2 | ||||
| Unison and flight lie hidden in problem chess Beat and dance both. So plant the chequered field And marvel at the chiaroscuro yield With seven men white, three black, not more, not less. The ebon queen by cavalry beset And interlocking pawns in amber taut Await the outcome floating in time caught By clashing weapons, lord and slave, in debt. Watch how the starburst queen with power ablaze Buzzes the solver's mind into a daze To tease, to lure him away into dark. But then this flitting nymph flies to the rescue Clad in the lacquered garb of magic clerk And barely hovers, pointing with her fescue. | ||||
| Problem setting tricks | ||||
![]() Over the last 5 or 6 years I've put together a problem quiz for the Christmas edition of Australasian Chess. I've mainly chosen problems composed by others, as my own attempts at problem composition have never amounted to much (My only 'Mate in 2' submission to a magazine was returned with the note 'too simplistic'). To avoid people simple solving the problems through shear processing power, a lot of the puzzles have little 'tricks' attached to them. Often these tricks involve ideas outside the usual rules of chess, although nothing downright illegal. One trick used in passed years is the 'upside-down' board trick. In these sort of problems there is no possible solution, unless the board is rotated in some way. The pawns can move in ways that are not obvious, thereby furnishing an answer. However this isn't the only trick, as the problem on the right will show. It is White to play and Mate in 1. As there is no Mate in 1 in the set position some deductive thinking is called for. When I set this for last years quiz, a number of solutions claimed that as there was no way the Black King could legally get to a2 and there fore the board *must* be the wrong way round. While they were right about the Black King it turns out they were wrong about what this means. There is another, far more creative solution to this problem. | ||||
Fri, 19 Feb 2010 12:41:00 +0000 | ||||
| Dutch Special: Matten 7 & De Pion | ||||
Mijn recensie van het vorige Matten-nummer begon ik met de constatering dat er sinds de opheffing van Schaaknieuws niet veel meer te beleven was op Nederlandstalig schaakgebied. Dat is niet meer helemaal juist. Niet alleen is er de nieuwe website schaaksite.nl, een initiatief van Kees Schrijvers met columns, verslagen en analyses, maar ook schrijft Richard Vedder sinds enige tijd zeer lezenswaardige schaakboekrecensies op schakers.info en zijn niemand minder dan Yochanan Afek en Hans Böhm een nieuwe, laagdrempelige serie over de schaakstukken begonnen. Het eerste deel, De Pion – De Ziel Van Het Schaakspel, werd onlangs gepresenteerd. Hoog tijd dus voor weer eens een Nederlandse (dubbel)recensie. Matten 7: Eindelijk op topniveau! Matten 7, uitgegeven door New in Chess, staat dit keer helemaal in het teken van schaken en vrouwen, en de introductie van dit enkele thema voor (bijna) alle artikelen is een gouden greep van de redacteuren, want dit nummer is zonder twijfel de leukste Mattten sinds haar oprichting in 2006. Ik wil beginnen met het interview dat Karel van der Weide had met de schaaktweeling Marlies en Laura Bensdorp. Hebben we in het verleden Van der Weide als schaakliterator regelmatig kritisch gevolgd, de rol van interviewer vertolkt hij met verve. Het interview, met de goed gekozen titel Zelfstandig en Weerbaar, is vlot geschreven, scherp en tegelijk bedachtzaam van toon en levert veel interessante en soms onthullende antwoorden van de schaakzusjes op. Sterk is vooral dat Van der Weide in dit interview nu eens niet zijn eigen (inmiddels overbekende) opvattingen over een onderwerp als het vrouwenschaak herhaalt, maar de zusjes alle ruimte geeft hun punt te maken:
In zo’n fragment toont Van der Weide dat hij wel degelijk kan schrijven: hij observeert, verwoordt en interpreteert goed, durft op te schrijven wat hij hoort en mixt alles met pittige soundbites van de dames zelf. Ook prima: het interview is ideaal van lengte, lang genoeg om de diepte in te gaan en toch kernachtig genoeg om niet te gaan vervelen. Langer van stof is een ander vermaard interviewer, Dirk-Jan ten Geuzendam, in een sympathiek vraaggesprek met Corry Vreeken – het interview is langer, maar de 82-jarige Damesgrootmeester honoris causa heeft logischerwijs ook meer te vertellen dan de nog geen dertigjarige dames Bensdorp. Ook Ten Geuzendam slaagt erin de geïnterviewde opmerkelijke uitspraken te ontlokken – curieus vond ik bijvoorbeeld dat Vreeken aan het eind van het gesprek, dat veel gaat over ouderdom en nog meer over herinneringen aan het verleden, bekent nog wel degelijk te schaken: op internet. Relevant en stijlvol is ook Ten Geuzendam’s inleiding over schaken en sanatoria in de literatuur, die mij herinnerde aan een andere beruchtste schaakroman die zich afspeelt in een sanatorium: Murphy van Samuel Beckett. Beckett had trouwens misschien beter gepast in het stuk van Peter Boel over die andere grande dame van het Nederlandse schaak: de in 2007 overleden tienvoudig Nederlands dameskampioene Fenny Heemskerk. Eigenlijk vond ik Boels stuk nog boeiender, waarschijnlijk omdat het persoonlijker, soberder en diepgravender van toon is: waar Corry Vreeken vooral smakelijke anekdotes vertelt, beschrijft Heemskerks dochter, die zelf ook behoorlijk schaakte, openhartig de manische depressies van haar moeder en de moeilijkheden die dat opleverde voor het gezin én Heemskerks schaakprestaties. Het resultaat is een betrokken en aangrijpend portret van een Nederlandse schaaklegende. Diepgang wordt zeker ook niet vermeden in John Kuipers’ stuk De ziel tussen duister en licht over Erika Sziva en Johan van Mil, een relaas dat in zijn eerlijkheid en onopgeschmukte tragiek soms bijna pijnlijk om te lezen is. Iets luchtiger, maar eveneens zeer onderhoudend, is het interview dat Danielle Pinedo hield met Peng Zhao Qin. Pinedo stelt goede vragen die getuigen van mensenkennis (’je aanpassingsvermogen is je redding geweest’, ‘ben je nooit bang geweest dat je familie de dupe zou worden van je vlucht?’) en Peng geeft open en uitgebreid antwoord op de vragen. Sterk is ook het opzettelijk wat raadselachtig gelaten stuk van Jan Timman over zijn trainingservaringen met Judit Polgar, en Matten’s huisfilosoof Dirk Poldauf houdt een genuanceerd en goed beargumenteerd ‘enerzijds-anderzijds’ betoog over het vrouwenschaak als speciale discipline, waar ikzelf mij in elk geval uitstekend in kon vinden:
De korte rubrieken Het Notatieformulier (Rob van Vuure) en De Foto (Allard Hoogland) zijn ook nu weer leuk om te lezen, en ook Het Gedicht dat Paul van den Hout schreef voor Frans Naerebout (’Verliezen doet hij immers nog maar zelden,/ want juist zijn stille kracht wordt onderschat’) is mooi en toepasselijk, op zijn minst voor wie Naerebout gekend heeft. Is het dan alleen maar hosanna voor de nieuwe Matten? Niet helemaal. Lex Jongsma schreef een wisselvallig en wat rommelig stuk (met de al even rommelige titel ‘Mag ik u mijn Dame aanbieden? Het Dameoffer en het Paard in de Zak’) dat aanvankelijk over De Groene-hoofdredacteur Martin van Amerongen lijkt te gaan, maar opeens overspringt op Reuben Fine, dameoffers en iets ‘uit eigen werk’. Jongsma’s aanstekelijke manier van vertellen komt op papier een stuk minder tot zijn recht. Ik kon mijn aandacht er in dit artikel niet bijhouden: te veel van de hak op de tak, te veel onuitgewerkte invallen, overbodige uitwijdingen en te stellig geformuleerde opinies (’Nu was Freud een genie, en Fine een schaker van wereldkampioenstatuur, en een zeer geacht en goed verdienend psychiater, die weliswaar nooit meer toernooien speelde, maar het schaken allerminst verleerd had: bij een enkele malen herhaald bezoek aan het Amsterdamse koffiehuis/schaakcafe op het Leidseplein eind jaren zestig, in de pauzes van een …’ Enfin, enzovoorts.) Vergeleken met deze woordenbrei zijn de twee bondige stukken over Jan Timman, van Hans Böhm (‘Madame Chaudé de Silans’ over hun reizen naar Frankrijk) en van Franka van der Loo (over de fascinatie van Laurie Langenbach) een lust voor het lezend oog. Pikant is de foto van Langenbach voor Timman waarop ze in ‘een decolleté tot haar navel’ staat afgebeeld met op de achterkant de woorden ‘Op de overwinnning!’. Ach ja, en dan is er nog Guus Luijters, als altijd kwistig strooiend met boek- en filmtitels en Grote Namen uit de Kunst en Literatuur. Luijters weet niets van schaken, is niet geïnteresseerd in schaken, schrijft niet over schaken. Dit keer roept hij wat over Graham Greene en de onlangs verschenen laatste roman van Nabokov (The Original of Laura), ‘koortsig proza, waarin zowaar een keer geschaakt wordt’, zonder ooit iets diepzinnigs of verrassends ter tafel te brengen. Raadsel waarom Luijters iedere keer weer gevraagd wordt voor een bijdrage aan Matten; ik begin inmiddels te vermoeden dat de redacteurs het zelf ook niet weten. Tot slot: een fascinerend portret van de Pools-Nederlandse schaker Salo Landau door Adri Plomp – het enige artikel dat niet over vrouwen gaat. Choquerend zijn iedere keer weer de antisemitische stukken die Aljechin, wiens secondant Landau was in 1935, in de Tweede Wereldorlog schreef; maar de door Plomp beschreven gebeurtenissen rond de dood van Landau in de oorlog, zijn nauwelijks met droge ogen te lezen. Het is volkomen terecht dat de Matten-redactie er ondanks het themanummer toch voor gekozen heeft dit boeiende artikel nu op te nemen. Met Matten 7 is het tijdschrift eindelijk helemaal op het niveau dat past bij de al tijdens de oprichting uitgesproken ambities van de redactie. Proficiat! Wij presenteren … De pion – De Ziel van het Schaakspel Er is een nieuw project van Hans Böhm en Yochanan Afek: een serie boeken over alle stukken van het schaakspel, uitgegeven door Trion Sport. Het eerste deel heet De Pion. Uit Böhms voorwoord:
Uit de inleiding wordt overigens niet helemaal duidelijk voor wie de serie nu precies bedoeld is. Voor mensen die ’slechts’ geïnteresseerd zijn in schaken? Of ook voor schakers die het leuk vinden problemen en schaakpuzzels op te lossen? Gezien het niveau van de stellingen denk ik eerder het laatste – en dat is goed nieuws voor gevorderde schakers! De historische inleiding is een pakkend en levendig geschreven stuk met relevante citaten en interessante feiten over de evolutie van de moderne schaakpion, die over het algemeen ook nog eens accuraat beschreven is. Ik kwam één foutje tegen: het zogenaamde Göttingen manuscript stamt volgens de laatste wetenschappelijke opvattingen niet uit 1471, maar uit de vroege 16de eeuw, zoals ik vorig jaar leerde op een symposium in Valencia over de oorsprong van het moderne schaak. (Zie J.A. Garzón, The Return of Francesch Vicent, 2005, p. 399 e.v.) Ook in de bijbehorende beschrijving van de ontwikkeling van de rokade kan wellicht de nodige nuance worden aangebracht, maar ik wil geen muggenzifter zijn. Het historische gedeelte van het boek is leuk en informatief, en daar gaat het om. Het leeuwendeel van het boek bestaat uit de al genoemde fragmenten en composities, ingedeeld in relevante thema’s. Het eerste thema is ‘De vertraagde pion’ en het eerste voorbeeld is meteen al behoorlijk pittig:
Remise. De eindspelkenner herkent direct een overeenkomst met de beroemde studie van Réti over het ‘kwadraat’, en inderdaad is deze studie van T.Gorgiev uit 1930 daarop gebaseerd, al noemen Afek en Böhm dit niet. De oplossing: 1.c6! (niet 1.a4 h6! ‘en zwart wint het tempospel’ of 1.a3 h5!) 1…h6 2.a3! h5 3.a4 h4 4.a5 h3 5.a6 h2 6.a7 h1D pat. Of 1…Kc7 3.a4 [sic, bedoeld is 2.a4] 3…Kxc6 4.a5 Kb5 5.Kb7 Kxa5 6.Kc6 h5 7.Kd5 ‘en de witte koning zit in het kwadraat (h1-h5-d5-d1) en dus remise’. Oef! Hoe fraai en subtiel de studie ook is, voor een eerste voorbeeld in het boek vond ik dit tamelijk zware kost, vooral omdat de bijbehorende uitleg nogal summier en weinig specifiek is. Mensen die dit boek kochten omdat ze ’schaken een leuk spelletje vinden’ zullen zich toch misschien wel even op hun achterhoofd krabben wat nu precies de definitie van een ‘kwadraat’ is (is dat altijd h1-h5-d5-d1 of alleen in dit geval?). Schakers die Afeks werk kennen weten dat zijn niveau hoog is, maar geldt dat ook voor argeloze kopers? De voorbeelden zijn trouwens niet allemaal zo pittig, al zijn ze ook nooit echt makkelijk. Uit het hoofdstukje ‘De kamikazepion’:
Dit is een fragment uit de partij Tal-Zdravko Milev, München 1958. De eerste zet is fraai en in het kader van het thema niet al te moeilijk te vinden, maar daarna wordt het toch lastiger: 1.d5!! exd5 2.Tfe1! Kd8 3.Db3 c5 4.Pxc5! en wit won in enkele zetten (al schrijven Böhm en Afek dat de partij hier ‘abrupt eindigde’). Afek en Böhm geven als alternatieven voor zwart op de tweede zet 2…dxe4 3.Dxe4+ De7 4.Dg4 en vervolgens – zonder nadere toelichting! – de tamelijk complexe variant 2…Le7 3.Pf6+! Kd8 4.Db3 Kc8 5.Lf4! Dxf4 6.Txe7 Tb8 7.Dh3+ en wit wint. Hier sta ik toch wel even van te kijken. Ten eerste wil ik na het spectaculaire 3.Pf6+ toch ook wel even weten wat er volgt op gxf6 gevolgd door rochade, dus ik zocht de partij op in mijn database en kwam toen pas te weten dat zwart helemaal niet meer mag rocheren aangezien de koning op zet 14 een stuk op d7 geslagen heeft en daarna weer teruggegaan is naar e8. Dat hadden de auteurs er toch wel even bij mogen zetten! (Dat wit toch wint als zwart had mogen rocheren, doet daar niets aan af.) Daarnaast is pas 19…c5? de beslissende fout en kan zwart nog aardig partij geven na 19…Kc8, al blijft wit ook dan goed staan. Uit deze twee voorbeelden blijkt dat de auteurs hun taak op een tamelijk rigoureuze manier hebben opgevat: het gaat ze puur om de ideëen die door de thema’s worden geïllustreerd: het visuele aspect. Ze lijken minder geïnteresseerd in de uitleg van het waarom, en dat is jammer, want gaat het daar uiteindelijk niet om? Misschien is dit een knieval naar het ‘grote publiek’, dat mogelijkerwijs niet zit te wachten op een diepgaande uitleg, maar op zoek is naar ’snel vermaak’. Zou het zo zijn? Zou een oppervlakkige lezer wel geraakt worden door de schoonheid van Gorgievs studie, maar niet geïnteresseerd zijn in de precieze uitwerking? Toch valt niet te ontkennen dat Hans Böhm en Yochanan Afek met De Pion een zeer vermakelijk en aanstekelijk boekje hebben geschreven, dat zich zowel goed leent voor ‘in bed’ als voor diepere (zelf)studie. Welk stuk volgt? Het Paard? Ook dat belooft wat. | ||||
Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:35:52 +0000 | ||||
| Nabokov’s chess sonnets translated | ||||
Vladimir Nabokov Vladimir Nabokov, most famous to chess players for his 1930 novel The Defense, held a lifelong fascination for chess, publishing problems and writing about the subject on various occasions. (Though it is very unclear how strong he really was as a chess player.) Of chess problems, he wrote that they are ‘the poetry of chess’:
His three early sonnets, including the original Russian text, linking, according to Roycroft, “chess, chess problems, chess history and sex”, can be read here. Underneath the article, there’s an interesting comment by professional Russian translator Sarah Hurst on some translational issues. It struck us that in the first sonnet, Philidor’s opponent is called ‘Dyuser’, which Roycroft translates as ‘Légal’. We have not been able to find the reason for this, since the full name of Légal (he of the mate) was Legall de Kermeur. Perhaps one of our readers knows more about this mysterious (to us) ‘Dyuser’? Vladimir Nabokov (1899-1977) was one of the most influential writers of the 20th century, gaining international fame with his novel Lolita (1955) as well as his strong and highly-esteemed opinions on literature and art. His poems, however, are generally regarded as being of lesser importance. His last unfinished novel, The Original of Laura, was recently published posthumously. (Update: Apparently ‘Dyuser’ stands for ‘Du Sire’ or ‘Dusserre’, which could in fact refer to ‘Sire de Legal’, although this is questioned by other scholars.) | ||||
Wed, 17 Feb 2010 14:24:54 +0000 | ||||
| Linares 2010 - First Rest Day | ||||
The 2010 Linares chess tournament is a six-player double round robin running from 13th until 24th February. The first rest day was granted after four rounds of intense games. Despite the high fighting spirit, thus far only two games have finished with decisive result, when Veselin Topalov beat Vugar Gashimov and Alexander Grischuk scored against Boris Gelfand in round two. Both were beautiful positional games, you can download them from the official website.Topalov and the last year winner Grischuk are sharing the lead with 2.5 points each. Topalov has been cautious more than usual, but nevertheless he run into problems in the game against the aggressive Levon Aronian, who is always seeking to crush his opponents with white pieces in hand. With resourceful and imaginative defence, Topalov narrowly escaped the defeat by transposing into an endgame with opposite-coloured Bishops and wrong promoting corner. Another wild game was the encounter between Boris Gelfand and Francisco Vallejo Pons. The Spaniard gave up the Queen for White Rook, but his minor pieces were dangerously coordinated and pointed towards the enemy King. With not more than 15 minutes on the clock, Gelfand decided to drop calculating complicated lines in the quest of exploiting material advantage, and instead gave the Queen back to reach a safe endgame where he easily held a draw. The competition continues with round five games on Thursday. Pairings are Topalov-Grischuk in the derby match, Vallejo - Gashimov and Aronian - Gelfand. ![]() Levon Aronian | ||||
