Being a database programmer, perhaps I shouldn’t have been surprised when I recently dreamt I had to develop a chess database. But it wasn’t an ordinary chess database.

Carceri XIV – Giovanni Battista Piranesi

I was told by a faceless person to make a chess database of all chess games ever played. If that doesn’t sound like much, it’s because that was not all. The man told me it must also contain all chess analyses ever made, as well as every comment, opinion or text ever written about any move. It would be a database of all existing chess knowledge -an endless chess library. It was like making the chess version of Jorge Luis Borges’ Total Library. The ultimate Mega Database – an entire chess universe.

I started by collecting all existing chess books ever written – both ancient manuscripts and newly printed books. I visited all chess libraries in the world and went through all privately owned chess book collections. But this clearly wasn’t enough. I had to visit every chess player in person to ask for any scoresheets of games that they had in their possession. Then, I went through all local club magazines and internet blogs to find games I missed. This reminded me that I had to get all chess magazines as well. And, of course, I downloaded all digital books, DVD’s, game analyses and instruction guides on chess.

When I had rubricized all material and put it in a more or less logical order, I started thinking about how to put everything in a database. It didn’t take me long to realize I wouldn’t be able to use existing chess database software. It would just be too impractical. For 1.e4 alone, hundreds if not thousands of comments somehow had to be entered in the database, and this can’t be done with a regular database program. While it is possible to add comments in different languages in some software, you can’t add comments by different sources – at least not dynamically.

So I started thinking about how to develop this chess database myself. Basically it had to contain many more dimensions than the current ones – in fact, it had to have an infinite amount of possible entries for comments and analyses. All published praise of 47…Bh3!! and 23…Qg3!! had to be entered into the database somehow. Actually, it should also be possible to add multiple annotation symbols, because perhaps some commentators had awarded these moves not with two, but only with one exclamation mark (a grave sin, I must say). The database design must take this into account as well.

With the help of data warehouse design techniques, I was able to establish which dimensions my database should have. Obviously there should be dimensions with information about the sources (the books themselves), and information related to the games, or game fragments. This could be players’ names, the year in which it was played, where it was played, and so on. The moves and sub variations (including move number, to keep track of things) should be stored in a different dimension (or, in its technical term, a ‘fact table’). Any game, including its sub-lines, could develop like a garden of forking paths, leading to an infinite amount of moves.

'Datavault' model of a data warehouse

The same was obviously true of comments. But there was an additional problem: comments could not only be related to moves, but also to people who had written them. in his books, Kasparov often refers to older authors, for example. At this point in my dream, my faceless principal interrupted my musings. He ordered me to also store all information about the people who had written the annotations: what use would the project otherwise be? This implied I had to include all biographies of chess commentators in my database. And of course, the commentators could also be chess players themselves, so they should also be linked back to the players and games dimensions.

When I had finished my design – or at least thought I had – a long-feared question arose in my head: where to start? Which data should be put into the database first? Would it be wise to work ‘backwards’ in time, starting with the most recent chess books and adding entries in the database for every name, move or comment that returned a blank? Wouldn’t it be wiser to start with the first chess manuscripts – the recent reconstruction of Francesch Vicent’s mysterious treatise, the surviving games of Ruy Lopez, or perhaps even the first ancient Arab chess problems?

In the end, I decided it wouldn’t really matter – it was a Sisyphus job in any case – and so I started with a game collection from 2010. It happened to be a new book on Capablanca. Slowly but steadily I worked my way back. Then I realized I had forgotten something crucial. Within comments, there could also be references to other works – references to database entries that didn’t exist in my digital library yet! I was suddenly faced with what is sometimes called ‘orphans’ – database references that can’t be traced back (anymore) to their primary dimension. In order to proceed, I had to put all titles in the system first. And so I started again.

My success didn’t last long. I soon found out that many chess authors use references to non-chess related literature all the time. Kasparov quotes Ilf & Petrov, Donner quotes Nietzsche. Once you start paying attention to it, chess and literature are completely intertwined. To be complete, the entire world literature should be included in the list as well. And that’s only the beginning of a myriad of problems. For instance, how to deal with references to literature that has been lost over the centuries?

I now realized the entire Total Chess Library idea would be quite pointless without having access to each and every chess book ever written; every game or analysis – including those that have been destroyed, mutilated, lost for good. I was trapped in a labyrinth I had created myself.

Then I woke up, of course. While I cycled to work, I thought about what use such a megalomanic project could be. Nobody would ever be able to use this monstrous database. The information would be sitting there in some kind of super computer without anyone ever touching it. At first I felt anger, then sadness. Then I felt like nothing had really changed. It was just like work.

As I switched on my laptop at work and opened the data warehouse environment I was currently working on, I remembered the words from another Borges story, The Library of Babel:

At that time it was also hoped that a clarification of humanity’s basic mysteries — the origin of the Library and of time — might be found. It is verisimilar that these grave mysteries could be explained in words: if the language of philosophers is not sufficient, the multiform Library will have produced the unprecedented language required, with its vocabularies and grammars.

For four centuries now men have exhausted the hexagons … There are official searchers, inquisitors. I have seen them in the performance of their function: they always arrive extremely tired from their journeys; they speak of a broken stairway which almost killed them; they talk with the librarian of galleries and stairs; sometimes they pick up the nearest volume and leaf through it, looking for infamous words.

Obviously, no one expects to discover anything.

The Young Grandmasters tournament in Biel, Switzerland, has started today. World Junior Champion Maxime Vachier-Lagrave is back where he won last year.

Report and analyses by IM Robert Ris

The Young Grandmasters Tournament is a single round-robin event with 10 players. It is being held from July 19 to 28. This year, the organizers decided to change the format from last year’s edition, when 6 players battled it out in a double round-robin. Current titleholder and reigning World Junior Champion Maxime Vachier-Lagrave is back in the town.

His main competitor can be expected to be Evgenij Tomashevsky, who is with 23(!) years the oldest participant. But clearly, the even younger top talents such as Anish Giri and Wesley So will no doubt think differently. With a FIDE Category 17 and an average elo of 2658, this invitation group is the main attraction of the 43rd edition of International Chess Festival in Biel.

Besides this main group, another strong Open is being held with a lot of titleholders, of whom the Russian GMs Alexander Riazantsev (2674) and Boris Grachev (2667) are topping the list of entries. This tournament will consist of 11 rounds and hence will last two days longer, until the 30th of July. Moreover, other activities such as 960 Chess and a Chess-Tennis competition are part of the agenda, which makes the festival one of the popular summer events among both professionals and chess tourists.

The first day of the Young Grandmasters started quite peacefully with two rather uneventful draws between Andreikin-Nguyen Ngoc Truong Son and Giri-Tomashevsky. In the former game White opted for a French Winawer with the rare 4.Nge2.

Andreikin soon started pushing his kingside pawns, but when Black subsequently castled queenside, he realized that his kingside aggression wouldn’t yield him anything. After a mass of exchanges the players didn’t see any perspective in the rook ending and hence decided to split the point on move 28.

In Giri-Tomashevsky, the veteran of the tournament deviated with 13…Na6 from a game Giri-Bitalzadeh, Hilversum 2009, where White easily took control over the c-file. Giri couldn’t find anything concrete and after the accurate 17…Rfe8 and 18…Rac8 Black easily could take care of the only weakness in his camp on c7. Ten moves later a draw was agreed.

More spectacular was the encounter between Rodshtein and Negi. Against the Catalan Defence, the Indian chose his pet system with 4…dxc4, 5…c6 and 7…Be7 and pretty easily survived the opening when White omitted to play 15.dxe5! The consequences of the positional exchange sacrifice would have certainly offered him better chances for an advantage. A complicated middlegame arose and when Black decided to release the tension by exchanging pieces, the following happened.

26…Rxd4?? 26…Ne1+ will probably lead to a draw – see the game analysis.

27.Na3! Now Black is suddenly lost. He doesn’t have time to cope with all his back rank problems.

27…Nd2 28.Ra2! Nf3 29.Rxd4 Nxd4 30.Rd2 and Black resigned in view of 30…Rc7 31.Rxd4!

In Vachier Lagrave-Caruana, the White player had more luck on his side. In an Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez with 5…Qd6, Black easily obtained equality after 16…f5! Black’s dynamic resources proved to be more valuable than White’s statical trumps. With 22.f4 White took some radical measures to defend his kingside, but soon the new Swiss resident found other ways to attack the weakened kingside. At the moment supreme, however, Caruana missed two excellent opportunities to decide the game in his favor. A few moves later, the following position was reached.

White now found a great defensive resource by means of 38.Re5! covering a lot of important squares around his king. Caruana disappointedly finished the game with a nice rook sacrifice which however only enabled him to give a perpetual check.

The last game of the day, Howell-So, saw a rather weird Exchange Variation of the Caro-Kann with 4.Bd3. During the live broadcasting, it took me some time before I recovered from the shock the Englishman delivered me by playing

10.Kf1!?!

Initially, I assumed some mistake had been made by the live relaying, but the dust in my eyes cleared when a little later, 19.h4 was executed as well. However, White’s original idea was simply punished when So’s heavy pieces entered on the queenside. With time scramble approaching, Howell committed the decisive mistake with 29.Re3? which was easily refuted by 29…Nc1! A rather simple win with Black for So, although we should hope Howell’s creativy will bear its fruits in coming rounds!

Standings after Round 1:

1. Rodshtein, So 1
3. Tomashevshi, Giri, Andreikin, Nguyen Ngoc Truong Son, Vachier Lagrave, Caruana
9. Negi, Howell 0

Games start daily at 14.00 CET, except July 25, which is a rest day.

Biel Young Grandmasters Games round 1, analysed by Robert Ris

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

In round 4, Quang Le from Vietnam showed he did not come to Dortmund to serve as cannon fodder! After the 2700+ aggression he faced in round 3, Quang Le was able to gear up and confront Ponomariov with some tactics of his own.

Report by Daan Zult

Until move eleven of a Grünfeld Indian, both players were familiar with the position from the white perspective. Earlier this year the position arose in Quang Le – Sasikiran (Moskou, 1-0) and Ponomariov – Carlsen (Nice, 0-1). Now Ponomariov was the first to deviate from both games with 11… b6, where Sasikiran played 11… Bd7 and Carlsen 11… Rd8.

Ponomariov’s move was only played twice before, both times by Gata Kamsky in 1991, in which he won and lost a game. The move might be a little bluff, because after 12.dxc5 dxc5 13.Qd5 or 12.dxc5 Ne5 the move is essentially a pawn sacrifice in a complicated position where white seems to have the better chances. This is further confirmed by the loss of Kamsky against Rao Vivek, who did accept the sacrifice and won the game. Quang Le rejected the sacrifice and played the more solid and careful 12.Bf4, after which he retained a small but evident advantage.

Whether Ponomariov tried to complicate the position in an eager to win or whether he thought it was a wise plan is unclear, but with 18… h5? he asked too much of his position.

It gave Quang Le the opportunity to show his true color, when with 19.Nxg6! Nxg6 20.Bd6 he unleashed some excellent tactics that gave him a pawn and the bishop pair. Fortunately for Ponomariov the position did not end in a clear cut win position and he might still have drawn it with accurate play. However, in an ending with bishops of opposite color Ponomariov showed once more it was not his day.

With 31… h4, he gave Quang Le the opportunity to create two connected passed pawns, starting with 32.f4, 33.e5, followed by g2-g3, which Quang Le confidently converged into a full point. With his victory Quang Le bounced back to a 50% score and brought new tension into the tournament standings. He also once again showed that Vietnam is a chess country to reckon with in the future. Kudos to Quang Le.

Liem Quang Le (photo by Georgios Souleidis)

In terms of ‘fire on the board’, the other games where less interesting. In particular Mamedyarov – Kramnik, which was a big exchange feast in the QGD and could be considered the first rest day for both players, although in fact Black seemed slightly more pleasant after the opening.

Mamedyarov - Kramnik (photo by Georgios Souleidis)

Mamedyarov will probably be happy now that he is in sole lead. Kramnik can also be satisfied with his play, and he can now try to get back in the tournament with white against Naiditsch in round 5.

The game Naiditsch – Leko, a Ruy Lopez Arkhangelsk, was not much different. With 15.Qd2 Leko was the first to deviate from a game Leko – Shirov, played in 1997, where he played 15.Qg3. This new move is unlikely to attract a bunch of screaming fans, because it did not change the evaluation and result of the game, which after a couple of exchanges ended in a drawn rook endgame.

Naiditsch - Leko (photo by Georgios Souleidis)

The big winners of round 4 were Quang Le and Skakhriar Mamedyarov, who is now in sole lead. Round 5 (played today) might show some fighting chess, because in Leko – Quang Le and Kramnik – Naiditsch, the rating favorites have white and might not let black walk with an easy draw.

Moreover, we have the number 1 and 2 of the standings competing against each other, where Pono might try to get back on top by having a shot at Shakh with white. However, the statistics on the FIDE site show this would be a surprise, because all their six previous rated games ended in a draw.

Standings after 4 rounds:

1. Mamedyarov 3
2. Ponomariov 2,5
3. Le Quang 2
4. Kramnik, Naiditsch, Leko 1,5

Games start daily at 15.00 CET and can be followed live here.

Dortmund Games round 4

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

Magnus Carlsen is closing in fast on Garry Kasparov's all-time record rating. The 19-year-old Norwegian scored an unbeaten 7.5/10 at Medias, Romania to take his score on the daily calculations up to 2826, just 25 points shy of the great Russian's peak mark.

And Carlsen did it while still not in optimum form. He began with two draws, then took risks including a 1 e4 e5 2 f4 King's Gambit and a couple of dubious positions, but his inventiveness and will to win coupled with the growing Carlsen-fear of those on the other side of the board ensured another impressive outcome.

Technically his most interesting game, certainly from the practical viewpoint of competition players, was the draw below. The Romanian No1 chose the rare 3...f5 Schliemann gambit, hoping for a surprise. Carlsen's opening knowledge is encyclopaedic and the game followed some obscure theory for 25 moves. Then Carlsen varied, but the position was always drawn.

He could have tried 16 Bxe6+ Qxe6 17 Qc4 Rhe8 18 Qxe6+ Rxe6 19 Ne4 which is rated slightly better but which Nisipeanu must have prepared. So the question now is whether 3...f5 will become the new fashion in combating the highly regarded 3 Bb5 Ruy Lopez.

M Carlsen v L-D Nisipeanu

1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5 f5 4 Nc3 fxe4 5 Nxe4 d5 6 Nxe5 dxe4 7 Nxc6 Qg5 8 Qe2 Nf6 9 f4 Qxf4 10 Ne5+ c6 11 d4 Qh4+ 12 g3 Qh3 13 Bc4 Be6 14 Bg5 O-O-O 15 O-O-O Bd6 16 Rhf1 Rhe8 17 Bxf6 gxf6 18 Rxf6 Bxe5 19 Rxe6 Rxe6 20 Bxe6+ Qxe6 21 dxe5 Qh6+ 22 Rd2 Rxd2 23 Qxd2 e3 24 Qe2 Qg5 25 Kd1 Kc7 26 Qd3 Qh5+ 27 Kc1 Qh6 28 Kd1 Qh5+ 29 Ke1 Qxh2 30 Qd6+ Kc8 31 Qf8+ Kc7 32 Qe7+ Kc8 ½-½

3146 1...Rd8? leaves the black queen unguarded and allows 2 Qxf7+! Kxf7 (or Kh8 2 Re6 with a pawn up and a strong attack) 3 Ne5+ Kg8 4 Nxc6 and the knight forks Black's rooks.

During my holidays I received a lot of chess books from various publishers. There’s lot to look forward to! One of the most interesting books is the latest volume of John Watson’s ambitious project to explain and analyse all chess openings. But the book became much more than just another opening manual.

Two years ago, I wrote a generally positive review of Mastering the Chess Openings Volume 3 (I also liked the first and second volumes), but in the fourth part of his series (published by Gambit), Watson goes a step further than he had gone before. In fact, he’s returning to some of his favourite chess themes, which were also discussed in his most famous books Secrets of Grandmaster Strategy (1998) and Chess Strategy in Action (2003).

This fourth volume begins conventionally enough, with two very solid chapters on the Réti Opening and an excellent overview of black kingside fianchetto systems such as ‘Tiger’s Modern’ and the Averbakh Variation (although I didn’t know it was called that way) starting with 1.e4 g6 2.d4 Bg7 3.c4, but then Watson switches to a more experimental way of explaining openings. In the chapter called ‘Modern Queenside Fianchetto’, he discusses various (you’ve guessed it) queenside fianchetto systems from the perspective of both Black and White. This means he not only writes about the Owen Defence (1.e4 b6) and the English Defence (1.d4 e6 2.c4 b6), but also about Larsen’s Opening (1.b3).

True to his style, Watson clearly explains the differences between playing the queenside fianchetto with Black and playing it with White. the author thereby takes a look at Ilya Odessky’s recent book on 1.b3 (which I reviewed last year) as well and comes up with some sensible improvements. For instance, in the line 1.b3 e5 2.Bb2 Nc6 3.e3 d5 4.Bb5 Bd6 5.f4 (Watson: “This is certainly the usual continuation in both the Owen and the English Defences: when the f-pawn can’t be captured, it makes sense to use it to break up the opposing centre.”) 5…f6 Odessky gave 6.Nh3

a ‘dubious’ sign (?!) because of the line 6…Nge7 7.fxe5 fxe5 8.0-0 Bf5! after which 9.Qh5+ and 9.Bxc6+ are unconvincing, but following Watson’s suggestion 9.c4 a6 10.Bxc6+ bxc6 11.d4!? with the threat c4-c5, White seems to be on top.

After this chapter, the book steers into even more broad-ranging waters, starting off with a chapter on gambits (in general) in which Watson discusses and explains gambits as diverse as the Göring and Morra Gambit, the Millner-Barry Gambit, various Wing gambits (both with b2-b4 and g2-g4), the famous Evans Gambit and, of course, the Benkö Gambit.

This chapter contains good stuff (although I don’t think serious gambit-players or gambit-busters will find too much shockingly new in it), but I was even more intrigued by the book’s next chapter, called ‘f-Pawns and Reversed Openings’. I’m sure some people would dismiss it as too philosophical for an opening book, but many fragments – however digressive they may appear to the practical player – had me on the edge of my seat:

The study of reversed openings will increase your understanding of what can and cannot be achieved in openings. Many chess players are mathematically oriented, with a facility for logical thinking. So it’s only natural to assume that there must be some way to make use of an extra move. After all, chess moves have value, and you wouldn’t voluntarily give a move away under normal circumstances. However, as we’ve talked about throughout these volumes, the worth of an extra move isn’t a straightforward matter. In reversed positions of the English Opening, for example, it’s remarkable how seldom White can actually claim to have the better game. For one thing, any advantage is limited by the fact that he will usually be playing what are essentially defensive or counterattacking lines. In addition, there’s a paradoxical benefit of not having to move, in that Black gets a better look at what his opponent is up to and is able to react accordingly. (…)

Stepping outside the practical realm, this difficulty (of converting a move into something of value) is also revealing about the nature of chess itself. The paradox of information applies to every move, whether in a reversed position or not. In some sense, however sound and logical a move is, it contains the risk of leaving you worse off! That enormously magnifies the complexity and subtlety of the game. If advantages and disadvantages were additive in some linear fashion, chess would be a minor game at best. But we have geniuses who do little else but study and play chess from the time they are five years old into their forties, and they make multiple mistakes in nearly every game, often quite serious ones! As an exercise, set up a reversed opening and try to find ways to make even modest improvements to your position without destabilizing something elsewhere on the board. You’ll find that the most trivial-seeming change always seems to show up in one or another line of analysis where you’re least expecting it.

