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

US Championship Tournament

Hikaru Nakamura7/9(+5 -0 =4)[games]
Robert Lee Hess6.5/9(+5 -1 =3)[games]
Alexander Onischuk6.5/9(+4 -0 =5)[games]
Varuzhan Eduardovich Akobian6/9(+5 -2 =2)[games]
Gata Kamsky6/9(+3 -0 =6)[games]
Yury Markovich Shulman5/9(+3 -2 =4)[games]
Larry Mark Christiansen5/9(+3 -2 =4)[games]
Ildar Rifkatovich Ibragimov5/9(+3 -2 =4)[games]
Joshua E Friedel5/9(+4 -3 =2)[games]
Jaan Yukhanovich Ehlvest4.5/9(+2 -2 =5)[games]
Boris Gulko4.5/9(+3 -3 =3)[games]
Alexander Shabalov4.5/9(+3 -3 =3)[games]
Ray Robson4.5/9(+4 -4 =1)[games]
Joel Benjamin4.5/9(+3 -3 =3)[games]
Julio Becerra Rivero4/9(+3 -4 =2)[games]
Michael A Brooks4/9(+3 -4 =2)[games]
Tyler Hughes4/9(+4 -5 =0)[games]
Enrico M Sevillano4/9(+3 -4 =2)[games]
Gregory Kaidanov3.5/8(+1 -2 =5)[games]
Irina Krush3.5/9(+2 -4 =3)[games]
Melikset Zavenovich Khachiyan3/9(+2 -5 =2)[games]
Samuel Shankland3/9(+1 -4 =4)[games]
Douglas D Eckert2/6(+2 -4 =0)[games]
Charles Lawton1/9(+0 -7 =2)[games]
Anna Vitalyevna Zatonskih0.5/2(+0 -1 =1)[games] Chess Event Description
US Championship (2009)

Previous edition: US Championship (2008). Next: US Championship (2010). See also US Women's Chess Championship (2009).

 page 1 of 5; games 1-25 of 107  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. I R Ibragimov vs Kamsky 0-1362009US ChampionshipA16 English
2. J Friedel vs Onischuk  ½-½432009US ChampionshipC67 Ruy Lopez
3. Ehlvest vs M Brooks 1-0912009US ChampionshipA14 English
4. Kaidanov vs I Krush  ½-½492009US ChampionshipD27 Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical
5. Y Shulman vs E Sevillano  1-0672009US ChampionshipA40 Queen's Pawn Game
6. Nakamura vs Shabalov 1-0402009US ChampionshipB84 Sicilian, Scheveningen
7. A Zatonskih vs Akobian  0-1642009US ChampionshipA41 Queen's Pawn Game (with ...d6)
8. S Shankland vs Joel Benjamin  ½-½562009US ChampionshipC87 Ruy Lopez
9. C Lawton vs Khachiyan 0-1682009US ChampionshipB76 Sicilian, Dragon, Yugoslav Attack
10. R Hess vs L Christiansen 1-0402009US ChampionshipB30 Sicilian
11. Gulko vs T Hughes 0-1412009US ChampionshipE61 King's Indian
12. J Becerra Rivero vs Robson 1-0342009US ChampionshipB81 Sicilian, Scheveningen, Keres Attack
13. Kamsky vs Akobian 1-0412009US ChampionshipC10 French
14. E Sevillano vs C Lawton 1-0892009US ChampionshipB06 Robatsch
15. T Hughes vs Onischuk 0-1212009US ChampionshipA81 Dutch
16. A Zatonskih vs I R Ibragimov  ½-½392009US ChampionshipD27 Queen's Gambit Accepted, Classical
17. Khachiyan vs Y Shulman 0-1502009US ChampionshipC18 French, Winawer
18. Ehlvest vs Nakamura ½-½372009US ChampionshipA14 English
19. Shabalov vs M Brooks  0-1362009US ChampionshipB90 Sicilian, Najdorf
20. J Friedel vs Kaidanov 1-0792009US ChampionshipC80 Ruy Lopez, Open
21. Robson vs Gulko 1-0442009US ChampionshipB64 Sicilian, Richter-Rauzer Attack
22. Joel Benjamin vs I Krush 1-0402009US ChampionshipB51 Sicilian, Canal-Sokolsky (Rossolimo) Attack
23. R Hess vs J Becerra Rivero 1-0442009US ChampionshipC69 Ruy Lopez, Exchange, Gligoric Variation
24. L Christiansen vs S Shankland  ½-½472009US ChampionshipD18 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav, Dutch
25. M Brooks vs E Sevillano  ½-½682009US ChampionshipC19 French, Winawer, Advance
 page 1 of 5; games 1-25 of 107  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 40 OF 40 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  swordfish: Congrats to Nakamura for a well-deserved victory. Onischuk's shared second is similarly no surprise, but

[whatthefat: Outrageous performance by Hess!]