Thu, 18 Feb 2010 04:34:09 +0000 | ||||
| La chronique échecs du jeudi avec Samir | ||||
Nous vous offrons tout d'abord ce bon café de notre ami photographe Charly Founes, histoire de bien commencer la journée avec Chess & Strategy. Ensuite, prenez le temps de lire le nouvel article sur les échecs du journal Paris-Normandie, un surprenant voyage dans le monde des cases blanches et noires, raconté avec passion chaque semaine sur notre site échiquéen par Samir Adyel. Au sommaire de cette chronique échecs très éclectique : un mat en deux coups signé de D. J. Shire, tiré du Problem Observer de 1989, l’arroseur arrosé illustré par la partie entre Ivanov et Cheparinov à Séville en 2004, une devinette, l'agenda normand, une finale 100% british entre Miles (2565) et Short (2485) à Manchester en 1982, une citation du 2ème champion du monde d'échecs Emanuel Lasker et un piège d'ouverture dans le début Larsen à l'Open Féminin Moscou 2010. Merci Samir. Retrouver la chronique échecs de Samir, tous les jeudi sur Chess & Strategy. | ||||
Thu, 18 Feb 2010 04:18:00 +0000 | ||||
| Re: Petit problème | ||||
| Salut,
Les liens sur la page de téléchargement corrigés. Merci. Patrick Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t778-Petit-probleme.htm?p=2185 | ||||
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 19:27:44 +0000 | ||||
| Petit problème — Erreur mauvais fichier | ||||
Porte les même numéros quand nous les téléchargeons Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t778-Petit-probleme.htm | ||||
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:49:52 +0000 | ||||
| Re: hierarchie coherente de mes modules | ||||
Stanislas Gounant a écrit:sa pourrait être pire il pourrais t'appeler staline Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t661-hierarchie-coherente-de-mes-modules.htm?p=2176 | ||||
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 04:59:20 +0000 | ||||
| Re: hierarchie coherente de mes modules | ||||
| Salut Nicola,
Il semble que "Terry" ait des problèmes avec les prénoms, il m'appelle Stalinas (l'homme de fer en russe ?). Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t661-hierarchie-coherente-de-mes-modules.htm?p=2174 | ||||
Mon, 15 Feb 2010 18:58:53 +0000 | ||||
| Re: NLUE / Nouvelle Ligue des UCI Engines | ||||
| Salut,
Je suis impatient de voir le tournoi d'entrée de Toga
Il correspond à toutes les conditions requises pour entrer dans l'UEL Il est librement accessible, sont auteur est identifié, moins de 5 ans, jamais commercialisé (c'est un dérivé de Fruit 2.1, programme qui était gratuit. De plus Fruit en tant qu'ancien commercial ne peut être dans cette UEL, donc le problème du remplacement de Fruit par un dérivé ne se pause pas). Stanislas Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t768-NLUE-Nouvelle-Ligue-des-UCI-Engines.htm?p=2167 | ||||
Mon, 15 Feb 2010 12:12:43 +0000 | ||||
| Echecs & Télévision : Lucie trop la pêche ! | ||||
Lucie, 10 ans, licenciée au Stade Français JEEN, fait découvrir depuis le 6 février et jusqu'au 7 mars sa passion pour les échecs dans l'émission Trop la pêche ! Dans ce programme court, proposé par l'ANIA (Association Nationale des Industries Alimentaires), Lucie et 9 autres enfants font comprendre, chacun à leur façon, que pour donner le meilleur de soi-même, quelques règles simples peuvent aider. Le reportage sur Lucie a été réalisé dans les locaux du Stade Français JEEN - organisateur du récent Top 12 féminin - avec sa famille et le MI et problémiste Abdelaziz Onkoud. | ||||
Tue, 16 Feb 2010 09:23:00 +0000 | ||||
| 101 Minipartidas - Ramón Crusi Moré | ||||
![]() Colección Escaques - De este libro, el Gran Maestro Internacional A. O'Kelly dice "bonita colección de miniaturas seleccionadas por Ramón Crusi..." y efectivamente así es. Crusi Moré colaboró con la revista Trebejos y de sus aportaciones allí recopiló las miniaturas jugadas entre 1965 y 1969 para darnos esta obra. Son 101 partidas cortas donde se pueden admirar combinaciones, celadas, novedades y sorprendentes finales que serán un deleite para todo ajedrecista. Este volumen, impreso en 1970, lo he obtenido de un juego de fotocopias que me facilitó un buen amigo, desconozco si le corresponde un número dentro de la Colección de Escaques, si alguien tiene más datos de él le agradeceré me los haga llegar. Mediafire | ||||
Sat, 13 Feb 2010 04:04:00 +0000 | ||||
| GM Moskalenko responds to ChessVibes review of Revolutionize Your Chess | ||||
In his review of Revolutionize Your Chess our reviewer Arne Moll wrote that he didn’t like the book. He used strong words, like ‘amazingly silly’, ‘rather confusing’, ‘extremely simplistic’ and ‘hopelessly flawed’. Here’s GM Moskalenko’s reaction:
Update 14:40 CET: meanwhile Arne Moll has responded in the comments – we’ll give it here as well:
Links | ||||
Mon, 15 Feb 2010 09:43:03 +0000 | ||||
| Beautiful old times learning Chess | ||||
![]() Hello everybody! As I was giving a chess lesson today to a young promising kid, I thought back at the wonderful times when I was growing up, and my Dad was teaching chess to me. The very nice collage above, made by Mister-M, helped me to think back and to remember what it was like. My Dad taught me to play chess when I was five, in 1989, and he would show me chess tricks daily, I loved them so much. At the time our family lived in Moscow, and my Dad would take me to parks to play chess with other kids and with grown-ups. Even though Russia was going through very hard times, my parents did everything so I would not notice, and I continued enjoying learning chess. On the top right of the collage you see me at 7 years old during the Moscow youth championship, when I earned my first title of Moscow champion Under-10. If you have children, give them the gift of chess. I promise you will not regret it, and chess will help them in their future life, that's for sure! Chess teaches to concentrate, it shows the value of hard work, and it develops memory and problem solving skills. The earlier one starts to play chess the better, so don't waste a moment - go and teach your loved ones chess! Very best wishes to you all on this Valentine's Day! And thanks to Mister-M for the beautiful collage he created! Alexandra Kosteniuk Women's World Chess Champion | ||||
Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:20:00 +0000 | ||||
| Peaceful start in Linares | ||||
The 27th Torneo Internacional de Ajedrez “Ciudad de Linares” takes place February 12-25 in Linares, Andalucia, Spain. As a result of the financial crisis, the event went back to the (nowadays almost universal) formula of six players, double round-robin. This year Veselin Topalov (2805), Levon Aronian (2781), Boris Gelfand (2761), Vugar Gashimov (2759), Alexander Grischuk (2736) and Francisco Vallejo Pons (2705) play. The rounds start at 16:00 CET; rest days are on the 17th and the 22nd. The rate of play is 2 hours for 40 moves, then 1 hour for 20, then 20 minutes for the rest of the game, wit 30 seconds increment starting from move 61. The Sofia rules for offering a draw apply in Linares for the first time. Round 1 report by Rick GoetzeeThe famous Linares tournament is on its way again. It is true that the event has lost some of its aura and some say that Corus has taken over as the Wimbledon of chess, but it is still one of the greatest tournaments around. And not only because of its history. It’s quite remarkable how the organisers have kept the event alive through great adversity and without corporate sponsorship. In the last year they had to deal with the economic recession and voices in the local government challenging the decision to invest in a chess tournament. Also the plan to host the first half of the tournament in Dubai fell through. Despite all this, the Linares organizers have secured this famous event for another year. The field once consisted of 14 players, but since 2006 (after Kasparov retired) there have been eight players, competing in a double round robin. This year, because of financial constraints, it went down to six. While this is a pity it puts it on par with the Grand Slam tournaments in Sofia and Nanjing. Only Corus still has 14 players in their A-group. One of the consequences of a relatively small field is that the tournament is very strong. In Wijk aan Zee there were a few players (predominantly the local ones) who acted as the rabbits in the field, as GM Joel Benjamin referred to them on ICC’s Chess.FM. In Linares the only local player is Vallejo Pons but with a rating of 2705 he can hardly be called a rabbit.