Watson then goes on to explain the subtleties of the Dutch Defence and the Bird Opening (1.f4) in lucid fashion, but as said, he also discusses other reversed openings such as the Ponziani (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3) which Watson points out, after 3…f5!? is in fact “a Vienna Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.f4) with reversed colours and as if Black had an extra …c6!” Or what about 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 f5, which the entire world knows as the Schliemann or Jänisch Defence of the Ruy Lopez, yet is described by Watson as…

[A] Vienna Game (1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.f4) in which White has the extra move Bb5. Strange to say, this would hurt White if he tried the standard remedy to the Vienna position, which is 4.d4 fxe4 5.Nxe5?! (5.Bxc6 dxc6 6.Nxe5 Nf6 is about equal) as 5…Nxe5 6.dxe5 c6 (in the reversed position, White’s bishop is still on f1, so this tempo-gain isn’t possible) 7.Bc4 (having come this far, White normally tried the unclear piece sacrifice 7.Nc3 cxb5 8.Nxe4) 7…Qa5+ followed by 8…Qxe5 wins a pawn. (…)

OK, I can’t resist one more example:

1.e4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Bc4 Bb4

Now we have a reversed Classical Variation of the Ruy Lopez (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 Bc5), with Black a whole tempo down. The Classical can be a pretty active system, so let’s see if White can make good use of the extra tempo.

4.Nf3 (…) 4.f4 has White playing the Schliemann Defence to the Ruy Lopez but with the extra move Bc4. The problem is that this gives Black the tactic 4…Nxe4! Then if White follows the normal Vienna Game strategy of 5.Qh5 (…), Black plays 5…0-0!, a move unavailable in the Vienna Game. (…)

4…Bxc3 5.dxc3 d6

The last reversal: Black has played the Exchange Ruy Lopez, and apparently given White much better development than he gets in the reversed position. But in fact, Black doesn’t generate many powerful attacks in the Exchange Ruy Lopez, and in this reversed position, White has nothing to be particularly excited about.

I could be wrong, but I don’t think I have seen this funny perspective applied in Vienna or Ruy Lopez text books before. Similarly, the chapter ‘Symmetry and its Descendants’ offers a refreshing point of view to infamously ‘boring’ openings such as the Petroff and the Four Knights Game. The chapter on ‘Irregular Openings and Initial Moves’ continues in this vein. What are irregular or ‘unorthodox’ openings anyway? Watson points out that

[t]he Trompowsky Attack 1.d4 Nf6 2.Bg5 has become popular and universally accepted, but one could argue that 2.Bg5 itself is not an ‘orthodox’ move; on the flip side, the form of the Torre Attack with 1.d4 d5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.Bg5 is orthodox by the classical standards of development, but it isn’t very popular any more. In a similar way, classically oriented openings such as the Ponziani Opening (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.c3) and the Hungarian Defence (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Be7) are orthodox in strategic terms, but rare in master practice; today, they could legitimately be called ‘irregular’.

Apart from this terminology issue, there’s what’s Watson calls ‘the appeal of the irregular’:

You make counterintuitive moves, waste time, or sacrifice pawns, and yet some not-so-obvious factor is working in your favour to give you positive chances. It’s a break from the drudgery of ‘correct’ play and following those tired old principles. Even if you don’t secure the better game, you can at least irritate your opponent and present him with multiple opportunities to go wrong. The most entertaining irregular openings also contain tactical traps into which one innocent victim after another falls.

These are not trivial, run-of-the-mill observations. Many opening book authors and even chess-improvement books fail to mention these human and very recognizable aspects of chess openings, even though keeping them in mind might help avoid some well-known mistakes in practical play. Thus, for instance, the line 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 f5!?

in the Nimzovich Opening, which is played by some fairly strong members of my local chess club and which Watson also mentions in his book, is not just ‘irregular’, ‘ugly’ and ‘bad’, but does contain some ‘not-so-obvious factors’ working in Black’s favour. White should be aware of this or he will get tricked, as I’ve personally seen many times.

Actually, I was particularly interested in what Watson wrote about the Nimzovich Opening because I sometimes play it myself and because I’ve seen lots of crazy analysis over the past years from enthusiastic club members. Crazy analysis which are often not so bad for Black as they look on first sight! And indeed, to his credit, Watson doesn’t dismiss the opening easily at all and calls it “one of the best of the irregular openings versus 1.e4.”

One of the lines Watson analyses is 1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.e5 Ng4 4.d4 d6 5.h3 Nh6.

His nuanced look at even such an obscure line is characteristic of his approach:

Black has a pretty ugly position that nevertheless has some merits. His decentralized knight is an undoubting disadvantage, but he has prospects of chipping away at White’s centre, after which that piece might be reintroduced by …Nf5. Of course, White can hardly complain about his prospects, but he shouldn’t expect too much from the capture Bxh6, which gives up the bishop-pair. 5…Nh6 introduces a wide a range of eccentric possibilities that are typical of irregular openings.

Watson now analyses no less than four alternatives for White, but in the end concedes that “Black’s position is within playable boundaries”. This is rather more realistic than my own initial opinion (”absolutely horrible for Black”) of this particular variation! (To my defence, I pretty soon realized that things were not so simple once I started studying the line in more detail.) I hope this small digression shows to what lengths Watson is willing to go to illustrate the versatility of various lesser known opening lines.

The book’s penultimate chapter on ‘Choosing and Preparing Openings’ is equally insightful, although some advices may of course sound familiar to readers who’ve bought other recent books on more general aspects of opening play. To my delight, Watson also quotes the great Korchnoi who “bluntly” said that if you want to improve your chess, you should play a new opening. Interestingly, Watson also recommends playing blitz games as a way of practising your opening preparation (”in sensible, non-addictive quantities”).

Watson ends his book with yet another philosophically-inclined chapter on the future of openings. Unavoidably, there are some echoes from his earlier books here, but it’s useful and entertaining all the same. Mastering the Chess Openings vol. 4 is a book any chess lover should have a look at – if not for its openings, then surely for its general awesomeness.

Links

• Get yourself a copy of Mastering the Chess Openings vol. 4
• Read more book reviews

In his book “The Ruy Lopez Revisited”, Sokolov referred to it as a fully-fledged variation.

Liviu Dieter Nisipeanu surprised world’s number one Magnus Carlsen last Thursday, by choosing this gambit to equalize easily in the ninth round of the Kings Tournament.

You might have guessed it by now, I’m talking about the dynamic Jaenisch Gambit. Proven sound to play against Carlsen, it should certainly be safe for you to use!

“The Jaenisch should appeal to any black player who’s ‘looking for trouble’ at an early stage of the game. I personally support Black’s cause.” - Ivan Sokolov

Imagine your opponent’s face when you play 3…f5 in the Ruy Lopez yourself!

Une petite leçon de stratégie ? Dans les principes modernes de l'ouverture aux échecs, si vous parvenez régulièrement à forcer vote adversaire à réagir de façon bien particulière à chacun de vos coups, on dira alors que vous possédez l'initiative de la partie.

Ci-contre, Virginie Efira, grande amatrice du jeu d'échecs © Gianni Soglia

Attention, un seul coup passif peut vous faire perdre cette initiative. Aujourd'hui, les joueurs d'échecs apprécient l'initiative bien plus que dans le passé, c'est pour cela que de nombreuses ouvertures s'appuient sur ce concept, comme la Ruy Lopez appelée également l'ouverture Espagnole.

2007-2010 © Chess & Strategy - tous droits réservés

All three games of round 9 in Bazna, Romania ended in draw. With one round to go, Carlsen leads the Kings Tournament with 6.5/9. Gelfand, who celebrated his 42nd birthday on Thursday, has a point less. Games commented by GM Dorian Rogozenco & videos.

The fourth Kings Tournament takes place in Medias, Romania from June 14 till 25. Against it’s a 6-player, double round-robin, with two rest days. This year Carlsen, Gelfand, Nisipeanu, Ponomariov, Radjabov and Wang Yue play. The rate of play is 2 hours for the first 40 moves, one hour for the next 20 moves and then 15 minutes plus an increment of 30 seconds per move.

The rounds start each day at 15.30 which is 14.30 CET and 08.30 EDT. They can run well into the evening, as we won’t see ultra-short draws in this tournament – no draw agreement by the players are allowed before move 30, except for cases of a triple-repetition, a perpetual or a theoretically drawn position.

The event is organized by Romgaz and the Chess Club Society “Elisabeta Polihroniade”. This year the tournament is officially part of the Grand Slam, substituting the cancelled MTel Masters. Venue is the brand new Romgaz Center in Medias (near Bazna), but the organizers are considering to move back to Hotel Complex Balnear Expro in Bazna, where everyone is staying.

ChessVibes will be at the tournament from start to finish, providing videos for the official website:

Videos

Source files: (for iPhone users and others)

Round 9

A bit more than an hour into the round, Radjabov and Wang Yue already finished their game. I was upstairs in my hotel room working on something else, and suddenly I saw the ‘1/2-1/2′ on the live transmission board. I went downstairs with my camera, but the players were nowhere to be seen. There wasn’t much to record anyway, since everything was theory, and analysed to a draw back in 2002.

More interesting were the other two games, but these two also ended in draws. Ponomariov-Gelfand had quite a disappointing finish, since there was still enough going on in the final position. The reason for this draw? Ponomariov was suddenly wondering what he was doing. He didn’t like his last few moves at all, and thought that if he’d continue that way, he’d certainly lose. Then he saw Gelfand had just two minutes left on the clock, and it was a good moment for a draw offer.

Nisipeanu surprised Carlsen by playing the Jänisch Gambit of the Ruy Lopez. This variation has mainly been played at top level by Radjabov recently, and Carlsen said he knew those games, but that he was less comfortable when he saw 5…d5 played. Therefore he didn’t go for the critical 9.Nxa7+, but the more solid 9.f4.

In his recent book The Ruy Lopez Revisited, Sokolov says about 16.Qf1 “this is considered to be White’s best. A number of other moves have been tried – almost everything. Black has adequate counterplay and the tables can easily turn,” and then 16.Nf7 Bxf7 17.Bxf7 Rhf8 (Timman-Speelman, London Candidates 1989), 16.Kb1, 16.a4, 16.Rdf1, 16.Bxe6+ and 16.g4 are mentioned. After 16.Rdf1 (instead of Carlsen’s 16.Rhf1) Sokolov gives 16…Rhe8 17.Bxf6 gxf6 18.Nf7 (18.Rxf6 Bxe5 as in the game is only possible with a rook on d1 instead of h1) 18…Rd7 Lau-Schiffer, Bundesliga 1996/97.

Nisipeanu played very accurately, e.g. his 21…Qh6+ and 25…Kc7! were strong. When Dorian Rogozenco told him that it had all been played in correspondence games, Nisipeanu said he ought to update his correspondence database, but in fact his second Iordachescu admitted they had looked at it. After the game Carlsen and Nisipeanu analysed a possible pawn ending for about half an hour.

At night, just like last year, Gelfand was given a birthday cake and we all toasted to his health with a glass of champagne. A very nice gesture from the organizers.

Round 9 games commented by GM Dorian Rogozenco

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

En un torneo con alto espíritu combativo, el búlgaro repitió su triunfo del 2009; cediendo sólo dos tablas y sacándole 1½ de ventaja a los segundos, el joven italiano Fabiano Caruana y el ruso Vladimir Malakhov.  A continuación el armenio Gabriel Sargissian y nuestro conocido Iván Salgado López, que quedó relegado tras perder en la última y espectacular partida contra el italiano Caruana.

A continuación el zafrense Manuel Pérez Candelario, Pía Cramling y la joven y destacada juvenil peruana Deysi Cori.

Esta 4ta edición del Magistral Ruy López, se disputó entre el 12 y 18 de junio, se llevó a cabo en Museo Histórico y Etnográfico de Villafranca de los Barros, de Badajoz y como es característico participan dos jugadoras. El espíritu combativo también es típico en el Ruy López y esta vez se definieron 20 de las 28 partidas (71%).

He did it last year, and he did it again: Ivan Cheparinov won the Ruy Lopez tournament in Villafranca de los Barros, Spain. The Bulgarian scored a superb 6/7 (2902 performance) and finished 1.5 points ahead of Caruana and Malakhov.

The 4th Ruy Lopez Chess Festival this year moved from Zafra, the birth place of Ruy Lopez, to Villafranca de los Barros. It took place June 11-19 at the Historic and Etnografic Museum. Traditionally, the Spanish organizers invited an interesting mix of players: Ivan Cheparinov (Bulgaria), Fabiano Caruana (Italy), Vladimir Malakhov (Russia), Gabriel Sargissian (Armenia), Ivan Salgado Lopez (Spain), Manuel Perez Candelario (Spain, Pia Cramling (Sweden) and Deysi Cori Tello (Peru).

Cheparinov scored an undefeated 6 out of 7 and finished one and a half point ahead of Caruana and Malakhov. The Bulgarian thus secured an invitation to the 5th edition of the tournament, which will be held in Zafra again next year.

The tournament website compared the 23-year-old to Bobby Fischer for ‘always looking for victory, in every game of the tournament’. But the fighting spirit was not limited to Cheparinov: out of a total of 28 games, only 8 ended in a draw. Below you can replay all games.

Game viewer

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Photo © Tournament website

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

Programa de radio “La Hora del Ajedrez” en Radio Tinamar, emitido el 16 de junio de 2010.

En el programa de hoy…

Entrevistas con Ramón Ropero, Alcalde de Villafranca de los Barros, lugar de celebración del Torneo Internacional Ruy López; Manuel Rodríguez Presidente del Club Ajedrez Linex-Magic y por último con Juan Antonio Montero, psicólogo y secretario general del Club Linex-Magic.

Yearbook 95 has just arrived! In this issue of The Chess Player’s Guide to Opening News you will find answers to urgent questions like:

- Who still dares to offer Alexander Grischuk the Poisoned Pawn in the Najdorf?
- What does Magnus Carlsen think of the French Defence?
- Has Viswanathan Anand refuted 6…a5 in the Catalan?
- What miracle move saved Anish Giri in the Slow Slav?
- Has Alexei Shirov found equality for Black in the Arkhangelsk Ruy Lopez?
and much more …

Please, have a look at the full contents of Yearbook 95.

Dmitry Jakovenko and Alexander Riazantsev lead the Karpov tournament in Poikovsky with 4/6. In a tournament where 24 of the 35 games ended peacefully, Ivan Sokolov is not joining the feast of draws but instead plays uncompromising chess.

The 11th edition of the tournament named after 12th World Champion Anatoly Karpov takes place June 2-13 in Poikovsky, Russia. For the first time the tournament has not 10, but 12 players. Today is the only rest day of the tournament. See our first report for more info.

Rounds 3-6

So far the tournament in Poikovsky has mainly been exciting for what happened in the fifth round, when both tournament leaders Jakovenko and Karjakin lost. This way the whole pack of players stayed together within one point reach. However, it also has to be pointed out that the tournament has seen a big number of draws – after six rounds the drawing percentage is as high 70% – and more importantly, no fewer than seven games lasted 18 moves or less.

In the first half the most adventurous player has been Ivan Sokolov, who drew just twice. In our previous report we already saw him going for one of his specialities, the Classical (3…Bc5) Ruy Lopez, twice with Black. It’s one of the lines he discusses in his recent book.

In round 4 Sokolov tried a very bold sacrifice against top seed Karjakin.

Karjakin-I.Sokolov after 25.Be3

Black played the stunning 25…Nxg2!? 26.Kxg2 Rxa5!? but after the simple 27.bxa5 Qxh3+ 28.Kh1 Nh4 29.f3 Nxf3 30.Rc1! there was no real follow-up.

A day later it went much better for the Bosnian/Dutch grandmaster, against Jakovenko. In the topical
4.e3 O-O 5.Nge2 line of the Nimzo he got an advantage at an early stage, and he could finish the game nicely:

I.Sokolov-Jakovenko after 35…Qa4

36.Kb2! Rxe4 37.Qxe4! Bxe4 38. Rxe4 Kh7 39.Re7 Qd1 40.d7 Qd2+ 41.Ka3 b5 42.Ba5 1-0

Yesterday Sokolov met an equally adventurous Riazantsev:

Riazantsev-I.Sokolov after 13.Bxg6 hxg6

White sacrificed a pawn with 14.b4! Bxb4 14…Bc7 15.cxd5 cxd5 16.a4! is good for White) 15.Nxd5 cxd5 16.Bxb4 dxc4 17.e4 and soon Black had to give up an exchange for White’s strong bishop, but didn’t get enough compensation.

Dmitry Jakovenko and Alexander Riazantsev are sharing the lead on the first rest day. Both grandmasters have 4 out of 6 and are followed by Emil Sutovsky and Sergei Karjakin who have 3.5 points.

Karpov Tournament (Poikovsky) 2010 | Round 6 Standings

Please note that Onischuk-Bologan (round 6) was postponed.

Games rounds 3-6

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

Dopo 4 turni conducono con 3 punti i favoriti Karjakin e Jakovenko con 3 punti.
Ecco il campo partenti di questa fortissima competizione, che rende omaggio ad Anatoly Karpov e che prevede un round robin con 12 giocatori:

Quarto turno

Terzo turno

Secondo turno:

Ecco il primo turno:

Rublevsky - Riazantsev

Il bianco ha appena giocato 49.h4 creando la possibile minaccia Dh8 matto, illudendosi di tenere legato il nero, che però vince con 49…Da1+ 50.Rg2, Ce1+ 51.Rg3, Dxa3+ 52.Rf4, Dc3! mettendo sotto controllo e5 e minacciando la semplice Cg2 matto 53.Df8+, Rh5 54.f3, Cg2+ 55.Rg3, Dxf3+ 56.Rh2, Cf4 con matto imparabile

Le partite in diretta con aiuto del motore qui: http://livechess.chessdom.com/site/

Last week Dmitry Jakovenko defeated Ernesto Inarkiev at the ACP World Rapid Cup, using the devastating 12.Ncb5!! – a theoretical novelty that won on the spot. Inarkiev could have prevented this disaster as the move was mentioned the day before the game in ChessVibes Openings #73!

Last Saturday GM Jan Timman visited my local chess club, Caissa Amsterdam, for a master class with a few members of Caissa’s first team. The club celebrated the Dutch Chess Federation’s prize they won last year, for welcoming the highest number of new club members in one season.

After the master class, Timman finished with a few endgame studies, and by showing a recent game. It turned out to be last week’s Jakovenko-Inarkiev, which he had seen on ChessVibes, and which featured an old love of his for White: the Ruy Lopez Exchange. In case you missed it, here’s that game once more:

Jakovenko-Inarkiev
ACP World Rapid Cup (Odessa) 2010

Game viewer by ChessTempo

At Caissa’s club house, Timman told that when he saw this game, he immediately remembered the move. “I had found the same idea, when I prepared for my game against Stefanova, at the Aventus tournament in Antwerp last year. Unfortunately she played differently, and I couldn’t execute this nice idea.”

The novelty was just waiting to be played by someone, somewhere, and Jakovenko was the lucky one to find a strong opponent who didn’t know it yet. But Inarkiev could have known it, if he had read ChessVibes Openings #73, which was in fact published on May 26th, the day before his game against Jakovenko!