Yeah, I don't think anyone gave a young New Yorker a realistic chance to finish just a half-point out of first. He's got a bright future!

As for Kamsky, he just drew too many games, a tournament strategy not well suited to Swiss-system events.

May-18-09  Marmot PFL: Kamsky never seemed in any danger of losing a game (in games i saw) but failed to cash in on what seemed to be some promising positions. Nakamura, on the other hand was in trouble in 2 or 3 games but held on and seized on all opportunities. In a top class round robin Kamsky would get my vote but Nakamura's play is very well suited for the Swiss system.
May-18-09  Nimzonick: Congrats Nakamura! An exciting tournament
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <San Sebastian - 16th June 2009 >

My wife's birthday! "Honey, I have a wonderful idea for a romantic getaway...."

Also the 105th anniversary of Bloomsday, i think.

May-18-09  kb2ct:

<parmetd: Nakamura's second is a master from TX called Kris Littlejohn.>

Thank you. I tried to catch the name, but it isn't easy to understand Jennifer Schade. She does a good job playing straight man to Sutovsky, but hardly a radio voice.

<In the media room Kris Littlejohn Nakamura's second, "i'm not dissapointed" with the current position on the board. Things are looking good for Nakamura.>

May-18-09  adair10: Shahade did a superb job for fans in my opinion. I attended last two rounds and while spent most of the time in the playing hall in the second floor, sometimes would run to basement to hear what Sutovsky had to say about games. He is of course very knowledgable, but it was Shahade who would discuss consequences of some obvious (sometimes wrong) moves that many in that room were wondering about. But boy, she is loud. BTW, setup was excellent. There was a big screen behind commentators with a specific game they were talking about with Sutovsky showing possible continuations. Also, plenty of food and drinks for everybody (not only commentators).
May-18-09  karoaper: Shahade's voice reminds me of the stereotypical vacuous California blond voice <"Like, totally ...">, but in her case very smart and knowledgeable things were coming out of her mouth, as opposed to the mindless banter that one would associate with that voice.
Premium Chessgames Member
  parmetd: actually adiar10, I found all those stupid moves she discussed annoying. It was always obvious why they were wrong and prevented them from analyzing real moves most of the time. What happens if I hang piece? You mean i'm just down a piece? I don't believe you! Like no way like I can't possibley make this horrible blunder like really?
May-18-09  turbo231: <timhortons> It's rybka2.3.2a the program that won the 2008 world cumputer championship.Please tell if that's not true.Rybka3 is only a few elo points stronger.I've looked for the match between akobian and rybka3 but i can not find it.Please grace me with your knowledge and tell me where the match is recorded i would love to download it.I'm serious.Also i would love to see the match between rybka3 and nakamura.If you want to see a funny game watch nakamura beat crafty in 155 moves!Nakamura is hard on computers!One more thing nakamura said he played a 20 game match with kamsky @ icc and scored 18.5 points against him.I saw and heard nakamura say that on video,during the open championship.
May-19-09  timhortons: <turbo231> seldom include icc blitz game in the database.Maybe the reason nakamura game against transwarp/rybka 3 and crafty got included here because of the funny nature it was played.

I post the pgn of akobian transwarp game in akobians page.Scroll down and check the pgn of scorpion83 v transwarp on the link.

Varuzhan Akobian

Rybka 2 has a bug that nakamura exploited well in blitz game at icc only him do it well though anton kovalyov come close to him and copy what he do.

Rybka 3 is improved version and i know nakamura never beat it since it play at icc blitz .IM kaufman at icc challenge Naka to play rybka 3 in a formal match but naka didnt reply to it.

May-19-09  timhortons: <turbo231>If theres something else drop me a note in my forum so we dont go off topic here.
May-19-09  blacksburg: <Nakamura is hard on computers!>

many people seem to be unaware that despite the 2 nakamura wins over rybka in this database, there are <hundreds> of rybka wins over nakamura that are not. transwarp destroys everyone, including nakamura.

May-19-09  turbo231: <timhortons> <blacksburg> Thank you but what about the rybka3 and nakamura match i want to see that too, if all possible
May-19-09  blacksburg: i don't think you're going to see Rybka 3 in a serious match with any human player any time soon, including nakamura. there's just nothing for any player to gain from getting annihilated by a computer.
May-19-09  turbo231: I think nakamura has a better chance playing a blitz game with rybka
May-19-09  whatthefat: <turbo123>

Not really. He, like everybody else, gets thrashed on average at that time control too.