Although he has always been a top player, it’s been already 13 years since Boris Gelfand has last played in Linares. In the polls before the start of the tournament Aronian was the favourite, undoubtedly because Topalov will have the upcoming world championship match in the back of his mind. The opening ceremony on Friday was short but entertaining with flamenco dancers and Spanish traditional music. The first round started on Saturday at 4pm which is quite late compared to other tournaments. It must have to do with the great Spanish tradition of ‘la siesta’. All games were drawn in the first round. Vallejo-Topalov lasted 41 moves after a Ruy Lopez opening, Breyer variation. This solid system isn’t something Topalov regularly plays, and Vallejo was probably not well prepared for it. The Spaniard chose an old system but got nothing, and after many exchanges Topalov couldn’t play for a win either.
Aronian-Grischuk was a Nimzo-Indian with 4.f3, the system popularized by Fritz Sämisch. White’s move 8.Qd2 led the game into a position that was popular in the 50s (!) and Grischuk used a lot of time in the opening, but he was able to solve all his problems. In fact if anyone was better it was Black, who could have tried 19…N7e5 if he’d had more time. After 26 moves the players shook hands. Aronian only used 40 minutes for the whole game.
The most interesting game of the day was Gelfand-Gashimov. The Azerbaijan GM went for his favourite Benoni, an opening we don’t see very often in the elite tournaments. According to GM Benjamin this is a sign of the new philosophy of modern top players. Chess is becoming more of a sport than a science. A fight over the board is preferred over home preparation. Well, in any case Gelfand was, as so often, very well prepared. The World Cup winner went for the 7.Bf4 line, and knew all ins and outs of Gashimov’s pawn sacrifice on move 9. Gashimov always seemed to have compensation, but was it enough? White’s bishops looked very strong. Eventually Black won his pawn back and the game ended after 54 moves with a repetition of moves in a knight and bishop ending.
Photos © María José Sánchez Rivera The pairings for the 2nd round on Sunday are Topalov-Gashimov, Grischuk-Gelfand and Vallejo-Aronian. Games round 1 with brief annotationsGame viewer by ChessTempo Links | ||||
Sat, 13 Feb 2010 23:34:37 +0000 | ||||
| Re: hierarchie coherente de mes modules | ||||
Le tournoi est interrompu pour cause technique ! les modules Zap!chess ont quelques problemes pour se charger et se decharger tous seuls dans l'interface sans mon intervention , ce sont bien les seuls à m'embeter (devinez ! encore cette de controle de cd)
Bref je regarde quelles sont les quelques parties concernées ( le moteur n'a pas joué pas apres la bibliotheque) , je les fais jouer en tete à tete , puis les remplace manuellement dans le tableau general , avant de reprendre la suite normale des operations . Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t661-hierarchie-coherente-de-mes-modules.htm?p=2148 | ||||
Thu, 11 Feb 2010 09:42:10 +0000 | ||||
| Black History: A Chess Perspective | ||||
Black History Month… a month that is to represent the triumph of a people over adversity and to pay hommage to their achievements. When Carter G. Woodson dubbed “Negro History Week” in 1926, his intent was bring exposure to the unique history and plight of the Black people. He founded the Negro World where he chronicled the condition of the Blacks and later wrote the seminal book, The Mis-Education of the Negro. He earned a Master’s a University of Chicago in 1908 and a Ph.D. at Harvard University in 1912 and became one of the foremost pioneers in the field of contemporary history. Is Black History Relevant? Woodson had a difficult time convincing others that there was a need for a commemoration dedicated to championing the “so-called American Negro.” He was told that Black history was no different from American history and there should not be any distinction. However, it is well-known that the way history is painted depends on who has the brush. Woodson opined that Black history and the accomplishments of Black men and women were often overlooked, blotted out of history or trivialized. Negro History Week became “Black History Month” and is recognized nationally. One of the problems with Black History Month is that the same figures are honored each year: Dr. Martin Luther King, Sojourner Truth, Harriet Tubman and George Washington Carver. These are staple of classroom lessons on Black history, but the perhaps they have become have lost their novelty. There is an increasing concern that the history is not being taught properly or by instructors who are very selective on which figures they cover. Of course Black history, extends far beyond what “African-Americans” have done. Black pioneers in Africa, the Caribbean, Latin America and Europe had made tremendous accomplishments. Haiti has been in the news of late and of course many are hearing the name Toussaint L’Ouverture, the military leader who lead the Haitians to a stunning victory over France in quest of slave independence. There are many other legendary leaders around the world who led independence and resistance movements such as Jean-Jacques Dessalines (Haiti), Paul Bogle (Jamaica), Marcus Garvey (Jamaica), Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana), Amilcar Cabral (Guinea-Bissau), Samora Machel (Angola), Zumbi dos Palmares (Brazil) to name a few. There are also a long list of scientists (Imhotep), athletes (Jesse Owens), politicians (Patrice Lumumba), historians (Cheikh Anta Diop), scholars (Sir Arthur Lewis) that could easily fill up a large encyclopedia. One would ask, “why it is important to have this history?” The best way to explain this is to reflect on the purpose of this very website. The Black Renaissance in Chess Many years ago as a rising young player in Chicago, I knew only a few Black Masters. In the midst of a conversation with a Caucasian player, he asked me about the number of Black masters and I could only name the few I knew. The problem was that no one had taken time to archive the history of the players and they certainly didn’t appear regularly in chess magazines. Thus, there became a need to show the contributions of a forgotten segment. There are now thousands of pages of documented history on Blacks’ contributions to chess at “The Chess Drum“. ![]() Looking back on chess history there are many landmarks for Blacks. There is 19th century chess problemist Theophilus Thompson who was the first Black player of note. In the U.S., Walter Harris, Frank Street and Kenneth Clayton and Leroy (Jackson) Muhammad led the 60s era along with Charles Covington and Charles Lawton of the 70s. Then came the effect of the “Fischer Boom”. The 80s saw a mass wave of Black Masters rise and throughout the world there were players making their presence felt. The 80s saw a teen sensations named Baraka Shabazz and K.K. Karanja. African and Caribbean nations began dotting the Olympiad landscape and taking their rightful place among the cadre of chess nations. African International Masters Watu Kobese (South Africa), Odion Aikhoje (Nigeria), Robert Gwaze (Zimbabwe) have produced shining moments for “Mother Africa”. WIM Oleiny Linares-Napoles made Cuba proud by winning a silver medal in the 2008 Olympiad with 9/10. A landmark event occurred when Maurice Ashley became the first Black Grandmaster in 1993. This became the benchmark for Black excellence and was followed by Pontus Carlsson (Sweden) and Amon Simutowe (Zambia). Of course, Emory Tate will go down in the annals of Black history as one of the most celebrated players, a reputation coming from his dashing victories. The historic Wilbert Paige Memorial was a tournament for the ages. The idea that there is such a history will provide the upcoming talents with examples of paths once trodden. History in the Making Currently, age records are being smashed with young stars around the world becoming living legends. It is also true that in the African Diaspora, there are a number of young boys and girls beginning to make progressive strides. In America, the players making a mark are getting younger and younger. Kassa Korley has broken the age record for U.S. National Master at 15 years 2 months. His record is endangered by players like Justus Williams and Josh Colas who are only 12 years old and already 2100 strength. These young boys have a history they can draw upon.