Dennis Monokroussos was the first to point this out on his blog:

Fast forward to later that day, to the rapid game Jakovenko – Inarkiev from the first round of their mini-match at the ACP World Rapid Cup. Had Inarkiev seen CVO, he would have known to avoid it; instead, he fell for it hook, line and sinker! He tried the second move given above, 11…cxb5, and after 12.Qc3 varied with 12…Bc6. That avoided an immediate mate, but his position was thoroughly lost after 13.Nxc6 bxc6 14.Qxc6 Bd6 15.Rad1. He kicked on to move 44, but as Mikhail Golubev commented in his annotations for Chess Today, “Black’s resistance [after move 19 made no] sense”.

Of course, it’s impossible for all of us to keep up with everything – time, money, and the limits of our memory all have their say. But for theory fans, this example makes a case for keeping CVO in mind when choosing what resources to follow.

ChessVibes Openings editor IM Merijn van Delft discovered the move while he was helping FM Stefan Kuipers at the Dutch Youth Championship last month. “I hesitated to mention the idea in CVO, but then I thought: everyone who checked the recent Radjabov-Mamedyarov game with an engine running on the background, will see the computer pointing out the move immediately. The novelty was just waiting to be played, so it made no sense to not write about it. It was funny to see it played litteraly the next day.”

This week’s issue: #73, May 26, 2010

ChessVibes Openings #73
The latest opening developments of the fourth week of May, covering the FIDE Grand Prix in Astrakha, the U.S. Championship and the Chinese Championship All about the Kalashnikov Sicilian which was analysed in our Game of the Week Akopian-Radjabov, Astrakhan 2010.

Other lines that are covered:

• Ruy Lopez, Closed, 12.d5
• Ruy Lopez, Exchange
• Vienna, 6…h6
• Nimzo-Indian, 4.Nf3/5.g3

For more info on ChessVibes Openings click here.

Pavel Eljanov today won the sixth and final FIDE Grand Prix tournament in Astrakhan, Russia. The Ukrainian finished with a score of 8/13, a full point ahead of a group of five GMs. One of them was Teimour Radjabov, who finished second in the final GP standings and qualified for the FIDE Candidates matches.

The 6th FIDE Grand Prix took place May 10-24 in Astrakhan, Russia. Akopian (2694), Alekseev (2700), Gashimov (2734), Gelfand (2741), Eljanov (2751), Inarkiev (2669), Ivanchuk (2741), Jakovenko (2725), Leko (2735), Mamedyarov (2763), Ponomariov (2733), Rajabov (2740), Svidler (2735) and Wang Yue (2752) played. More details can be found in our first report.

Round 10

Would Pavel Eljanov be able to finish the tournament as strongly as he had played so far? How would he fare after the second and last rest day? Well, on Friday the Ukrainian had a crystal clear answer to this question. He defeated Hungarian top GM Peter Leko in 43 moves, perhaps not in the most convincing way, but the result is what counts.

Leko was more than fine after the opening (Eljanov didn’t like his 10.Ng3) and even rejected a draw offer on the 20th move. However, in the subsequent game the Hungarian made a few mistakes, and White obtained an advantage in the ending due to a strong passed pawn on the queenside. From that point Eljanov played very energetically. He did not allow Black to bring his king into the center, which would save the game for Leko. On the 43rd move White’s passed pawn became unstoppable, and Leko resigned.

Gashimov stayed half a point behind the leader after beating Inarkiev in a strong Ruy Lopez game. “I found an interesting plan with 15.Bd3 and 16.Re2,” he said afterwards. “My pawn sacrifice led to a curious position: White is a pawn down, Black pieces seem to be active, but actually White can play for a win at no risk. Soon I regained the material, keeping all the advantages of my position, then won an exchange and converted the advantage without much trouble.” Inarkiev: “I admit that Vugar played very energetically and deserved his win.”

Radjabov slowly but surely outplayed Akopian with Black in a Sveshnikov. “Maybe trading the queens was wrong,” said Akopian, “and I should have preferred 24.Qh6. I also don’t like my next moves – 26.Ndf4 and 28.f4. White’s position became very cramped, and Teimour showed good technique, not giving me any chances to survive.” 26.Ndf4 was a “serious inaccuracy” according to Radjabov.

Round 11

This round saw another Azeri derby: Radjabov versus Mamedyarov. It was an important game, since Radjabov’s win regained his chances to qualify for the Candidates matches. In the Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez White got a small advantage and then developed a strong initiative following Black’s unsuccessful queen maneuver on the 19th move. The game transposed to a queen ending with a remote passed pawn for White. Black was short on time and committed the decisive error on the 38th move. Mamedyarov resigned immediately due to inevitable loss of the kingside pawns.

Radjabov: “I think after 20.Qf4 White may already be winning. Not sure if 28.d6 was necessary, but I thought I needed to force the issues. In any case, after this move it becomes extremely difficult for Black to hold.” Mamedyarov didn’t agree with Radjabov’s assessment of the opening: “In my opinion, White didn’t get any advantage. He started to take the upper hand only when I made a mistake by 19…Qd4 – this move is overambitious.”

Also relevant for the Candidates spot was Gashimov’s loss against Ponomariov. He couldn’t adopt his Benoni as the Ukrainian went for other schemes. Ponomariov about Gashimov only playing the Benoni: “The disadvantage is that he knows other lines superficially. Thus I decided to transpose to the Nimzo-Indian Defense. In my opinion, I got a very comfortable position. Perhaps in the middlegame I could play better. For example, on the 17th move I could take on g3 with the queen, making Black’s defensive task tougher. Yet, defending was unpleasant enough for such an active player as Vugar. He started to make reckless moves such as 26…h5, which helped me to win the game.”

Round 12

Five-time Russian champion Peter Svidler finally won his first game in Astrakhan. He successfully avoided Gelfand’s Petroff and used the Four Knights to beat the Israeli in 31 moves. Gelfand’s sharp f-pawn push on the 21st move proved to be a big mistake. Svidler delivered a nice tactical blow, and Black’s position collapsed.

Akopian defeated Ivanchuk in just 23 moves. The Ukrainian handled the Ragozin Variation of the Queen’s Gambit too passively. Akopian comfortably arranged his pieces and launched a kingside attack. On the 21st move the Armenian sacrificed an exchange, which turned out to be a very unpleasant surprise for Black. In two more moves Ivanchuk abandoned his resistance.

Akopian, after the game: “I’m surprised that the victory came so easily – I have a bad score against Vassily. The plan that I employed in this game is not new: White ignores the d4-pawn and concentrates on a kingside attack. Vassily played without confidence; his 14…g6 only provokes my attack. And on the next move he should have played 15…h5. After he missed this opportunity, my only problem was to choose correctly from several good continuations. The final position is so ugly for Black that Vassily just resigned. Well, this probably just wasn’t his day…”

Mamedyarov improved upon his first round game against Jakovenko, to which Leko couldn’t find a good answer. Perhaps White didn’t find all the best moves, but nevertheless Mamadyarov managed to transpose to an ending with a big advantage, which he effectively converted to the full point.

Leko: “This was a strange game. Losing to Eljanov killed my chances to qualify for the candidates matches, which obviously affected my motivation today. Of course, this is not a good excuse for my poor play against Shakhriyar…”

Alekseev-Inarkiev was the longest game of the 12th round. After interesting complications in the Slav Defense the players arrived at a very original position, in which White had three minor pieces against a rook and three pawns. White slowly but surely consolidated his pieces and launched the attack on the king. He then won a pawn and advanced to a winning ending. Despite Black’s stubborn resistance, Alekseev won the game on the 88th move.

Round 13

Eljanov needed a draw to secure sole first, and he did so with the black pieces against Gelfand. The two have worked together in the past years, but with White Gelfand did press for while. In a Nimzo he sacrificed a pawn to open up the position, but Eljanov gave back the material and after the exchange of the minor pieces the position remained balanced.

After winning the Bosna tournament in 2009, Eljanov now has a new ‘best tournament of his career’. Winning this Grand Prix, one of the strongest tournaments on average rating and of this scale ever held, is a fantastic result for the 27-year-old, who proved that his new status of Ukraine’s number one player wasn’t a coincidence.

Report based on the tournament website

Photo courtesy of FIDE, more here

Games rounds 10-13

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Astrakhan Grand Prix 2010 | Schedule & results

After the 12th round, Ivanchuk, Leko, Mamedyarov and Alekseev were eliminated from qualifying for the runner-up position. Grischuk was also eliminated, because Radjabov scored well enough to ensure that even if he’d lose his final round, he’d gain enough GP points to surpass Grischuk.

In the final round of Astrakhan, Jakovenko was eliminated with his draw and Gashimov has been eliminated with his loss. The winner of the Radjabov-Wang Yue game decided matters: a win for the Chinese would have meant qualification, but Radjabov with White held a Petroff ending a pawn down to a draw and this was enough to end second in the overall Grand Prix. Thanks to ebutaljib for providing this table:

Source used: Wikipedia page on the GP

And so an end has come to a long series of six super tournaments which had its ups and downs. Positive were the tournament websites, with extensive reports (disclaimer: which were written by yours truly in Baku and Sochi), sometimes videos (by the Turkish Chess Federation in Baku, Europe-Echecs in Sochi and – another disclaimer – by me in Nalchik) and sometimes game analysis by GM Sergey Shipov.

More importantly, a big number of players had the opportunity to play in big, strong events and make good money.

But of course many more things went wrong. Three host cities (Doha, Karlovy Vary and Montreux) withdrew when it became clear that the money wasn’t there. Their nominated players had to leave the series and Yannick Pelletier was hit the most, as he couldn’t play a single event. The Czech organizers were very disappointed when Adams and Carlsen had good reason to leave the series: because of the sudden change of the World Championship cycle, during the cycle.

When it all started, the idea was that the winner of the GP would play against the World Champ. (We would have had a Aronian-Anand match in 2012.) winner of the World Cup. (We would have a Gelfand-Aronian match and the winner would play Anand.) But during the Olympiad in Dresden, FIDE President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov suddenly announced the Candidates ‘tournament’ (which would later be rephrased to ‘matches’), for which the numbers one and two of the GP Series would qualify.

Another point of criticism FIDE received by many (e.g. more than once by Kasparov) was about the locations of the events. The whole series never managed to leave the greater Caucasus region, and so no single event was organized in a bigger, Western city, which didn’t really help to attract corporate sponsorship either.

In general the idea wasn’t so bad. But the execution could have been much better.

Update: according to Harish in the comments, the pairings for the Candidates matches are:

1. Topalovs vs Kamsky ( 1 vs 8 )
2. Carlsen vs Radjabov ( 2 vs 7 )
3. Kramnik vs Nominee ( 3 vs 6 )
4. Aronian vs Gelfand ( 4 vs 5 )

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

Previous reports

• Astrakhan FIDE GP R1: Gashimov beats Ivanchuk
• Many draws so far at Astrakhan FIDE GP
• Eljanov leads in Astrakhan
• FIDE GP: Eljanov back ik the lead

Gata Kamsky, Alexander Onischuk, Hikaru Nakamura and Yury Shulman Thursday reached the quad finals of the U.S. Championship in St. Louis. After a rest day, the tournament resumes today with the first of the decisive three rounds.

The 2010 U.S. Chess Championship takes place May 13-25 at the Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis, Missouri. The event features a new format, which includes a 24-player, seven-round Swiss tournament followed by a four-player Championship final. In the event that there is no clear U.S. Champion after the quad finals, there will be a championship playoff. More info in our first report.

Rounds 5-7

Of the seven players who we sharing the lead after four rounds, only two continued with victories. Gata Kamsky and Alexander Onischuk, the second and third seeds, both won as White, against Larry Christiansen and Varuzhan Akobian respectively.

Against Christiansen’s off-beat Ruy Lopez, Kamsky put up a strong center and then thought up some subtle queen moves. “I had to do something,” Kamsky said afterwards. “My experience with Larry is that he’s a very aggressive player.” Instead of “attacking” he thought this game should be called “positionally-based, with aggressive intentions”.

Onischuk extended his U.S. Championship unbeaten streak to a record 46 games by beating Akobian. 28…a5 was a mistake and Black’s final chance to save the game may have been 31…e3.

Onischuk-Akobian, after 31.Qc5

After 31…e3!? 32.fxe3 Qxe3+ 33.Qxe3 Nxe3 34.Kf2 Nxf1 35.Kxf1 the ending is drawn according to Onischuk.

In round 6, an uneventful draw between the pre-round leaders and two decisive games on boards two and three landed Kamsky, Onischuk, Nakamura and Shulman atop the tables with 4.5 points. “I played the Catalan,” Nakamura said. “Generally speaking that is a draw. I just felt like playing something simple rather than going for complications.” The reigning champ fell behind on the clock for one of the first games in the event and became worried that Kraai’s celerity meant some home cooking. “I didn’t want to walk into anything,” Nakamura said.

Kraai said he simply missed the pin 26…Rc8, which offered better resistance. Kamsky, advising Kraai after the game, claimed even before the wholesale trades Black should have played …a5 before White played it. “But okay, I can defend passive positions,” Kamsky said. Understanding Nakamura’s reputation, Kraai said he did not feel comfortable crouching into a ball and defending for several hours.

Also winning to tie for the lead was Shulman, who beat Alex Stripunsky. Like Nakamura, Shulman won a rook-and-pawn endgame due to his more active rook.

On Thursday the three top boards ended in a draw, and so indeed the four names to proceed to the quad finals were Kamsky, Onischuk, Nakamura and Shulman. Only Shulman and Onischuk split the point in a peaceful manner, though.

Kamsky’s draw against Shabalov didn’t go smoothly. The 2007 World Cup winner began shaking his head in disbelief when he overlooked Shabalov’s cunning defence 22…Bg6 at the end of a long variation. He had only considered 22…Kg8, which wins for White after 23. Qd5+.

Kamsky-Shabalov

Here Black played 22…Bg6!.

Though short on time, Kamsky gathered himself and found a way to capture several pawns whilst simultaneously weakening Shabalov’s king. “It was a pretty unpleasant scenario,” Kamsky said. “I was looking to minimize the damage.” Kamsky then found what he called an “extremely strong defensive maneuver” – bringing his rook to the fourth rank to defend his king on the g-file. Black then ran low on time and after Shabalov whispered “draw,” Kamsky ran his clock down to 1:20 and agreed.

The last qualifier for the finals would come down to board two. Christiansen, a veteran of decades of championships, needed to win as he began the round one half point behind defending champion Nakamura. Known for his attacking style, Christiansen built up a strong center and spatial advantage. “I was guardedly optimistic,” Christiansen said. Nakamura was not content playing passively and struck with the strange-looking thrust 8…g5. World Champion GM Viswanathan Anand, calling in from Spain live during the on-air commentary [see video Calling Anand below!], questioned the move. “I’m not sure if Nakamura knows how to (play solidly),” Anand said. “But he doesn’t lack confidence, that’s for sure.”

As the game petered out into a pawn-up endgame for Christiansen, the crowd at the Chess Club and Scholastic Center of Saint Louis gathered around the monitors. Players who generally left the club after their games stayed to see the result. GM Maurice Ashley, commentating on the game, saw Christiansen move his rook around to press for the win. “You’re going to sit here and you’re going to suffer young man,” Ashley said of Christiansen’s mindset. Eventually, too many pawns were traded and Nakamura held on to qualify.

Today is the first of three rounds of quad finals, with Nakamura-Kamsky on the program. The winner of the final will win $35,000. The other 20 players will play two more rounds of the Swiss event, where the winner takes home $10,000.

Report borrowed heavily from FM Mike Klein’s excellent round-by-round coverage.

Photos © Betsy Dynakov, more here.

Selection of games rounds 5-7

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Videos

The organizers allowed us to embed their video show player, which is licensed under the Creative Commons license (”BY-NC-ND“).

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

After nine rounds Pavel Eljanov is back in the lead in Astrakhan. The Ukrainian GM drew just three games, and he’s the only one who collected 5.5 points so far.

The 6th FIDE Grand Prix takes place May 10-24 in Astrakhan, Russia. Akopian (2694), Alekseev (2700), Gashimov (2734), Gelfand (2741), Eljanov (2751), Inarkiev (2669), Ivanchuk (2741), Jakovenko (2725), Leko (2735), Mamedyarov (2763), Ponomariov (2733), Rajabov (2740), Svidler (2735) and Wang Yue (2752) play. More details can be found in our first report.

Round 6

Tournament leader Pavel Eljanov lost his first game, with White against Evgeny Alekseev. In a Queen’s Indian the Russian seemed better prepared and not only did he keep improving his position, but also his advantage on the clock. Around move 27 Eljanov had 9 minutes left for 13 moves against Alekseev’s 26 minutes. White soon lost a pawn and eventually the game.

This allowed Ernesto Inarkiev to grab sole lead, by beating Boris Gelfand with the black pieces. After 19 moves of Semi-Slav theory Black equalized comfortably and then got the upper hand. After 26…b4 White had to give up two pieces for the rook and then Inarkiev never let go.

Jakovenko and Ponomariov played a sharp game in a line of the Exchange Grünfeld that has been topical since Giri-Sutovsky, Corus 2010. In a difficult position Ponomariov blundered with 21…Qc6? missing 22.Bxb5! immediately winning an important pawn. Although he then put up a lot of resistance, the Ukrainian couldn’t prevent a loss.

This round saw yet another decisive game: Akopian-Wang Yue 0-1. In the main line of the Petroff, the Chinese GM showed once again that it’s well possible to play for a win with Black too.

Rounds 7

Inarkiev’s lead was short-lived, as he lost the next game to Eljanov. They went for the topical 6…Qb6 line of the Advance Caro-Kann, where 11.Kd2 was new. Inarkiev’s 13.g4!? was quite inventive but Eljanov’s solid answer left White with a worse position. He had to give a pawn and for an Eljanov in good form this is enough to win.

Alekseev continued with another win to move into joint second place. The Russian defeated Akopian in a (very) Closed Ruy Lopez: the 12.d5 line of the Chigorin Defence. With 23.bxc4! he opened the queenside when Black decided to go all or nothing on the kingside, but it was nothing.

Rounds 8

This round saw the all Ukrainian derby Eljanov-Ponomariov. In a Catalan/Bogo Indian hybrid, White was the first to seize the initiative, and gained the control over the c-file in a queenless middlegame. However, Black’s nice prophylactic ideas Kf8-e8 and Rb8 before breaking open the queenside proved strong. The initiative went over to Black, and he clinched the full point after another mistake on move 43 by Eljanov in the rook ending.

After two wins, Alekseev was defeated in this eight round, by Mamedyarov. In the same opening as in Eljanov-Ponomariov, Mamedyarov tried an interesting new set-up that involved leaving his queen’s knight on b1 until move 25! It looks like 18…Ng4 was wrong.

The game of the round, and in fact of the tournament thus far, was Akopian-Inarkiev. Watch what happened:

Position after 14.b3

It looked like White was crushed like a patzer when Inarkiev played the obvious 14…Nxd5, but then it became clear what Akopian had in mind: 15.Nxf7!. Inarkiev responded well and gave up his queen to get a dynamically equal position. At some point Akopian avoided a move repetition and he was rewarded with the full point after 104 moves, when he won a Q vs R ending.

Rounds 9

Eljanov did it again. His last five (!) games ended in ‘0-1′, and being Black himself, he regained the sole lead on top of the leaderboard. And he did it in nice, Capablanca style, slowly outplaying Radjabov with the black pieces in a Ragozin ending.