May-19-09  grasser: <sisyphus> Yes I don't compete anymore, but not by choice. I am on SSI disability since 2003 and cannot afford my USCF dues as food is a daily struggle. I teach kids at the local library and I put a tip jar out, but after three years of doing that I think I have received less than $10! People have given me cat food, so my cats are fed, but not me! Go figure? I guess I need to develop a taste for Friskies. :)
May-19-09  SetNoEscapeOn: Absolutely. The time when a straight up man vs. machine match made sense has passed.

The only thing I think might be interesting now would be a match between one of the very best players in the world and a program where the human player received full draw odds (if the player either draws or wins, he receives one point and the program gets nothing). At this point, a program like Rybka 3 would likely still be favored, but I think a few guys have some chances in such a match.

May-19-09  Shams: <SetNoEscapeOn>

My opinion: the natural extension of the man v. machine chess battle is a Grandmaster against chess engine that runs on its own, without tablebases or opening books. Analytical power vs. accumulated knowledge. That would swing things back to humans for a good while, and be more interesting for spectators.

May-19-09  timhortons: <turbo231> I think nakamura has a better chance playing a blitz game with rybka.

Nakamura could get 1 draw in every 20 losses against rybka 2 and seldom win.But people keep on observing it during the time because its entertaining to watch, even magnus carlsen and the rest of the gms are watching it.pstat transwarp smallville at icc. should specify for the record that its rybka 2 because that game in the databse makes people think that naka is better than rybka whos software keep on improving each time.

No chance for naka to win against rybka 3 since transwarp upgrade his software.Naka never win once.

<Who among the GM do you think would play transwarp 4 who are running on 52 core?>

May-19-09  blacksburg: <Who among the GM do you think would play transwarp 4 who are running on 52 core?>

heck, i'll play the monster. i'd probably get the same results as any GM anyways.

May-19-09  SetNoEscapeOn: <Shams>

I agree, that should give the humans a much better chance. However, I wonder how interesting the games themselves would be. If the human wins, it would likely be due to either just a won position from the opening or a hilarious blunder by the computer in the endgame.

On the other hand, I guess one could argue that computer victories over humans now are usually just a case of a human missing some hidden but vital detail in their calculation, or a mindless one move blunder. That can also only be so interesting.

I should also mention that some time ago on Joel Benjamin argued that computers probably don't even need an opening book now:

I'm not sure how accurate his ideas are because I haven't seen any games where it has been tried. Intuitively I agree with you but maybe we are wrong.

May-19-09  SetNoEscapeOn: <Anatoly21: For such a large number of players, I really wish they had more than 9 rounds. It just seems far too short to be a good judge of who is the best in the US, even though Nakamura did demonstrate a great performance.>

Well, this was actually the smallest US Championship field in several years. 24 players in a nine round swiss really makes it feel much more like a round robin. Just look at Nakamura's opponents; he played just one non-grandmaster (an in-form Brooks) in round 8.

May-19-09  Jim Bartle: Or how about four groups of six, with the winner advancing to a semi-final of two game matches?

I know, I know, you would almost automatically get ties in the groups after only five games, forcing rapid playoffs.

But group round robins in some form are a good idea. Maybe three groups of eight, plus a "wild card."

May-19-09  Brown: <timhortons<IM kaufman at icc challenge Naka to play rybka 3>>

That's hilarious! Someone please tell IM Kaufman that I challenge Kaufman to fight my killer robot.

Oh, and I also challenge Kaufman to share his recent Senior Chess Champion victory with GM Suba, who was robbed. He could have been a gentleman and split the title, but seemed uninterested in this move.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 40)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 40 OF 40 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, is 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, profane, raunchy, or disgusting language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate or nonsense posts.
  3. No malicious personal attacks, including cyber stalking, systematic antagonism, or gratuitous name-calling of any member Iincludinfgall Admin and Owners or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. If you think someone is an idiot, then provide evidence that their reasoning is invalid and/or idiotic, instead of just calling them an idiot. It's a subtle but important distinction, even in political discussions.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No malicious posting of or linking to personal, private, and/or negative information (aka "doxing" or "doxxing") about any member, (including all Admin and Owners) or any of their family, friends, associates, or business interests. This includes all media: text, images, video, audio, or otherwise. Such actions will result in severe sanctions for any violators.
  6. NO TROLLING. Admin and Owners know it when they see it, and sanctions for any trolls will be significant.
  7. Any off-topic posts which distract from the primary topic of discussion are subject to removal.
  8. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by Moderators is expressly prohibited.
  9. The use of "sock puppet" accounts in an attempt to undermine any side of a debate—or to create a false impression of consensus or support—is prohibited.
  10. All decisions with respect to deleting posts, and any subsequent discipline, are final, and occur at the sole discretion of the Moderators, Admin, and Owners.
  11. Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a Moderator.

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, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors. All Moderator actions taken are at the sole discretion of the Admin and Owners—who will strive to act fairly and consistently at all times.
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 | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2019, Chessgames Services LLC