Scholastic All-Americans: Justus Williams and Josh Colas There is something clearly important about seeing images of successful people with whom you have something in common. For those who have never had problems finding role models, it may be hard to understand the significance. For those who have to look far and wide for examples, the Black Master playing against the world’s best can make a huge difference in the confidence of impressionable minds. One thing is for sure… the “Wall of Fame” will only get bigger as long as we preserve the immediate history. Mimicking Carter G. Woodson, we should be compelled to present historic examples that are often overlooked. There are many beautiful stories yet to be told! | ||||
Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:04:08 +0000 | ||||
| Su valoración, por favor | ||||
|
El rey en el centro es un tema clásico. En esta partida clave de la Bundesliga Alemana, el actual Campeón del Mundo sub-20 había sacrificado un peón para abrirse paseo hacia el rey negro, lo cual fue respondido con 16...f6. ¿Cuál es su veredicto sobre esa continuación? A) Es un error: las blancas podrán penetrar la posición de manera decisiva. B) Una buena jugada: las negras repelen al alfil y consolidarán su peón de más. C) Mucho ruido y pocas nueces. La posición sigue equilibrada. La solución está aquí, pero antes de mirarla le sugerimos que reflexione sobre el problema con una versión más grande del diagrama... | ||||
Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT | ||||
| Multiples Installations de Fritz et amis | ||||
| J'ai une ribambelle de cd Fritz shredder etc autres amis sous interface Chessbase...
generalement je change d'interface au gré de mes humeurs ou ds necessités , mais dans un souci de rationalité ( tout germanique comme chessbase) , j'ai essayé de combiner le meilleur de chaque version d'interface ... j'ai ainsi reussi à " françiser" toutes mes versions ! car certaines etaient en français , d'autres en anglais ( les plus économiques !) ... J'avais la nostalgie des commentaires français humoristiques de la version Fritz 5.32 ( en 3 Cdroms ! dont un consacré uniquement à la VF) , je crois que ces commentaires étaient faits par eric Birmingham . Ils continuent à me faire rire au bout de 10 ans ! Helas les commentaires francais de la version fritz 9 , n'etaient pas aussi reussis dans le ton sacarstique, humoritique , et dérision ... ( je ne sais plus qui est le gmi qui parle , mais il m'est pourtant familier) je ne parle pas des commentaires anglais des differentes versions dont je ne saisis pas toujours l'humour au second degré et qui eux m'agacaient rapidement car je ne peux pas tous les comprendre ( argot ?) . J'aime bien aussi certaines versions qui ont les morceaux musicaux bien reussis ( JS Bach est mon préféré) . J'ai archivé methodiquement toutes les bibliotheques d'ouvertures presentes sur les cd : il est remarquable de voir à quel point ces bibliotheques grand public ont evolué depuis fritz 5 ! elles ont aussi pris de l'embonpoint comme moi au fil des années . au passage je rappelle que la bibliotheque de shredder 12 est gratuite en telechargement sur le site shredder : elle est excellente . j'ai archivé methotiquement toutes les databases de parties fournies avec chaque version (il n'y a pas que des doublons , certaines bases presentent des particularités selon les versions ) .. j'ai été bien ennuyé par chessbase et sa nouvelle politique : la version Chessbase Light 2009 , ne permet plus de travailler veritablement à l'interieur des parties contenues dans une database .... j'ai donc voulu reinstaller une version chessbaselight 2007 : Horreur ! chessbase a mis une protection temporelle !! Au lancement de l'executable j'ai un message me disant que la date d'installation a expiré !! je suis presque sur que chessbase light 2007 permettait de travailler sur les parties d'une database ! Visiblement Chessbase a modifié sa politique de gratuité de chessbaselight , qui n'est plus qu'un" READER "de fichiers database.... Enfin , heureusement j'ai toujours une version de chessbaselight 6 parfaitement fonctionnelle ...qui m'a permis de travailler sur les parties comme je le souhaitais ... en attendant de rentrer dans les entrailles de chessbase light 2007 pour l'utiliser malgré ces nouvelles limitations. Ceci dit je n'ecris pas toutes ces lignes sans une raison precise : j'ai une question à laquelle je n'ai pas trouvé la réponse malgrè mes recherches ( lié au fait que je ne peux travailler pleinement avec chessbaselight) Lors de l'installation d'une GUI chessbase , Deux repertoires principaux sont créés : - l'un dans programmes files contient les executables chessmachine et les moteurs engines . , chaque installation d'une nouvelle version GUI est cumulative , et les sous repertoires cohabitent parfaitement en partageant le repertoire engines par exemple . aucun probleme à ce niveau ( Patrick a créé un tutoriel à ce sujet sur les archives du fou numerique que j'ai bien relu ! ) - L'autre repertoire se trouve dans " mes documents" du profil windows : ce repertoire " chessbase" contient les bibliotheques (book) ainsi que les parties joués par le joueur contre les moteurs ou les moteurs entre eux ( tournois, matchs, autosave) .. Mais il contient aussi la database de parties references originaire du cdrom nommée simplement Database ! Ma question est celle là : pourquoi n'y a t il qu'une seule base de reference database dans ce repertoire ,apres avoir installé plusieurs cdrom , alors que chacun des cd rom ayant des databases de parties references differentes ? Ne pouvant utiliser que chessbaselight , je n'ai pas la reponse . quelqu'un a t il une idee ou une reponse à cette question ? merci cordialement thierry Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t769-Multiples-Installations-de-Fritz-et-amis.htm | ||||
Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:20:50 +0000 | ||||
| Re: Bonjour | ||||
| Bonjour François, bienvenue parmi nous.
Si c'est uniquement pour jouer sans te faire massacrer, un ancien programme commercial tel que Chessmaster 9000 est parfait parce qu'il permet de choisir les niveaux de jeu via ses avatars (je ne connais pas la dernière mouture en cours et j'ai rencontré trop de problèmes avec la 10e édition pour pouvoir la conseiller). Avec une réserve toutefois : l'affaiblissement du niveau n'est pas homogène et continu. Il se traduit trop souvent par une série de bons coups interrompue par exemple, par une pièce mise en prise, avec ensuite retour aux bons coups. Mais c'est un programme, ce n'est pas un joueur humain... Moins convivial, mais évolutif et gratuit : télécharger sur le site d'Arena l'interface 1.1 (dernière version stable) et ses compléments indispensables (écocodes, ingines.ini, trad de l'interface et plus si affinités), la compléter avec la dernière biblio généraliste de Harry Schnapps (ici) et, toujours ici, choisir dans la Ligue un ou plusieurs moteurs UCI en fonction des résultats obtenus par Patrick. Avantage évident : si un UCI paraît à l'usage trop fort ou trop faible, ou si son jeu ne satisfait pas ou plus, on le change. Maintenant si tu veux analyser tes parties après coup ou étudier une ouverture, les derniers Fritz sont très bien. En prime ils comportent une importante base de données. Mais natürlich, jouer contre eux, c'est aller à l'abattoir, j'en sais quelque chose...
Naturellement il s'agit de mon opinion perso et non d'une vérité révélée. D'autres pourront avoir des avis différents et tout aussi motivés. JB Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t767-Bonjour.htm?p=2126 | ||||
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:02:22 +0000 | ||||
| Is Nakamura the ‘Real Deal’? | ||||
|
Hikaru Nakamura has quite a story to tell. Born in Osaka, Japan and arriving in the U.S. at the age of two, Nakamura has been gracing the pages of chess magazines since he began breaking many of Bobby Fischer’s records. One of the first indicators of chess talent is the age record for National Master. There have been many talented players to come through the scholastic ranks, but many either quit playing after high school, or shortly after reaching National Master. When Nakamura entered Dickinson College, there were fears that America would lose yet another promising talent along the likes of Grandmasters Michael Wilder and Patrick Wolff. Under the early tutelage of his stepfather FM Sunil Weeramantry and the mentorship of older brother Asuka Nakamura, young Hikaru shattered the record reaching the mark in 10 years, 79 days. In 2008, his record was later lowered to 9 years, 11 months by Nicholas Nip, a player who is no longer active. Five years later, he broke Bobby Fischer’s long-standing record by earning Grandmaster status in 15 years, 79 days. Media comparisons to Fischer immediately heightened when he won the U.S. Championship at age 16. However, Nakamura reminded everyone, “I’m not Bobby Fischer.” He was intimating the point that Fischer was an unbalanced individual who only thought of chess. Of course, this was only half the story with Fischer, but certainly he was one who could not operate comfortably outside of the chess realm. When you talk to Nakamura, he is comfortable talking about a wide range of topics including his beloved Vancouver Canucks hockey team. He also has a variety of interests including music, finance, sports and politics. Many of the existing stereotypes of Nakamura are based on history from his teen years and commentary from online chess servers. ![]() Chief Organizer Erik Anderson (left) stands next to GM Hikaru Nakamura and WGM Rusudan Goletiani after both were crowned the 2004 U.S. Champions. Nakamura’s talent was hardly questioned on the U.S. scene as he had put together an impressive résumé of wins. At the closing ceremonies of the 2003 U.S. Championship, winner Alexander Shabalov singled out a young Nakamura and stated that he had a bright future in chess. In American tournaments, Nakamura’s brash style has become a breath of fresh air in a sport that had become stagnant with the same players competing every year in the U.S. Championships and the open tournaments. His victory the next year was definitely good for chess. Once Nakamura joined the elite class in the U.S., he carried a reputation as being an isolationist and distrustful of his colleagues. He rankled many when he made comments about collusion among the U.S. elite. “That’s actually why I still work alone. It’s very hard to trust anybody.” However, as Nakamura begin to ascend to a world-class level, he enlisted some help. After the 2009 U.S. Championship, he mentioned that he had been working with National Master Kris Littlejohn. This choice of a second puzzled many, but has paid dividends.
