chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

TOURNAMENT STANDINGS
Pivdenny Bank Chess Cup Tournament

Vassily Ivanchuk7/9(+6 -1 =2)[view games]
Alexander Grischuk6.5/9(+5 -1 =3)[view games]
Teimour Radjabov5.5/9(+4 -2 =3)[view games]
Alexey Shirov5.5/9(+4 -2 =3)[view games]
Boris Gelfand5/9(+4 -3 =2)[view games]
Yuri Drozdovskij4/9(+1 -2 =6)[view games]
Etienne Bacrot3.5/9(+1 -3 =5)[view games]
Viktor Korchnoi3/9(+1 -4 =4)[view games]
Vladimir Borisovich Tukmakov2.5/9(+2 -6 =1)[view games]
Ilya Smirin2.5/9(+1 -5 =3)[view games]

 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 45  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves Year Event/LocaleOpening
1. Shirov vs Korchnoi  1-047 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupE11 Bogo-Indian Defense
2. Shirov vs Radjabov 0-151 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupC63 Ruy Lopez, Schliemann Defense
3. Grischuk vs Bacrot 1-051 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD15 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
4. Y Drozdovskij vs Korchnoi  ½-½56 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD73 Neo-Grunfeld, 5.Nf3
5. V Tukmakov vs Smirin 1-041 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupE62 King's Indian, Fianchetto
6. Gelfand vs Ivanchuk 0-149 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD20 Queen's Gambit Accepted
7. Smirin vs Shirov 0-159 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupC78 Ruy Lopez
8. Korchnoi vs V Tukmakov  ½-½57 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD47 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
9. Bacrot vs Y Drozdovskij  1-056 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD11 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
10. Y Drozdovskij vs Ivanchuk  ½-½31 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD20 Queen's Gambit Accepted
11. V Tukmakov vs Bacrot 1-038 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
12. Radjabov vs Gelfand  0-130 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupE15 Queen's Indian
13. Ivanchuk vs Grischuk 0-136 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupB86 Sicilian, Fischer-Sozin Attack
14. Grischuk vs Gelfand 1-041 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD43 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
15. Smirin vs Radjabov 0-131 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupB30 Sicilian
16. Y Drozdovskij vs Shirov  ½-½105 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupE63 King's Indian, Fianchetto, Panno Variation
17. Radjabov vs Bacrot  ½-½55 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupC45 Scotch Game
18. Smirin vs Gelfand  ½-½42 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupB93 Sicilian, Najdorf, 6.f4
19. Korchnoi vs Ivanchuk 0-122 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD37 Queen's Gambit Declined
20. V Tukmakov vs Y Drozdovskij  0-130 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupD16 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
21. Shirov vs Grischuk 0-151 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupE15 Queen's Indian
22. Ivanchuk vs Bacrot 1-047 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupC88 Ruy Lopez
23. Grischuk vs Smirin  0-128 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupC99 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Chigorin, 12...cd
24. Gelfand vs Korchnoi  1-055 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupE11 Bogo-Indian Defense
25. Radjabov vs Ivanchuk 0-147 2007 Pivdenny Bank Chess CupA61 Benoni
 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 45  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  
 

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jul-09-07  notyetagm: Game Of The Tournament: Gelfand vs Shirov, 2007
Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  chessmoron: <The 2005 FIDE World Cup was basically a lottery, with one loss eliminating you for all intents and purposes.> Not exactly. There's 2 classical games and Chucky drew 1 and lost one. If he drew the classical match, there's 2 rapid games. And if that drew, blitz. And drew again, Armageddon.
Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  acirce: Will people stop calling chess events "lotteries" when they are based on actual play? It's plain silly.

If you lost one of the long games, you could still reach tiebreaks by winning the other. And if you didn't, it's your own fault, not "bad luck".

Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  SwitchingQuylthulg: There is such a thing as a player's probability to win, which immediately turns it into mathematics, not chess. In a 2-game knockout format it's not necessarily the best player who wins; in fact if it is, it can be considered a big surprise. People like a format where there's a good chance the best player actually wins.
Jul-09-07  drawocoward: <here is such a thing as a player's probability to win, which immediately turns it into mathematic> Actually it turns it more into statistics, which is kind of a big difference.
Jul-09-07  NimzoKing: <chessmoron: <The 2005 FIDE World Cup was basically a lottery, with one loss eliminating you for all intents and purposes.> Not exactly. There's 2 classical games and Chucky drew 1 and lost one. If he drew the classical match, there's 2 rapid games. And if that drew, blitz. And drew again, Armageddon.>