The only other decisive game was the second win in a row for Mamedyarov, also with the black pieces. The Azeri defeated Inarkiev, who went for the rare 3.c4 in the Sicilian and continued somewhat passively. Mamedyarov showed his usual aggressive style and occupied the center with many pawns, which at some point cost White a piece.

Report based on the tournament website

Photo courtesy of FIDE, more here

Games rounds 6-9

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Astrakhan Grand Prix 2010 | Schedule & results

Today is the second and last rest day of the tournament. With four rounds to go, Wang Yue and Radjabov will have to do better to reach the second and last spot in the Candidates. Gashimov and Jakovenko seem to have better chances right now, but the calculations remain complicated. We’ll repeat here what we mentioned before, and what Thomas pointed out. It makes most sense to look at two best results of the players who still have a chance to finish second:

Radjabov 303.3
Wang Yue 273.3
Gashimov 263.3
Ivanchuk 245.0
Jakovenko 243.3
Leko 240.0

The idea is that the third (worst) result doesn’t matter if they do better in Astrakhan. It follows that the maximum number of points any player can get is [number above] + 180 for clear first. The players’ chances are as follows:
- Radjabov can obviously defend his qualifying spot.
- Wang Yue is through if he finishes clear first (Radjabov can tie if he’s clear second, but has the inferior fourth result which is the tiebreaker).
- If Gashimov finishes clear first, Radjabov can stay ahead of him (but then Gashimov should get the wildcard, or would it go to Mamedyarov who is currently higher-rated?)
- If Ivanchuk is clear first, Radjabov needs to be at least clear third to stay ahead of Chucky. Noone else could catch him. This is because Ivanchuk’s score is “most improvable” – he had one really bad result in Nalchik (12th-14th) which will be deleted.

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN via TWIC

Previous reports

• Astrakhan FIDE GP R1: Gashimov beats Ivanchuk
• Many draws so far at Astrakhan FIDE GP
• Eljanov leads in Astrakhan

Two weeks ago I wrote about David Vigorito’s new book on the Marshall Attack of the Ruy Lopez. In this review, I want to take a look at GM Ivan Sokolov’s latest book The Ruy Lopez Revisited, published by New in Chess. I think both books have their charm, and in a way, they complement each other quite nicely.

In the introduction to The Ruy Lopez Revisited, Sokolov describes his switch from the Sicilian to the Ruy Lopez about twenty years ago, and how he “faced [a] huge amount of theory and deviations White had at his disposal.” He writes how he made the practical decision to study and play early deviations instead of mainlines, and it clearly paid off. Now, he’s written a book about these sidelines, which he calls a “practical opening guide to a tournament player who is willing to employ these variations, whereby he will often bring a fight to his opponent’s doorstep as easy as move 6 or 7.” And a very impressive opening guide it is, too.

Most attention is devoted to the Jaenisch Gambit (3…f5) and the Classical Variation (3…Bc5), but Sokolov also has a close look at lesser known systems such as the Cozio (3…Nge7), a line I have always liked (but never actually played) because it looks so entirely natural to defend the knight on c6. Sokolov, as always, is quite objective and writes that while it’s an interesting move, “it does not equalize. I abandoned this variation in the mid-1990s and I am in no hurry to return to it.”

One thing that struck me while looking at the variations that follow in this variation is that Sokolov doesn’t always promote the best moves to mainlines. This strange habit is something I’ve noticed before in some New in Chess publications (e.g., The Black Lion) so I don’t think the author is to blame. After 3…Nge7, 4.Nc3! is “the most unpleasant option” according to Sokolov, yet 4.0-0 is the Cozio’s main line. The reason is probably that there’s more theory on castling, but it’s a bad reason in my view since it disrupts the flow of reading and indeed studying. Still, Sokolov’s knowledge of this minor line is absolutely amazing. What I liked in this chapter in particular is his clear and useful explanations, such as the following:

Quinteros-Larsen
Manila 1973

17…f6! A standard plan in this type of position – if White takes on f6, then he relinquishes his space advantage, while if he defends the pawn on e5, Black will at some stage take on e5 and get either control of the f-file – should White recapture with his f4 pawn – or mobile pawns of his own – should White recapture with his d4 pawn. Similar motifs we often see in the Open Spanish.

18.f4 a5! Taking some more space and provoking a white weaknesses [sic] on the queenside.
19.a3 a4 20.Kb1 Na5 21.Qd3 Nc4 22.Bd2

22…fxe5! The time has come: White is forced to recapture with his d4 pawn (otherwise 23.fxe5? Rf2) and Black now gets mobile central pawns of his own:
23.dxe5 Rad8 24.Bc1 b5 25.Rhe1 Rfe8 26.Qf3 c5 27.Rd3 d4 The black pawns roll easily, while White cannot push his pawns or create any counterplay (…)

By the way, if you thought this book was written for players on the black side of the Ruy Lopez, you’d be wrong: one of the great qualities of Sokolov is that he’s able to look completely objectively at the lines even though he mainly has experience with them as Black himself. (This is already shown in the above mentioned section on the Cozio when Sokolov confesses he thinks 4.Nc3 is the nastiest reply for White.)

Sometimes, Sokolov gets so carried away in displaying his knowledge and ideas that he forgets to explain some basic stuff to players who are not quite of his strength. For instance, in the Jaenisch mainline – one of the most impressive chapters in the book – after the automatic moves 3…f5 4.Nc3 fxe4 5.Nxe4 d5 (Sokolov considers 5…Nf6 to be “fully playable” as well) 6.Nxe5 dxe4 7.Nxc6 Qg5 8.Qe2 Nf6 Sokolov seems so eager to get on with the dazzling complexities of it all that he completely fails to mention why the main move, 9.f4, is in fact stronger than the immediate 9.Nxa7+.

To me, the move f2-f4 in this position has always looked distinctly odd (somehow it looks as if the pawn can be taken in two different ways), but then on the next page Sokolov explains it in a slightly different line after all: 9.Nxa7+ Bd7 10.Bxd7+ Nxd7

and now, after 11.f4!, Sokolov does elaborate, explaining that f4 defends the g2-pawn which is obviously quite important. He writes:

The position is very complicated and unfortunately has not been seriously tested in practical (very few good games). I have analysed this position for a while and would like to share those analyses with the reader here. (…) Black is indeed material down, but the white king will be stuck in the centre for quite some tim, the white knight on a7 has to be brought back into play, which will cost time, and White still has to develop his c1 bishop and connect his rooks, which, again, costs time.

On general grounds Black should have good compensation here and therefore 9.Nxa7+ should be considered risky for White, but a rather serious analytical back-up for both sides would be rather helpful here – White can easily get into trouble with his king in the middle and his uncoordinated, under-developed pieces, while Black is after all two pawns down. I am surprised that this line has not been seriously tested in grandmaster practice.

This explanation, very useful in its own right, is just an introduction to over six pages of extremely detailed home analyses by Sokolov. It shows his determination in getting to the heart of the position and how the author is not just satisfied with an ‘unclear’ verdict. Unbelievable, unprecedented stuff and my only complaint is actually one of luxury, namely that this entire line really should have been given a separate chapter or paragraph, since now finding one’s way through the wood of varations numbered C33312b and so on, might not be to everyone’s taste.

Though I’m no expert of the Jaenisch myself, I must say Sokolov’s thorough analyses of all these complex positions look very impressive indeed. I naively checked a few sharp lines with my engine running in the background, but couldn’t find any holes even in what often look like rather speculative variations. Perhaps people who’ve played the variation all their lives will disagree with me, but I would be surprised if this book wouldn’t be a valuable treasure not only for people who are considering to give 3…f5 a try, but also for people who know all the ins and outs of this intoxicating line.

One interesting (and, in my opinion, highly sympathetic) aspect of Sokolov’s way of writing is that he isn’t afraid to admit that he doesn’t understand things. Here’s how he introduces yet another early …Nge7 line in the Classical Variation:

3…Bc5 4.0-0 Nge7

In this line Black develops his g8 knight to e7. Compared to the other moves after 3…Bc5 4.0-0, like 4…Nd4, 4…Nf6, 4…d6 or 4…f5 (after 4.c3), this continuation seems to me to be the least recommended for Black. That said, I have to admit that 4…Nge7 has always remained a bit of a puzzle to me because based on a number of logical and not very difficult variations White seems to be obtaining an easy opening advantage; namely, in the line with 5.Nxe5 as well as the main line (…).

Taking this into consideration, it is rather difficult for me to explain the fact that a number of very strong players, including Fischer (!), have played this line for Black. Unfortunately, in the game Tal-Fischer, Candidates’ Tournament Curacao 1962, the by the ex-World Champion Mikhail Tal decided not to follow the main line, and so we will never find out what Fischer had in store and why Tal refrained from the main line. Over the years, I have spent many days analysing this position and wondering what idea Fischer may have had in store, but I failed to find a satisfactory solution.

For me, such a fragment is pure delight, not only because I always llike it when authors share their uncertainties with their readers, but also because it immediately triggers my imagination and makes me want to find out, too, what Fischer may have had in mind! So, naturally, I had a look at 5.Nxe5 and perhaps I’ve found something which I hereby share with my readers: 5…Nxe5 6.d4 and now Sokolov only mentions 6…c6, leading to a good position for White, but perhaps Black can play my engine’s suggestion 6…Bd6? This move, as I found out afterwards, was tried once by Arhur Kogan in 1995 against Sergei Movsesian when they were both still 2400-players. In that game, Black didn’t have particular problems so maybe, just maybe this is what Fischer had in mind?

The Ruy Lopez Revisited has already been praised numerous times, and rightly so. This is simply a great opening book, probably one of the best ever on the Spanish Opening. I can only hope Sokolov will one day decide it’s time for another book on “offbeat systems and unexplored resources” (as the book is subtitled) from another opening in his repertoire to explain in such detail. What a treat that would be.

Links

• Get yourself a copy of The Ruy Lopez Revisited
• Read more book reviews

Ville riche de 150 nationalités, Astrakhan, surnommée "l'étoile du Sud" par Alexandre Dumas, accueille du 10 au 25 mai la finale du Grand Prix Fide, un tournoi d'échecs majeur en 13 rondes.

Riche de cent cinquante nationalités, "l'étoile du Sud", comme l'appelait Alexandre Dumas, accueille du 10 au 25 mai le Grand Prix Fide, un tournoi d'échecs en 13 rondes.

A classic opening has had an unexpected revival at the world championship

Anand-Topalov, world championship game 4, Sofia 2010

At the halfway stage, defending world champion Vishy Anand led challenger Veselin Topalov 3.5-2.5. It has been an exciting contest so far, full of fighting chess. After Topalov stormed out of the traps to score a stunning win with the white pieces in the first game, the champion struck back to win games two and four, also with white (with three draws).

Many world championship encounters involve theoretical opening duels. When Alekhine and Capablanca slugged it out in Buenos Aires in 1927 it wasn't just the title that was at stake but the reputation of the Orthodox Defence to the Queen's Gambit, which was played in almost every one of their 34 games. In London in 2000, defending champion Kasparov's inability to break down Kramnik's Berlin Defence to the Ruy Lopez was critical in deciding the outcome.

In Sofia, Anand's two wins so far have been achieved with the Catalan – 1 d4 Nf6 2 c4 e6 3 g3 d5. The opening was invented to order by the Franco-Polish player and chess writer Savielly Tartakower (1887-1956) who was asked by the organisers of the 1929 Barcelona tournament to come up with an opening to name after the city's region. Anyone interested will find useful chapters on the Catalan in Boris Avurkh's Grandmaster Repertoire 1 d4, vol 1 (Quality Chess).

In the position, Anand has broken up Topalov's king defence with an earlier knight sacrifice on h6. With the black pieces on the wrong side of the board, White now pressed his advantage with 1 e5, against which there is no defence. After 1...Bxg2 (1... Qg7 2 Qxg7+ Kxg7 2 Bxc6), White continued 2 exf6 Rxd6 (2...Qh7 would not have helped: 3 Qg5+ Kh8 4 Rc4 Rg8 5 Nf7+ Qxf7 and mate will follow) 3 Rxd6 Be4 4 Rxe6 Nd3 5 Rc2 Qh7 6 f7+ Qxf7 7 Rxe4 Qf5 8 Re7 and Black resigned.

The remaining games can be watched live on anand-topalov.com.

chess@guardian.co.uk

A punto de finalizar el Trofeo Cabildo de Gran Canaria, disputadas 8 rondas, encabeza la clasificación, invicto con 7 puntos, el Maestro Internacional Daniel Ortega Hermida.

En esta ronda se han producido los enfrentamientos con los detalles siguientes: Sabrina Vega Gutiérrez-Rubén de la Hoz Sánchez, 1-0, Defensa Rusa o Petroff, 41 movimientos; Daniel Ortega Hermida-Nicanor Camino Carrio, 1-0, Defensa India de Rey, 47; Francisco López Colón-Nicolás Natalicchio Escalante, 0-1, Defensa Nimzoindia, 48 y Héctor Marrero Falcón-Belinda Vega Gutiérrez, 0-1, Apertura Española o Ruy López, 47. Se ha aplazado la partida entre el Maestro Internacional José García Padrón y el Maestro FIDE Augusto Menvielle Laccourreye, para el martes, por continuar enfermo el maestro García.

Las hermanas Vega han finalizado este evento ya que van a representar a la Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, junto a los jóvenes Daniel Gutiérrez Olivares y Omar García Blanco, a partir de este domingo hasta el miércoles 5 de mayo en el Nacional Universitario a celebrarse en León. Para seguir este universitario, hacer click en: http://chess-results.com/tnr33172.aspx?lan=2

El próximo día 4 de mayo se clausurará el evento con la entrega de premios.

Más detalles y partidas pinchando en este enlace: http://chess-results.com/tnr31091.aspx?lan=2

Admit it: one of the reasons you’re not playing the main line Ruy Lopez or even 1.e4, is that you’re afraid of the Marshall Attack. I, for one, plead guilty to this charge. I’ve always avoided the Marshall Attack like the plague, not because I don’t like exciting openings, but because I simply don’t have the time to investigate all these hypersharp developments.

Of course, there have been publications in the past that dealt admirably with the Marshall Attack, such as Bogdan Lalic’s 2003 book or Nunn and Harding’s Batsford classic from 1989, but that was exactly the problem, wasn’t it: these books are hopelessly outdated now, and there are so many new concepts that it’s impossible to gain a proper overview of recent ideas. But now there finally is a new book on the Marshall: Understanding the Marshall Attack by IM David Vigorito, published by Gambit.

Subtitled “A layman’s guide to the supergrandmaster’s favourite gambit”, this book is an excellent chance for cowards like me to get reacquainted with this great opening line. First of all, the chapter names already give you an idea of what to expect: “Elite Equaliser”, “Refined Rook lift”. Then there’s the pretty elaborate bibliography, in which I couldn’t spot any obivous flaws. (Yes, Anand’s Chess Informant monograph is there as well.) The only thing I missed was a reference to ChessVibes Openings, which has dealt with the Marshall on numerous occasions. A missed opportunity!

Understanding the Marshall Attack is one of those rare objective opening books not aimed at either Black or White, but just intended to give amateurs a good, solid overview and practical tips. It’s not as personal a book as Jonathan Rowson’s Understanding the Grünfeld, but it’s well-written and has a clever setup. I really liked the ‘recommendations’ chapter, which contains useful practical advice such as:

For the typical club player, I would start by going through Chapter 2, the Old Main Line. Although this variation has fallen out of favour, it contains an abundance of typical Marshall Attack themes. In the Old Main Line, Black burns all his bridges and must play for the initiative. The value of every move is high and one can learn a lot about attack, defence and counterattack by going through the lines in this chapter. Similar play can be found in the Pawn Push variations of Chapter 3. Although one may not want to play these lines forever because of their rather dubious theoretical value, I think the creative black player could get some mileage out of these systems if he picks and chooses his lines carefully.

Equally useful is the chapter on ‘Typical Ideas’. Here are two instructive non-tactical examples, one for Black (on the two bishops ending) and one for White (on the exchange sacrifice), also indicative of the book’s objectivity.

I. Gurevich – Benjamin
New York 1992
Here we have a typical Marshall endgame. White has difficulty creating a passed pawn and Black’s space on the kingside keeps White at bay as well.

28…Be2! 29.Nh2 If White plays 29.gxf4 Bxf4 his knight will only be able to move somewhere that will allow Black to head for a drawn opposite-coloured ending (30.Bd2 Bxf1! =).

29…Kf7 30.Kg2 Kf6 31.f3 h5! Taking away the g4-square (…)

In this small fragment, note how Vigorito doesn’t avoid the oft-debated question of whether Black should or should not head for a simple draw in the Marshall sometimes: yes, he should!

Yakovenko – Zhang Zhong
Ergun 2006
Even with the queens exchanged, White’s central roller combined with the weaknesses in Black’s structure can give White good chances.

21.a4! Before starting operations on the kingside, White creates the possibility of opening the a-file.

21…h6 22.Kg2 Rd7 23.h4! gxh4 24.e5 Be7 25.gxh4 Kg7 If 25…Bxh4 then 26.Nf3 wins the pawn.

26.axb5 The immediate 26.Ne4 was also possible.

26…axb6 27.Ne4 The knight is heading to g3 and f5. White has a powerful initiative.

David Vigorito is able to explain subtle opening ideas in a clear and easily understandable way. For me, and I suppose for many a club player, The Marshall Attack has often given me difficulty to grasp the precise nuances of certain concepts such as 12.d3 instead of 12.d4. I mean, isn’t it just a more passive way of playing? Why would the pawn be any better placed on d3? If anything, it might become a weakness later on, and it doesn’t control the e5 square, right? Of course, things are not that simple:

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5 9.exd5 Nxd5 10.Nxe5 Nxe5 11.Rxe5 c6 12.d3

This is a more modest-looking continuation than 12.d4. At first glance it does not seem like this should be dangerous for Black, but White maintains control over the e4- and c4 squares, which allows for some tactical possibilities. White has not grabbed as much space, however, and the pawn on d3 may become vulnerable itself. White will often be more than willing to offer this pawn in order to fight for the initiative. It will all come down to the specifics of each position. Despite the similar appearances at first glance of this position to those we have already seen, the play is surprisingly different from that in the first four chapters.

12…Bd6 13.Re1

Now Black faces an important decision. In this chapter we look at the most natural move, the direct 13…Qh4, while the next chapter considers the modern preference, 13…Bf5.

13…Qh4 Black continues as he does in the first few chapters. However, White can exploit a tactical detail that was not available to him in Chapter 4.

14.g3 Qh3 15.Re4

This move is the point of White’s play. He intends Rh4 often with Nd2-e4 to follow. Compared to the previous chapter [12.d4 followed by 15.Re4 - AWM], 15…g5 is not possible, because after 16.Bxg5 Qf5 the e4-rook is protected and White will remain two pawns up. Therefore Black must find another way to create counterplay. (…).

Aha! So that’s why 12.d3 is such a useful little move. Very enlightening, and I think I will actually start playing this move once I’ve built up the courage to move the bishop just one square further on move 3. (Of course, I will have to study the ‘elite equalizer’ move 13…Bf5 to avoid a quick draw against an elite player!) The book is up to date until 2009, and contains a lot of mouth-watering recent supergrandmaster games by players like Anand, Aronian and Grischuk. On top of that, most of the main lines in the book are based on these games – always a sign that the author is not afraid of the ‘real’ hardcore stuff.