Viktor Mikalevski ponders Gata Kamsky’s next move while Nakamura-Najer reaches the climatic stage of the 2009 World Open. Photo by Daaim Shabazz. In U.S. chess, there had been too many “friendships” between top players which resulted in many quick draws and dispirited play. Nakamura was dismissive of these tactics and forced the issue with his ‘play-to-win’ attitude. His determination affords him psychological capital when an opponent understands that they have to fight when they are already content on drawing. This fighting spirit came into great effect when he won his first U.S. Championship at age 16. However, in an important interview in Salon magazine, there were still had doubters.
Nakamura’s sales pitch to Europe was more difficult, but he was beginning to pick up momentum. Tournament organizers were attracted to his brash, no-nonsense style. He has since broken through in a number of strong tournaments and is now comfortably ensconced in the top 20. Many detractors rail at the notion that Nakamura has not gotten the opportunities to face the elite level. They cite his skipping Corus “B” in 2008 for the Gibraltar Masters as a snub. Nakamura cited inadequate conditions, but made good on his trip by winning Gibraltar. He added a few more accolades including the 2009 U.S. Championship, 960 World Championship and the Cap d’Agde Rapid Tournament (over Anatoly Karpov and Vassily Ivanchuk). There were still doubters who stated that he couldn’t win in a strong classical tournament. After playing poorly in the London Classic, Nakamura finally got his coveted invite to Corus “A” and made a strong showing with 7.5/13 (4th place). Magnus Carlsen, the winner of the tournament, identified Nakamura as a new rival. On various chess blogs, the conversation of Nakamura ascendancy is a popular topic. Naysayers continue to claim Nakamura is not worthy of “elite” status for very specific reasons. After he refutes these reasons, another set will be created and standards increased. At this point, pundits state that Nakamura has to make top 10 to be considered seriously as a World Championship. Last year, it was top 20. Of course, the candidacy of players such as Magnus Carlsen, Sergey Karjakin or Teimour Radjabov was recognized almost immediately. What is the difference? The theory was that the European stars were “battle-tested” and Nakamura had not faced tough competition. Many top chess journals, websites and blogs take liberties to print negative portrayals of the young American star. Even his head-to-head blitz victory over Carlsen in Norway was trivialized. So the question…”Is Nakamura the ‘Real Deal’?” Does he have World Championship potential? When Vladimir Kramnik was asked this question, he seems to believe that Nakamura is a legitimate talent, but stopped short of giving a full endorsement. Most of the fans and journalists believe that Carlsen is the heir apparent to Viswanathan Anand or Veselin Topalov, but it is not certain if Carlsen will maintain his level. The performance of Anish Giri turned some heads and the Chinese and Indians deserve attention. If one looks at Nakamura, he has many things going for him.
GM Hikaru Nakamura at 2010 Corus in Wijk aan Zee. Will these factors mean that he has enough to win a World Championship? Time will tell. One thing that is true is that if Nakamura has his goal set and resources are not an issue, he will have more than an adequate shot at winning the World Championship. He is only 22 years old and he will continue to get better. The downside is does not have a sponsor and gets limited help from his federation which means that he does not have the luxury of focusing purely on chess development. In a 2005 interview with the New York Times, Nakamura summed up his chances.
Nakamura has the tenacity, the nerves and still has some areas of improvement in his game. Given Carlsen’s breach of 2800, there will be a new cadre of players to vie for the world crown. With the right combination of training, sponsorship and tournament invitations, Nakamura hopes to be one in that number. | ||||
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:38:07 +0000 | ||||
| Ajedrez de Sherlock Holmes | ||||
| Surgió una secuencia muy original en este encuentro siciliano disputado en el recién terminado torneo Corus en Wijk aan Zee (Holanda). El caballo negro está siendo atacado, pero ¿a qué casilla se debería desplazar? Esta es solo una de las preguntas (A), porque también es interesante la cuestión de cuál ha sido la última (¡y mejor!) jugada de las blancas (B), ejecutada en respuesta a una anterior de las las negras (C). ¿Qué opina Ud., apreciado Watson? ¿Elemental? La solución está aquí, pero antes de mirarla le sugerimos que reflexione sobre el problema con una versión más grande del diagrama... | ||||
Sat, 06 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT | ||||
| La apertura Catalana - Y. N. Neustadt | ||||
![]() Volumen 32 de la Colección Escaques - Esta apertura se le atribuye a Ksawery Tartakower, quien jugó una de sus variantes hace más de 80 años en la ciudad de Sitges municipio de Cataluña, en la provincia de Barcelona. La Catalana está clasificada dentro de los Sistemas Indios (1. P4D, C3AR), como una apertura semicerrada, sus movimientos fundamentales son: 1. P4D, C3AR; 2. P4AD, P3R; 3. P3CR (1. d4, Cf6; 2. c4, e6; 3. g3). Esta apertura tiene mucha aceptación entre los campeones contemporáneos. Por lo denso de su contenido, la obra está más indicada para los ajedrecistas de categorías superiores, pero seguramente también será de mucha utilidad a todo aquel jugador deseoso de enriquecer sus conocimientos. Mediafire | ||||
Sat, 06 Feb 2010 17:35:00 +0000 | ||||
| Re: Robbolito Ivanhoe Firebire Rybka il en manque un: hypocrito | ||||
Bruno Fitoussi a écrit: Salut, Ca, c'est le rideau de fumée que répand Rajlich. Fritz, Shredder, Hiarcs ou Junior n'ont pas fait de progrès fulgurants après la sortie de Fruit. Leur progression est restée constante depuis plus de 10 ans. Patrick Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t744-Robbolito-Ivanhoe-Firebire-Rybka-il-en-manque-un-hypocrito.htm?p=2104 | ||||
Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:36:56 +0000 | ||||
| Re: Robbolito Ivanhoe Firebire Rybka il en manque un: hypocrito | ||||
Bonjour,
Thierry Hugues a écrit: Pour le test des positions "tranquilles", je suppose que cela permet d'identifier le style de jeu, la mesure fine de la fonction d'évaluation : le choix d'un coup parmi plusieurs coups équivalents possibles permettrait de mieux déceler la nature profonde du programme. Mais effectivement, le debat quand à l'outil est assez ouvert : Ne mesure t-on pas finalement plus la force des programmes plutôt que la parenté ? A cet argument, Don, sans prétention, répond que les résultats du test montrent que certains programmes de force comparable et très forts sont peu corrélés ... Patrick Buchmann a écrit: Bon ... si je comprends bien : Rajlich considère que le programme Strelka est un clone de Rybka1.0b. Mais l'analyse réalisée sur le code source de Strelka montre qu'il serait fortement inspiré de Fruit donc Rybka serait aussi un dérivé de Fruit ... CQFD (?) Bref tout cela ressemble à un panier de Crabe J'ai toutefois la nette impression que beaucoup (ou la plupart ?) ont largement beneficié de l'apport incontestable de la technologie de Fruit ! Le problème étant évidemment, pour les programmes commerciaux, le GPL associé ...