Whats armageddon in chess

Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: <drawcoward> Statistics is a part of mathematics.And, actually, the probability that the stronger player wins a 2-game-match, is quite big. With 100 Elo-points difference, the chances in one single game are 64:36 in favour of the stronger player (i.e., the probability that the weaker player wins or draws, is 36%). In a two games match, the weaker player must at least draw both games to go into tiebreaks. The probability for it is 0,36*0,36=0,1296. I.e., the weaker player reaches tiebreakes or wins in classical only with 13% chance. I wouldn't call it too high.
Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  acirce: <SwitchingQuylthulg> Was that a response to me or just a general reflection? I agree with everything apart from <..turns it into mathematics, not chess.> Even in a ridiculously short match, even at shortened FIDE time controls or rapid, you won't lose unless you actually play worse than your opponent.
Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: Huh, some bad maths from me... Forgot the drawing probability:)
Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  SwitchingQuylthulg: <alexmagnus> There's a <<<<very>>>> big error in your calculations. 64:36 does not mean that the weaker player wins or draws 36% of the time but that weaker player scores 36%; in other words, he's winning percentage + (drawing percentage/2) is 36%. The probability that he *at least* draws depends on the draw ratio and could be as high as 70%. I.e. the weaker player reaches tiebreaks half the time. Also, you forgot that he didn't have to at least draw both games; winning one and losing one is also OK, putting the percentage yet higher.

Also, even if the difference between the players was so huge that the better player actually won 87% of the time, he'd have to win a lot of such matches to be a champion. His odds of winning seven such matches in a row (luckily the last matches are a bit longer, but it makes no big difference) are only 37%.

Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  SwitchingQuylthulg: <acirce: Was that a response to me or just a general reflection?> Mainly a general reflection to you, if you know what I mean.

<I agree with everything apart from <..turns it into mathematics, not chess.> Even in a ridiculously short match, even at shortened FIDE time controls or rapid, you won't lose unless you actually play worse than your opponent.> From a mathematical point of view, playing worse is just another number which has a certain statistical possibility. If, say, Kasparov would blunder a queen against me, he wouldn't do it because he's a bad player but because even Kasparov does it sometimes, however rarely.

Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: <SwitchingQuythulg> However, if Kasparov blunders a Queen against you, he may not resign:)

BTW have you noticed that GMs practically never blunder against amateurs? In GM vs. GM games, one can make a huge collection of silly blunders, but it takes enormous effort to find a GM vs. amateur game where GM blundered....

Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  SwitchingQuylthulg: <alexmagnus> I guess it's because amateurs don't give them so many problems to deal with. In the same way good amateurs can actually play quite well against other amateurs but make silly blunders against GMs. It's easier to play well in an easy position. Still, GMs blunder even in easy positions, even if extremely rarely.

I think I'd win Kasparov if he blundered a Q against me. (That is, unless I would counterblunder my own queen, which is quite possible.) Of course, there would still be the other game, which he'd surely win, and then he'd smash me to bits in the tiebreak...

Jul-09-07  Aspirador: Piv Denny was the nickname of a guy we met one night in a down-and-out bar in Lagos, Nigeria. His real name was Denny Piverling though.
Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: <Aspirador>LOL.The actual meaning of "Pivednny" is "the Southern" in Ukrainian.
Jul-09-07  s4life: <acirce: Will people stop calling chess events "lotteries" when they are based on actual play? It's plain silly.

If you lost one of the long games, you could still reach tiebreaks by winning the other. And if you didn't, it's your own fault, not "bad luck".>

It was a lottery in hinsight, for whatever reasons... Kasim and Kalifman world champions? come on....

Jul-09-07  unsound: <acirce> didn't say the knockout was the best way of deciding a World Champion (he's said quite the opposite before, I believe). He just pointed out that it's not a pure "lottery" either. Which it isn't; Kasim etc. had to beat lots of players at one speed or another, and did so, which counts for something, even if it didn't mean they proved they were the best in the field. I don't get what's so hard about that.
Jul-09-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: Check out the picture of the "bear midriff" in Chessbase's account of this event; the bears are quite fetching in Odessa.

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail...

Jul-09-07  cornflake: it looks like Chucky is back.
Jul-09-07  notyetagm: <cornflake: it looks like Chucky is back.>

Go Chucky!

Jul-10-07
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Good....
Jul-10-07  kingsindian2006: this tourney seems like alot of fighting chess.. and few draws... fun to see....
Jul-11-07  dehanne: And here was I thinking Pivdenny was in Ireland.
Jul-11-07  Timex: 3 tournaments won in a row!!
Jul-16-07  GufeldStudent: Alexmagnus, are we discussing Fide championships. If we are, consider the effect that so many mismatched short matches will have on the end result.
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific tournament and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2017, Chessgames Services LLC