So, just in case you’re still too afraid to enter these dungeons of adventure, the book also discusses the Anti-Marshall variations such as 8.a4, 8.h3 and some minor deviations on move 8 or 9. Here, too, Vigorito gives useful advice and sometimes an enlightening insight in what these top players might actually be considering when choosing a particular quiet line:

10.a3 White’s play is very flexible, but it is also very slow. I find it very difficult to believe that moves such as 8.h3, 9.d3 and 10.a3 can constitute any kind of threat to the 7…0-0 move-order. White now has two plans of development, depending on how he develops his queen’s knight. It most often develops to d2, from where it will usually go to f1 and then either e3 or g3. The alternative is to develop to c3 with an eye towards d5, which often leads to exchanges. The knight may also go to g3 via e2, but this is less flexible than the Nd2-f1 route.

Finally, I must mention a few light points of criticism, too. Weirdly, there’s no index of players – quite rare for a Gambit publication. Also, some diagrams are inconveniently placed in the wrong column. I also missed a bit of historical background to the Marshall Attack in general. Vigorito does mention Capablanca-Marshall, New York 1918 in the introduction, but that’s about it. It would have been nice to have a little bit more context to some lines and especially their theoretical development. But then again, this is a practical book and so it’s not a real issue.

It will be interesting to compare this book to Ivan Sokolov’s recent book on Ruy Lopez sidelines, which I will discuss in my next review.

Links

• Get yourself a copy of Understanding the Marshall Attack
• Read more book reviews

The Fine Art of Trying for Nothing At All

IM Levon Altounian recently qualified for the 2010 US Championship by winning an online State Champions qualifier on the ICC.  I have had experience in this event, winning a West qualifier (a bunch of 3 0 games) a few years ago only to stumble in a playoff vs. Connecticut master Ted McHugh.  Indeed, online ICC games of any importance are very nervy affairs.

Altounian’s toughest match was the semi-final vs the Northern California champion, IM Sam Shankland.  Two games were contested at the time control of Game in 25 minutes with a 3 second increment.

In this two-game mini-match, Altounian showed how “doing nothing” (chess nihilism) is actually a dangerous weapon, especially in faster time controls. If the opponent doesn’t react well to “nothing”, then technique takes over.

I think the times on ICC are accurate so I will use them in this story.

Game 1.

L. Altounian (Arizona)  -  S Shankland ( NoCal )   G/25 + 3 sec increment

1. e4!?

A surprise!   Levon doesn’t play his usual Catalan!  I can imagine that before this game Altounian worked out riskless sidelines to respond to any black move.

1…e5!?

A surprise from Shankland!  I would have expected 1…c5 then some riskless move from white such as 2. c3 and a probable draw.   Black’s surprise move results in a good game for him!

2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. Nc3 This knight does not look happy here!

What a strange move!  An excellent example of nihilism.  White simply says “I’m trying for nothing, let’s just make some more moves.”

5…f6 This move is perfectly good.

Also fine is the active 5… Bc5!? 6. Nxe5 (6. d3 Qe7 7. Be3 Bxe3 8. fxe3 Nf6 9. O-O O-O =) 6… Qg5 7. d4 Qxg2 8. Qf3 (8. Rf1? Bh3 wins)  Qxf3 9. Nxf3 Bb4 =.

6. d4 exd4 7. Nxd4 c5! Why not?  White gets a very awkward formation.

8. Nde2 Qxd1+ 9. Nxd1

This is playing for a win?! No.. it’s playing for a non-loss!

Playing for a non-loss!

However I will be bold here and say white could, in fact, lose this!  This just means chess is not an easy game and white can’t force a draw so easily.

9…Bd7 I would definitely prefer 9…Be6 to keep the d-file open after castles long.  Then, if as in the game 10. Bf4 O-O-O 11. Ne3 Ne7 12. f3 g5! 13. Bg3 Bg7!  and black is very happy with the latent power of the bishop pair.  All of black’s pieces are very active.  If we were to talk about “winning chances for black” in an exchange Ruy Lopez, this would be it.  In the game, transferring the bishop from d7 to c6 is also good and gives black nice tactical motifs shortly.

10. Bf4 O-O-O 11. Ne3 Bc6 12. f3

To ...g7-g5 or not to ...g7-g5?

I can imagine black was very confident here.  He also had, as in the previous note, the immediate 12… g5! 13. Bg3 Ne7 14. h4 (on other moves, black is doing well) 14…g4! 15. Nxg4 f5! with fantastic compensation.   14…Bg7 was also fine for black in this line.

12…Ne7 13. Kf2 g6 Black may have been reluctant to weaken squares, but the space grabbing 13… g5 was still good.    At this point, black had 18 minutes left and white had 22 minutes left.  This means that white may have been better off playing 13. h4! before Kf2.

14. Rad1 Bg7 15. h4 h6 Black could play nihilistically here with 15…Rxd1 16. Rxd1 Re8 (doing nothing) and be all right.  The problem for white is if the game opens, the bishop pair comes into their own.

16. g4 f5 Sharpening the play.  Black has 15 minutes left and white has 20 minutes left.  Objectively, black is still fine but it’s not easy in a fast game.

17. gxf5

Key Moment

17…Bxb2? The position is tricky. Correct is simply 17…gxf5. If 18. exf5? Rdf8! is very good for black due to 19. Ng3 Bxb2 with a black edge.   If 18.  Rxd8+ Rxd8 19. exf5 Rf8! again is correct. Black is OK in this line after, for example, 20. Rg1 Bf6! hitting h4.  Since the position has just become unexpectedly sharp, this miscue has severe consequences.

18. Rxd8+ Rxd8 Essentially forced. 18…Kxd8 runs into 19. Nc4 Bf6 20. Be5! with a big edge.

19. c3? Winning is the brute force 19. fxg6 Nxg6 20. Bxh6, for example 20…Rh8 21. Bg5 and the pawns roll.  It is natural for a human in a fast time control to go for the “piece trap” but this should have squandered much of the edge.

19… gxf5 20. Rb1 fxe4 21. fxe4 Ba3?! Here it’s important to get rid of white’s h-pawn.  Thus 21… Ng6! 22. Rxb2 (22. h5?? Nxf4 wins for black due to Rd2+ next) 22… Nxh4 23. Bxh6 Bxe4 and black can fight on and with reduced pawns retain decent chances of the draw.

22. Rb3 Bxe4 22….Ng6 again with the aim of eliminating white’s dangerous h-pawn.

23. Rxa3 Ng6 24. h5 Since white’s h-pawn lives, the battle is concluded.  A very tough loss for black after such a nice opening.

24…Nxf4 25. Nxf4 Rf8 26. Kg3 Rg8+ 27. Kh4 Rf8 28. Ng6 Rf6 29. Ng4  Rb6 30. Ne7+ Kd8 31. Ng8 Bf3 32. N8xh6 Kc8 33. Ra5 Rb2 34. Rxc5 Rxa2 35. Rf5 Bd1 36. Rf1 Be2 37. Rf2 Rc2 38. Nf5 Bd3 39. Rxc2 Bxc2 40. Kg5 1-0

The next game was conducted shortly after this one, and it’s very tough to reorient and bounce back at full strength.  In the second game, playing black, Altounian showed, well, an ingenious opening preparation for these conditions.

Game 2

S. Shankland – L. Altounian  QGA Strange Sideline

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 Be6 This had to be a surprise.  An unusual sideline!

This?!?!

4. Nf3 In an action game my first thought would be to get the c-pawn rounded up with 4. Na3!? for example 4… Nc6 5. Nxc4 Qd5 6. Nf3. Not sure how much it offers, but it’s safe and no time spent on the clock.   The knight on c4 participates usefully.

4… Nf6 5. Nbd2 c5 6. Ng5 Bd5 7. e4 h6 I would hazard a guess that this was “main preparation” for Levon within this rare QGA sideline. As it turns out, the R/h8 finds useful work on its original file!

8. exd5 hxg5 9. Bxc4 cxd4 10. Nf3 g4 11. Ne5 Previously seen was 11. Nxd4 Rh5 12. Qb3 and it was about equal (but white went on to win in   1-0 Hansen,C-Zagema,W/Hinnerup 1979.

11… Nbd7 12. Qxd4 Nxe5 13. Qxe5 a6 14. O-O e6! The fact that this move is possible means black solved his problems effectively.

15. Bf4 Rh5! 16. Qe2 Bd6 It all goes like clockwork.

17. Bg3 Bxg3 18. fxg3 18. hxg3 Qe7 19. dxe6 O-O-O 20. exf7 Rdh8 is a typical mating pattern that white, of course, avoids.

18… Qb6+ 19. Rf2 e5 20. Re1 O-O-O 21. Qe3  Qxe3 22. Rxe3 e4 23. Bb3 Rdh8 24. Rc2+ Kd7 25. Rec3 Kd6? The most accurate here is 25… Ne8.
26. Rc7 e3 27. Rxb7 Nxd5 28. h4? Last chance for white (remember he has to win to level the match) is 28. Rxf7! Rxh2 29. Kf1! averting mate.  Then for example, 29…g6 30. Bxd5 Kxd5 31. Rd7+ Ke5 32. Re7+ Kd4 33. Rc3 and white can fight on perhaps gaining a full point if black miscues.

28… gxh3 Now black wins with no problems. 29. Ra7 (29. Rxf7 hxg2 30. Kxg2 Rh2+ 31. Kf1 Rxc2 32. Bxc2 Rh1+ 33. Ke2 Rh2+ 34. Kd1 Rd2+ 35. Kc1 Nb4 36. Bb1 Rxb2 wins) 29… hxg2 30. Rxa6+ Ke5 31. Kxg2 (31. Ra5 Rh1+ 32. Kxg2 R8h2+ 33. Kf3 Rf1+ 34. Kg4 Rxc2 wins) 31… Rh2+ 32. Kf3 Rxc2 33. Bxc2 Rh2 0-1

The rare sideline worked out very well for black!  In the finals, Levon faced NM Damir Studen from Georgia (no, not Soviet Georgia) and won fairly easily, so this Western battle was definitely his toughest test.

Hello once again to everyone out there in the blogosphere. Before I dive right into talking about Wijk, I would like to clear up a certain rumour from the online world. I am not playing in Aeroflot, nor did I ever seriously consider it. Any suggestions to the contrary are simply not true. Now that this is out of the way, onto the tournament recap!

Round 1: Smeets-Nakamura

In the first round, I had Black against Dutch GM Jan Smeets. Like quite a few other European GMs, I have seen him at several tournaments over the past few years but not had the opportunity to play. Overall, Jan seems to be a very solid player with a pretty good general knowledge of openings. In our game, he surprised me by playing the 6.Bg5 variation against the Najdorf. As fate would have it, the tournament seemed to be a referendum on whether the Bg5 variation is good for White or not. I picked a mild sideline which surprised Jan, and he played a tame variation.

The following was the position after 14.Nd5. Oddly enough, our silicon friends seem to think 14...Nxd5 was simply better for me, but I thought White had a solid positional advantage after 15.exd5 followed by eventually putting a knight on e4. When I chose to avoid this variation, the position eventually fizzled out and it was a fairly standard draw. Overall, I felt that coming off of the tournament in Turkey this was a great start to the tournament with a solid draw as Black. Onto round 2!

Round 2: Nakamura-van Wely

In the second round I had White against another Dutch man albeit it, one who is a bit older and stronger! Shockingly Loek was playing in Wijk for a 19th! straight year. The last time we played in Amsterdam, I was White in a Najdorf, but blundered in a completely winning position and he was able to escape with a draw. This time around, we played another Najdorf although I decided to play the 6.Bg5 variation against him. Unfortunately for Loek, I was very well prepared and he walked right into my preparation.

This is the position after 15.Nd5. Unlike the game against Smeets, the knight on d5 is actually an intentional piece sacrifice. Prior to the game, I had prepared this variation with Kris and we concluded that the position might be holdable for Black, but it would be extremely unpleasant for a human to play. As it turned out, our assessment was correct since Loek went wrong almost immediately and simply got blown off the board. It was after this second round game that I realized I would at least have a chance of putting together a good showing in the tournament.

Round 3: Short-Nakamura

In the third round, I faced another familiar opponent in Nigel Short. Having faced Nigel only the month before in the London Chess Classic, I had become fairly familiar with his style. During the tournament in London, Kris and I both lamented having White against Nigel and not Black as we felt Nigel was significantly more solid with Black than White. This time around, I decided to surprise everyone by playing the Classical Sicilian. Having played it in Turkey during the World Team Championship, I felt like giving it a whirl! Nigel deviated from prep very early on by choosing to play the Boleslavskij variation. At which point the following critical position arose.

This critical position occurred after 13...Bg4. Strangely enough, this was the third straight game of mine featuring a knight on d5, and it certainly wasn't the last either! Here, Nigel went badly astray with 14.c4. This move isn't necessarily awful, but after 14...Nxd5 15.exd5 Nb8, I had absolutely no problems as well as having an easier position to play. After the game, Nigel seemed to think 14.Nxe7 Qxe7 15.c4 gave White an advantage, but subsequent analysis shows that there is no advantage at all after 15...Nd7 due to Nc5-e6-d4 ideas later on. Although Nigel probably could have maintained the equilibrium and drawn, a few minor errors in a row doomed his position and I pounced on them to win my second game in a row. More than the great start, I was pleased by my calculation and accuracy in playing the best moves. From the first three games, I very rarely deviated from the Rybka suggestions in any given position.

Round 4: Anand-Nakamura

In the fourth round, I faced my first major test as I had Black against the current World Champion, Viswanathan Anand. Many people have asked me if I felt nervous before the game. Having played against Carlsen and Kramnik in London certainly helped me as this felt like just another game. I think that once you play against anyone who is top five, you inevitably realize that it is just a name and they are still "only human." As such, I did not feel nervous at all and enjoyed the moment instead! Regardless of what happens, I can certainly tell my children in the future that I played a World Champion! That in itself, is more than enough!

The game itself started off as a Leningrad Dutch. Recently, I have started playing the Dutch frequently as it is an opening which is unbalanced and gives both sides chances. I also felt that as Vishy is not a native d4 player, something off the beaten path would yield me better chances. The opening was fairly tame, as I avoided several chances to go for serious complications. Eventually we reached the moment of truth.

In this position, the obvious trump for White is the better pawn structure with only one potential weakness in the pawn on a3. During the game, I actually felt mildly nervous as I had overlooked 19.Rac1 Nb5 20.Rxc6! after which White is close to winning. However, during the game I noticed the nice safety moves 19...Nf7 contending for and eventually preparing to play e5. Vishy chose a much less testing continuation in the more natural 19.Ne5 after 19...Bxe5 20.dxe5 I had the nice tactical shot in 20...Qa5! after which the position is almost completely dead equal. This led to a draw shortly there afterwards. Once again, I went in there with a goal and held my own with Black.

Round 5: Nakamura-Carlsen

In the fifth round I was White against another opponent who has become a bit too familiar. Having played Magnus so many times recently, (Norway,London) I have become extremely familiar with his style. This time around, I decided to deviate early and play the exchange Ruy Lopez. I felt this was simply a practical choice as I avoided any deep analysis by Magnus or Garry. In many ways, when I play against people such as Magnus, I try to play simple chess and just outplay them instead of playing a different game called memorization.

In the game itself, my plan worked out nearly perfectly as Magnus lashed out with the dubious 10..b5 which was a novelty. After this error I certainly had some initiative although, much to his credit, Magnus was able to alleviate the pressure and simplify into an ending where he had three pawns for a piece. During the game, I felt I did not miss any clear wins, although the following position is where many people thought I had winning chances.

In this position, I chose to play 47.Ne6. Many people seemed to be of the impression that 47.h4 was winning, but upon further analysis 47...b2 48.Nf5! g5! 49.Rxf6 Ke8 50.Rb6 gxh4 51.Kxh4 Kd7 followed by b1 leads to a simplification and a draw. After the game, I was rather disappointed that I could not win but sometimes chess is simply a draw.

Stay tuned for Part II shortly! Have a great Superbowl weekend, everyone!

Cheers,

Hikaru! 2.6.10

Former world chess champion renowned for his strategic and endgame play

Vasily Smyslov, who has died aged 89, was world chess champion for a year in 1957-58 and among the game's best players for more than two decades. At his peak, Smyslov was renowned for his strategic and end- game play, and more recently he set new achievement records for a grandmaster in old age, reaching the world title semi-finals at 63 and maintaining his strength into his 70s. Yet chess was only his second career option, after he failed to become a singer with the Bolshoi Theatre.

Smyslov was born in Moscow. He learned chess at six from his father, a player of master strength who once won a game from the future world champion Alexander Alekhine. The 14-year-old Smyslov was inspired to take up the game in earnest after watching the Moscow international tournament in 1935. His progress was rapid. He won the Moscow title in 1938, placed third in the 1940 USSR championship, and, most significantly, came third again in the 1941 Soviet "absolute championship", behind only Mikhail Botvinnik and Paul Keres, who at that time were probably the two best players in the world.

Smyslov was excused military service due to poor eyesight, and used the war years to hone his game. He came second to Botvinnik in the 1944 USSR championship, yet still lacked international recognition. The US was the dominant chess power throughout the 1930s, with four successive gold medals between 1931 and 1937 in the biennial team Olympiads. So when the US and USSR met in a 10-board radio match in 1945, the Americans were favourites.

In the event, the Soviet team won 15.5-4.5, a score that included Smyslov's 2-0 victory over the four-time US champion Samuel Reshevsky. The mature style of the young Russian's wins made a big impression, especially the first game where the American was bemused by a prepared opening. After 23 moves the respective clock times read Reshevsky, one hour; Smyslov, three minutes.

Third place behind Botvinnik at Groningen 1946 confirmed Smyslov's position among the elite. That year Alekhine died, leaving a vacant title, and in 1948 a five-player match tournament decided his successor. Smyslov finished runner-up to Botvinnik. He was a decade younger than his rival, and the result established him as the new champion's heir apparent. By now he had perfected an intuitive, strategic style, which relied much more on a finely tuned sense of optimum squares for his pieces than on specific calculation of variations. His opening repertoire favoured long-term plans rather than theoretical debates, exemplified by his quiet 2 Nc3 against the fashionable Sicilian 1 e4 c5 and the several in-depth defensive systems he developed against the Ruy Lopez 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bb5. He liked the English 1 c4 as a route to simple, clear positions and to the endgames where he had no peers.

At the board Smyslov usually sat immobile, clenched hands to his cheeks. Tall and auburn-haired, he would pace the arena with a leisurely, almost stately mien. He had an individual technique, too, when moving a piece, grasping it midway down its stem rather than near the top as most players do, then placing it on its new square with a slight screwing action. The overall effect was of controlled, assured power.

In 1950 Smyslov, who had a fine baritone voice, was among several hundred singers who entered a national contest for a position at the Bolshoi, failing only at the final shortlist stage. Singing remained one of his great interests and he sometimes gave recitals during chess tournaments, often accompanied by Mark Taimanov, a fellow grandmaster.

His bid for the Bolshoi helps explain why he finished only third in the 1950 Budapest Candidates tournament, but he made up for it three years later when winning the Zurich 1953 Candidates, one of the strongest tournaments of all time. From 1953 to 1958 he was in his prime, and fully the equal of Botvinnik; yet the older man held the world title for a total 13 years, as against just one year for Smyslov. The answer lay in Botvinnik's superiority in match play, in preparation, and in using the small print of championship regulations to his advantage.