Cordialement, Bruno Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t744-Robbolito-Ivanhoe-Firebire-Rybka-il-en-manque-un-hypocrito.htm?p=2101 | ||||
Sat, 06 Feb 2010 09:37:24 +0000 | ||||
| Re: Robbolito Ivanhoe Firebire Rybka il en manque un: hypocrito | ||||
Nicola Gotti a écrit: Salut, Je pense que ChessBase a largement verrouillé son contrat avec Rajlich pour ne pas avoir de problèmes en cas de procès. Mais il y a peu de risque de procès. Avec quels moyens l'auteur de Fruit qui a pratiquement tout fourni gratuiment pourrait-il faire un procès aux USA. Avec l'appui des charognards qui se précipitent sur n'importe quoi sans aucun sens moral. Qui est près à mettre des millions sur la table pour la morale ? Car Rajlich est bien sûr pratiquement à l'abri au royaume des voleurs en chemises blanches. On n'a jamais vu un tribunal US condamner un escroc américain lorsque les victimes sont à l'étranger. Les Native Engines sont fournis par leurs auteurs. Ce n'est pas ChessBase qui est adaptent des WinBoard Engines mais les auteurs qui demandent à ce que ce soit fait. J'ai fait une grosse connerie en laissant entrer Rybka dans la UEL. Patrick Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t744-Robbolito-Ivanhoe-Firebire-Rybka-il-en-manque-un-hypocrito.htm?p=2087 | ||||
Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:53:21 +0000 | ||||
| Early mistakes | ||||
![]() I quite like the observation made by Arthur Yusupov in his book "Build Up Your Chess". "Most mistakes occur in the early moves in variations" he says, pointing out that calculating long variations are useless if miss a strong reply from your opponent at move 1. To overcome this he suggests that you learn to calculate short variations accurately. One way of doing this is to solve Checkmate in 2 problems. As much as the 'practical' chess player dislikes Mate in 2's for their contrived positions, by solving them you are forced to take into account every possible reply from your opponent. Here is a Mate in 2 from Yusupov's book, which I set as a puzzle for a group of juniors. While it took me quite a while to find the key move (eventually realising that it defeated the most obvious Black defence), the group of juniors solved it quite quickly, and then complained that it was too easy! | ||||
Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:49:00 +0000 | ||||
| Solutions to our Christmas puzzles – Part two | ||||
| We gave you the solutions for the first five or our 2009 Christmas puzzles a few days ago. Here is part two, which contains all the pretty letter problems submitted by GM Pal Benko, the construction problem provided by Indian GM Sandipan Chanda, and the solution to a truly unique chess problem composed back in 1991 by mathematician Noam Elkies. Enjoy. | ||||
Sat, 06 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT | ||||
| Re: Sondage | ||||
| Salut Thierry,
Tu peux déjà essayer la version de Shredder Classic. Sinon, pour Shredder, Stefan envoie un mot de passe par mail. Ce mot de passe est valable sur toutes les machines. Je n'ai jamais eu de problème au changement d'ordinateur. J'ai même installé Shredder au bureau
Amicalement, Patrick Message: http://lefounumerique.xooit.com/t760-Sondage.htm?p=2072 | ||||
Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:25:20 +0000 | ||||
| Moscow Open 2010 | ||||
The Moscow Open 2010 is taking place on January 30th - February 7th at the Russian State Social University. The Festival will see approximately 1226 chess players from 30 countries, divided into A, B, C, D, E1, and F group."Moscow Open is the major tournament for the Moscow Chess Federation. And despite a difficult economic situation in the country, we managed to keep the prize fund and budget of the festival at the same level," commented Vasiliy Zhukov, the president of Moscow Chess Federation, rector of the Russian State Social University, member of the Russian Academy of Science. Round six was played on Thursday and five players grouped on the top of the Moscow Open 2010 A crosstable, with 5 points each. GM Dmitry Andreikin drew with GM Viktor Bologan and was joined in the lead by Evgeny Bareev, who scored with black against the top seed Alexander Motylev, Igor Kurnosov, Indian star Krishnan Sasikiran and the ultra-talented GM Le Quang Liem from Vietnam. Top round seven matches are Sasikiran Krishnan - Andreikin Dmitry, Bareev Evgeny - Le Quang Liem and Inarkiev Ernesto - Kurnosov Igor. ![]() GM Ernesto Inarkiev Women are competing in their own group, dubbed as Moscow Open 2010 C. Among 140 players, WGM Maria Manakova (SRB 2346), IM Marina Romanko (RUS 2433), WGM Tatiana Grabuzova (RUS 2345), WGM Atousa Pourkashiyan (IRI 2306), IM Salome Melia (GEO 2431), IM Elisabeth Paehtz (GER 2484), GM Zhao Xue (CHN 2504) and WGM Lilit Galojan (ARM 2374) are sharing the lead with 5 points each after six rounds. Interview with IM Melia Salome, Georgia's new women chess champion, conducted by Yana Melnikova for the official website: - Salome, how many times did you participate in Moscow Open? - I’m here for the 3rd time. For the first time I played at the festival in 2005. It was the first year of Moscow Open work, so there was no gender group division. Besides, I was the first among women and reached the norm of male International Master. My second one was in 2008, but I didn’t succeed that time. There was a woman tournament, but I didn’t even get a prize-winning place. At that time I also took part in another Moscow tournament – Aeroflot Open. It’s an interesting competition, but it gets more and more expensive to take part in it without a sponsor. - What can you say about this festival organization? - In the whole, everything is good, I like it. The only tip for organizers concerns the Internet. Now we have it in the inn, but there are problems with connection. - You have become a Georgia champion recently. How important is this achievement to you? And whether or not this fact is going to influence your life? - For the last 2 years I got only second position at the Georgia Championship. Therefore, I am really happy I managed to win. I hope I would be able to qualify to the national team. Since the past 2 years I was the only candidate for the team - I have been practicing a lot, but at the last moment - I found that I am out of the competition. ![]() IM Melia Salome - There are tensions between Russia and Georgia these years. How does it influence on tournaments participation? - Georgian women didn’t take part in World Championship 2008 in Nalchik. Nowadays there are not big difficulties. But I got a visa to Russia through Swiss Embassy, and flew to Moscow passing Prague. - Do you have any further tournament plans? - The next tournament I take part in will be held in Bucharest, Romania, I’ll play round robin women’s tournament "President Cup". Then I have 3 free weeks and Individual Europe Championship in Croatia. - Chess is your only profession? - Yes, I’m a professional. Last year I graduated from law department at Batumi State University. This profession was interesting for me but I have never thought about working as a lawyer. I think to do something well, we should do one thing. For me it's chess. The Festival's venue is one more time the Russian State Social University (RSSU), the only state higher educational establishment in Russia which centers on social field. In accordance with the state license, over 100 000 students obtain higher education in 63 disciplines. More than 22 000 of them study in Moscow, the other - in over 50 branches of RSSU that are located in various regions of Russia and abroad. | ||||
Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:08:44 +0000 | ||||
| L'AGE de glace, selon Chouia la vraie | ||||