Botvinnik took an early lead in their 1954 series, exploiting weaknesses in his challenger's openings. Though Smyslov levelled, Botvinnik regained a narrow advantage and kept enough in hand to draw the match 12-12 and retain his title for another three years. Smyslov then won the 1956 Candidates in Amsterdam, and this time came better prepared for the championship. His strategic and endgame skills proved much superior and he won 12.5-9.5 with two games to spare. It was very different in the 1958 mandatory return match, which Smyslov began not fully recovered from a bout of influenza. Botvinnik unleashed the Caro-Kann 1 e4 c6 as an opening surprise, took a 3-0 lead and, though he tired near the finish, regained the title 12.5-10.5. They called Smyslov "the winter king" and his brief tenure seemed to diminish his motivation.

He was still favourite for the next Candidates in Yugoslavia in 1959, where his chief rival was the dazzling new talent Mikhail Tal. Tal specialised in the calculation of complex tactics, the complete antithesis to Smyslov's mastery of positional nuances. Before they met in the first round, Smyslov declared he would punish Tal's unsound style, but it was the younger man who triumphed. Soviet officials, who preferred a Russian to the Latvian Tal as candidate, were then scandalised when the normally staid Smyslov whose wife, Nadezhda Andreevna, had stayed at home in Moscow, started a public relationship with a Yugoslav woman grandmaster that affected his play.

His failure in Yugoslavia seemed to mark the end of Smyslov's career as a serious world-championship contender, but he continued to enjoy high-level success and the creative satisfaction of his artistic games. He won eight successive tournaments in the mid-1960s, with victories ranging from Havana to Hastings and Monte Carlo to Moscow.

Then, to everyone's surprise, he qualified as a candidate again at the age of 62 in 1983, and was paired in his quarter-final with the West German No 1 Robert Hübner. After extra time and a 7-7 scoreline, the organisers decreed that the match should be settled by the roulette wheel in the Austrian casino hosting the match. Smyslov flew back to Moscow without waiting for the denouement, but the wheel stopped at his colour, red, and he advanced. He beat Hungary's Zoltan Ribli in fine style in the semi-final before losing, despite a tough resistance, to the rising star Garry Kasparov in the final.

Smyslov continued to perform at a high level well into his 70s. Nobody of his age had ever maintained grandmaster strength, though later another durable ex-Soviet, Viktor Korchnoi, achieved similar results. In 1991 Smyslov won the inaugural World Senior (over 60) championship, and he had several impressive scores in the annual Veterans v Ladies match. By now his eyesight was deteriorating badly, so that he was virtually calculating without sight of the board.

He could still fight his corner, as when David Bronstein, who had tied for second at Zurich 1953, claimed that Soviet officials had pressured himself and other Russians to arrange results to ensure that Smyslov finished ahead of the American Reshevsky. Smyslov denied any knowledge of pre-game arrangements at Zurich, and countered that Bronstein's own success in the 1950 candidates was deliberately staged when he was a point behind the leader with two rounds left and allowed to catch up.

The title of Smyslov's 1979 autobiography V Poiskakh Harmonii (In Search of Harmony) referred both to his abortive musical career and to his belief that smooth interplay of the pieces was the key to practical success. Grandmasters respected his achievements as an icon of the golden age of Soviet chess and he was often invited as an honorary guest to tournaments.

• Vasily Vasiliyevich Smyslov, chess grandmaster, born 24 March 1921; died 26 March 2010

"Smyslov was always known for his positional style and his extraordinary endgame abilities. He was also a great combinational player, and in his games we find many spectacular tactical shots. In the opening he made important contributions to the English, Grünfeld, Ruy Lopez and Sicilian." --Chessbase website

"He is truth in chess! Smyslov plays correctly, truthfully and has a natural style. ... But I am fond of his style. I would recommend a study of Smyslov's games to children who want to know how to play chess because he plays the game how it should be played: his style is the closest to some sort of 'virtual truth' in chess. He always tried to make the strongest move in each position." --Vladimir Kramnik (photo at right from ChessNinja blog)

• Botvinnik-Smyslov (1954 WC match) - King's Indian - queen sacrifice
• Botvinnik-Smyslov (1957 WC match) - English / Slav - endgame
• Smyslov-Liberzon (1968 USSR champ) - English / Dutch - bishop pair
• Smyslov-Ribli (1983 London) - QGD / Semi-Tarrasch - builds up attack
  

Hello once again to everyone out there in the blogosphere. Before I dive right into talking about Wijk, I would like to clear up a certain rumour from the online world. I am not playing in Aeroflot, nor did I ever seriously consider it. Any suggestions to the contrary are simply not true. Now that this is out of the way, onto the tournament recap!

Round 1: Smeets-Nakamura

In the first round, I had Black against Dutch GM Jan Smeets. Like quite a few other European GMs, I have seen him at several tournaments over the past few years but not had the opportunity to play. Overall, Jan seems to be a very solid player with a pretty good general knowledge of openings. In our game, he surprised me by playing the 6.Bg5 variation against the Najdorf. As fate would have it, the tournament seemed to be a referendum on whether the Bg5 variation is good for White or not. I picked a mild sideline which surprised Jan, and he played a tame variation.

The following was the position after 14.Nd5. Oddly enough, our silicon friends seem to think 14...Nxd5 was simply better for me, but I thought White had a solid positional advantage after 15.exd5 followed by eventually putting a knight on e4. When I chose to avoid this variation, the position eventually fizzled out and it was a fairly standard draw. Overall, I felt that coming off of the tournament in Turkey this was a great start to the tournament with a solid draw as Black. Onto round 2!

Round 2: Nakamura-van Wely

In the second round I had White against another Dutch man albeit it, one who is a bit older and stronger! Shockingly Loek was playing in Wijk for a 19th! straight year. The last time we played in Amsterdam, I was White in a Najdorf, but blundered in a completely winning position and he was able to escape with a draw. This time around, we played another Najdorf although I decided to play the 6.Bg5 variation against him. Unfortunately for Loek, I was very well prepared and he walked right into my preparation.

This is the position after 15.Nd5. Unlike the game against Smeets, the knight on d5 is actually an intentional piece sacrifice. Prior to the game, I had prepared this variation with Kris and we concluded that the position might be holdable for Black, but it would be extremely unpleasant for a human to play. As it turned out, our assessment was correct since Loek went wrong almost immediately and simply got blown off the board. It was after this second round game that I realized I would at least have a chance of putting together a good showing in the tournament.

Round 3: Short-Nakamura

In the third round, I faced another familiar opponent in Nigel Short. Having faced Nigel only the month before in the London Chess Classic, I had become fairly familiar with his style. During the tournament in London, Kris and I both lamented having White against Nigel and not Black as we felt Nigel was significantly more solid with Black than White. This time around, I decided to surprise everyone by playing the Classical Sicilian. Having played it in Turkey during the World Team Championship, I felt like giving it a whirl! Nigel deviated from prep very early on by choosing to play the Boleslavskij variation. At which point the following critical position arose.

This critical position occurred after 13...Bg4. Strangely enough, this was the third straight game of mine featuring a knight on d5, and it certainly wasn't the last either! Here, Nigel went badly astray with 14.c4. This move isn't necessarily awful, but after 14...Nxd5 15.exd5 Nb8, I had absolutely no problems as well as having an easier position to play. After the game, Nigel seemed to think 14.Nxe7 Qxe7 15.c4 gave White an advantage, but subsequent analysis shows that there is no advantage at all after 15...Nd7 due to Nc5-e6-d4 ideas later on. Although Nigel probably could have maintained the equilibrium and drawn, a few minor errors in a row doomed his position and I pounced on them to win my second game in a row. More than the great start, I was pleased by my calculation and accuracy in playing the best moves. From the first three games, I very rarely deviated from the Rybka suggestions in any given position.

Round 4: Anand-Nakamura

In the fourth round, I faced my first major test as I had Black against the current World Champion, Viswanathan Anand. Many people have asked me if I felt nervous before the game. Having played against Carlsen and Kramnik in London certainly helped me as this felt like just another game. I think that once you play against anyone who is top five, you inevitably realize that it is just a name and they are still "only human." As such, I did not feel nervous at all and enjoyed the moment instead! Regardless of what happens, I can certainly tell my children in the future that I played a World Champion! That in itself, is more than enough!

The game itself started off as a Leningrad Dutch. Recently, I have started playing the Dutch frequently as it is an opening which is unbalanced and gives both sides chances. I also felt that as Vishy is not a native d4 player, something off the beaten path would yield me better chances. The opening was fairly tame, as I avoided several chances to go for serious complications. Eventually we reached the moment of truth.

In this position, the obvious trump for White is the better pawn structure with only one potential weakness in the pawn on a3. During the game, I actually felt mildly nervous as I had overlooked 19.Rac1 Nb5 20.Rxc6! after which White is close to winning. However, during the game I noticed the nice safety moves 19...Nf7 contending for and eventually preparing to play e5. Vishy chose a much less testing continuation in the more natural 19.Ne5 after 19...Bxe5 20.dxe5 I had the nice tactical shot in 20...Qa5! after which the position is almost completely dead equal. This led to a draw shortly there afterwards. Once again, I went in there with a goal and held my own with Black.

Round 5: Nakamura-Carlsen

In the fifth round I was White against another opponent who has become a bit too familiar. Having played Magnus so many times recently, (Norway,London) I have become extremely familiar with his style. This time around, I decided to deviate early and play the exchange Ruy Lopez. I felt this was simply a practical choice as I avoided any deep analysis by Magnus or Garry. In many ways, when I play against people such as Magnus, I try to play simple chess and just outplay them instead of playing a different game called memorization.

In the game itself, my plan worked out nearly perfectly as Magnus lashed out with the dubious 10..b5 which was a novelty. After this error I certainly had some initiative although, much to his credit, Magnus was able to alleviate the pressure and simplify into an ending where he had three pawns for a piece. During the game, I felt I did not miss any clear wins, although the following position is where many people thought I had winning chances.

In this position, I chose to play 47.Ne6. Many people seemed to be of the impression that 47.h4 was winning, but upon further analysis 47...b2 48.Nf5! g5! 49.Rxf6 Ke8 50.Rb6 gxh4 51.Kxh4 Kd7 followed by b1 leads to a simplification and a draw. After the game, I was rather disappointed that I could not win but sometimes chess is simply a draw.

Stay tuned for Part II shortly! Have a great Superbowl weekend, everyone!

Cheers,

Hikaru! 2.6.10

Vasily Ivanchuk is back in the lead at the Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament in Nice. The Ukrainian defeated Alexander Grischuk 1.5-0.5 today, while Magnus Carlsen lost with the same score to Vugar Gashimov.

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 7

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Round 7 report

Vasily ‘Mr Amber’ Ivanchuk once again back in the sole lead
In round 7 of the Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament, Vasily Ivanchuk once again moved into the sole lead. The Ukrainian grandmaster had luck on his side in his mini-match against Russian champion Alexander Grischuk. Thanks to this 1½-½ win Ivanchuk replaced Magnus Carlsen as leader in the overall standings. The Norwegian top-seed had an off-day. He was obviously disappointed by his ½-1½ loss against Vugar Gashimov, but he was even more worried by the play he had shown. Sergey Karjakin moved up to shared third place thanks to a 2-0 win over his former compatriot Ruslan Ponomariov.

Vladimir Kramnik won a nice game against Levon Aronian in their blindfold encounter. In a Tarrasch Defence Black got into problems when he pushed 20…d4. Better would have been 20…Qc5+ 21.Kh2 and only now 21…d4. After 21.f5 White’s attack became very dangerous. If for instance Black had played 21…Bd5 instead of 21…Bc4, White pushes 22.f6 and he is in time to mate the black king. The game got a sudden end when Black blundered with 22…Qxa2, allowing White the crushing 23.Rb2 (”I had forgotten about that one,” Aronian said) and 24.f6.
Aronian levelled the score in the rapid game, but this was a far from flawless performance from both players. As Aronian summed it up when he entered the hospitality lounge after the game: ‘First I was winning, then I was losing and then I was winning again.’ No one argued with that, not even the various engines present. The first time the tables were turned when Aronian blundered with 26.Rxe3 (after the wrong 25…Nxb2? where 25…Ree8 was necessary) and found himself in a lost position after Black’s answer, while he could have gotten a great position with 26.Qg2 Re7 27.Rxe7 Kxe7 28.Qg7+. Kramnik returned the favour with 32…Kf8, which gave away most of his advantage, whereas 32…Kf6 33.Re4 Rg8 would still have had him winning comfortably. After this missed opportunity the game seemed to be steering for a draw, but another mistake by Kramnik cost him the game. With 49…Kh7 he would have kept the draw. After 49…c3 he must have been shocked by White’s unnerving reply and one move later he had to resign.

After he had drawn the blindfold game against Boris Gelfand, Jan Smeets admitted that this was the first time in his Amber debut that he had felt comfortable ‘watching’ his position. Which didn’t mean that he hadn’t realized that the opening hadn’t entirely gone his way. What he meant to say was that he was just feeling comfortable. Without hesitation he sacrificed a pawn to get some play and, as if this was the most natural cause the game could take, he regained it relatively effortlessly some ten moves later. The ensuing endgame was level and no longer contained problems for Black that could rob him of a well-deserved draw.
The rapid game was less pleasant for the Dutchman. Between moves 15 and 20 he misplayed the position that had arisen from a popular line of the Petroff and ended up in trouble. He decided to give a pawn, but this concession did little to alleviate the pain. By a forced sequence the players ended up in a rook endgame in which Black had an extra pawn and good winning chances. That was the way Gelfand described it and he proved his point on the board.

Vugar Gashimov was confronted by a Berlin Wall in his blindfold game against Magnus Carlsen. In the endgame that duly appeared on the board within a few moves, White is supposed to be only slightly better, but Gashimov’s life was made easy by Carlsen’s 14…b6 (the white player suggested 14…Ne7 as an improvement). After 13.Ng5 and 14.c4 White had two imposing knights in the centre and Black’s position was not to be envied. Gashimov was proud of his move 18.Rac1 and felt that in general he had played a good game. He also kept a cool head when Carlsen came up with his last trick, 29…c6, and converted his advantage with a steady hand.
In the rapid game Carlsen seemed to get good chances to level the score in this mini-match, when Gashimov played too riskily in the opening. With 20.Rd1 Qa5 21.Ne4 the Norwegian could have gotten a considerable advantage, but thinking 20.Nf5 was also promising he spurned this opportunity. Carlsen had missed 24…Rfe8 and now suddenly he was in trouble. The ending should have been winning for Gashimov (one improvement Carlsen indicated was 34…Rb3 instead of 34…Rxf3), but as always it’s not over till it’s over and with tenacious play White managed to save the draw; on 58 there were only two kings left on the board. Carlsen was obviously disappointed about the chance he had missed and when he was asked whether he minded that he had drawn his first game he replied negatively but added that he did worry about his play today.

After the blindfold encounter between Alexander Grischuk and Vasily Ivanchuk had ended in a draw, the Ukrainian runner-up described the course of the game as ‘complicated’, his favourite word when for whatever reason he doesn’t want to go into too much detail. What he did want to say was that he had the feeling that he had had winning chances after 25…Rc3. He certainly got good chances after that move, but how close he came he will probably explore in his private analysis later today.
The rapid game featured another Najdorf Poisoned Pawn. Grischuk got a good game as Black, but at the point that Ivanchuk could bail out with a draw with 29.Qxd4, he spurned this opportunity and played the risky 29.Qe1. ‘I was feeling that I was in danger, but I wanted to try this’, he explained after the game. ‘Probably I was losing, but I was lucky’, he spoke frankly. If he was really lost was not that clear, but he certainly was lucky when Grischuk blundered 39…Qb7, where he could have made a draw with 39…Qf4. After White’s answer 40.Qb3+ Black was indeed lost.

Leinier Dominguez came very close to his first Amber win in his blindfold game against Peter Svidler. Unfortunately for the luckless Cuban it wasn’t to be. Having played strong and pointed chess in a classical Ruy Lopez, Dominguez reached a wonderful position. In fact, the win was there to be harvested, but at this point his play lost punch and he missed various wins, perhaps the most obvious being 39.Nxg7 Kxg7 40.Qg4+, when the defences around Black’s king are in ruins. His last inaccuracy was 42.Nd6 and two moves later he offered a draw. The Cuban tried not to be too upset about the missed chances and admitted that playing blindfold has proven more difficult than he had expected.
In the rapid game Dominguez surprised Svidler with his opening choice, but didn’t manage to fully equalize. After the game Svidler suggested various improvements for his opponent, such as 11…Qe4+ or 13…Nd5 14.Bxd5 0-0-0! Or 16…Rxf3 17.Re4 Nd4 18.Rxg4 Nxe2 19.Bxe2. But the real mistake of Dominguez was that he had missed 31.g6+ which was followed by a sequence that Svidler had foreseen and left to a winning position after 40.Rxb7. Dominguez kept fighting on, but twenty moves further on he had to resign.

The longest game of the blindfold sessions between Ruslan Ponomariov and Sergey Karjakin lasted 71 moves and 90 minutes and ended in a victory for the latter. Karjakin was reluctant to give an assessment of the opening (‘that has to be analyzed’), but pointed out that the game turned around when White played 28.Nd6, a move ‘that looks nice, but after my simple answer White’s position is unpleasant’. After 34…Bf8 Black felt very comfortable and once the white f-pawn had inevitably dropped off, Karjakin was simply a pawn up and his main concern was not to forget the position of his pawns and pieces. This he managed well (although there was a moment when he played some rook moves to find out the position of the white king that he had briefly forgotten about!) and after a long session the point was his.
The rapid game was a walkover for Karjakin, as Ponomariov put up feeble resistance. In the opening Karjakin deviated from the game Ivanchuk played against the same opponent here with 7.Nxg4 (Ivanchuk went 7.a4). Black’s first inaccuracy was 9…Bb7, as at this point he had been better advised to complete his development. White got a great game and when Black took another risky decision with 14…d5 Black was soon with his back against the wall. Karjakin was proud about his move 16.Nc3 (and in general he thought that this was his best game in this year’s Amber so far) which greatly boosted his initiative. Things very quickly went totally wrong for Black and when Ponomariov resigned on move 23 he was only three moves away from mate.

Report & photos © official website, more here

Videos

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN: Blindfold | Rapid, via TWIC

After six rounds Magnus Carlsen is in sole lead at the Amber tournament. The Norwegian scored yet another 2-0 victory, today against Boris Gelfand, while Vasily Ivanchuk drew twice with compatriot Ruslan Ponomariov. Jan Smeets scored his first victory and played 1-1 against Vladimir Kramnik.

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 6

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Round 6 report

Fourth 2-0 knock-out brings Magnus Carlsen back on top again
In Round 6 of the Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament, Magnus Carlsen regained the lead in the overall standings. In a gripping clash, the Norwegian defeated Boris Gelfand 2-0 and overtook former leader Vasily Ivanchuk from Ukraine, who had to settle for two draws against his compatriot Ruslan Ponomariov. The gap between the front-runners is widening. Third place is shared by Boris Gelfand, Alexander Grischuk en Vladimir Kramnik, two full points behind Carlsen and one and a half points behind Ivanchuk. After 12 games Carlsen has not yet drawn a single game, winning 9 and losing 3.

Ruslan Ponomariov explained that his blindfold game against Vasily Ivanchuk reminded him of their final match in the 2002 FIDE World Championship in Moscow, where stubborn defence in suspect positions contributed to his ultimate success. Once again a Ruy Lopez with an early g6 appeared on the board, one of the most popular openings in this Amber, and this time it was Ivanchuk who improved on Dominguez’s play against Ponomariov with 5.d4. Ivanchuk’s idea (combined with 7.a4) worked out fine and if you’re wondering why Black didn’t take the exchange on offer on move 10, the following line may give you an idea: 10…Bxd4 11.Qxd4 Qf6 12.e5 Qb6 13.Qf4. The critical moment came on move 15, where Ponomariov felt he should have played 15…Bxb3 16.Qxb3 Kh7 followed by Kh7. After 15…Qb8 his position was just unpleasant and Ivanchuk could start to realize all his plans at his leisure. But Ponomariov didn’t just wait to be finished off, and tried to create some counterplay by playing his bishop to f4 and bringing his queen to the kingside via d8. And it worked. Afterwards various improvements were suggested for White, such as 47.h4, which would have allowed him to put his king on h2, but as it went the game ended in a repetition of moves on move 68.
In the rapid game Ponomariov wanted to discuss a line in the Catalan, but was bit clumsy when that opportunity really appeared. Instead of playing the critical move, 13.Ne4, he mixed up moves and went 13.Bf4. And soon found himself two pawns down and wondering what his compensation consisted of. Luckily for him he found 16.Ng5, an aggressive assault that allowed him to bail out with a draw by repetition. Ponomariov wasn’t too happy with his missed chance to play the opening he had aimed for (‘I would have liked to see what Ivanchuk had prepared’) and only found some consolation in the thought that ‘maybe Carlsen will not complain about my result’.

The blindfold game between Peter Svidler and Alexander Grischuk was a wonderful achievement by the Russian champion (the current champion Grischuk we mean, not five-times former champion Svidler). At least, that’s what we thought when we saw Black’s queen sacrifice and the way he next obtained more than enough compensation. But Grischuk, although he had a contented smile on his face, wasn’t too impressed: ‘It looks impressive, but in fact it is quite easy. If you look at the way my pieces coordinate and the threats I have it is not that difficult.’ Of course not, particularly not in blindfold. According to Grischuk, White’s 14.Qh5 was a ‘stupid move’ based on a miscalculation and after this Black would also have been better without the queen sacrifice. The key move of the combination was 20…Bd3, a quiet move that highlights White’s problems with his queen. In fact, Grischuk had hoped that Svidler would resign at that point, not because it would have made the picture prettier, but for the simple reason that it would have prevented him from making any possible moves. Obviously, Grischuk was referring to his recurring time-trouble problems, but this time such worries were unwarranted as he converted his advantage without any glitches.
‘Not a very exciting game, but a correct one’, Svidler commented after the rapid game had ended in a draw. In a Grünfeld Defence Grischuk tried a new move (in this position), 9.Qa4. Black’s 14…Qa5 was a precise move, as he has to stop his opponent from steamrolling him on the kingside and White cannot really avoid the exchange. Perhaps in the following phase 15.g4 would have been more critical, as now Black was doing fine after 16…f5. And once some pieces were exchanged the draw was not far off.

Sergey Karjakin and Leineir Dominguez discussed the merits of a Be3-Najdorf with Black playing an early h5 in their blindfold game. This discussion will no doubt continue in future games, but once the principled fight between Black’s queenside ambitions and White’s kingside ambitions came to a head, the pawn on h5 was more of a liability than an asset. The game turned sour for Black when he played 29…Nxc6? Which soon had him in insurmountable problems. Instead, he might have fought on with 29…Nxg4 30.Qxg4 f5 31.Re2 fxg4 32.Rxg2.
The rapid game saw an Exchange Slav in which Karjakin tried to stir up complications. His attempts bore fruit when Dominguez erred with19.h3, allowing the strong 19…Bb5. The Cuban took the wisest decision and sacrificed the exchange, leaving Black with a slightly better position, but no tangible advantage. But the game was far from over and in mutual time-trouble Karjakin kept looking for his chances. In the end he was successful when Dominguez let himself be tricked and dropped a piece.

Levon Aronian arrived for his blindfold game against Vugar Gashimov in an impeccable white suit, white shoes, and black shirt to match the white jacket and black shirt of his opponent. After the game he admitted jokingly that this had been part of his strategy: ‘That’s why I only put it on briefly before the game. I didn’t want him to see my novelty.’ As expected Gashimov defended himself with his pet Benoni, but apparently he wasn’t very familiar with the old sideline that Aronian played. ‘And it’s a big disadvantage in rapid and blindfold if you’re not familiar with a line and your opponent is’, the Armenian explained. According to him his opponent’s 12…fxg4 was imprecise and that 12…Nf6 was theory. But his real error was 14…Bg7, where he should have played 14…Be7. ‘Later in the game I was mainly trying not to do what I was doing in previous rounds’, Aronian continued. He did so convincingly and after 38 moves Gashimov threw the towel.
In the rapid game Aronian defended with the Berlin Defence, which these days is more often called the Berlin Wall. The opening served him well, as Aronian, who lives in Berlin, was better throughout the game. In the end it was not enough when Gashimov forced a draw by a repetition of moves.

A beaming Jan Smeets walked into the hospitality lounge after had won the blindfold game against Vladimir Kramnik. Not only had he beaten the former world champion in an excellent game, he had also won his first game in his Amber debut. As in their game in Wijk aan Zee, Kramnik relied on the Pirc Defence. That game he won, but this time things went different. Smeets had chosen a sharp line, and although he admitted that he didn’t remember all the ins and outs he felt at ease. Kramnik tried to invade the white position with an avalanche of pieces, but he couldn’t avoid that his knights became unstuck. As a result White won a piece against a couple of pawns, but this compensation was not enough for Black. Smeets’ main concern was that he would end up in this traditional time-trouble and blunder something. The time-trouble he couldn’t avoid entirely, but for the rest he kept a clear head, picked up a pawn here and there and forced Kramnik’s surrender on move 41.
Kramnik hit back in the rapid game, but only after a gritty fight from both sides. The opening put Black under pressure, although Smeets didn’t worry too much. Looking for a speedy kill Kramnik sacrificed a piece with 32.Bxh6, but it was questionable if he objectively made much progress with this investment. He did when Smeets steered for an endgame with 34…Qe8, wrongly assessing the following developments. The Dutch grandmaster had assumed that his a-pawn would be a strong trump, but whereas his a-pawn didn’t move that fast, his opponent’s pawns became truly menacing.

Magnus Carlsen was pleased with the way he had played the blindfold game against Boris Gelfand. He obtained nothing from the opening, but that had not worried him. Instead he had enjoyed he had worked to create something from nothing. The ‘something’ was in the air when he finally could play 37.Ne5 and when that same knight struck on g6 one move later it was clear that White was on to something. The game was essentially decided when Carlsen played 41.g4, after which he assessed the position as ‘very bad to lost for Black’. Ten moves later he concluded the game with mate and notched up his first point after his winning streak was interrupted in yesterday’s rapid game. ‘Six more to go’, he grinned.
The rapid game also ended in a win for Carlsen, but what a fight it was. In a King’s Indian he ended up with a worse position and could only breathe again when Gelfand made a mistake with 24.Nxc5, giving Black a nice outpost for his knight on d6. The remainder of the game was a demonstration of Carlsen’s magnificent fighting spirit. Many a player would have been tempted to go for a draw when it was there for the taking, but he rather played for a win skirting the precipice. Gelfand certainly missed various ways to draw, but Carlsen’s courage prevailed when under great pressure he managed to deal the decisive blow.

Report & photos © official website, more here

Videos

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN: Blindfold | Rapid, via TWIC

After winning 2-0 one more time, today against Smeets, Carlsen joined Vasily Ivanchuk in the lead in Nice. The Ukrainian on his turn defeated Aronian 1.5-0.5, while Kramnik went down 2-0 against Gelfand.

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 4

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Round 4 report

Magnus Carlsen catches up with Vasily Ivanchuk after third 2-0 wipe-out
After four rounds of the Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament, Magnus Carlsen and Vasily Ivanchuk are tied for first in the overall standings with 6 points from 8 games. The Ukrainian grandmaster defeated last year’s winner Levon Aronian 1½-½. Magnus Carlsen continued his remarkable comeback after he lost 2-0 to Ivanchuk in Round 1. The world’s number one defeated Jan Smeets 2-0, raising his number of consecutive wins to six. Manifold Amber winner Vladimir Kramnik suffered a highly atypical 2-0 defeat at the hands of Boris Gelfand. Perhaps typical for the fighting spirit of the round was the fact that 5 out the 6 rapid games were won by black.
Tomorrow, March 17, is a rest day. Play is resumed Thursday March 18 with Round 5.

Magnus Carlsen was understandably ambitious to continue his winning streak in his blindfold game against bottom-seed Jan Smeets. Despite a modest opening set-up (that started with 1.g3) he indeed got an edge, but there was no reason for Black to despair yet. Afterwards Carlsen commented that had Smeets just stayed put, instead of becoming active with 31…Rc3, he didn’t see how he could have made progress. Smeets’ action was based on a miscalculation. After 32…Rxc4 the only reply he had counted on was 33.Rd6+, but instead Carlsen dealt a killer blow with 33.Bg5. Three moves later Black resigned, raising Carlsen’s winning streak to five.
In the rapid game the Norwegian also scored his sixth consecutive win, but this time he really had to squeeze water from a stone. After the opening he was slightly worse, but he kept looking for his chances, collecting one minimal asset after the other. On move 33 there was a minuscule victory when he exchanged his knight for a bishop and with 38…g5 he made a brave winning attempt, as he let the white c-pawn on the board. Objectively speaking all his tries would have been in vain had Smeets kept his cool, but low and time and feeling the pressure the Dutchman finally succumbed. As late as move 54 he still could have made a draw with 54.Nh2 as this saves an essential tempo compared to the move he played, 54.Nf2.

The blindfold game between tournament leader Vasily Ivanchuk and defending champion Levon Aronian suddenly ended when the board was still full of pawns and pieces when on move 25 White offered a draw. In a slightly unorthodox Ruy Lopez it seemed that Black had obtained a good game, but Aronian wasn’t so sure. When he was asked why he had accepted the draw, he simply replied: ‘Because I am worse.’ And he elaborated that his pieces might look nice and active, but that White can slowly continue h3, Rd1 and c4, and on top of that he didn’t like the g5-h4 pawn-structure on the kingside either.
In the rapid game Ivanchuk maintained the (shared) lead with a fine win with the black pieces. A speculative piece sacrifice by Aronian (19.Nxe6) for three pawns and the initiative failed to impress and although the game remained complicated Ivanchuk hauled in the point with determined and precise play.

In the blindfold game between Peter Svidler and Sergey Karjakin a tense Sicilian with chances for both sides saw an untimely and unfortunate end when on move 42, White put a knight en prise. Following his resignation yesterday against Carlsen when there was still everything to play for, this was a new blow for the Russian grandmaster.
Svidler found some consolation in a well-played rapid game that finally brought him a win again. In his beloved Grünfeld Defence he believed that his 12…Rd8 was a safe road to equality, but it required accurate play. Instead of 17…g5 he could also have played 17…c4, but he felt more attracted to the push of the g-pawn. Karjakin felt optimistic about his chances when he won a pawn, but in fact this materialistic decision spelled disaster, as very soon the black pieces assembled for a strong attack. One nice line that didn’t appear on the board was 24.Bf2 (in the game 24.Bd7 was played) 24…Nxf3 25.Bg3 Qxg3! 26.hxg3 Rh6+ 27.Kg2 Rh2 mate. The end of the game was less drastic, but nevertheless there was no escaping for White.

Boris Gelfand didn’t hide his contentment after he had won his blindfold game against Vladimir Kramnik. ‘It’s always nice to win against such a great player’, he almost humbly commented. The Israeli grandmaster more or less blamed Black’s defeat on the opening system he had chosen, the Bg4-system that is mainly popular among some Azeri players. One of the ideas of the black approach is the exchange sacrifice on e3 that also happened in this game. Gelfand wasn’t convinced of its correctness and suggested Black should have looked for something else at that point. He pointed out the sad offside position of the black knight on c7 in particular and quoted Tarrasch who said that if one piece doesn’t take part in the play there’s something wrong with the entire position. Gelfand was satisfied with his plan Bd1 and Ne2 which allowed him to cement his advantage and slowly but surely win the game.
In the rapid game Kramnik was perhaps too cautious in his approach, certainly if he had clear plans to level the score, and this seriously backfired. Playing actively Gelfand freely advanced his pawns and directed his pieces to active positions. Objectively speaking, White was not yet in trouble, but Black’s position was much more pleasant and easy to play. Gradually the black pressure built up and following a blunder, 31.Rc2, Kramnik soon had to throw in the towel. An impressive achievement by Gelfand.

Ruslan Ponomariov seemed determined to blow up Vugar Gashimov’s Benoni Defence in their blindfold game and judging by the comments of the kibitzing grandmasters in the hospitality lounge he was soon on his way to realize that objective. But then the Benoni is a resilient customer and although his position looked highly suspect, Gashimov seemed to have no wish to surrender without a fight. He stayed afoot in the complications and he could have even taken over the initiative if instead of 31…Rh8+ he had gone 31…Rxf4 32.Rxf4 Qh6+. But soon he was in the driver’s seat anyway when White first missed the winning continuations 32.Kg2 and next 32.Kg1. Instead the players ended up in a rook ending with one pawn (white) against two. This they played on for many more moves until on move 68 the computer indicated a threefold repetition and the game was drawn.
The rapid game was a protracted battle in which the balance was not really disturbed for a long time. Nevertheless, Gashimov managed to upset the equilibrium in the endgame and score his second win in the tournament.

Alexander Grischuk was clearly satisfied after his blindfold win against Leinier Dominguez and he had every reason to. In a Sicilian Najdorf that his opponent had clearly prepared (Dominguez blitzed out his first 18 moves), the Russian champion was in a creative mood and managed to create attacking chances with pointed play. Probably the key moment of the game was the point where White played 23.Qh5, a move that Black had missed and that netted White the important f7 pawn. Grischuk kept playing strong and incisive chess and after 63 moves he had earned a well-deserved point.
The rapid game also saw a Najdorf, but (not surprisingly) a different line. Dominguez’ troubles started when early on in the opening he played his knight to d5 and shortly afterwards had to withdraw it to c3 again, losing two precious tempi. Grischuk obtained a comfortable game and it was impressive to see how he gradually exploited his advantage to score his second win of the day.

Report & photos © official website, more here

Videos

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN: Blindfold | Rapid, via TWIC

After beating Sergey Karjakin 1.5-0.5, Vasily Ivanchuk leads the combined standings of the Amber tournament with a score of 4.5/6. Magnus Carlsen again won 2-0, this time against Peter Svidler, who resigned in a probably drawn position in the blindfold game.

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 3

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Round 3 report

Vasily Ivanchuk in sole lead
Magnus Carlsen back in business with two more wins
After three rounds of the Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament, Vasily Ivanchuk is in the sole lead in the overall standings with 4½ points from 6 games. The Ukrainian grandmaster, the only GM to play in all 19 Amber tournaments, defeated Sergey Karjakin 1½-½. Defending champion Levon Aronian scored his first full points at the cost of Jan Smeets. Magnus Carlsen also won 2-0, the victim being Peter Svidler. Despite his dramatic start, the Norwegian is now only half a point behind the leading Ivanchuk. And he optimistically faces the future: ‘I am hoping for two more tomorrow.’

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.
The rapid game was anything but boring. Playing adventurously Gelfand sacrificed two pawns to develop an attack against the black king and was awarded for his courage with a winning position. But just when everyone expected Grischuk to resign soon, Gelfand faltered and failed to deal the final blow. With 32.Bh7+ he let Black back into the game, where he could have decided the issue with 32.axb5 cxb5 33.Nd5 exd6 34.Bxd5+. In raging time-trouble for both, Gelfand again got a winning position, and might just as well have lost if Black had found 42…Kh6 instead of 42…Kg6, but in the end it was a draw and that was a result that definitely felt deeply unsatisfactory for Gelfand.

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 presented Ponomariov with a problem that every grandmaster faces from time to time: he had to play against an opening variation that he also has played himself. A tense struggle developed in which both sides were fighting for their chances, and although those of White looked slightly more promising in the middlegame, the game ended in a draw when most pieces and pawns had left the board on move 47.

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.
In the rapid game Kramnik emphatically wanted to be at the wheel from the word go. With gritty play he put his opponent under pressure and obtained a sizable advantage. But Gashimov had no wish to knuckle under and fought back with determination and his 37…Bg5 came as a rude awaking for Kramnik. Now suddenly the win was far off, objectively speaking no longer there, and a messy phase followed in which White kept looking for a win. And found it, because Gashimov didn’t grab his chances. The final mistake came on move 51, when the Azeri grandmaster played the right idea in the wrong order. Had he gone 51…Qf1+ 52.Kh2 Ne1, White would have had to resign himself to a draw. When he played 51…Ne1 immediately, Kramnik had 52.Qb5 and now 52…Nf3 doesn’t work because of 53.Qf8 mate.

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.
At that point the players had already left for their rooms, Carlsen happily laughing off the fact that he had prepared for the wrong colour: ‘In any case it seems to be clear that in the blindfold I do better when I play the black pieces.’ Yes, but this time he needed a helping hand from his opponent. In his room he obviously also found 26.Nd7, but to his mind Black could nevertheless have kept on playing for a win with 26…Nh3+ 27.Kg2 Qc6+ 28.Bd5 Qxd7 29.Rxd4 e6.
The rapid game saw a rare sideline of the Qb3 Grünfeld, which, according to Carlsen, both players were not too familiar with. He himself seemed to suffer the least from this relative ignorance as he obtained a pleasant position. ‘And then it just got better and better’, he summed up the game. One moment he pointed out to illustrate the strength of his position was the moment when he played 22.Nd3, planning g5, pushing away the knight on d5 with e4, and then playing Nf4 threatening Nxg6 mate. To prevent such plans Svidler played 22…g5 himself, but his troubles remained and after 34 moves he had had enough and resigned.

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.
In the blindfold game Ivanchuk got promising play and tried various ways to improve the position of his pieces. But Karjakin defended tenaciously and when his opponent failed to make any headway a draw was the result after 44 moves.

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.
The rapid game was a tumultuous affair that started out with an opening that was popular at the start of the 20th century (the rather unusual 4…Nc6 followed by 5.e4). Aronian was pleased with his position but commented afterwards that he should have played 13.Qa4+ instead of 13.Bxf4, as he had underestimated 15…Qd7. Further on he had planned the imaginative 19.Kf1 until he saw 19…0-0 20.Rd6 Bc4!. Black’s troubles started with 24…Qh1, where he could have secured a level position with 24…Qxf2+ 25.Kf2 Ne4+ 26.Kg2 Nxd6 27.Bxa7. His final mistake was 25…Qh5, when he should have gone 25…Qxh6 26.Nd5 Qh4. Now his king was too vulnerable and as Smeets was also in time-trouble it didn’t come as a surprise that Aronian quickly hauled in the point.

Report & photos © official website, more here

Videos

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN: Blindfold | Rapid, via TWIC

Magnus Carlsen today recovered completely from his bad start in Nice. The Norwegian defeated Levon Aronian, the winner in 2008 and 2009, in both the blindfold and the rapid game. Ukrainians Ivanchuk and Ponomariov lead the combined standings after two rounds.