| De nouveau, un excellent article de Chouïa, que je vous livre sans la musique. Allez sur son site pour tout comprendre : http://chouia-au-pays-des-echecs.over-blog.fr/ Je ne sais pas toi, cher lecteur, mais je la sentais venir, celle-là ! Mais bon, tout de même, je gardais l'espoir que.... En vain, bien sûr. Alors voilà, comme tu peux t'en douter, il s'agit (encore ? ben oui !) de notre malheureuse Ligue et de ses mésaventures...il y a quelques jours, je t'avais laissé dans un suspense quasi insoutenable : AGE, pas AGE (*) ? Pour ce faire, il fallait réunir les demandes des présidents d'au moins 53 clubs représentant au moins 128 voix, quorum largement atteint en peu de jours, avec 69 clubs (43, 67% !) représentant 199 voix (soit 51,82%!, la majorité absolue, tout de même....) (***). Alors hier, comme de juste, les présidents des Comités des Yvelines (Marc Plantet), des Hauts-de-Seine (François Voituron), de l'Essonne (Milomir Nikolic) et de Seine Saint-Denis (Guy Bellaïche) ont adressé à Dédé la lettre qui va bien http://canalsaintmartin.blogspot.com/, avec la liste des clubs (dont le mien, bien sûr !...et puis aussi mes deux anciens clubs : ça fait plaisir !). Il n'y avait plus qu'à décider de la date... Comment ça, de la date ? tu rêves ou quoi ? Les deux A (****) ne vivent pas "au pays des Bisounours" (selon les termes employés par Mr Rasneur soi-même dans un des nombreux et pénibles mails qu'il m'a adressés la semaine dernière), eux : où va-t-on, je vous le demande, si on commence à respecter les statuts ? Nos célèbres duettistes se sont donc fendus d'une réponse qu'ils croient argumentée, se payant même le luxe d'une vague référence à la loi de 1901 (histoire de bien montrer que nous sommes là face à de fins juristes....), bref, à un tas de mots formant des tas de phrases qui peuvent se résumer à un "NON" catégorique et de la plus belle eau... Un front d'airain pareil, c'est pas commun, faut le reconnaïtre ! Mais Dédé, le problème, c'est que tu n'as pas à être d'accord ou pas, on ne te demande pas ton avis, on te demande juste de réunir une AGE à la demande du tiers des clubs représentant le tiers des voix : que ça te plaise ou non, tu dois le faire, c'est ton rôle de président, c'est tout.... Et puis ça commence à être lassant, cette attitude, qui s'ajoute à tout un tas d'autre trucs, comme le refus du webmestre du site de la Ligue d'annoncer le traditionnel Grand Prix du R2C2 au prétexte qu'il a lieu le même jour que le championnat de France de Blitz (dimanche prochain) ! Du coup, tu trouveras le lien ici, cher lecteur, puisque la Ligue ne fait pas son boulot, je le fais ! http://www.club-r2c2.org/ Par contre, ça ne le gêne toujours pas, le webmestre, d'annoncer l'ineffable et annuel Championnat rapide féminin d'Île de France ! .../... Le vrai problème de fond : certains semblent avoir oublié que la Ligue est au service des joueurs et des clubs, pas le contraire.... Bon, alors, il va bien falloir commencer à en parler...."talking about a revolution" de Tracy Chapman. | ||||
Wed, 03 Feb 2010 11:28:00 +0000 | ||||
| L'analyse éclairée de Blaise le Savetier | ||||
| Recueillie sur France échecs ce soir, je ne saurais dire mieux, suite au pied de nez du Général des Zouaves, et de son porte-mine Andreas Ragnagna. Il y avait 2 problèmes, maintenant il y en a 3 ! Un problème d'opportunité : on n'augmente pas une cotisation d'une façon aussi considérable (même en période de vaches grasses, ce qui n'est - hélas - pas le cas). Un problème de légalité : la forme est contestée par nombre de participants. Il y a maintenant un problème de légitimité : un (ou des) mandataire (s) peut-il (peuvent-ils) ignorer impunément une demande expresse d'une majorité de ses (leurs) mandants? Ces dernièrs représentant eux-même une majorité des licenciés. | ||||
Tue, 02 Feb 2010 20:31:00 +0000 | ||||
| “Tote Stellungen” in Regelwerk, Komposition und Partie | ||||
|
In einer Partie wird eine Mattstellung erreicht. Doch beide Spieler machen noch einen weiteren Zug. Erst dann stellen sie das Matt fest und beenden die Partie. In einer Turnierpartie zwischen Großmeistern wäre dies schon sehr seltsam, oder. Vergleichbares geschieht aber regelmäßig in bestimmten Remisstellungen. Und kein Schiedsrichter greift ein. Nach den Regeln ist die Partie beendet. Trotzdem wird ein weiterer Zug gespielt, aufgeschrieben und alles auch noch veröffentlich. So geschehen gerade wieder in der Partie Arndt Lauber gegen Konstantin Landa am letzten Bundesligawochenende. Regelwerk Die aktuelle Version der FIDE-Schachregeln (siehe hier) wurde im November 2008 beschlossen, vom DSB übersetzt (siehe hier), und gilt seit dem 1. Juli 2009. Im Artikel 1.3 heißt es: “Ist eine Stellung erreicht, in der keinem der beiden Spieler das Mattsetzen mehr möglich ist, ist das Spiel “remis” (unentschieden).” Daraus folgt: Lässt sich für eine Stellung zeigen, dass ein Matt nicht mehr möglich ist, ist die Partie sofort beendet. In einigen anderen Artikeln wird der Inhalt von 1.3 aufgenommen und ausführlicher formuiert. Ich zitiere Artikel 5.2 b): “Die Partie ist remis, sobald eine Stellung entstanden ist, in welcher keiner der Spieler den gegnerischen König mit irgendeiner Folge von regelgemäßen Zügen mattsetzen kann. Eine solche Stellung heißt “tote Stellung”. Damit ist die Partie sofort beendet, vorausgesetzt, dass der Zug, der die Stellung herbeigeführt hat, regelgemäß war (siehe Artikel 9.6).” und Artikel 9.6: “Die Partie ist remis, sobald eine Stellung entstanden ist, aus welcher ein Matt durch keine erdenkliche Folge von regelgemäßen Zügen erreichbar ist. Damit ist die Partie sofort beendet, vorausgesetzt, der Zug, der diese Stellung herbeiführte, war regelgemäß.”
Interessant ist die Geschichte des Artikels 1.3. (Im Folgenden stütze ich mich übrigens auf die Sammlung älterer FIDE-Schachregeln von Otto Janko (siehe hier). Eine kommentierte Geschichte der Regeländerungen wäre hilfreich. Ich konnte aber keine finden und freue mich über jeden Hinweis.) Er taucht zum ersten Mal in den FIDE-Schachregeln von 1996/97 auf (siehe hier: “If the position is such that neither player can possibly checkmate, the game is drawn.”) Die weiteren oben angeführten Ergänzungen wurden dann in späteren Fassungen hinzugefügt (siehe z. B. hier). In den FIDE-Schachregeln von 1992/93 (siehe hier) gab es noch keine allgemeine Formulierung, sondern in dem damaligen Artikel 10.4 nur eine Aufzählung besonderer Stellungen, König gegen König, König und Leichtfigur gegen König, und König und Läufer gegen König und Läufer bei Läufern auf gleicher Farbe: “The game is drawn when one of the following endings arises: (a) king against king; (b) king against king with only bishop or knight; (c) king and bishop against king and bishop, with both bishops on diagonals of the same colour. This immediately ends the game.” Artikel 10.5 stellte dann noch klar, dass ein bloßer König nicht gewinnen kann. Gegenüber 1992/93 gab es also 1996/97 eine sinnvolle Erweiterung. In der Version der FIDE-Schachregeln von 1977 (siehe hier) fehlte noch jeder Hinweis auf später so genannte “tote Stellungen”. Groben Unfug wie eine Spielen auf Zeit mit König und Springer gegen König hätten die Regeln damals noch zugelassen. Hier hätte der Schiedsrichter eingreifen müssen. Schachkomposition Die Komponisten von Schachproblemen haben einen besonderen Sinn für die offiziellen Schachregeln. Ich verweise nur auf den schönen Artikel “In the Twilight Zone of Chess Rules” von Jens Kristiansen. Berühmt ist die so genannte “Pam-Krabbé-Rochade” (siehe hier und hier), die zu einer Präzisierung der Rochade-Regeln führte.
Zum Zeitpunkt der Komposition entsprach die Pam-Krabbé-Rochade vollkommen den Regeln. Weder König noch Turm hatten gezogen. Und nur der Turm übersprang ein vom Schwarzen bedrohtes Feld. Durch die Einführung der weiteren Bedingung, dass nämlich König und Turm auf einer Reihe stehen müssen, wurde die vertikale Rochade dann aber bald ausgeschlossen. Nach der Aufnahme des Artikels 1.3 in die FIDE-Schachregeln 1996/97 durfte man rückblickend fast erwarten, dass Schachkomponisten sich der neuen Regel annehmen würden. Wenige Jahre später war es dann soweit. Andrew G. Buchanan beschreibt seine Entdeckung in seiner FAQ for Dead Reckoning so: “A weird thing happened. I stumbled across a chess rule that no one knew about before. No, really. The International Chess Federation updates the Laws of Chess every few years. Obviously, they don’t change the key stuff: like how a bishop moves. But they do fiddle around at the margins, and in 1997 they introduced a rule which has little impact on the real game, but does have consequences for chess problems. It wasn’t until late 2000 that anyone noticed these consequences. It happened to be me.” Um welche Regel es sich handelt, wissen wir ja schon. Jedenfalls machte sich Buchanan ans Werk und komponierte eine ganze Reihe von wunderbaren Aufgaben. Auf der Website Some Novel Chess Problems hat er eine ganze Sammlung zusammen mit einführenden und erklärenden Texten veröffentlicht. Hier zwei Beispiele, die zeigen wie solche Probleme funktionieren. Bei nur zwei Königen auf dem Brett zu fragen, wer zuletzt gezogen hat, mag auf den ersten Blick ganz sinnlos erscheinen. Aufgrund der “Tote-Stellung-Regel” lässt sich das Problem von Buchanan (siehe Diagramm) aber leicht lösen. Nehmen wir an Schwarz hat zuletzt gezogen. Dann ging der König von b8 oder a7 nach a8. War das Feld frei, war die Partie mit nur den Königen vorher schon beendet, und die Diagrammstellung konnte gar nicht mehr entstehen. Diesen Schluss nennt Buchanan “Dead Reckoning”, was ich ein bisschen holprig mit “Tote-Stellung-Überlegung” übersetze. Weiter: Der schwarze König muss auf a8 eine weiße Figur geschlagen haben. Bei einer Leichtfigur wäre die Partie vorher schon mangels Mattpotential beendet gewesen. Und bei einer Schwerfigur war der schwarze König gezwungen zu schlagen. Damit wäre die Partie ebenfalls bereits beendet gewesen. Wieder eine “Tote-Stellung-Überlegung”. Eine Bauernumwandlung auf a8 führt zu einer der beiden schon behandelten Fälle. Daher kann der schwarze König nicht zuletzt gezogen haben. Für den weißen König lässt sich dies dagegen zeigen. Er könnte z. B. auf c6 einen Turm oder Bauern gesch |