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 2

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Round 2 report

Carlsen bounces back with 2-0 win over defending champion Aronian
After two rounds of the Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament, Vasily Ivanchuk and Ruslan Ponomariov are in the lead in the overall standings with 3 points from 4 games, followed at half a point’s distance by Vladimir Kramnik and Peter Svidler. Top-seed Magnus Carlsen recovered from his poor start with a 2-0 win over defending Amber champion Levon Aronian. The Norwegian admitted that he had been upset about his 2-0 loss on the first day (particularly the rapid game, where he believed he was in no danger of losing), but said that he certainly had not despaired: ‘With twenty rounds to go there is always time to recover.’ The first two of those twenty rounds were certainly encouraging for him.

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.
Aronian’s worries were compounded when he also lost the rapid game. And perhaps this loss hurt even more as it was completely unnecessary. From a Four Knights’ Defence the players ended up in a totally drawish rook endgame. Probably the main factor that kept the game going was that neither of the players were willing to offer a draw. And as they plodded on Aronian got himself into trouble. A first moment where he was inaccurate was when he played 42…Ra2, when he could have thwarted all White’s further tries with 42…g5. He further pleased Carlsen with 50…h5 when he should have played 50…Kh7. Now his position became very unpleasant, and when he missed a last chance to stir up complications with 59…d5 he was inexorably counted out.

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.
The blindfold game was another eventful affair and again the surprising outcome was a draw. In a Ruy Lopez Smeets lost his c-pawn after a heavy manoeuvring phase. Things looked bleak, but it wasn’t too easy for White to make further progress and when Karjakin made the move Smeets had been waiting and hoping for (58.h4), the vulnerability of his king suddenly became a source of sorrow. In fact, White would have been totally lost had Smeets played 59…Qg1. But being short of time (just like Karjakin) he failed to see this opportunity and the game ended in a repetition of moves. Ironically, Smeets could still play Qg1 in the final position, but he didn’t complain that the threefold repetition had ‘only’ brought him a draw.

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.
In the blindfold game Svidler felt he had missed a good chance when he played 13.Qd2 instead of 13.Qc1. ‘The idea is essentially the same, but it would have saved me a tempo in almost any variation’, as he explained afterwards. He even got into slight problems when Black played 22…Qe7, effectively stopping Ng5, the move White had hoped to make. In the final phase of the game the Russian had to be careful not to lose any material, but when he managed this task the game was drawn.

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 started slowly. White got a slight edge but nothing for Black to get worried about. The game turned around when Gelfand opened the position and Gashimov snatched a pawn, that his opponent called ‘poisoned’. Soon White was totally lost, but the game was far from over yet. Gelfand spoiled his advantage and in the end he had to win an opposite-coloured bishop ending in a study-like manner (although the Israeli grandmaster was the first to say that he was not sure if this win was waterproof). Gelfand was certainly pleased with his two wins, but he didn’t forget how he obtained them: ‘Two points with bad play’.

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.
In the blindfold game Kramnik played the Pirc Defence, the opening with which he surprised (and beat) Smeets in the recent Corus tournament. Again it looked as if this rather offbeat opening would give him easy and pleasant play, particularly after he bagged a point. But White had compensation for his material deficit and although Kramnik remained better for the rest of the game, Dominguez hung in tenaciously and was rewarded with a draw after 88 moves.

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.
At the end of the rapid game Ponomariov walked into the hospitality lounge and wondered what people had thought of his rapid game. He himself wasn’t too happy as he had hoped to play something active, but somehow his Grünfeld ended up in a static position in which he had to suffer for a draw. When on move 32 the queens left the board, Grischuk offered that draw and Ponomariov didn’t have to think long before he accepted.

Report & photos © official website, more here

Videos

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN: Blindfold | Rapid, via TWIC

“The 40-year old Ukrainian has a reputation of being an unpredictable genius, capable of producing absolutely brlliant games, as well as amateur-like losses from time to time,” Magnus Carlsen wrote on his blog yesterday. Today, at the Amber tournament in Nice, he met with a Chuky in excellent shape, and lost 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 1

Game viewer by ChessTempo

Round 1 report

First day sensation: top-seed Carlsen loses 2-0 to ‘Mr Amber’
Last night the opening ceremony of the 19th Amber Blindfold and Rapid Tournament took place at the Chateau de Cremat, a stylish wine chateau perched on a hill overlooking Nice at a half and hour’s drive from the Palais de la Mediterranée, the five-star luxury hotel on the Promenade des Anglais where the grandmasters are staying and playing. The evening started with a degustation of various wines of the house and then the guests of the Van Oosterom family and the players sat down for a delicious dinner. In the opening speech there was special attention for the totally unique place that the Amber tournament occupies in chess history. There have been chess benefactors who sponsored one tournament, two or even three. But no one ever came even close to the astounding 19th edition that the Amber tournament reaches this year.

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!’
Ponomariov completed his ‘revenge’ (to avoid any misunderstanding, he was the first to point out that, of course, these two games cannot be compared to the World Cup final) in the rapid game. Spoiling for a fight he came up with an interesting plan in the Grünfeld, sacrificing an exchange for promising play. He indeed got wonderful compensation when Gelfand played 14.f3? where he should have tried 14.Qe3. Suddenly it was a delight to sit behind the black pieces and Ponomariov fully enjoyed the next phase. White still managed to get into an ending with opposite-coloured bishops, but the two extra black pawns quickly carried the day.

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.
Kramnik struck back in the rapid game. After a strongly played opening he obtained a clear advantage and looking back he concluded that Black’s position was difficult after 34.Rd4. But Kramnik praised his opponent for his inventive defence in the next phase and expressed his doubts whether the position was really winning for White (‘That has to be checked with the computer’). However, Grischuk was once again low on time and after 40…Nc3 (he should have played 40…Nb6) Black certainly was lost. The rest wasn’t difficult anymore and Kramnik wrapped up fairly effortlessly.

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.’
The rapid game was a variation of the Italian Game ‘in which many games have been played’, as the database experts call it these days. The key question was if the knight that Gashimov managed to post on e7, was an asset or a weakness. Frantically he calculated variations, considering sacrifices here and there, but there was nothing that worked. In the meantime, Dominguez just stayed put and maintained his position. After some further manoeuvring it was clear that this balance was not going to be upset and a draw was agreed.

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.
In the rapid game Carlsen tried to fight back with the Poisoned Pawn of the Najdorf Defence. Afterwards Ivanchuk felt that he again had had sufficient compensation for the sacrificed pawn, but was reluctant to give a concrete assessment of the game as it had been so ‘very complicated’. One move he criticized was 25…Kf7, which allowed him to increase the pressure. They ended up in a rook endgame of three pawns versus two, which Black failed to defend, leading to a sensational 2-0 defeat of the top-seed.

‘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.
The rapid game ended in a draw. In a classical Ruy Lopez Black got good play and when he started piling up on White’s a pawn, Smeets decided that instead of defending a pawn that will drop off anyway at some point, he better hand it over immediately for some activity. This turned out to be an excellent exchange and at a certain point his compensation even seemed to turn into more. But his advantage got never concrete and both players could live with the draw that materialized.

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.
In the rapid game Levon Aronian showed a different face and put his opponent under pressure right from the opening. Perhaps this permanent pressure also explained the mistake Karjakin made at the end of the game. Instead of hanging on in a dubious ending he blundered and even got mated.

Report & photos © official website, more here

Videos

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGN: Blindfold | Rapid, via TWIC

• Beginner's Repertoire at Chessgames.com
  The link presents a game collection from Chessgames.com with great classic games showing you how to crush people with the Moeller and other Giuoco lines.  It's essentially a complete repertoire in games -- just click your way through them and you get the basic theoretical ideas and tactics.
• "Don't Shoot the Piano Player!" by Leviathan at Chessgames.com
  Another great games collection that serves as an excellent introduction to Giuoco Piano themes and ideas.
• Exeter Chess Club's The Italian Game for Beginners by Dr. Dave (e-book in PDF)
  Tricks, traps and tactical ideas in the Italian lines, including the Evans, Moeller Attack, and others.  This little e-book makes a great beginner's introduction to Giuoco Piano themes.
• Swansong of the Giuoco Piano, Part 1 (Kibitzer #64 at ChessCafe) by Tim Harding
• The Giuoco Piano, Part 2: The Case for the Defence (Kibitzer #65 at ChessCafe) by Tim Harding
• The Giuoco Piano on Trial, Part 3: The Summing Up (Kibitzer #69 at ChessCafe) by Tim Harding
• The Giuoco Piano on Trial: White Wins the Case (Kibitzer #70 at ChessCafe) by Tim Harding
• The Giuoco Piano Revisited (Kibitzer #118 at ChessCafe) by Tim Harding
  This five part series of articles on the Giuoco Piano lines with c3 and d4 for White -- mostly focused on the Moeller Attack and Rossolimo's Bd2 line with only some discussion of others -- gives a great overview to the Giuoco Piano theory and is remarkably pro-White in the final analysis.  In the last article, Harding returns to the Giuoco by way of reviewing Pinski's book, focusing on the critical lines vs the Moeller Attack and the Rossolimo Variation.

• The Lolli Attack by Michael Goeller 
• The Lolli Attack at Chess Teaching and Lessons 
• Back to Basics (Opening Lanes #121 at ChessCafe, January 2009) by Gary Lane
  Covers the Lolli and Fried Liver attacks.
• Giuoco Piano, Two Knights, Fried Liver (C57) by Richard Westbrook (Farragut Chess Club 2006) -- see also Paul Morphy Fried Liver Attack.
  A useful article on how to win the Fried Liver Attack.
• Fried Liver Attack, Pratt-Wolford 1976 by John Pratt
  A useful introduction to the Fried Liver for beginners.
• The Fegatello Attack (Unorthodox Openings Newsletter #2) by Paul Valle
  Available in the archive or download the issue of UON.  Offers some deep analysis showing how Black might survive the traditional Fried Liver with 6.Nxf7.
• The Fried Liver Attack, Part One by Boris Alterman (June 1, 2008)
• The Fried Liver Attack, Part Two by Boris Alterman (June 6, 2008)
• The Fried Liver Attack, Part Three by Boris Alterman (June 13, 2008)
• The Fried Liver Attack, Part Four by Boris Alterman (June 16, 2008)
• The Fried Liver Attack, Part Five by Boris Alterman (June 19, 2008)
• The Fried Liver Attack, Part Six by Boris Alterman (June 29, 2008)
  A useful presentation for amateur players focused mostly on the 6.Nxf7 lines, culminating in the annotated game Morphy - NN, New Orleans simul 1858 which features the Lolli Attack.

• The Fritz and Ulvestad Variations by Steven Craig Miller for the Renaissance Knights Club
  A very useful quick-start guide on these critical lines.
• Open Games Revisited: The Two Knights (November 2005, Kibitzer #114) by Tim Harding
  Covers both the Fritz/Ulvestadt and main lines after Ng5.
  
• Charbonneau - Schneider, USCL 2009 without notes -- I hope to find some material on the web analyzing this game.
• Death of the Main-Line Ulvestad by Mark Ginsburg
  A very pro-White analysis refuting the Ulvestad.  See also his comments on Zierk - Friedel, embedded.
• Vallejo-Pons vs Naiditsch, European Teams 2007
• New Investigations in the Two Knights Defense (September 2008, Kibitzer #148) by Tim Harding
• Friedel's Fritz-Ulvestad Wins Again by Michael Goeller 
• GM Josh Friedel Plays the Ulvestad by Michael Goeller
• Two Knights Defense, Fritz-Ulvestad Variation by Michael Goeller
• Two Knights, Ulvestad by Katar at Chessvideos  
• Two Knights Fritz Notes by Pete Tamburro (forum only requires free registration to access).

Naiditsch, Vallejo, Jobava, Pelletier, Timofeev, Martinovic, Skoberne, Krasenkow, Inarkiev, Nisipeanu, Efimenko, Maiorov and Nepomniachtchi are the names of the thirteen players who are still on 100% in Rijeka. Three rounds at the European Individual Championship have been played.

The 11th European Individual Men and Women’s Chess Championship is held from 5th to 19th of March 2010 in Rijeka, in new Zamet Centre sports hall. The event is organized by chess club “Rijeka”, in agreement with the Croatian Chess Federation under the auspices of the City of Rijeka and the European Chess Union. It is open to all players representing the chess federations which comprise the European Chess Union (FIDE zones 1.1 to 1.9) regardless of their title or rating. There is also no limit of participants per federation.

The championship is based on Swiss system in accordance with the ECU Tournament Rules and FIDE Rules of Chess. The rate of play is 90 minutes for 40 moves plus 30 minutes for the rest of the game with an increment of 30 seconds per move, starting from move one. As always, the European Championship is a qualification event for the next World Cup. According to FIDE regulations and the decision of the ECU Board, 22 players will qualify.

Rounds 1-3

Top seed Zoltan Almasi started with a draw with Black against Italian GM Lexy Ortega. In this first round, played on Saturday, Russian top GMs Alexander Motylev and Evgeny Tomashevsky, the reigning European Champion, also started with draws. The biggest upsets were IM Artem Smirnov beating GM Evgeniy Najer, IM Pavel Potapov beating Viktor Laznicka, FM Burak Firat beating GM Konstantin Sakaev and FM Danny Raznikov beating GM Zaven Andriasian. On one of the lowest boards, Dutch GM Friso Nijboer was held to a draw by Denis Kadric (2171).

The second round saw two draws on the top boards, in Stefansson-Bacrot and Movsesian-Ragger. Moldav top GM Viktor Bologan lost to Bulgarian GM Valentin Iotov and GM Avetik Grigoryan defeated GM Kiril Georgiev. Ivan Cheparinov, long-time team member of Veselin Topalov, lost to Spanish GM Josep Manuel Lopez Martinez, but another Bulgarian of the same generation did better: IM Momchil Nikolov defeated GM Boris Savchenko. FM Hamitevici Vladimir managed to beat GM Mateusz Bartel in this round.

Round 3 was played on International Women’s Day, and all the women playing in the tournament received a rose “as a small sign of appreciation to all women players and all the ladies participating in the organization of this big sporting event”.

Dutch ladies Lisa Schut, Anne Haast and Arlette van Weersel, with roses at the chess boards

In the women’s section there are four leaders with a perfect score after three rounds: Tatiana Kosintseva (RUS), who is the only survivor from the ten best rated players, Monica Socko (POL), Ketevan Arakhamia-Grant (SCO) and Irina Chelushkina (SRB).

Back to the men. After three rounds there are still 13 players with a 100% score. Among them are the two young international masters Sasa Martinovic (CRO) and Jure Skoberne (SLO) who in round 3 defeated GMs Vorobiov and Howell respectively. David Navara, these days boasting a 2708 rating, lost to Yannick Pelletier yesterday. Cheparinov went down again, this time against IM Artem Smirnov. IM Pavel Povatov and FM Burak Firat had more successes: the former defeated GM Tomi Nyback, the latter beat GM Gregorz Gajewski.

Today’s round will see some interesting encounters: Vallejo Pons-Timofeev, Krasenkow-Jobava, Naiditsch-Efimenko, Pelletier-Inarkiev, Skoberne-Nisipeanu, Nepomniashtchi-Maiorov and Adams-Martinovic. In the women’s section there are two clashes at the top: Arakhamia-T.Kosintseva and Socko-Chelushkina.

A nice curiosity about the European Individual Men and Women’s Chess Championship in Rijeka

For the first time, there will be a ‘priest’ to represent – unofficially – the State of Vaticano. Unofficially because Vaticano is not (yet) affiliated to FIDE.

The name of the priest who will partecipate to the European Championship is Don Valerio Piro, from Neapolis; he got the formal authorization from Cardinal Sepe (note that Cardinal is more than Bishop; the Cardinal reports directly to the Pope).

Don Valerio is candidate-master for the Italian Chess Federation. Officially he is registered as Italy, but he will play with the flag of Vaticano. This is the first partecipation of a representative of the little State that is not afffiliated to FIDE. But only for the moment, as there are many priest that are good chessplayer.

Historically, the first (important) was Ruy Lopez – the inventor of the famous opening. The last one is William Lombardy, assistant of Bobby Fischer.

There is the idea to organize a championship for ‘ecclesiastics’ (priests, friars, monks, nuns), then there will be the possibility to create a Chess Federation of the state of Vaticano. So may be that it will be possible to see a team fom Vaticano also in the Olympiads.

The news had a good interest in the Italian newspapers and press agency. Please find enclosed the links (sorry, but the articles are in Italian!). Please note that the most important ‘catholic’ newspaper, Avvenire, dedicated a complete page to the news.

• http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/regioni/campania/2010/02/28/visualizza_new.html_1709041681.html
• http://napoli.repubblica.it/dettaglio/scacchi-parroco-di-boscotrecase-primo-sacerdote-agli-europei/1875352
• http://www.ilvesuvio.it/index.php?page=0&news=8711
• http://www.adnkronos.com/IGN/Regioni/Campania/Prete-ai-Campionati-europei-di-scacchi-Al-mio-rientro-lezioni-in-parrocchia_70956501.html
• http://www.libero-news.it/regioneespanso.jsp?id=360194

Thanks and best regards!
Adolivio Capece

Selection of games rounds 1-3

Game viewer by ChessTempo

The venue is the Zamet Centre (16,830 m2), which hosts various facilities: a sports hall with max 2,380 seats, local community offices, a library, 13 retail and service spaces and a garage with 250 parking spaces.

These days the sports hall is occupied with tables, seats and chess sets...

...and hundreds of chess players

Croatian chess fans watching the games from the side

Vallejo Pons, from Linares to Rijeka, with Michael Adams next to him

Local hero GM Marin Bosiocic (r.), here against GM Ernesto Inarkiev, has many fans

Top seed GM Antoaneta Stefanova (l.), here against WGM Sopiko Guramishvili

Second seeded is IM Nadezhda Kosintseva, but another favourite...

...is her sister Tatiana, two times European Champion already

Photos courtesy of the official website, more here

Links

• Official website
• All details and statistics
• Games in PGN: Men | Women via TWIC

In what was probably the strongest Bundesliga match ever, OSC Baden-Baden Saturday lost for the first time in more than three years, against their biggest rival Werder Bremen. The two teams are leading the standings, together with SG Solingen, with 20 points out of 11 matches. Games, photos and a video.

In the 10th round of the Schachbundesliga, Werder Bremen won 5-3 against Baden-Baden. It was the first loss in more than three years for the German champion. The match took place last Saturday at the Kongresshaus of the Stadthalle in Heidelberg, and match winners were Alexander Areshchenko and Michael Roiz who defeated Michael Adams and Arkadij Naiditsch respectively. All other matches ended in a draw.

ICC Chess.FM’s Macauley Peterson was in Heidelberg too this weekend and made the following video on the victory for the ‘Green Shirts’.

On Sunday Baden-Baden recovered and easily defeated Hamburger SK with 1.5-6.5. On board 1 Anand beat Kempinski with a nice combination. Shirov, Movsesian, Naiditsch and Heine Nielsen also scored full points. Werder Bremen did even better by crushing host club Heidelberg-Handschuhsheim 7.5-0.5. Winning 2.5-5.5 against SK Turm Emsdetten, SG Solingen managed to reach a shared first place together with Baden-Baden and Werder Bremen.

Selection of games played last weekend

Game viewer by ChessTempo

The venue, with Baden-Baden against Werder 'Green Shirts' Bremen

The World Champion, scoring 1.5/2 this weekend...

...including an easy draw with Black against Vugar Gashimov using fine, Archangelsk Ruy Lopez preparation

Peter Svidler, another Baden-Baden top gun...

...but it was Bremen's Michael Roiz, together with...

...Alexander Areshchenko who decided the important match

Photos by Christian Bossert & Georgios Souleidis

Links

• Official website
• Games in PGNvia TWIC